81-Year-Old Korean War Vet Fights Off Carjacker
Barney and Constance Trusewicz, married for 56 years, stopped for gasoline at a local service station. As Korean War vet Barney went to ask the attendant to activate the pump, “39-year-old Christopher Bowens had somewhere to go and he decided to carjack Constance and Barney.”
“It turns out Bowens just got out of prison in December and has as many priors as he does tattoos — numerous bank robberies, larcenies and stolen cars.”
Bowens jumped in the driver’s seat and ordered Constance to get out. Barney saw his wife being threatened and hustled over on his “bad knees” to confront Bowens. Barney reached in, turned off the car, and wrestled with Bowens, who had a knife. Holding onto the knife hand, Barney finally forced Bowens to leave.
Here’s why it’s a good idea for law-abiding senior citizens to go armed:
“He indicated that he targeted the elderly couple because of their age,” Lincoln Park Police Sergeant Joseph Lavis said in court. “He felt that they would offer little or no resistance.”
Bowens was arrested nearby and is back in jail. With this latest attack, he faces a life sentence. Looks like Bowens has “somewhere to go” after all.
Barney and Constance are safe and unharmed.
Atta boy Mr. Barney!!
They just do not make ‘em like that anymore…
Indeed!!
The punk should have checked for a VFW or Veterans sticker on the bumper before approaching that couple. Man, you don’t mess with those old guys.
This is not a happy ending. These old folks could easily have been killed.
The take-away is this: travel armed and concealed and shoot to kill. Every mutt you kill in self-defense is no longer going to be a threat to the next (unarmed) victim.
A happy ending would be the perp dead in the gas station parking lot.
So let me see if I read you correctly. You’re not happy because the attacker is still alive, and you’re confusing your hypothetical utopian outcome with the reality that the elderly couple is safe and unharmed. But instead of taking responsibility for your disagreeing with their actions, you project it on them for failing to live up to your standards.
Now let’s examine your standards. The only happy outcome is a dead attacker. This again is your projection of your values and expectations upon others. You attempt to interfere with how others choose to deal with situations. You declare that killing the attacker is the only happy outcome, ignoring how people who really shoot attackers have to deal with post-traumatic stress and remorse, not to mention legal costs and fearing reprisals by family members, or social snubbing by neighbors who read the media’s version that makes the defender the criminal and the attacker the “good boy who was just turning his life around.”
You also contravene standard self-defense training, which teaches students shoot to stop the attack. Yes, sometimes this ends in dead attackers, but we don’t go around looking to kill “mutts.”
You also publicly declare your intent to use your firearm to kill anybody you think is attacking you. This documents premeditation on your part and could be grounds for prosecution should you ever have to defend your life.
You also help the Brady Campaign to stereotype gun owners as sexually challenged, enraged vigilantes looking to reaffirm our virility by using a substitute phallic symbol to dominate others.
Did I miss anything?
Mr. Nemerov:
Killing someone is the absolute last thing you want to do. If you HAVE to shoot, you shoot to stop the fight. You shoot to LIVE. The fact that the perp might die as the result of his own action is HIS fault, not yours.
Mr. Trusewicz had control of the weapon, and forced the perp to leave. Because of his age, and the fact that the perp was armed, had he been carrying, he might have been justified in dropping the hammer. Law enforcement officers facing someone with an edged weapon would by training have dropped the hammer if the perp was within seven yards but out of arm’s reach. The fact that the perp was in a confined space and preoccupied with Mrs. Trusewicz worked to Mr. Trusewicz’s advantage, along with the fact that Mrs. Trusewicz would now present an additional adversary to the perp.
The way it played out was a good outcome.
Not sure if you are responding to Paul or me? In my response, I mentioned that we train people to shoot to stop. I addressed Paul’s desire to “kill all mutts” whatever that means. My lede was “A self-defense story with a happy ending.” Paul said the ending was not happy because the attacker lived.
As you note, the defender stopped the attack, and that’s all that matters.
We don’t know if Barney was armed. Generally, a grand jury would review a case of armed self-defense by an 80+ man against a 30-something attacker armed with a knife, and return a no-bill. Disparity of physical force, speed and agility, attack versus defense.
I am not sure I did this right. I was primarily responding to the Dirty Harry/Rambo wannabe, but I also wanted to keep the chain of responses in the correct order. If I did it wrong, it’s my bad. Beside, I’m not sure he would listen. This guy is confusing Hollywood with real life. Hollywood deals in stereotypes. Liberals who want nothing better than to destroy us draw up these stereotypes. As you said, this clown would make the perfect poster child for the hoplophobic Obozo/Brady campaign.
As to “post-traumatic stress,” I’m not sure if this isn’t a modern development. My Dad’s war, WWII (Army AmeriCal Division Artillery, Guadalcanal) was far bigger, but you never saw events blamed on “post-traumatic stress” that you see now, and in the numbers you see now. It seems to me that this started with the expulsion of Jesus Christ from our public schools. When I grew up, we had civics, American history, and American government as part of our core curriculum in grade school. We also had our Christian roots taught. We learned that our criminal, civil, and moral code were originally based on the Ten Commandments. We also learned that recognizing our Christian roots did not rise to the level of IMPOSING Christianity on the people. We were taught that we could worship in the manner of our choosing, or not to worship at all. Those who had the distasteful task of having to kill people in war had Jesus Christ they could turn to for comfort and whatever help they needed. They knew to get help from their chaplain in this endeavor. Now that we have Secular Humanism imposed on us as the de facto state religion, we are now seeing this “post-traumatic stress” come to fruition.
Thanks for clarifying, because it seems we agree on Paul’s post. Anyway, of course Post Traumatic Stress didn’t suddenly originate recently. My reference is from the NRA’s Personal Protection manual, one of our sources at KR Training. As you note, running out and shooting may seem emotionally satisfying in theory to some, but the reality is that there are many unpredictable consequences when a good person takes a life. It may still be a good idea to consider retreat as a possible option, even when the law tells you it’s not required. This is a personal choice when one performs scenario planning.
This is a good example of why little old women should go armed.
Yes, Howard, you did. It looks like you missed your meds.
Heh. Unsubstantiated attempted insults? Are you a psychiatrist? Otherwise, it looks like you’re practicing medicine without a license, making a diagnosis, and without any proper intake at that.
If you like making yourself look silly in public, by all means keep at it.
Mr. Nemerov:
This may be the same clown who writes under several different screen names. His trademark is ad hominem attacks of this ilk when he cannot come up with constructive comments.
I have two more quick comments. I just observed that “post-traumatic stress” appears to be more prevalent in generations that were not raised in a more Christian/less secular environment. It has probably always existed. Christians appear to be better equipped spiritually to deal with it.
I have a final comment. Learning to avoid trouble or retreating if given the chance was something I learned to do because of a job I had some forty years ago, after I got out of the Army. Let’s just leave it at that.