How Far Would You Go to Protect Your Child?

My thoughts were similar to Jessi T's... Unless I'm missing something, it appeared that it was HER life at risk here, probably not her child's, although the child would certainly be affected by anything happening to the mother. Rape is what came to my mind, too.

Every comment I've seen agrees that she had the right to protect her child. I agree with that also. But even if there was no child in the home, she had every right to protect HERSELF and her proterty.Two men with knives were likely not interested in her child, but in her! Drugs maybe, but in my mind I see more of a rape cinereo. I'm glad she had the means and the guts to do what was neccessary. Yes, a life lost is sad, but 2 lives saved is better.

I would absolutely wield a weapon to protect my family, are you kidding? Absolutely. I've been shooting since I was eight, so I wouldn't go for a broad, easy target like the chest. I'd aim for kneecaps. The intruder would be less likely to die that way, and more likely to have to live with his injuries and actions for the rest of his life.

If what is reported in the news is the correct version of facts, then: (1) the man who was killed knew his intended victim as had harrassed her before (2) the man who was killed had already exhibited recent suspect behaviour just a few days prior to the incident (3) the man was attempting to break into the home of a single woman - facts he knew, as knew her husband had died (4) the man had a second male with him, and since he knew the intended victim lived alone was setting up a two on one situation (5) the man did not quietly attempt a catburglary in a manner where he could non confrontationally break in and leave with drugs - he noisly banged on the doors for 21 minutes and ensured the intended victim had no exit as he was at one door and his accomplice at the other (6) he was holding a large knife that is used to kill not a pen knife to pop a lock (7) he popped drugs prior to the break-in which would contribute to a feeling of bravado - they are not an excuse for his behaviour but a reason to showforethought not impulsivity in his actions. In conclusion, I think it is rather obvious that the man was perhaps looking for drugs but also looking to assault his intended victim. If it were only about drugs he would have broken into her house when no one was home, in a stealthy manner. It is a mobile home, not a mansion - doubt he needed her there to lead him to where drugs would be kept! Seriously. She maybe did not warn that she had a gun - but was he yelling out " I have a large knife!"???? She shot him when he aggressively actually broke into her home - not during the attempts. She maybe shot deliberately to kill - or maybe just randomly shot and got lucky. Or maybe he ould die at that range regardless. Who cares? He was obviously a sociopath intent on causing he grievous harm otherwise no need for aggressive break-in, blocked exits and the knife. In that situation a victim does not have to figure out the gunshot that would cause least harm. I am sure Dr. Petit from Conneticut has no issues with how this story ended.

I love her attitude and am glad that both she and her son are safe.

I would do anything to protect my children. I would give my life for them without a thought. That said, I am very disturbed by this story and the overwhelming “good job” comments. On the news link there are over 14000 comments. I obviously have not read them all, but the ones I have read are unanimous in their support of Ms. McKinley’s use of deadly force.

I have many questions. Why was she on the phone to 911 for over 20 minutes? Is she in such a rural area that she is more than 20 minutes away from the nearest police station? She had not one but two guns, a situation I find concerning with a child in the house, but it is legal, so that’s that. But why, if she was armed, did these men continue to pursue breaking and entering? Could she have not wounded the man rather than kill him? These might all have very reasonable answers. But I just am very uncomfortable with the whole scenario.

It is tragic that she is only 18, has just lost her husband and now is responsible for the death of another human being. I am very, very glad that she and the baby are safe. But considering a man is dead, even though he had criminal intent, I cannot join the chorus of “Well done!” My reaction is more like a very wary “Well, if you had to…”

We asked the same thing of our readers. We're okies, and this one was close to home. So far, it's 100% chiming in with "good for her," and "Hell yes, I'd shoot." Tonight, our news report showed "the other side of the story" where the intruder's friend's were given the chance to speak up for him. That was difficult to watch because they were clearly in pain about the entire thing. Overall, however, I think it's an incredibly compelling story. I've sat on the stairs with a gun in my hand and another person on the other side of the door banging like crazy at midnight. I would have shot them. I had two babies in the house and my husband worked nights. I would have shot them and not hesitated, had they gotten in.

They were dumb enough to take the risk of burglarizing an sharp, widowed, lactating, protective mother. Even without the tragedy of losing her husband a woman in that condition is dangerous to mess with. I nearly cheered when I was this news story. Can I say that out loud?

in answer to the question what did they want: her husband passed away from cancer on Christmas. Speculation is the perps thought there were strong pain killers still in the home.