Quote of the Day: Home Defense Edition

 

I don’t own a gun, but I keep a bag of baseballs near our bed. If someone breaks in they better be wearing a batting helmet because I am going to throw at their head.  – Randy Johnson, Major League Baseball pitcher

Considering Johnson threw a 90mph fastball during his major league career, I’d consider that a credible defense strategy. He is supposed to have said this while he was with the Seattle Mariners in the 1990s, but even today, at age 60, I’ll bet he still has enough heat left to strike out a home invader or two. I will also bet this home defense strategy served him well during stints in gun-averse New York and San Francisco. Someone might get in trouble for being in possession of a handgun in those cities, but deny a MLB pitcher possession of hardballs? It would get laughed out of court.

As satisfactory as this home defense solution is for a ten-times All-Star, five-times Cy Young Award pitcher, most of us lack the ability to hurl a ball with that amount of kinetic energy.  But as the old saying goes, “God created men, Col. Colt made them equal.” For the rest of us a handgun, responsibly used, is a satisfactory home defense or personal defense strategy.

That goes a long way towards explaining New Mexico Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham’s spectacular flame-out with her unconstitutional ban on carrying weapons. Slapped down by even her own party and a Biden-appointed federal judge (!) she had been reduced to pouting and shrilling like Housman’s Queen of Air and Darkness. Self-defense is a basic human right. Even Democrats have to concede that. (Lujan Grisham even lost Ted Lieu and David Hogg.)

Meanwhile, if baseballs work for you Mr. Johnson, good for you.

Published in Group Writing
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 35 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. DaveSchmidt Coolidge
    DaveSchmidt
    @DaveSchmidt

    It is too bad that this controversy happened September 2023 rather than September 2024.   

    • #1
  2. Mad Gerald Coolidge
    Mad Gerald
    @Jose

    This whole situation is weird.  All the lefties slamming the NM gov and no one supporting her doesn’t compute.

    • #2
  3. Arahant Member
    Arahant
    @Arahant

    Seawriter: (Lujan Grisham even lost Ted Lieu and David Hogg.)

    That was pretty wild.

    • #3
  4. Seawriter Contributor
    Seawriter
    @Seawriter

    DaveSchmidt (View Comment):

    It is too bad that this controversy happened September 2023 rather than September 2024.

    She’s still be around in September 2024 muttering “I’ll get you my pretty. And your little dog, too!” Her reaction to the restraining order has been hilarious. She=’s doubling-down, issuing another unconstitutional restraining order. Like herpes, she’s the gift that keeps on giving.

    • #4
  5. Jimmy Carter Member
    Jimmy Carter
    @JimmyCarter

    • #5
  6. Seawriter Contributor
    Seawriter
    @Seawriter

    Jimmy Carter (View Comment):

    1. Makes his point about using a baseball.
    2. How did they score that? I mean really? Ball? Strike? Some type of didn’t count?
    • #6
  7. DaveSchmidt Coolidge
    DaveSchmidt
    @DaveSchmidt

    Mad Gerald (View Comment):

    This whole situation is weird. All the lefties slamming the NM gov and no one supporting her doesn’t compute.

    The lefties are willing to betray their deeply held values in the pursuit of power.

    • #7
  8. Jim McConnell Member
    Jim McConnell
    @JimMcConnell

    DaveSchmidt (View Comment):

    Mad Gerald (View Comment):

    This whole situation is weird. All the lefties slamming the NM gov and no one supporting her doesn’t compute.

    The lefties are willing to betray their deeply held values in the pursuit of power.

    Yep. They always have a finger in the wind to see which way it is blowing.

    • #8
  9. Some Call Me ...Tim Coolidge
    Some Call Me ...Tim
    @SomeCallMeTim

    Mad Gerald (View Comment):

    This whole situation is weird. All the lefties slamming the NM gov and no one supporting her doesn’t compute.

    I agree.  There’s something else going on here. No idea what it is, but there’s something. 

    Like Roseanne Rosanadanna said, “It just goes to show you; it’s always something.”

    • #9
  10. Steve Fast Coolidge
    Steve Fast
    @SteveFast

    Seawriter (View Comment):

    Jimmy Carter (View Comment):

    1. Makes his point about using a baseball.
    2. How did they score that? I mean really? Ball? Strike? Some type of didn’t count?

    Umps called it a no pitch. Apparently the rules said nothing about what to do when a pitch strikes an animal.

