Thanks to Wisconsin recently passing a concealed carry law, this Wisconsin man and former Marine was able to keep a violent thug at bay from kicking a woman’s face in and killing her.
Comment Policy: Please read our new comment policy before making a comment. In short, please be respectful of others and do not engage in personal attacks. Otherwise we will revoke your comment privileges.
This man is a hero! WI must have a great CCW, need to look at it. Scott Walker should honor this man for saving this woman’s life. Be interesting when the perp’s sheet is released to see what crimes he’s previously been charged with and his convictions. Thanksfully the FOX station carried the story.
OneThinDime “…to see what crimes he’s previously been charged with…”
Very very true, and the point I’ve been making to my representatives: stop blaming law abiding citizens, get your spending under control so funds are available to enforce the multitude of crime laws already in place. Too many criminals are on the loose.
Keep up the good work! I’m curious to see if she had a protective order and how long it took law enforcement to arrive on the scene for a crime committed at 4:00 am.
I heard an interview with him on Friday, he said it took about 5 minutes for the police to arrive. During that time the perp kept talking crap at him and inching closer. The former Marine tried to keep 20 feet of distance between them but it narrowed to about 15 feet.
Thanks for the update! 5 minutes can be a lifetime. This woman, if kicked in the head for 5 more minutes, may well have not survived or survived on life support for the rest of her life. I truly hope she appreciates what this young veteran did….
And that’s if the guy hadn’t done anything but call the police.
Liberals; They want guns off the street but leave violent criminals like this on the street, he only needed his feet to kill her.
Exactly! But it was a woman so would the state Dem legislators even care???? They clearly don’t in CO. Sad that that thought even comes to my mind.
You left me with quite the dilemma. Don’t move and wait to get arrested, or howl at the moon one last time before you send me to Hell. Hmmm, I’ll take my chances with the coppers.
Darn you and your gun-totin’ conceal carry permit!
With a little jailhouse justice awaiting him, I hope.
OneThinDime Yup, and we have to pay for it. (tot my wife in the background) “Honey, cancel that dinner reservation…..”
Rshill7 Nice chuckle Rshill7.
You’re much more aware when you carry. Just a fact.
RighteousCrow_JustCaws Right on that!!
The guy will probably be charged with simple assault and let go. Hope the woman gets a CCW permit and is able to defend herself the next time her ex boyfriend tries something.
Isn’t it great how effective guns are for good without even firing a shot!
I thought I saw something from the NRA with stats on how many crimes were halted when the CCW holder pulled out their firearm….Remember the shopping mall case that the MSM wouldn’t cover?
But the important question is how many rounds did he have in the magazine! Only kidding. That guy did good. I was going to say that woman was lucky he came by, but I guess she would have luckier if her attacker hadn’t come after her… Still. Good job sir!
If the guy has a violent history then liberals created this incident.
toongoon WolfieUSA And they are so anti-gun I bet they are actually unhappy about this story because a gun saved a life and the perp was actually caught. I thought the Marine showed great restraint.
It demonstrates that evil exists in our society and all it took was a good man with a gun to stop what could likely have been a murder. As toongoon says below, a foot can be the weapon used to murder someone. Will the libs now argue for mandatory amputations? And I concur, the VETERAN did a great job saving her life and he knew exactly what to do. Wouldn’t I pay to see him brought to Congress by Ted Cruz to take on FrankenStein
WolfieUSA I’m more surprised that Wisconsin has a concealed carry law. What’s the world coming to when a liberal state votes for concealed carry?
stage9 WolfieUSA Nearly all states have Conceal and Carry. WI, MN, MI and other hunting states are filled with gun owners.
WolfieUSA I venture to say one (1) would have been enough for that gutsy Marine. I’m sure he was doing what the Marine hierarchy taught him to do, defend freedom at any cost ( even if it is a .75 cent bullet).
Can you still find a bullet for only 75 cents???? Sorry had to toss that out there.
OneThinDime Yup, FMJ .40 cal. I have a few. Well, maybe more.
