Thank goodness the woman wasn't hurt or worse. It has to be terrifying not to be able to be safe in your own home.

...'a sad necessity' in the eyes of men of principle, it would be still more unfortunate if wrongdoers should dominate just men." - Augustine of Hippo 1600 years ago. Some things change a lot and some not at all.

K&R

posts victim-blaming, such as suggestions the woman in the story was a drug dealer or involved in some other criminal enterprise, was essentially a "ammosexual" psychopath and owned a gun with the primary intent and desire to kill people, that she could have safely dispatched multiple young, strong male intruders with a baseball bat, golf club or even a can of beans, or she should have waited desperate and defenseless in a closet or under her bed while on the phone with 911 (whom she called before defending herself) because she might have survived the invasion, and hurting the poor home invaders was not worth her meager possessions or her risk of death, serious injury or sexual assault.

'Because there was an Adam Lanza there should be no AR-15s in private hands.'

Remember that some of the controllers / prohibitionists really don't believe in the whole concept of using a firearm for self-defense. They think it is immoral, and an "enlightened" society should be beyond that. That those who do so are violating the criminal's right to a fair trial. Or because they are a Buddhist or pacifistic, everyone else must be one also. Some even want to largely disarm the police ala the UK, and are naive and foolish to believe that will ever happen here.

For the uninitiated, HyperPunks© are those B&E types who, unlike most others, actually desire a confrontation with someone, not a quick and easy break-in of an unoccupied home. No casing-the- joint for these guys; they have other needs what need to be satisfied.