Albuquerque Girl Scares Burglars Away With Pink Rifle

“I ran back into my mom’s room and grabbed her little pink rifle, and there was two bullets in there,” she said.

With the loaded rifle, Gutierrez said she checked the bathroom and then the living room ready to defend herself. She said she ran to her mother’s closet and called 911.

Full story – HERE

That could have ended badly if she didn’t have that rifle. Two shots is better than zero shots any day of the week.

Pretty awesome that even though she only learned how to shoot a few days prior, she still had the guts and the know how to do what she did.

42 COMMENTS

JUMP DOWN ↓ TO ADD ANOTHER

ariggsd December 21, 2010 at 09:02 am

I believe this puts the score at: Guns-5461246 and Gun Control-0

Reply

Jesse December 23, 2010 at 01:13 pm

Apart from the 6 million people who have shot themselves, for example, my recently departed (not from a gun) step father.

That put’s gun control ahead.

wimp’s use guns. wimp.

Reply

Iman Azol December 23, 2010 at 02:00 pm

Suicide is not dependent on method. If you wish to make that case, Japan has a higher violent death rate than the US, mostly from pills (suicide is considered an act of violence).

Are you suggesting this little girl is a wimp? Or, since your stepfather killed himself with a gun, that he is a wimp?

It sounds as if you could benefit from some grief counseling.

Reply

I has read December 23, 2010 at 02:16 pm

How can you tell that his dad commited suicide by shooting himself? Especially since he explicitly said his step father did not die from shooting himself… Just because a lot of asians commit suicide it does not change the statistics for gun violence. You’re a real piece of work. And ya that little girl has a pink rifle, she’s a sociopathic wimp.

Reply

Thorgrimr December 23, 2010 at 11:48 pm

Jesse and I has read:

You two are effing idiots. Spineless, gutless, cretins like you are a large part of what is wrong with this nation. This little girl had the both tool she needed to defend herself from three larger, stronger criminal adversaries and the courage to use it if she had to and you attack her? How DARE she presume to hold her life precious, and defend herself from armed attackers who could, for all we know, have been bent on rape and murder. They were obviously ready to commit violence against anyone in the home, as they went there armed.

If YOU don’t hold your life and person as valuable and are not willing to defend same, at least have the decency to not villify a little girl (or anyone else) who hasn’t been so corrupted by spineless PC drivel that they will surrender to villainous scum willing to steal what is not theirs and kill to do it.

Reply

semperfi December 24, 2010 at 03:10 am

Jesse and retard (I has read),

By your logic everyone who has had to take a life with a firearm to preserve thier own life is a “wimp”? Every soldier that has ever defended your right submit moronic comments is a “wimp”? Every Law Enforcement officer that puts there life on the line every day to keep you comfortably setting around in your parents attic oblivious to the real world is a “wimp”? And that little girl is a “wimp”????? I truely hope, Jessie and I Has Read, that no one ever puts you in a life threatening situation as you will be totally at there mercy. Its your right to choose your own path, as for myself, if the time ever come when i have to take another human life to preserve my own, I will be ready. And pertaining to this story, I’m glad we now have one more hero instead of 6,000,001 victims.

Reply

Jude November 11, 2011 at 10:51 am

No, smart people use guns to defend themselves – like this girl. She was outnumbered. What would she have done without a gun? Clearly she would’ve been robbed or maybe even worse.

Reply

snoopycomputer December 22, 2010 at 03:03 pm

That’s a single-shot cricket rifle by Keystone arms, no magazine. 22’s aren’t exactly high speed low drag to get in the chamber. Its good the gremlins beat feet when they did, both for their sake and hers.
Had she not been armed, I’m sure armed teenage boys could have thought of something to do with a teen girl completely under their anonymous control.

Reply

Jesse December 23, 2010 at 01:17 pm

Yes, giving out more guns is the solution.

When my car broke down i shot it, simple fix. When i couldn’t blow out a candle on my birthday cake, hey uncle larry got shot, but he gave lame gifts anyway

/i’m really scared for you people.
//not for myself though, you wouldn’t make it a day with that attitude in parts of NYC

Reply

Iman Azol December 23, 2010 at 02:01 pm

It sounds as if you need some serious therapy, if you think guns are appropriate for car trouble.