Wow, we can’t purchase from under $1/bullet now.
Awww man, I wanted to see what happened to the guy shooting heroin while driving on the interstate!
Me too! Scoop, can you find that footage? It would be interesting to here the libertarians argue that legalizing drugs is okay!
OneThinDime That would be a great Open Thread for the day. lol!
OneThinDime Drunk driving, drug driving, what is the difference? Both are illegal, just one is legal to consume, the other isn’t. We Libertarians are not wanting to legalize driving while high, sorry to bust your bubble. We all still believe in DUI’s, just what you do behind closed doors, shouldn’t have any baring on what you should control. You give Government an inch, they take your liberty.
And who is going to pay for the costs of caring for drug-addicted babies, you? Do you have billions laying around? Are you going to prosecute the mother for using drugs while pregnant? If not, don’t you believe in the unborn child’s rights? And what about the negative affects the babies suffer in crack and most recently meth houses? What happens when the house explodes with children inside? Since they are doing it “behind closed doors”, that’s okay with you? And because someone lives next door and the meth seeps into the ground, that’s okay with you because the perps did it “behind closed doors”?
OneThinDime Without adding emotion into the equation, the costs should be on the individual. Being that I wholly understand “freedom” and the right for an individual to pursue their own version of happiness, pregnancy in and of itself is two lives in one. Meaning, if one person is harming another person, then yes, that should be a crime. However, does not the arguments you make go, as well, for alcohol? That is behind closed doors, but we saw what happens when the Government steps in, it creates crime. Not one of those emotional arguments can one defend. If you are for controlling how one acts inside their own home, then you are for bigger Government, and Government only takes liberty, it never gives back. If you are worried about someone else’s life, then you want to govern, but we the people want to govern ourselves, not be told how to act.
I don’t think anyone is for no government. Government has a necessary function, although at this point it’s almost hard to believe.
Drugs, whether it’s alcohol, heroin, marijuana is not a victimless habit.
Whenever you alter your normal thinking process you are not in control of your actions. When you alter your thinking process regularly you naturally become more and more irresponsible and incapable of being able to make the restitution necessary for your actions. To make the assumption that a user will have the presence of mind to take responsibility is very shortsighted.
Families are destroyed everyday because of drug use. How do you pay for that? How do you make restitution for your children who grow up seeing your action and believing that using is the way you make it through life?
I agree that laws against drugs create a worse problem. I would like to see people deal with life unaffected by drugs and deal with the blows and disappointments in a mature way.
By the way, drug use among Americans is one of the ways the Communists wanted to sedate the people for an easy take over of America. It is really disappointing to see that there are so many people who are so willing to sedate themselves.
Barton1 OneThinDime So, you’re saying a HEROIN ADDICT has the SENSE TO REASON NOT to get behind the wheel of a car while high?
Where do you live? In a DISNEY CARTOON???
If you’re stupid enough to do drugs, you’re too stupid to do anything else….including VOTE!
Barton1 OneThinDime You don’t understand CRAP! You’re living in the same purple haze liberals live in.
And, yeah, alcohol is REALLY a great comparison.
Almost half of all drivers who were killed in crashes and tested positive for drugs also had alcohol in their system.
About one-third of all drivers arrested or convicted of driving while intoxicated or driving under the influence of alcohol are repeat offenders.
Over 1.41 million drivers were arrested in 2010 for driving under the influence of alcohol or narcotics. (So in other words, they are LAW BREAKERS to begin with! So, do you think they’ll suddenly OBEY LAWS when it’s legalized and there are no consequences to their behavior?)
In fatal crashes in 2010, the highest percentage of drunk drivers was for drivers ages 21 to 24 (34 percent), followed by ages 25 to 34 (30 percent) and 35 to 44 (25 percent).
In 2010, 211 children were killed in drunk driving crashes. Out of those 211 deaths, 131 (62 percent) were riding with the drunk driver.
Every day in America, another 27 people die as a result of drunk driving crashes.
50 to 75 percent of convicted drunk drivers continue to drive on a suspended license. (MORE LAWBREAKING!)
