SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
The Washington Post reports that an internet escort in Charleston, W.Va., may have saved her own life and the lives of many other women, when she shot and killed an alleged attacker who showed up at the woman's home on July 18 after answering an escort ad she had placed on Backpage.com. Neal Falls showed up with multiple pairs of handcuffs and a Subaru full of weapons and tools, including a shovel, knives, a bulletproof vest, a machete, bleach, trash bags, sledgehammers and axes. In Falls's pocket, police said, was a list of names of potential future victims, all of whom are sex workers who advertised on Backpage. Investigators are trying to determine whether Falls is responsible for a string of slayings targeting sex workers in Ohio and Nevada. "We are entering his DNA profile into CODIS, which is a national crime DNA database, to see if it matches any previous submissions from anywhere in the United States," says Steve Cooper, the Charleston Police Department's chief of detectives. "If his DNA has been located in any other crimes and his profile was entered into CODIS, there will be a match."
From the moment Falls showed up at the home of his latest alleged victim, he turned violent. "I knew he was there to kill me," says the victim who asked not to be identified. Falls pulled a gun on her and began strangling her. "When he strangled me he just wouldn't let me get any air. I grabbed my rake and when he laid the gun down to get the rake out of my hands, I shot him. I just grabbed the gun and shot behind me." Local authorities are treating the shooting as an act of self-defense. According to Cooper, "when we find multiple sets of handcuffs, a machete, an axe, a bulletproof vest and container of bleach, the first thing that comes to an investigator's mind is, 'This is a serial killer kit.'"
(Score: 5, Insightful) by captain normal on Monday July 27 2015, @05:30AM
In this case the lady did not save herself with her own weapon. She managed to over come her assailant by alert action. Still For once I've got to agree with Runaway. The 2nd Amendment says the right to bear arms shall not be infringed. It does not say the right to bear arms shall not be infringed unless by court of law or legislative action. The founding Fathers of the U.S. were leary of a standing army as well as a national police force and had a huge loathing of monopolistic companies such as the East India Company. They believed that the best defense against tyranny was an armed citizenry. I have no fear of normal people carrying firearms. I do have great fear of only the police, gangs and terrorists carrying arms.
Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts"- --Daniel Patrick Moynihan--
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 27 2015, @05:39PM
But it does say, and I quote:
Ignoring literally half of the amendment is called "cherry picking". To get it to say what you want it to say, it has to be amended.
(Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Monday July 27 2015, @07:08PM
That clause is the rationale; it doesn't contribute any directive to the sentence. Try this instead:
The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed, because a well-regulated militia is necessary to the security of a free state.
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 28 2015, @12:22AM
Except your change in wording isn't what it says. The amendment is very clear that the purpose of owning firearms is for participation in the well-regulated militias, which were intended to be the only army of the country, what with a standing army of more than 2 years duration being explicitly unconstitutional.