I have no problem with this. He was in her home. She was protecting what was hers, she did not use an assult weapon or a hand gun with a clip.

Are you suggesting that she could only use a revolver and not a semi-automatic pistol with a magazine (clip)??

My only problem was she didn't use a gun with a clip and empty 12 shots in him.

There is a legitimate problem with gun violence. It doesn't "help" for people who don't know the difference between an assault rifle and a semi-automatic pistol to offer their "help".

http://www.blogtalkradio.com/theaudioblog/2013/01/14/what-can-easton-do-for-gun-control-laws

Melinda Herman only made one mistake.... She should have been certain to have killed the creep. Now he'll get some bleeding heart attorney to represent him and sue her, where had she killed the creep he wouldn't be around to testify and extend the trauma in her life that he created in the first place.

what about taser guns? Gets the job done without killing.
Why not arm teachers with taser guns?

Have you ever used a taser gun? or seen one used? Can you guess what their range is?

great story. this is why we need to have for protection. not sure if Chris Christie would agree, some of toughest gun laws in nation and he wants gun control as well.

I personally would not use a weapon like a machine gun. However... I would not hesitate to use a handgun revolver or w/ a magazine to protect myself or family. My only concern is that the preditor of that family doesN'T GET AWAY W/ TRYING TO SUE THIS WOMAN FOR BODILY HARM. I have been told by proffesionals that if you need to shoot someone for defense. Do it w/ the intent of making it FINAL/fatal, because there have been cases of the criminals turning around & slapping a law -suit on their victims for damages rendered. You will have some lawyer or activist group trying to defend these criminals. WE see it everyday. Do I think this woman is a champion? You bet I do, and so do her children! So take notice. All you theives & criminals, I WILL take your life if I ever am in the position to protect myself or what is mine. God help us all. This guy got off easy. He'll get free medical treatment, legal represntation & 3 square meals a day (called room & board )courtesy of our penal system & our hard earned taxes. Too good for him if you ask me.

Glad she got the job done with a shotgun.. or a hand gun... or a taser... they would have worked as well. I'm also glad none of her kids ever accidentally or intentionally got THEIR hands on that shotgun in the house and killed another family member or friend. I went to a funeral in 1990 of a three-year-old accidentally shot by his five-year-old brother with his dad's hunting rifle. I will never forget how unrecognizable his mother was due to her agony, how his father was a grown man literally yelping with grief, and the smallest white coffin I've ever seen. I'm also an elementary teacher. I wonder if there will be a day when one person interviewing for a teaching position gets the job over another equal candidate simply because she did better on the target-shooting-portion of her job interview. Does this sound completely insane to you? Because that's what it will come to. As a teacher, you'll have to pry my cold dead hand open to get a gun into it. Call email and write your elected lawmakers, and tell them to BAN assault weapons, high capacity magazine clips, gun show sales, and illegal gun trafficking.

A "taser would have worked as well"?? Someone with bad intentions and a gun is 30 feet away from you and you would use a taser??

it starts with banning this or that then it snowballs to other things.
when they get their foot in the door they will try forcing it wide open.

People are just plain stupid....good for this woman, wouldn't matter if she had an automatic or not. Defending herself with either or is just perfect!! As far as a 5 year old shooting the 3 year old, very super sad story, but where were the parents and what kind of parents keep guns unlocked when having such little children around....again, its on the irresponsible parents. Wake up fools!! Its becoming the pussification of America!!!

Having a gun doesn't make someone "more of a man", and those calling for this poor woman to have killed her intruder are just callous. No one should glibly discuss killing another human, no matter what the context. I support her defending herself and her family, but I don't support killing people so they won't sue.

Hopefully, an intruder will consider death as one of the consequences of intruding. No doubt, it has prevented some intrusions. They (intruders) just don't let us know that it did. My wife is a better marksMAN than I am. But she doesn't consider herself "more of a man". You are entitled to your boundaries, motives and level of mercy you wish to extend to an intruder. Those are your personal choices.

@Ronnie- how about the incident ended the way it did, and that's that. How about being glad no one was killed because that's the best outcome. Calling for people to be killed is the reason why the gun control crowd is so opposed to people owning guns. That sorta talk doesn't make anyone sound responsible at all. Good people should never find joy in the death of another, even if they may be deemed "bad guys". We tout our Christianity when it suits us, but Jesus wouldn't approve of that sorta thinking.