People like you are why people like me keep guns. Sooner or later you’re going off the deep end.

Reply

John Doe December 23, 2010 at 04:59 pm

Iman, It’s called sarcasm, you f**king idiot.

Reply

saywhat? December 23, 2010 at 09:25 pm

So shooting the car in unacceptable but, shooting Uncle Larry accidently is acceptable.

Fine, I hate lame gifts too. As long as we can rationalize Uncle Larry’s injuries.

Excuse me while I go shoot my car….

Reply

Tyler Durden December 24, 2010 at 05:20 pm

All of you are so fucking retarded.

As if you somehow think you are going to change someones opinion on gun control by calling them names, or taking obvious sarcasm literally.

What are you, 10? Grow up and deal with the fact that people won’t always agree with you, especially on the internet.

Reply

Jude November 11, 2011 at 10:52 am

Nice strawman argument, moron.

Reply

kevin c December 23, 2010 at 10:38 am

The family knew one of the robbers (not uncommon). They were trying to steal guns . Not exactly a bragging right for pro guns.

Reply

Manty01 December 26, 2010 at 06:05 pm

A simple matter of evolutionary mechanics: those who abhor it, but will nonetheless commit lethal violence against animals of any kind that endanger them and their tribe, deserve to live a fruitful and happy existence. Those unwilling to defend themselves by even an intellectual standard, need not pollute the space with spiteful drivel, they will simply cease existing by their own actions. The bolt action 22LR she had was a good enough tool for the job. Her next decision would undoubtedly been the right one: to kill the most dangerous animal, the armed one. A shot in the face or throat from a 22LR at point blank range will kill you just as fast as a .50 cal will. Her execution of the bolt was flawless, clearly indicating that she could get the second round loaded and ready for terminal performance before one of the other animals could successfully rearm. They were the lucky ones that day.

Reply

Jude November 11, 2011 at 10:52 am

They could’ve easily been trying to steal anything else, though.

Reply

fork December 23, 2010 at 10:47 am

“Not exactly a bragging right for pro guns?”

This story shows that
1) having a gun can save your life even when you’re an 11-year old girl and
2) laws won’t keep criminals from trying to get guns.

now, I don’t know how you read it, but by my count this is a pretty pro-gun story.

Yes, the story could have turned out horribly, but this time it didn’t-thanks to safe, responsible gun stewardship.

Reply

Jesse December 23, 2010 at 01:14 pm

So what you got out of this is that we should arm 11 year olds?

And your allowed to pro-create? Do you wear a helmet when you walk outside?

Reply

Jessie December 23, 2010 at 02:00 pm

You being someone that doesn’t know how to properly spell “you’re” is capable of and allowed to pro-create?

Reply

Iman Azol December 23, 2010 at 02:04 pm

My daughter has been armed since age 4, my son since 6. They’re honor students with exemplary behavior. And yes, they wear helmets outside…when riding bikes on streets full of idiots armed with cars.

Now, perhaps we shouldn’t arm YOU, but your moral and intellectual betters aren’t a problem.

olegvolkDOTnet/gallery/friendsandstrangers/madmike/m4morrigan_4476.jpg.html

Reply

Bob Jones December 24, 2010 at 07:16 pm

@Jesse,

Look, moron, clearly we shouldn’t intentionally arm 11 year olds, anyone with a brain, other than you, apparently got the reference.

In an emergency situation where you have to defend yourself, a gun is a good *TOOL*. The gun is only as good as the person using it. That’s the only kind of “gun control” that I believe in.

If someone broke into YOUR house, armed… what would you do? “Here, take everything, just don’t shoot me!”

No thanks. You break into my home armed and your life is forfeit. I would NEVER use a gun for anything other than self defense in an emergency situation.

I think that’s the whole point. Guns are not to be taken lightly, but are a necessary evil in our world, I really wish you idiotic gun control nuts would realize that.

Reply

Mike August 5, 2011 at 10:09 am

‘Procreate’ is not hyphenated.

Reply

bullsballs December 23, 2010 at 11:22 am

It is time to take the laws out of the hands of greedy career politicians and keep the laws to ourselves.
The lawyer/politician should be hung/shot/dismembered and put on public display.

Several laws were broken here. An underage person had unrestricted access to a firearm. The firearm was loaded and not under adult supervision, and the firearm was not locked in a security vault.

