“A burglary suspect on (San Antonio’s) east side learned that even little old ladies may be packing heat.” When Fannie Mae Brown woke up to the sound of someone breaking into her home, she did what any 89-year-old woman would do to protect herself. Knowing she’d be no match for the burglar physically, she picked up a tool designed to equalize things a little . . .

She reached for her .38 revolver. From kens5.com:

Fannie Mae Brown says she saw the burglar’s flashlight inside the house and realized the intruder was headed toward her bedroom. She fired one shot toward the light, police said, which sent the suspect running off into the night.

Gosh. An old woman who’d otherwise be defenseless against a burglar intent on God-knows-what was able to protect herself because she owns a gun. Chances are, she’d never had a self-defense lesson or had even been to a shooting range.

She just made like Nikon – point and shoot. “Brown said she will be keeping her gun next to her from now on.” Why didn’t we think of that?

 

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

69 COMMENTS

  3. This lady should get an award! She chose NOT to be a victim, NOT to sucumb to the PC crowd, and she did San Antonio a great service. I can’t wait for (drum roll please) the Rev. Jesshy Jacked-son, and Al (n0t so) Sharp-TON to descend on her like the vultures they are, and eat her liver.

    • I agree 100%. Far better to raped and murdered by a “burglar” who entered a home knowing it was occupied.

        • I don’t really. I wish you wouldn’t say stuff like that.

          I want people to be better qualified to own and carry guns than they are now. I want tighter restrictions than we have now. Better qualified people operating within tighter restrictions would make fewer mistakes including letting their guns slip into the criminal world.

          • Presumably, Fannie Mae Brown isn’t “better qualified,” or you wouldn’t have posted this comment.

            And, of course, you want “tighter restrictions” and “better qualified” people, but you’re vague on exactly what you mean. Why not tell us? Be specific.

            You say “I don’t really. I wish you wouldn’t say stuff like that,” but the reality is that’s EXACTLY what you’re saying. Better Brown be sacrificed to whatever the intruder wanted than be able to defend herself because you, Mike, don’t approve of how she did it.

            • She said it’s better that Brown be sacrificed? I certainly didn’t.

              My point is that many of the DGU that you guys post about, even though you try your best to use good ones, are not without problems.

              Do you relieve her of the Rule of being sure of your target and what’s behind it?

              Because of that, this is not a good clean DGU.

              • I’ve read your little screeds for some time now, and one of the real highlights is your total divorce from reality. How many violent predatory criminals will have the courtesy to ply their trades in a vacuum, under completely optimal conditions for a defender to act? It doesn’t happen. Also, the article doesn’t mention that she had anyone else living in the house at the time, so under the circumstances I’d say she did know it was as safe as it would ever be to shoot at this dirtbag. If any gun owners or violent crime victims listened to nitpicking by the likes of you, there would be an epedemic of stolen guns taken from dead people who would otherwise be alive if they hadn’t stopped to ask their assailants to give the “all clear”.

          • And who gets to decide who is qualified? or what tighter restrictions would be? If it ends up being someone like Bloomberg or Emmanuel (sp?) you can keep it. “No free man shall ever be disbarred the use of arms”, Thomas Jefferson, seems to fit the intent of the Second Amendment close enough for me.

          • “I want people to be better qualified to own … guns…”

            I know just how you feel. Sometimes I wish for tighter regulations on the use of First Amendment privileges. too. Perhaps requiring a license to express an opinion.

            But then I remind myself that rights — to keep and bear arms, for example — are not an indulgence by the state. That, in fact, the state’s sole claim to legitimacy is that it protects these rights. On what basis would anyone insist that a citizen be “trained” to exercise a natural right?

              • I usually don’t respond to silly comparisons to the 1st Amendment. But, since you asked, I don’t accept the idea that gun ownership or concealed carry is a natural right.

              • Now we finally see mikes true colors. His “reasonable restrictions” would basically make sure that almost nobody could own a gun.

                And Mikey, comparisons of 2nd amendment freedoms to 1st amendment freedoms are not silly. Many of us consider both those natural rights to be equal in importance, and beleive the best way to ensure gov never takes our 1st amendment freedoms is to make sure we keep our 2nd amendment freedoms.

              • I don’t know how you get that my restrictions would mean almost no one would own a gun. That’s not true at all. All mentally sound and responsible people would, even if i had my way. I just don’t see the need to elevate it to the level of god-given and basic-human rights. That part is bullshit, but that doesn’t mean you couldn’t own them. You don’t need god-given and basic-human rights to own a car, yet you can if you meet certain requirements.
                Now are you happy? You made me use a car comparison.

              • “His “reasonable restrictions” would basically make sure that almost nobody could own a gun.”

                I really don’t see how you get that. None of my ideas would interfere with a responsible person owning guns.

              • You have never even attempted to spell out your definition of “reasonable” nevermind your definition of “responsible”.

                If terms remain undefined, your reply here is void.

          • Good thing guns are dead simple to use. Nearly everyone can operate one, which is why they are the best defensive arm.

            -D

    • Agreed ….But how will “we” react when we are her age?…and as for it being a relitive….what relitive is bumbling around a dark house in the middle of the night?……. you go granny…….just get that girl some fragmenting bullets….you know…to keep the neighbors safe….

    • Is it a good idea for 22 year-olds?

      What about 35 year-olds?

      Where do you draw the line for those who are too old to protect themselves?