This is only part of the story, what about the part when the bad guy gets up after taking 5 shot to the face and leaves under his own power. what if there were multiply bad guys, would 6 shots be enough? Obliviously not, considering this guy took 5 shots and got up an ran away under his own power. So I would say anybody who says we don't have a use for 10+ magazines, what is it that Bidens say FULL OF MALARKEY

I have seen comments here saying that you shouldn't shoot an intruder witha semi-automatic pistol, another says you use a taser, one suggests there whould be no guns in a house and now consideration should be shown to an intruder in the name of religion. These are real-life dangerous/deadly situations. Perhaps this is a video game mentality where, after the homeowner is hurt or killed, you just reset and start a new game , careful not to make the same mistake again. Criminals + intruders read this too. No doubt, they support your agenda 100%. Maybe they'll even "write to our legislators". None of you appear to have a well thought out plan in the event that your families are subjected to a situation like this. You may not get the chance to rethink it.

@Hugh- you're convaluting my point to suit your narrow pov. If you read my comment clearly, I was addressing those calling for his death. Killing people is not a reflection of responsible gun ownership. It has nothing to do with any supposed sympathy you might think I have for the intruder. As I've stare before, we have a firearm in the house. Were it ever required, I would use it for protection, but I wouldn't brag about doing so nor would I find joy in the fact that I had to, and it would hang in my heart if the unfortunate outcome was that someone was killed in my effort for protection. Responsible gun ownership is a solemn act that requires respect on the part of the gun owner. Killing people, for any reason, isn't something any of us should take lightly.

@Ronnie- funny, I read at least two comments where the writers said she should have killed him so he wouldn't sue. Even you stated she should have killed him so he couldn't do it again. Who's acting as the Judge there? And Jesus called for us to turn the other cheek. I seem to recall a commandment that went something like "Thou shall not kill". If this woman had indeed killed her intruder, so be it, but calling for his death after the fact is callous, period.

@StGabes- I don't think Jesus would fault her, but I dont think he would revel in it either. I'll say it again, I support this women defending herself. I wouldn't judge her if she killed her intruder in that defense, but in the end that isn't what happened.

@Ronnie- so, saying that we shouldn't call for this woman to have killed her intruder is now considered being "on a high horse"? That's just a weak justification for one's own blood lust and self righteous desire to judge others. You speak for this woman, yet have no idea how it has affected her. My brother had to shoot someone in the line of duty. He was required to take three days off and had mandatory counseling, and that person only lost their finger. Shooting someone is a big deal. Killing someone even moreso. You boast about such things and lack humility. That is why you are wrong.

The right of people to defend their homes is well established in British common law and American constitutional law probably since the 1700's. We at the Lehigh Valley Coffee Party have been struck by the fact that 88-96% of Americans (based on three recent major polls) support closing up the swiss cheese-like federal background check law, which were supposed to have been corrected by the Brady Bill but were sandbagged by the NRA. A consensus of that magnitude has a power that cannot be denied by any number of lobbyists or legalized bribes to legislators. We at the Lehigh Valley Coffee Party support Senator Schumer's Fix Gun Check Laws Now! bill and Senator Kirsten Gillebrand's bill to require gun show purchasesand private gun sales and gifts to be subject to the background check.

http://tinyurl.com/pistolpakinmama

@Hugh- I appreciate you clarifying your position, and take a step back myself. My point wasn't about sympathy for the intruder. Had he been killed in his act of aggression, so be it. Rather, I was making a stance regarding our collective humanity. I simply don't think it advances us collectively to wish for the death of any one.

@Joe Sommer- as I've stated numerous times. We have a firearm in our household. I would use it if I had to. I find no need or joy in boasting about that possibility. You're glee in discussing taking anothe's life that you deem not worth incarcerating is appalling. it's voices like yours that are fueling the anti gun sentiment in this country. You end up sounding like an angry unhinged individual who probably shouldn't possess firearms of any sort. Maybe that's why you're so frightened by conversations about how to curb gun violence.

@Joe- your need to divide and seem superior doesn't assist your argument. What truth are you telling, that the idea of you being able to legally kill someone is exciting to you somehow? Because that's what you end up sounding like. This shouldn't be a partisan issue. All responsible gun owners should welcome a conversation about how to curb gun violence. Becoming angry because that's what's happening doesn't make you look responsible.

@Ronnie- I'll say this again, I'm not expressing sympathy towards the intruder. Had he been killed, that would have been his doing, but he wasn't and that's the facts. I'm saying that it's callous to call for the death of anyone regardless of the context. Celebrating the right to kill someone is nothing to celebrate. The fact that this poor woman had to attempt lethal force in front of her children is nothing to celebrate. Saying you would shoot someone's head clean off and ask questions later IS boastful and lacks respect for the severity of the topic being discussed. Stating that he should have died is equally as callous. This isn't sport.