All of these infractions could cause the owner to have prison time, fines and loss of their gun ownership rights.

But the libtards that make these laws would rather see the little girl raped and killed…

Backwards written was this!

Reply

thisguyisamoron December 23, 2010 at 12:13 pm

Your such a moron, lol.

Reply

Jason December 23, 2010 at 01:18 pm

Yeah, if anyone should have a gun it’s you.[/sarcasm]
I mean, one girl saving herself really makes up for how many who die because of it?
Funny how other countries that have gun laws, you know – civilized ones, have less gun related murders. Right?
I’m just glad I don’t live around idiots like you.

Reply

tony December 23, 2010 at 05:19 pm

Less gun related murders maybe but less murders no. guns put a 90 pound woman on a level field with a 250 pound man

Reply

Chris December 24, 2010 at 12:29 am

Since no one else pointed it out, no laws were necessarily broken. It is highly dependent on the state with regards to the ones you listed. In many states there are no such requirements.

Reply

Ruhk December 23, 2010 at 02:50 pm

Guns dont kill people, criminals kill people.

Had that little girl not had a gun, she may have been the victim of a violent crime. MAY HAVE. Just because she had the rifle does not mean that she ensured her safety. But it helps.

Furthermore, for all the liberals that believe that removing all the guns is the answer; how long does it take the police to respond to a call in your area, and do you honestly believe it to be quickly enough to save your life? (assuming you were able to call them while on the receiving end of a violent home invasion)

All this girl did was protect her life and liberty. Nothing more, nothing less. Give her a pat on the head and a cookie and move on.

“The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subject races to possess arms. History shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by so doing. Indeed, I would go so far as to say that the supply of arms to the underdogs is a sine qua non for the overthrow of any sovereignty. So let’s not have any native militia or native police. German troops alone will bear the sole responsibility for the maintenance of law and order throughout the occupied Russian territories, and a system of military strong-points must be evolved to cover the entire occupied country.” –Adolf Hitler, dinner talk on April 11, 1942, quoted in Hitler’s Table Talk 1941-44: His Private Conversations, Second Edition (1973), Pg. 425-426. Translated by Norman Cameron and R. H. Stevens. Introduced and with a new preface by H. R. Trevor-Roper. The original German papers were known as Bormann-Vermerke.

Reply

Logan December 23, 2010 at 03:09 pm

Switzerland has one of the lowest violent crime rates in the world and also one of the highest percentages of gun ownership. Granted the gun owners have almost all had extensive training in the use of fire-arms…So it’s obvious that guns are not the problem…Rather it is guns in the hands of idiots (especially when it’s only the idiots who have them).

A smart course of action might be to require more education for gun owners but getting rid of guns altogether is obviously not the solution.

Reply

Mayree December 23, 2010 at 10:41 pm

for. real.
kudos.

Reply

shiny666 December 23, 2010 at 05:16 pm

i’m not sure if anyone has ever considered that the majority of people won’t be able to safely reach their firearms in time if they are stored in most of lock boxes i’ve seen. i mean consider how much time you don’t have to react once someone has broken into your home. hoorah for glass-paned gun cabinets and keeping the ammo by the weapon. don’t cut yourself on the glass; use the ball bat.

this reminds me of a rule in one area or other where you could have a firearm in your vehicle (glove box, locked), but all of your ammunition had to be well out of reach. that way you could be shot and killed before you loaded the thing, let alone get a shot off. this was another prime example of ignorant regulation. so you’d to unlock the glove box, crawl across the vehicle and/or get into the trunk, then load and engage the weapon, all before being able to defend yourself against assailants which have already loaded, cocked, safety-released semi-automatic or possibly fully automatic firearms, potentially with multilple attackers. moreover, it’s quite possible that they already have a time advantage by having targetted you and planned their actions before you even noticed them.

this is the type of decision we need to avoid: an overreaction by regulating authorities. a political facade catering to a restrictive school of thought. regulation where education comes short. a blanket policy. making those effectively powerless that are already unfairly disadvantaged is not the way to make the irresponsible or uneducated safer.

you don’t keep first aid kits out of the hands/reach of children just because they might have sharps in them, do you? do you hide a defribilator from a child because it presents a potential electrical hazard? no, you should tell them it’s dangerous, but it’s important for emergencies, and you show them right where it is, lest you die right beside it, before any help arrives.