      Or maybe you think the flashlight was being wielded by someone wanting to fix her air conditioner in the middle of the night? Maybe it was her long-lost uncle Bob just popping in to say hello?

      Critical thinking is a skill lacking in most humans these days.

    • This occured on the citys East side. Its not exactly a side of town filled with upstanding citizens. In fact, its the one part of town i avoid at all costs. Im sure the old lady knew exactly what was going on when she saw a flashlight in her house.

    • I think I know why Robert welcomes the felon Michael Bonomo. Most of his posts reveal the moral depravity of the anti-gun mafia. Only a sociopath would criticize an 89 year old woman living alone for defending herself against an intruder. Had Michael Bonomo been in the Warsaw Ghetto he probably would have run to the Gestapo to tell them that his fellow Jews were going to defend themselves against the SS.

      Michael Bonomo would rather see 100 old ladies raped and murdered than have one creep crap in his pants because he got shot at by an 89 year old woman.

        • Are you the convicted felon Michael Bonomo that tdiinva is referring to? If you are not, then I think you may have a libel case, although you would have to prove that tdiinva was directing the comment at you. If you are, then you should realize that “Mister” is a title denoting someone worthy of respect, which you would not be.

          • I shouldn’t be looking for Rachel, as Holmes said. “Mister” is German for manure spreader.

          • A felon is someone who commits a felony. It doesn’t imply that you have been convicted or served time. By Mr. Bonomo’s own admission he has committed felonies in the past and that is why I refer to him as a felon. I apologize if he has taken this the wrong way. From now on I will add the caveat whether convicted or not when I refer to Mr. Bonomo as a felon. Of course he could be lying about his illegal dealings to enhance his “street cred.” That often happens on the internet. So perhaps I will refer to Mr. Bonomo as either the felon or the liar.

            FLAME DELETED

            • First of all a felon is one who has been convicted of a felony. Are you kidding me with that bullshit about only having committed one? Where’s the due process or the “innocent until proven guilty” in that?

              Do you make this shit up as you go along, anything that will serve your argument however nonsensical?

              Secondly, I’ve admitted no such thing.

              Thirdly, Robert you should put a stop to this asshole. Would you allow any of your Armed Intelligentsia to be spoken about like tdiinva speaks about me?

              • Mr. Bonomo:

                If you check the dictionary you will find that the term Felon refers to someone who has committed a felony. You don’t have to be convicted. Now it has been reported that you have claimed that you done things that have violated firearms and drug laws. (Felonies) If this is untrue then why did you make such claims on other blogs? Or if these reports false why didn’t you state that they were false?

                You come here and regularly insult people. If you want to insult people be prepared to receive insults in return. You have an incredibly thin skin. As they say don’t dish it out if you can’t take it.

              • Do you seriously enjoy being as much of a hypocrite as you are evidencing yourself to be right now? I guess the being false and having a different truth every time your heart beats thing is fun for some critters.

        • Awww, it doesn’t like being called a hidden criminal. How adorable. Maybe if it wasn’t a hypocrite someone would care.

    • Ah, TTAG’s own Alan Colmes Jr has returned for more!

      She was sure of her target. What’s your problem with that?

    • Perhaps Mike would like to give out his home address. Potential Bad Guys would be interested to know Mike is opposed to defending one’s own home from intruders. (Perhaps Mike could also post a complete inventory of his valuables so the above-mentioned BG’s will know exactly what they’re looking for when they enter his undefended home).

    • If you live alone and see a flashlight in your living room at 3 AM chances are it’s not Santa Claus bringing you gifts.

    • Damn, that’s brutal. I know a guy whose grandma has a .22lr Webley she keeps by her TV chair and in the nightstand when she goes to bed. It gets locked up when the grandchildren come over.

  7. Good thing she didn’t hit him, it would have turned into a media circus. She would be on trial for murder.

  8. I LOVE IT!!! Everybody should have the right to protect themselves, especially little old ladies… there are alot of sick people in the world. Ive said it many times before, but it certainly doesnt hurt, I would rather have one and not need it, than to need one and not have it!

  11. Now that’s the kind of death panel I’d agree to.
    “You break into my house, I shoot through the paneling, you die.”

  12. Someone should help Ms. Brown down to the range: so her aim improves. It just takes a little practice.

  13. Wish you’d said “like Kodak”, because they invented point-and-shoot with the Brownie.

  14. Here in MA we just had the opposite outcome, for the second time this year an elderly woman was murdered by a knife wielding home intruder in S. Boston.

    Yet another criminal enabled by Deval Patrick and the “we discourage self help” MA legislators who would rather the elderly were killed than trust the citizens with firearms.

  15. I think Dan Zimmerman was premature to say that Fannie Mae Brown had probably never been on a shooting range. People that own guns take them very seriously.

    Rhetoric becomes just that when you feel the weight of a gun and you know can kill someone. Everyone that owns a gun thinks long and hard about when to use it.

    No one gets a gun without shooting it first. The kick, the weight, the type of ammunition is all very important. No one wants the bullet to go through their wall and kill a neighbor. No one wants a gun that could break their wrist. No one wants a gun that kicks so hard that the second bullet could go through the ceiling. Conversely, no one wants a gun that will only make a small flesh wound. They want a gun that will do the job. Nothing more, nothing less.

    Most gun owners will not shoot to protect their T.V. They shot to save their lives. That is the way it should be. That is what Fannie Mae Brown did. Good for her.

Comments are closed.