I see a pattern here: If you are a substance abuser you will commit crimes JUST SO YOU CAN CONTINUE to abuse drugs and alcohol. You’re a selfish person who only cares about your own addiction. You cost taxpayers millions. You are responsible for someone mourning the loss of a family member. You’re young and stupid.
Barton1 OneThinDime Would you give Clinton a pass for what he did in MY oval office? We eventually end up arguing about a person’s character, in the end. 99.9% of the time it does effect those that are not behind the doors or under the covers. Character is not defined by what is done in the open, but what is done when others are absent.
toongoon Barton1 OneThinDime I am not saying NO government at all, but one with limitations, one, that follows the Constitution, and one that doesn’t go beyond it’s wall of rules. Those rules followed PROPERLY would be one without welfare, and one where drugs are not made legal or illegal. If we tried to stop every person from doing everything harmful to themselves, we would be no better than mayor Bloomberg, or a fascist country. You can’t stop everyone from doing things you find harmful to them. I can’t stop that either. People should be free to make choices, even one’s we wouldn’t agree with. That is freedom, without screwing up, you can’t correct things. Don’t get me wrong, I am not for drugs, but for freedom to choose. Families get hurt everyday without it being due to drugs. If a person isn’t allowed to choose, then what good are we calling ourselves free?
stage9 Barton1 OneThinDime Nope, not saying that at all, but alcoholics cant reason that way either.
stage9 Barton1 OneThinDime
Do you think that when I was an alcoholic (42 years ago) and my license had been suspended, do you think that stopped me from driving to the store to get more beer? Of course not.
stage9 Barton1 OneThinDime First off, not living is a haze, but you sure do point out many of my points. Alcoholics break the laws as well as drug addicts. DUI’s, whether alcohol or drugs, are illegal. But, let’s take the drugs out and just use alcohol here, since it is LEGAL TO CONSUME. First point, almost half of all drivers who were killed in crashes and tested positive for drugs also had alcohol in their system: so that means we should ban alcohol(prohibition). Second statement: Over 1.41 million drivers were arrested in 2010 for driving under the influence of alcohol or narcotics.(So in other words, they are LAW BREAKERS to begin with! So, do you think they’ll suddenly OBEY LAWS when it’s legalized and there are no consequences to their behavior?): My exact point, I think you are trying to make a point that alcohol should be banned, otherwise, as I am trying to make a point, that drugs should be legal to consume, just as alcohol is. Law breakers will break the law regardless. All of your points are about alcohol, which is legal to consume, but has fatal consequences. This is true. Prohibition didn’t lessen the drunks, it criminalized consumption, which is what the drug prohibition is doing. As with alcohol, when it was banned, people still died. It didn’t curve the deaths, and neither has the drug war. As to your last sentence, I am far from young, or stupid. You pointed out my exact reasons for legalizing drugs, or you want to reinstate prohibition, can’t tell which.
Godisright Barton1 OneThinDime Clinton and his oral issues have nothing to do with this. But, he was wrong in many ways. As to your 99,9% statement, no, far from true, cause if so, my ex-wife would be a burden to me, and she isn’t(she is an alcoholic). She stays home, on our dime, and drinks everyday to the point of drunkenness, and it doesn’t affect me(outside the fact she is living off welfare).
tinlizzieowner stage9 Barton1 OneThinDime Would banning consumption have stopped you? Of course not also. That is where I am, at consumption, not at this driving while high or drunk or whatever these people are trying to say I am. I am all for DUI’s, and I am all for allowing consumption. Prohibition didn’t work, and it isn’t working on drugs either.
Could you point out where in the Constitution it provides a person with the right to use heroin, crack, crank, meth, marijuana? Well it doesn’t. You use the false falicy of comparing drugs to alcohol. If drugs were to become legal (just look at CA’s ‘medical marijuana’), supply goes up, use goes up, crime goes up. This country does not have nearly the problem with fetal alcohol syndrome like it does with crack and meth babies. Check on those medical costs lately? Thought not.
