• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

ARMED WOMAN ENDS SERIAL RAPIST'S CAREER

U

Ulfwald

Moderator Emeritus<br>Elite Member
Meet Jean Zamirripa. She's a retired medical assistant. While she prepared for bed on November 18, 2000, she heard someone trying to break in through her back door. She knew that two women had been raped in her Colorado Springs neighborhood recently. A friend had persuaded her to keep a gun in her home. So she picked up her loaded .38-caliber revolver and headed for the back of the house. When the intruder burst in, she was ready--she'd even braced her elbow on a countertop to steady her aim. She fired four shots and put three bullets into the intruder. The man fled but was later picked up by cops.

Zamirripa's would-be attacker was Anthony Peralez. Police became aware of the similarities between the attack on Jean Zamirripa's house and the rapes of three other women in the Colorado Springs area. DNA evidence tied Peralez to the rapes. Last Wednesday, Peralez was found guilty of 51 charges including sexual assault. It's likely that Peralez will spend the rest of his misbegotten life in prison. Thanks to Jean Zamirripa, this rapist will no longer terrorize the residents of Colorado Springs.

Many folks don't realize that law enforcement isn't legally bound to protect individual citizens--only the public as a whole. Odds are they're not going to get there in time to prevent the crime. The police usually get there in time to clean up. That's why many law-abiding individuals own guns. They realize they are ultimately responsible for their personal safety.

A gun in the hand is infinitely more useful to you than a telephone if someone's breaking through your kitchen window at 3:00 in the morning.
News Article.3


Well folks once again, a gun was used to protect a innocent life. Yes I know that you gun grabbers are just seething right now, but deal with it.

Now you ask why do I post these stories? So that there will be another side presented to you other than the leftist media that only serves to demonize guns and remove responsibility from the individual.
 
For all your "reports", there are probably others that argue the opposite. Get a life. Most people here are quite opinionated and are probably not going to change their views based on what you imply or try to imply.
 
My question is: How does a person with 3 X .38 rounds in them flee?!

Oh and BTW some innocent was murdered by a gunman in LA last night during an armed robbery!
 
I follow the Church of Heston.

I have, and always will, believe that weapons in law abiding citizens will help more then they can ever harm. Anyone who thinks otherwise has not been presented with the proper facts.

Case in point: Rosie O?Donnel. A hypocrite to the worst degree. Always campaigning against the evils of firearms in private citizens. Oh but what?s this?? Her bodyguard applies for a permit to carry a firearm? Oh no! But it?s okay.. he must be a special case.

Just thinking about that example angers me to such a great degree... I have to hit reply now before I punch my fist through the wall in disgust.
 
sigh.... what are your articles proving, that law abiding citizens should have guns? I've said that all along, but the criminals get them just as easily and that's where the problem lies.
 


<< She fired four shots and put three bullets into the intruder. The man fled but was later picked up by cops. >>

Which indicates to me a shotgun is the way to go.
 
Ufwald-

While I am a proponent of gun control, I was very happy to hear this story. This story is a prime example of a responsible gun owner who knows how to use a weapon properly.

Ryan
 
I have but one question for the anti-rights activists: If Jean Zamirripa had not had a gun and had not been willing to use it for lawful self-defense, who would Peralez have targeted next? You, your mother, your daughter? If you think an armed neighbor is a threat to your safety, perhaps it is time to think again. Your life may depend upon it!
 


<< Oh and BTW some innocent was murdered by a gunman in LA last night during an armed robbery! >>



That is not the point. There is a difference between criminals with guns and law abiding citizens. Criminals will ALWAYS get their hands on guns. Anyone who thinks otherwise is a moron. If they are banned us lawful citizens will lose the right to protect ourselves while the criminals still get their hands on them.
 


<< Case in point: Rosie O?Donnel. A hypocrite to the worst degree. Always campaigning against the evils of firearms in private citizens. Oh but what?s this?? Her bodyguard applies for a permit to carry a firearm? Oh no! But it?s okay.. he must be a special case. >>



she was just at some event here in michigan with her "ladyfriend"(read: lesbian lova) and she had 2 bodyguards. Guess what? Both were armed. This is according to the news woman on 101.1 WRIF.
 
Case in point: Rosie O?Donnel. A hypocrite to the worst degree. Always campaigning against the evils of firearms in private citizens. Oh but what?s this?? Her bodyguard applies for a permit to carry a firearm? Oh no! But it?s okay.. he must be a special case.


Rosie is not for banning firearms. She is for tighter restrictions. She thinks - as any sane person should - that things like background checks should be run for people buying handguns at gun shows and stuff like this.
 
gun control might help take crime down a bit, but in the long run, its just a bad idea. We do not live in a perfect society, and we never will. With or without guns there is still going to be greed, crime, and death. This is just the way things are.
 
The solution is not to further restrict gun use, we should have more severe punishment for people who commit crimes with guns. Singapore gives the death penalty to ANYONE who uses a firearm in a crime, regardless of whether or not it was fired. Guess what...they have an EXTREMELY small problem with gun control.
 