A career in crime is risky. A criminal's worst fear is enoountering an armed homeowner. This woman was fortunate. What might have happened to her and her children if she wasn't armed is something I would rather not contemplate.

Amend - as a responsible gun owner I have no problem discussing how to curb "criminal violence". The term "gun violence" is lame as an inanimate object can not act violently on its own. Tens of millions of law-abiding firearm owners go through each day not acting violent. Why punish the many for the actions of the few?

The abuse of an object should not prohibit its use.

@moe- i'm not caught up on the semantics of the debate, but not all gun violence is criminal in nature, nor am I looking to "punish" anyone. No where in any of my comments will you see me saying that we even need to ban anything specifically. Mostly I've been asking for sensible solutions that don't call for more guns, and keep guns out of the hands of irresponsible people. To me, it's about there being too much easy access with too little oversight. Beyond that, I've been pointing out how certain comments come off as callous and immature, and that that isn't helping the debate.

@Joe- where is anyone getting the notion that the government wants to repeal the 2nd amendment? That's just paranoid nonsense meant to muddy the conversation about how we get a grip on gun violence in this country.

@Joe- what valid point were you making masked as truth? All you offered up so far is a lot of anger, name calling and emotional rhetoric.

@Joe- I'm not a liberal. I'm an independent. And I never mentioned a ban on anything. That's you letting your bias cloud your ability to hear what I'm saying. Personally, I feel like we could better use our existing laws were it not for the NRA lobbying to block the use of them. Better tracking of sales and registration, better oversight as to who has firearms and what their mental state or those in their household may be, better training, stronger sentences for illegal gun possession and crimes committed with guns including threats, making straw purchases illegal, limiting access to what is being called assault style weapons to only those who have demonstrated their ability to handle them (think regular driver's liscence compared to CDLs)...those seem like simply concepts that don't require responsible people to forfeit their 2nd amendment rights. Nothing is a panacea, but that doesn't mean nothing can be done. I also think ending the war on drugs would greatly reduce street level gun violence, but that's another discussion. Adding abortion to the discourse is a canard. There's no correlation between the two topics.

@Joe- name calling is the recourse of those who have weak debate skills and poorly formulated opinions. That not withstanding, armed security guards wouldn't curb the vast majority of gun violence, and if I recall correctly Columbine had an armed security guard. I'm not saying they shouldn't be considered, I'm just saying you offer little in the way of intelligent dialogue regarding this very serious issue. And since conservatives are so dead set against tax increases, how are you proposing that already cash-strapped school districts pay for armed guards?

Joe, give up on Amend. He always claims to be the most open minded of us all! He always says that he is independent and he clearly isn't. Anyone who doesn't agree with him is not adding to the intelligent discussion....kind of sounds like our president doesn't he? If you don't see his genius...you are just to ignorant. Amend also always throws in an explanation of what Jesus would do...lol! Of course Amend is the chosen one (besides Obama) to enlighten the rest of us. Lucky us!

@Jenn- I'm not sure why my opinion should cause you such consternation. The whole point of having a comment section on an open forum like this is so that people can share and discuss their opinions with one another. I didn't realize I was expected to agree with others in that effort to share my opinion.

Wow. The NRA has NO CLUE.
They manage to top themselves day after day. Today, on the one month anniversary of the Sandy Hook MURDERS committed with high-powered stolen guns, the NRA has released a FREE APP - A VIOLENT VIDEO GAME, where you can SHOOT at an upright coffin in the "head," the "heart," etc. They've rated it for ages 4 and up...
Have they NO CLUE?
Have they NO IDEA what they're doing to the families of those victims?
Have they no eyes and ears as to what MOST AMERICANS are saying and wanting in the way of gun control?
Stupid, heartless, shameful, delusional, paranoid, treasonous cowards..

It isn't that you don't agree...it's your arrogance. You always sound like you are talking down to people who don't agree with you and you twist other people's words around. I have seen your posts over the past few months. You always act like you are on the moral high ground. You always act like you need to educate anyone who doesn't agree with you.

@Jenn- so, I should dumb it down a little then so that others don't feel like I'm picking on them? I'm assuming that you have the same critique for others like Ronnie and Joe then, right? I mean, Ronnie has called me a coward in the past, Joe has called me a liberal loser and Crestor has thrown so many insults my way that it's hard to think of just one. All because I have a different opinion. Somehow, staying on topic and not bowing to that hostility makes me arrogant. Interesting logic. Still, I pride myself on being a gentleman. You're criticism is duly noted. I'll see what I can do to reign in my tone.