So the Constitution does not give the age of consent for sexual relations. Given your argument, a 70 year old man could enjoy a 3 year old girl right? Aren’t those individual rights and your definition of freedom? And couldn’t someone then have sexual relations with animals because that isn’t in the Constitution either? What about 15 people married to one another, that isn’t in the Constitution but is your freedom right?
The US is a nation of laws with the Constitution as our backbone.
You can’t see and understand what people are conveying to you. If drugs were to become legal and available like alcohol, the crimes committed would more than double. It is long proven that the effects of drug use are much quicker and much more severe than alcohol. So you are okay with children raised in a household where they are breathing in marijuana? Remember, they don’t breathe in the alcohol do they.
And the people that live next door to a home cooking meth when the house blows up and their own home catches on fire is okay with you too.
The argument is exactly on point, you are arguing that anything not specifically stated in the Constitution is someone’s freedom. So Billy Boy doing the Monica must have been A-okay with you
History shows us they do it and murder innocent people. Again, according to you, since the Constitution does not prohibit drunk or drugged driving, if someone is prevent it infringes on their freedom.
Just admit it, you are okay with druggies and couldn’t give a rip the effects to innocent unborn children, spouses, siblings, neighbors, other citizens, all you care about is getting drugs easier.
If only I could move to a state that honors our Constitution. Living in the people’s republic of NJ, the only way one can get a CCP is if you’re politically connected. Maybe if I send chubby a donation?
Find a way. WI has 24 states in its CCW reciprocity.
Thank God for that young Marine.
I love it. The heroic vet does a good deed and saves a like — and the police say they don’t encourage that law abiding citizens stop these sort of acts? This is not the correct response by the police.
Just goes to show that the Minnesota authorities have been brainwashed for years about law abiding permit holders being an eligible class that has the law in their best interest as well.
This is Wisconsin but the liberal mindset is identical everywhere you go.
toongoon Godisright Right you are. Thanks for the correction.
Godisright I’ll bet the WOMAN disagrees with the police!!! Go figure….
1tootall Godisright She may go back for some more, sadly enough!
The police do need to caution, the CCW law is still new and there are lots of Dems in the legislature and likely no cases with a citizen holding someone at gun point for law enforcement to arrive running through the courts yet. BTW, this was Wisconsin but no doubt Minnesota is bleeding over the border.
I’ll turn on the MSM and wait to see if this is reported on…
Good for this hero.
The Sentinel Please don’t be holding your breath while waiting.
The Sentinel God God man! Don’t do that! That’s like staring at the sun! You have so much to live for!
stage9 The Sentinel Lol!
You notice that the Police Chief was quick to point out that if you decide to do what’s ‘right’ for another human being in a situation such as this, you better have all your ducks in a row because he is going to be just as interested in prosecuting you as he is the obvious criminal. Maybe even more so because you are encroaching on ‘his turf’.
We have been (liberally) programmed to cower in fear until somebody ‘qualified’ arrives to defend us. This honorable Marine was pushing the limits of what liberals define as ‘qualified’.
Here’s a better article! WI Conceal and Carry allowed him to restrain the perp, my state’s does not allow you to defend anyone but self and loved ones. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2294546/Marine-concealed-carry-permit-stops-man-beating-woman.html?ito=feeds-newsxml
You notice he said “the police ‘eventually’ showed up”. That’s what concealed carry is all about in the first place. When you need a cop right now, you can usually count on them being several minutes away.
Exactly! I believe someone read another article that said 5 minutes went by. That woman could have been dead and G_d knows if they guy might have carjacked someone and had another murder on his belt.
Don’t get me wrong, though I am sympathetic for the woman and she’s lucky the Marine came to her aid, I’d also be willing to speculate that she specializes in violent ‘thugs’ for boy friends and this isn’t the first time she’s been beat up. I know women who will put themselves back in the same abusive relationship, no matter how many times someone tries to help them out of one. Remember, this is merely a speculation on my part and I can be 100% wrong, so. I’m not going to spend ANY time arguing over a ‘speculation’.
Join other followers