Missouri man fatally shoots his mother at home after mistaking her for intruder

https://sh.itjust.works/post/16029710

Missouri man fatally shoots his mother at home after mistaking her for intruder - sh.itjust.works

>A 25-year-old Missouri man says he mistook his mother for an intruder before shooting her to death at their home’s back door. > >Prosecutors have charged Jaylen Johnson with manslaughter and armed criminal action in connection with the shooting death on Thursday of his mother, Monica McNichols-Johnson. > >McNichols-Johnson’s shooting death came less than a year after another shooting in Missouri saw Ralph Yarl, then 16, get shot on 13 April by 84-year-old Andrew Lester after ringing the wrong doorbell while picking up his siblings.

Living with a handgun owner particularly increased the risk of being shot to death in a domestic violence incident, and it did not provide any protection against being killed at home by a stranger, the researchers found. - Guardian Article April 7, '22

The relationship of Americans and our guns is such a weird, religious-level issue. Just bizarre people. And some of them are friends of mine. The people, not the guns.

People in homes with handguns more likely to be shot dead, major study finds

Researchers find ‘zero evidence of any kind of protective effects’, with women at particular risk

The Guardian

I’ve heard this claim before and haven’t really been able to dig into it. One question that came up through that article related to this paragraph:

The study focused only on homicide risk and did not examine how living with a handgun owner might increase or decrease the risk of being victimized in other ways, including by nonfatal assault, home invasion, or property theft.

This sounds like something like a home invasion that would have ended in a homicide but didn’t (due to a gun or other reasons) wouldn’t be counted. The cases that are due to a gun would seem especially important.

I dont understand what you are questioning, the stat is about invaders with weapons. Having a weapon does not decrease risk in those instances.

The part you quoted is talking about how handguns may decrease risk in other non fatal home invasions. Maybe I’m reading what you’re saying wrong, but the gun encounters are the ones being counted for comparison between those with or without handguns.

One caveat. The study claimed to follow people living with handgun owners. Unless I missed something, it seems to indicate, without explicitly stating, that it is not following actual gun owners.

As for the question there are a few examples I’d proffer that would not appear in this study but would be a positive indicator for “living with a gun owner”. A home invasion or attempted theft that gets repelled due to having a gun. Incidents where injuries occur but no one dies.

It was also unclear if they would count a homicide of the suspect should the “person living with a gun owner” prevail.

Long story short, I still have lots of questions.