Reply

shiny666 December 23, 2010 at 05:17 pm

grammatical correction: “…got a shot off.”

Reply

shiny666 December 23, 2010 at 05:19 pm

along with spelling/typographical error “multiple”. forgive my horrible typing, and feel free to disagree.

Reply

ariggsd December 23, 2010 at 07:39 pm

My simple belief is that if everyone owned at least one gun wether they kept it within reasonable distance for emergency use or not, the simple fact that EVERYONE knows that EVERYONE else has a gun would give pause for the thought of “hey, if I try to commit a violent act against that person there is the HIGH possibility that I might get shot, because I KNOW that they at least own a gun.” Which in itself is a HUGE deterrent to MOST violent acts. True, it wouldn’t be a cure-all, so to speak, but it would defiantly help a lot more than disarming everyone, and putting anyone with malicious intent in the mind set of “I’m bigger than them, so therefore I can have my way with them in anyway I please and there is nothing that they can do about it.”

Reply

Mayree December 23, 2010 at 10:40 pm

People of all ages should be properly informed on how to safely handle and use a weapon; for hunting, for protection. It is better to know how to use an armed weapon the right way, than to wish you had.
Those raised in the country have far less incidences of shooting others on an accidental basis because of their previous knowledge. It is those in the city, who buy one ‘just in case’, who wind up shooting their Fed-Ex man or roommate.
There is also less gun-related violence in states that allow an open carry policy, meaning residents of the state are allowed to wear a gun in a holster in plain sight.
*Food for thought.

Reply

Daryl December 24, 2010 at 03:16 am

OR….. Some inconsiderate adult left an armed 11yr old girl at home alone, she is neither capable or trained for making the decision of when to apply deadly force. Those boys could have been hurt, or worse killed. Think about how that would have affected their friends and family. I hope my own daughter would have the foresight to see the consequences of her actions. That’s why I teach her to emulate nature and play dead while defecating herself.

Reply

slapleather December 24, 2010 at 05:48 am

Hey, JESSE…. I bet I know why your step father offed himself… he couldn’t take having an idiotic moron like you for a step kid. By the way, how did he do it? Did he put his head in a vise and then turn the crank until his head was crushed? A gun would have been much easier. Why don’t YOU try it?

Reply

buckshotbill December 24, 2010 at 05:56 am

Jesse – I can picture you now, if it was you in that house instead of the girl. You would be on your knees, hands together begging for your life. You would be simultaneously sobbing, begging, shaking, and pushing a turd out into your shorts. If we all get into a fight for our lives, I sure hope Jesse is MY partner! Men like Jesse are who built this country!

Reply

Lulabelle December 24, 2010 at 06:10 am

You bunch of A-holes, leave Jesse alone! Just because his opinion differs from yours, you attack him. Cowards. To prove that I am not like the rest of you retards, I hereby offer my body to Jesse to hump as much as he likes. I know every sex position there is, and I am extremely fertile. I would consider it an honor to have Jesse’s baby. Jesse, let me know where we can meet so that you can ram your 11 inch baby maker into me! Besides, this would be fun for me, as I have not had sex with an invertebrate yet. I am getting so horny, imagining that spineless dwarf, Jesse, crawling all over me!

Reply

ron December 24, 2010 at 02:07 pm

While this seems a heartwarming story for gun advocates, it didn’t sound like the pink gun played any part.
They busted in, she tried to hide, they saw her, she ran into a bedroom, then they ran away and got caught. Then she loaded the gun and checked the house. Good for her. Seriously. She was very brave and took action.

But if they wanted to harm her they could have crashed through the door even if she had any time to lock it. She could have been calling 911, or gettina a gun, or escaping through a window for all they knew. They could have easily over-powered her if they wanted to restain or harm her, or could even have plain shot her before she could find and load the gun.

If it’s true that the guns were the target of the breakin, then in this case guns were the cause of the problem, and not in any way related to the solution.

Reply

kid charlemagne(nor) December 25, 2010 at 07:38 am

the robbers must have been kinda gay, trying to steal a pink gun:P

Reply

LEAVE A COMMENT:

Previous post:

Next post: