Despite being caught, [a group of four or five males] didn’t plan on leaving empty-handed. Police say one of the suspects pulled out a firearm and pointed it at the woman to convince her to back down so they could get away with their prize. Unfortunately for them, she wasn’t as defenseless as they thought.
As it turns out, the woman has a concealed carry license and is well-trained to use it. Without hesitation, the victim pulled out her firearm and aimed directly at the thieves. She fired at the fleeing criminals, hitting one. Unfortunately, the others managed to get away and no weapon was recovered at the scene.
Police say that the wounded suspect was a 13-year-old boy. He was reportedly struck by a round in the neck and was rushed to the University of Chicago’s Comer Children’s Hospital. He was treated and is in fair condition. No one else was reported as injured in the incident.
While the incident was still under investigation, authorities quickly made a statement regarding civilians attempting to defend themselves in the event of an armed robbery. Chicago Transit Authority vice president of security Kevin Ryan says that the police are warning citizens not to try to defend themselves but to “be compliant.”
— Carrie Dominic in Female Concealed Carrier Foils Armed Robbers, Hits One
8 Responses
“Police say that the wounded suspect was a 13-year-old boy. He was reportedly struck by a round in the neck and was rushed to the University of Chicago’s Comer Children’s Hospital.”
Play adult stupid games, win the same stupid prizes.
I take it the public CTA is a (chortle) “Gun-Free Zone”? Will she likely face criminal penalties for her righteous self-defense of her life and property?
If so, lawsuits by ‘GSL’ need to be launched to correct the situation, and make the thugs fear pulling guns on the riders… 🙁
““Police say that the wounded suspect was a 13-year-old boy”
This is priceless. An 18 year old is not mature enough to be given their constitutional right to bear arms in many places, but a 13 year old is mature enough to do adult crimes.
Sounds like Toronto!
Makes sense since many in the metropolitan areas don’t have cars.
Gotta have something to give the criminals.
You could be charged if you don’t have something to give the criminal.
After all the criminal deserves your property and isn’t that why you work?
“Chicago Transit Authority vice president of security Kevin Ryan says that the police are warning citizens not to try to defend themselves but to ‘be compliant.’ ”
There’s that “lets give ’em false hope” regurgitation again simply because it MIGHT in SOME RARE CASES work less than 10% of the time. The actual studies for this ‘compliance always’ thing came about by selecting rare instances in which it did work but ignored that MIGHT happen less than 10% of the time.
According to Kleck’s “Point Blank: Guns and Violence in America” – the leading authority on the subject of compliance and referenced by the DOJ:
1. Any form of resistance, except with firearm, carries with it an injury rate of 52%.
2. Resistance with a firearm carried with it the risk of injury of 17%, but use of a firearm early in an encounter carries with it a risk of injury of 6%.
Overall, in Kleck, you 4 times less likely to be injured if you have your firearm and are prepared to use it. (or in other words 4 times greater than a non-resistance compliance rate of SOME RARE CASES where it MIGHT work less than 20% of the time – or for short an over 90% chance of no injury if you use a firearm for defense. In 2023 the serious injury rate, some died, of victims who were not armed with a firearm and did comply was over 90% where people armed with a firearm and employed the firearm avoided serious injury 96% of the time.)
Take away here summary: compliance may still result in injury (which includes death), resistance without a firearm carries a 52% chance of injury (which includes death), resistance with a firearm lowers chance of injury (which includes death) to 17%, resistance with a firearm early in the encounter further lowers risk of injury (which includes death) to 6%
If you are armed are you willing to gamble that you are not in the 25%?
if you are not armed are you willing to gamble that you are not in the 52%?
Compliance or not, resistance or not – is not a decision one needs to make. The answer is already provided, non-compliance via firearms resistance offers the best chance of no injury. But if you want, you can roll the dice and take the chance of being a good-n-dead witness because police are saying ‘comply’ because it MIGHT in SOME RARE CASES work less than 10% of the time.
correction for : “…less than 20% of the time…”
should have been …
“…”less than 10% of the time…”
sloppy fingered keyboard.
When it comes to the elites; authorities, richies, politicians, etc…, always do as they do not as they say.
They tell you to place your fob by the door. Is that what they do?
They tell you not to defend yourself. Is that what they do?
They say you don’t need guns for protection. Is that what they do?
They say conspicuous consumption is good for the economy. Is that what they do?
They say social media and screentime are good for you. Is that what they do?
They want you eating grass and bugs. Is that what they do?
They want you driving (not owning) EV’s. Is that what they do?
They want you sterilizing your kids and addicted to pornography. Is that what they do?
They say you shouldn’t build walls. Is that what they do?
They say you should welcome the illegals. Is that what they do?
They hate you. They hate me. Stop listening to what they say and pay attention to what they do.
They defend themselves with guns.
They restrict their own and their childrens access to the internet and social media.
They spend their money on assets that appreciate.
They, along with their private security, train to defend themselves.
They eat lobster and waygu beef while attending globalist meetings discussing how you get you to eat grass and bugs.
They own token EV’s but always travel in luxury SUV’s powered by fossil fuels.
They have large families.
They build walls around their property.
They ship any illegals that happen to get into their spaces away immediately.
This isn’t partisan politics. This is class. There are always a few playboys or nuevo rich idiots who behave badly but the majority of them don’t behave the way they expect all of us slobs to behave. If they did they wouldn’t be rich.
Rewarding criminal behavior invites more criminal behavior.
It seems that shooting at a fleeing person would not be considered lawful, unless that person was pointing a gun at the shooter. I think this woman may be in trouble, especially since her shot hit the boy.
Also, the linked article makes no mention of trains or the Chicago Transit Authority. So the CTA’s statement has nothing to do with the incident.