Some of the pro-gun people around here are either willfully ignorant or just stupid to ignore the downside of guns. Guns kill much more than they protect, the only purpose of guns in society isn't just to save poor defenseless women from evil rapists. Whether you want to face the facts or not, the gruesome reality is that people are shot, killed, and murdered everyday, and more of them are innocent than not.

If a small handgun will defend a household, why do we need people owning multiple uzis, rifles, any weapon for mass killing. I haven't heard of so many mass breakins or robbers that an automatic weapon would be needed to take out the intruder. Even then, what is so scary about regulations on handguns? If they are kept out of the hands of criminals and stricter regulations make sure that guns aren't on the streets is it gonna take away your freedom? More than one or two guns in a household is outrageous (unless maybe they are for hunting) and there is no reason for assualt weapons to be allowed for the general public, they aren't meant for "defending the home".

Guns don't kill, but they are instruments that make killing much easier. Because some people are keeping themselves ignorant of the harm these weapons do, innocent people are dying everyday. Your gun might save your own life, but your so called "freedom" is taking the lives of others. But why care about anyone else, right? You've got your own gun, no need to bother with those who don't. Its disgusting to live in a nation where so many people can just ignore the deaths of other so blatantly because of their own selfish desires :disgust:
 
when someone receives a gun, he receives a very efficient and sure way of killing another person. This give the person great power, but great responsibility as well. It is similar to getting a drivers license, although it should be much stricter as it is designed to kill. IMHO a new form of weapon should be created for self defence that is not as lethal as a gun, but just as effective. Bats and melee weaponsare usually not a good idea, considering you have to be close to attack. Something more along the lines of a taser would be perfect for law abiding citizens who want to be able to protect their home
 


<< Singapore gives the death penalty to ANYONE who uses a firearm in a crime, regardless of whether or not it was fired. Guess what...they have an EXTREMELY small problem with gun control. >>


😀

Siva, from what I understand, the whole debate is really about the legality of firearms, not stricter regulations. Anybody can live with regulations, but some people get paranoid without an object which can pretty much guarantee your safety (Unless the criminal is also armed. Oh well, shoot first.)
 


<< Some of the pro-gun people around here are either willfully ignorant or just stupid to ignore the downside of guns. Guns kill much more than they protect, the only purpose of guns in society isn't just to save poor defenseless women from evil rapists. Whether you want to face the facts or not, the gruesome reality is that people are shot, killed, and murdered everyday, and more of them are innocent than not.

If a small handgun will defend a household, why do we need people owning multiple uzis, rifles, any weapon for mass killing. I haven't heard of so many mass breakins or robbers that an automatic weapon would be needed to take out the intruder. Even then, what is so scary about regulations on handguns? If they are kept out of the hands of criminals and stricter regulations make sure that guns aren't on the streets is it gonna take away your freedom? More than one or two guns in a household is outrageous (unless maybe they are for hunting) and there is no reason for assualt weapons to be allowed for the general public, they aren't meant for "defending the home".

Guns don't kill, but they are instruments that make killing much easier. Because some people are keeping themselves ignorant of the harm these weapons do, innocent people are dying everyday. Your gun might save your own life, but your so called "freedom" is taking the lives of others. But why care about anyone else, right? You've got your own gun, no need to bother with those who don't. Its disgusting to live in a nation where so many people can just ignore the deaths of other so blatantly because of their own selfish desires :disgust: >>



now you are just talking out your ass. Me, a lawful gun owner, has nothing to do with whether or not some gangsters in NYC carry guns around and kill people. What the hell does our 'selfish desire' have to do with murder, something that has been happening since the dawn of time, regardless of weapon availability. If you want to make the streets safer, push for stricter registration laws. Don't just sit and whine and insult people who own guns. That's just pathetic.
 
Skoorb

<< Oh and BTW some innocent was murdered by a gunman in LA last night during an armed robbery! >>

By a repeat offender most likely. The same people who push for gun control are the same pantywaists that want to coddle criminals and "rehabilitate" them instead of locking them up for life. Maybe if everybody would start pushing for some serious penalties and none of this probation-for-rapists-and-murderers bullsh!t, crime might actually go down and the need for personal protection would decrease.
 
yes, it is a story where a gun was put to use.. but u want me to start posting all the incidents where people get shot n killed from random gun violence.. posting the story to prove a point is silly... it was actually a good read.. untill i read your little schpiel at the end.... just my opinion tho
 


<< So she just shoots the guy when he comes in her house???

That's a good thing??? >>



Yes. If you break in someone's door, don't expect milk and cookies at the table. Expect a .45 in your face. Rapists should be executed, and when someone is kicking down your backdoor, it's safe to assume the worst.
 


<< So she just shoots the guy when he comes in her house???

That's a good thing??? >>


You're right. She should've opened the door for him and invited him in for some coffee.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top