Man foils burglary with shotgun, all the paper can focus on is his immodesty.

Status
Not open for further replies.
I don't blame the guy for arming himself to protect himself and his home, but running "out after them" doesn't seem like a good move, trousers or no. He ain't in Texas.

It is kind of funny, though, that the fellow was out there in the street in his skivvies. Seems reportable to me.
 
Sounds pretty positive to me. Please note that an officer was involved and apparently didn't have a problem figuring out that a man running down the street with a gun was the good guy.
 
This is an important lesson for us. Never say something like "Man, I was so mad I could have killed them."

That right there is enough to get you convicted should you have to shoot the next group of burglars.
 
That is Mormon territory- they frown up being out in public with no pants on. ;)
 
Man foils burglary with shotgun, all the paper can focus on is his immodesty.

Um, no. Sure, it was part of the article, but it was an interesting and funny part of the article.

What? Maybe you expected them to do an in depth description of the shotgun, accessories, and loading?

Nope, he's in Utah! Ever heard of it? Nice place for gunnies.

I have heard of Utah. Wasn't that the place that had the big Y2K pants shortage?
 
W. Valley man foils burglars - in his underwear, with a shotgun
The Salt Lake Tribune
Article Last Updated: 07/02/2008 09:18:44 AM MDT


Posted: 7:34 AM- WEST VALLEY CITY - Next time, maybe some pants?
Still, West Valley City homeowner Tony Gamonal managed to foil burglars when he took out after them with a shotgun -- and wearing only his boxer shorts.
2News reports today that he surprised the burglars, then armed himself to give chase. A nearby police officer joined him, eventually capturing one of the pair, a woman. The second suspect, a man, remained at large.
Gamonal says it wasn't until the capture that he realized he was outside, in the street, in his underwear.
"I looked down and said, 'Oh man . . . here I am,'" he told 2News.
Gamonal says this is the second time robbers have targeted his home in two weeks.
The last time, the hinges were cut off his gate and up to $10,000 worth of property was stolen. The fence around his home has also been vandalized with spray-paint.
He says he's had it. And he plans to protect his home -- regardless of what he is, or is not, wearing
"If you can't be safe in your own home, where can you be?" Gamonal says. "There was no doubt; I was so mad that I would have shot them."
 
Man foils burglary with shotgun, all the paper can focus on is his immodesty.

Maybe you would have rather read about the maniac running loose through the community, dressed only in his underwear, brandishing a shotgun, trying to dispense his own brand of vigalanty justice, and recklessly endangering citizens left and right?
 
Well, you are not going to be dressed in a 3 piece suit all the time. What do they want?

He gave chase so I'm sure he at least was "panting"....nyuck nyuck.
 
Last edited:
With all gun discussion aside, The guy has been pretty much TERROIZED in his own home and all they can focus on is his immodesty.

I've read news articles wear I swear I could picture the writer crying as they were writing about Britney Spear's latest custody battle.
 
This is why I only wear bright neon, leopard print, thong skivvies. That sight sends them running off screaming faster than a shotgun blast will, and leaves the kind of scars that cant be seen, and never heal, but are very painfull still....

:D
 
The last time, the hinges were cut off his gate and up to $10,000 worth of property was stolen. The fence around his home has also been vandalized with spray-paint.

I'm not sure the the guy would have gotten away (without a few holes) a second time.
 
This is why your mom always said to wear clean underwhear. You never know who might see it.
 
"
Man, I was so mad I could have killed them."

He obviously never saw the "Don't Talk To The Police" video.
kinda what I was thinking. You don't want to say something like that, it'd give them (the anti-gunners) ammo should you HAVE to defend yourself in the future.
 
kinda what I was thinking. You don't want to say something like that, it'd give them (the anti-gunners) ammo should you HAVE to defend yourself in the future.

I doubt such would be allowed in court as it would not be relevant to the current case, or if allowed, the defense lawyer would just have it presented as evidence that he is experienced and while previously mad at the bad guy, didn't shoot because there was no need. In other words, he exhibited appropriate control in spite of being mad.
 
If that happens to me and I'm clothed, I'll just have to strip down on the way out. That seems like the only way to get media attention for defending yourself with a gun.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top