    • #10
  11. DaveSchmidt Coolidge
    DaveSchmidt
    @DaveSchmidt

    Steve Fast (View Comment):

    Seawriter (View Comment):

    Jimmy Carter (View Comment):

    1. Makes his point about using a baseball.
    2. How did they score that? I mean really? Ball? Strike? Some type of didn’t count?

    Umps called it a no pitch. Apparently the rules said nothing about what to do when a pitch strikes an animal.

    Time to hire a consultant from PETA.  

    • #11
  12. Basil Fawlty Member
    Basil Fawlty
    @BasilFawlty

    Seawriter: But as the old saying goes, “God created men, Col. Colt made them equal.”

    And Smith & Wesson made the Equalizer.

    • #12
  13. Fritz Coolidge
    Fritz
    @Fritz

    Some Call Me …Tim (View Comment):

    Mad Gerald (View Comment):

    This whole situation is weird. All the lefties slamming the NM gov and no one supporting her doesn’t compute.

    I agree. There’s something else going on here. No idea what it is, but there’s something.

    Like Roseanne Rosanadanna said, “It just goes to show you; it’s always something.”

    I think it was a test run. Albeit a clumsy, ham-handed one, but a test run to see if she could get away with it in the post-Covid shutdown and mask era. While she has not succeeded, that is but for now.

    When the same thing is tried in D.C., it’ll be interesting to watch how the rabid leftists of the D.C. District Court react. Look at Judge Chutkin presiding over “Mr. Trump”‘s J6 trial (that’s “President Trump” to everyone else)– one could not find a more openly biased trial judge but it appears to be business as usual in D.C.

    I am relieved for the residents in New Mexico but doubt this kind of thing is going away. If government power expands in emergencies, then government power-seekers will create emergencies wherever possible.

    • #13
  14. AMD Texas Coolidge
    AMD Texas
    @DarinJohnson

    Some Call Me …Tim (View Comment):

    Mad Gerald (View Comment):

    This whole situation is weird. All the lefties slamming the NM gov and no one supporting her doesn’t compute.

    I agree. There’s something else going on here. No idea what it is, but there’s something.

    Like Roseanne Rosanadanna said, “It just goes to show you; it’s always something.”

    For those that are culturally challenged

    • #14
  15. Henry Castaigne Member
    Henry Castaigne
    @HenryCastaigne

    DaveSchmidt (View Comment):

    Mad Gerald (View Comment):

    This whole situation is weird. All the lefties slamming the NM gov and no one supporting her doesn’t compute.

    The lefties are willing to betray their deeply held values in the pursuit of power.

    With the exception of power and the belief that government=good the left has no principles.

    • #15
  16. Eugene Kriegsmann Member
    Eugene Kriegsmann
    @EugeneKriegsmann

    I am only guessing, but I would bet that hitting a home invader with a baseball and merely wounding him would more likely end up in the home owner being sued. Shooting them center mass might remove that possibility. Just saying.

    • #16
  17. Seawriter Contributor
    Seawriter
    @Seawriter

    Eugene Kriegsmann (View Comment):

    I am only guessing, but I would bet that hitting a home invader with a baseball and merely wounding him would more likely end up in the home owner being sued. Shooting them center mass might remove that possibility. Just saying.

    People die from head hits with hardballs. Especially when thrown by someone capable of throwing at 9omph.  Plus, many home invaders who get shot survive. Almost none sue, especially if the injury takes place inside a house. 

    • #17
  18. jonb60173 Member
    jonb60173
    @jonb60173

    The problem is it’s hard to get much of a windup in a bedroom.  So accuracy and velocity are greatly diminished.  If I was going with the baseball form of defense I’d just grab a Louisville Slugger any weight and length should do, and you don’t have to go for the home run, a line drive single should work.  If you’re going with the firearm option, forget the hand gun, a tactical shot gun has a much higher probability of hitting it’s target.

    • #18
  19. David Carroll Thatcher
    David Carroll
    @DavidCarroll

    DaveSchmidt (View Comment):

    Mad Gerald (View Comment):

    This whole situation is weird. All the lefties slamming the NM gov and no one supporting her doesn’t compute.

    The lefties are willing to betray their deeply held values in the pursuit of power.

    Call me a cynic, but I think in this case about getting votes. Gov. Grisham’s order was so outrageous and likely to anger normal people that the politicians on the left realized that they could get some crossover votes by coming across as reasonable.