@Jenn- there was a sliver of humor in that comment. Honestly, I don't see the equity in your expectations. It's ok to call people names, and denigrate them, but arguing one's point otherwise is arrogant. I'm not trying to be an ass, but that just sounds backwards to me. Just take this thread as an example. My initial comment was about how I didn't think it was cool to be saying that the woman in the article should have killed her intruder so he wouldnt sue. Ronnie and Joe took it upon themselves to tell me that I didn't know what I was talking about and the conversation went on from there with them fixated on trying to convince me why legally killing someone was an ok thing and that I was a know-nothing bleeding heart liberal. I replied by trying to discuss why not killing someone was a better outcome. They insisted I was defending the intruder and that I wanted to ban guns and repeal the 2nd amendment and that I was simply wrong. Would you still think me arrogant if we were on the same side of the argument?

@Jenn- oh, no worries. I don't fret words on a screen. They're just words.

"This is a matter of vital importance to the public safety ... While we recognize that assault-weapon legislation will not stop all assault-weapon crime, statistics prove that we can dry up the supply of these guns, making them less accessible to criminals.” - Reagan

“I do not believe in taking away the right of the citizen for sporting, for hunting and so forth, or for home defense. But I do believe that an AK-47, a machine gun, is not a sporting weapon or needed for defense of a home.” - Reagan

“Certain forms of ammunition have no legitimate sporting, recreational, or self-defense use and thus should be prohibited.” - Reagan

"“Certain forms of ammunition have no legitimate sporting, recreational, or self-defense use and thus should be prohibited.”- Reagan

"“I think maybe there could be some restrictions that there had to be a certain amount of training taken.” - Reagan

“Well, I think there has to be some [gun] control.” - Reagan

After all of the hoopla about addressing gun violence, they are leaking out parts of the new + improved laws and programs . For the most part, they are talking about better enforcement of what is already on the books with stiffer penalties for some violations. It is possible that there will be some limitations on magazine (clip) capacities. Almost sounds like the NRA + Obama got together on this one. More talk +politicking than substance. This is not the big change that many were hoping for. It is a complex problem and there is no "silver bullet". In the meantime, be a safe gun owner and a safe homeowner.

A home invasion in Bucks County took the life of a man who lives there...The intruders also took firearms from the house...This should be a lesson to gun owners to be on constant alert in situations such as this, otherwise, guns for protection would be a farce.

Five people shot at three different gun shows across the nation today on "National Gun Appreciation Day." ... wow. There are no words... http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2013/01/19/1473881/two-people-accidentally-shot-at-a-gun-show-safety-checkpoint-on-gun-appreciation-day/?mobile=wp

And then, one day after the five people are shot at gun shows during the so-called "gun appreciation day"... Reuters reports that- A teenage boy with several weapons including an assault rifle shot and killed five people, three of them children, at a house in Albuquerque, New Mexico.
ENOUGH DEATH... I CANNOT WAIT FOR ALL OF THE PRESIDENT'S CHANGES IN GUN LAWS. BRING IT.

Nazaretti, I have seen plenty of your posts. You are one of those people living in happy unicorn land! Obama continued on Bush's path. I give Seal Team 6 and our military the credit. Wow, Obama had the balls to give the go ahead. He certainly gave himself the credit. He is a horrible leader and the worst excuse for president!

And today, a “responsible” gun-owner points his new assault rifle at his own daughter over her school grades. Yes.. HIS daughter... her GRADES.
http://aattp.org/responsible-gun-owner-points-assault-rifle-at-daughter-over-her-grades-video/
He was arrested and faces two charges of terroristic threats. No word on whether the Gun Owners Of America, or the NRA will pay for his defense. Gee, when my kids do poorly in school I take away screen-time. This gun-owner seems to think THIS is how one should use an assault weapon... among the other weapons found in his home.

Change the law, Charlie Dent. Change it. How much more evidence do you need????

Sandy Hook residents responded to Second Amendment rights advocates by quoting the Declaration of Independence. "Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness are our inalienable rights," said David Wheeler, the father of 6-year-old Newtown shooting victim Benjamin Wheeler. "The liberty of any person to own a military-style assault weapon and high-capacity magazine and keep them in their home is second to the right of my son to his life," Wheeler said.

Enough said.

StGabes, lol! Kirsten Powers is the only attractive lib I know. Think about it...Hilary, Debra W.S., Michele Obama, Feinstein, psycho eyes Nancy P....I could go on! Pick your team ladies!

Ann...Not only is the group UGLY they are the most DESPISED woman on the planet partricularly Pelosi. If she was my mother I would disown her.