    • #19
  20. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Mad Gerald (View Comment):

    This whole situation is weird. All the lefties slamming the NM gov and no one supporting her doesn’t compute.

    Indeed.  They do all apparently want guns banned, but… not THIS way, or something?  Bizarre.

    • #20
  21. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    David Carroll (View Comment):

    DaveSchmidt (View Comment):

    Mad Gerald (View Comment):

    This whole situation is weird. All the lefties slamming the NM gov and no one supporting her doesn’t compute.

    The lefties are willing to betray their deeply held values in the pursuit of power.

    Call me a cynic, but I think in this case about getting votes. Gov. Grisham’s order was so outrageous and likely to anger normal people that the politicians on the left realized that they could get some crossover votes by coming across as reasonable.

    Likely, but how do they explain flip-flopping back again later?  Short attention spans?  That’s getting harder to pull off these days.

    • #21
  22. Eugene Kriegsmann Member
    Eugene Kriegsmann
    @EugeneKriegsmann

    Seawriter (View Comment):

    Eugene Kriegsmann (View Comment):

    I am only guessing, but I would bet that hitting a home invader with a baseball and merely wounding him would more likely end up in the home owner being sued. Shooting them center mass might remove that possibility. Just saying.

    People die from head hits with hardballs. Especially when thrown by someone capable of throwing at 9omph. Plus, many home invaders who get shot survive. Almost none sue, especially if the injury takes place inside a house.

    Given the normal reaction time to a situation like the one described of a home invader, a multi-shot pistol would be preferable. Home invasions are frequently made by more than one person. Additionally, one of the usual justifications for a Glock or other pistol with a large capacity, not to mention a AR-15 with the normal 30 round magazine, is that situations of this kind may involve having to fire multiple rounds. How many baseballs does this particular person keep by his bed, and how many could he get off before he was overwhelmed by a second intruder? I have no doubt about the effectiveness of a hardball thrown at high velocity hitting any part of the body. Hitting someone in the head is a somewhat dicey matter, even for a professional pitcher. The reason police officers are taught to shoot for center mass is that in the kind of situation where that kind of action is required, stress can have an enormous effect on your ability to respond in the manner you think you will when thinking about this kind of situation. That is why spending hours at the range shooting into paper targets that are static is considered lousy preparation for an actual home invasion or other self defense situation where you may be called upon to fire your gun at an attacker. The psychological difference between shooting paper and shooting another human being is enormous. If you doubt my word on this I suggest reading Dave Grossman’s On Killing.

    So, I continue to contend, as I originally said, that as convincing as that quote might seem, it is, likely, poorly anchored in the real world.

    • #22
  23. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Eugene Kriegsmann (View Comment):

    Seawriter (View Comment):

    Eugene Kriegsmann (View Comment):

    I am only guessing, but I would bet that hitting a home invader with a baseball and merely wounding him would more likely end up in the home owner being sued. Shooting them center mass might remove that possibility. Just saying.

    People die from head hits with hardballs. Especially when thrown by someone capable of throwing at 9omph. Plus, many home invaders who get shot survive. Almost none sue, especially if the injury takes place inside a house.

    Given the normal reaction time to a situation like the one described of a home invader, a multi-shot pistol would be preferable. Home invasions are frequently made by more than one person. Additionally, one of the usual justifications for a Glock or other pistol with a large capacity, not to mention a AR-15 with the normal 30 round magazine, is that situations of this kind may involve having to fire multiple rounds. How many baseballs does this particular person keep by his bed, and how many could he get off before he was overwhelmed by a second intruder? I have no doubt about the effectiveness of a hardball thrown at high velocity hitting any part of the body. Hitting someone in the head is a somewhat dicey matter, even for a professional pitcher. The reason police officers are taught to shoot for center mass is that in the kind of situation where that kind of action is required, stress can have an enormous effect on your ability to respond in the manner you think you will when thinking about this kind of situation. That is why spending hours at the range shooting into paper targets that are static is considered lousy preparation for an actual home invasion or other self defense situation where you may be called upon to fire your gun at an attacker. The psychological difference between shooting paper and shooting another human being is enormous. If you doubt my word on this I suggest reading Dave Grossman’s On Killing.

    So, I continue to contend, as I originally said, that as convincing as that quote might seem, it is, likely, poorly anchored in the real world.

    There are options.  For example, my brother recently bought a compact shotgun that holds I think 6 “normal” shells, but there are shorter shells available, still fine for home defense, and his gun will hold at least 10 of those.

     

    • #23
  24. Eugene Kriegsmann Member
    Eugene Kriegsmann
    @EugeneKriegsmann

    kedavis (View Comment):

    There are options.  For example, my brother recently bought a compact shotgun that holds I think 6 “normal” shells, but there are shorter shells available, still fine for home defense, and his gun will hold at least 10 of those.

     

    Shotguns are very acceptable options. Baseballs aren’t. Bringing a baseball to a gunfight just doesn’t cut it.

    • #24
  25. Basil Fawlty Member
    Basil Fawlty
    @BasilFawlty

    kedavis (View Comment):
    There are options.  For example, my brother recently bought a compact shotgun that holds I think 6 “normal” shells, but there are shorter shells available, still fine for home defense, and his gun will hold at least 10 of those.

    Perhaps a Shockwave? If so, please don’t call it a shotgun. It’s a firearm. The classification of guns under federal law is a wonder to behold.

    • #25
  26. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Basil Fawlty (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):
    There are options. For example, my brother recently bought a compact shotgun that holds I think 6 “normal” shells, but there are shorter shells available, still fine for home defense, and his gun will hold at least 10 of those.

    Perhaps a Shockwave? If so, please don’t call it a shotgun. It’s a firearm. The classification of guns under federal law is a wonder to behold.

    Why would you say something like a Shockwave is not a shotgun?  I’m not sure if that’s what my brother has, but I know it’s Pump-action.  It takes the “full size” shells, 3″ or so, but there’s other sizes available including something like 1 3/4″ shells.  And they all go in the tube magazine.  You can get almost double the number of 1 3/4″ shells vs 3″.

    For home defense you also don’t want a very long barrel or stock.  It needs to be able to move around rather quickly without hitting things.  “Bullpup” is one popular option, another is a “youth sport” model designed for younger – and smaller – people.

    It doesn’t need to be 12-gauge either.  For home defense, 16 or 20 is plenty.  You’re not trying to hit “clay pigeons” at 50 yards or something.

    • #26
  27. Basil Fawlty Member
    Basil Fawlty
    @BasilFawlty

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Basil Fawlty (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):
    There are options. For example, my brother recently bought a compact shotgun that holds I think 6 “normal” shells, but there are shorter shells available, still fine for home defense, and his gun will hold at least 10 of those.

    Perhaps a Shockwave? If so, please don’t call it a shotgun. It’s a firearm. The classification of guns under federal law is a wonder to behold.

    Why would you say something like a Shockwave is not a shotgun? I’m not sure if that’s what my brother has, but I know it’s Pump-action. It takes the “full size” shells, 3″ or so, but there’s other sizes available including something like 1 3/4″ shells. And they all go in the tube magazine. You can get almost double the number of 1 3/4″ shells vs 3″.

    For home defense you also don’t want a very long barrel or stock. It needs to be able to move around rather quickly without hitting things. “Bullpup” is one popular option, another is a “youth sport” model designed for younger – and smaller – people.

    It doesn’t need to be 12-gauge either. For home defense, 16 or 20 is plenty. You’re not trying to hit “clay pigeons” at 50 yards or something.

    https://www.walkertaylorlaw.com/mossberg-is-making-a-wave-legality-and-classification-of-the-590-shockwave/#:~:text=The%20590%20Shockwave%20is%20not,shotgun%20under%20the%20federal%20definition.

    • #27
  28. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Basil Fawlty (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Basil Fawlty (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):
    There are options. For example, my brother recently bought a compact shotgun that holds I think 6 “normal” shells, but there are shorter shells available, still fine for home defense, and his gun will hold at least 10 of those.

    Perhaps a Shockwave? If so, please don’t call it a shotgun. It’s a firearm. The classification of guns under federal law is a wonder to behold.

    Why would you say something like a Shockwave is not a shotgun? I’m not sure if that’s what my brother has, but I know it’s Pump-action. It takes the “full size” shells, 3″ or so, but there’s other sizes available including something like 1 3/4″ shells. And they all go in the tube magazine. You can get almost double the number of 1 3/4″ shells vs 3″.

    For home defense you also don’t want a very long barrel or stock. It needs to be able to move around rather quickly without hitting things. “Bullpup” is one popular option, another is a “youth sport” model designed for younger – and smaller – people.

    It doesn’t need to be 12-gauge either. For home defense, 16 or 20 is plenty. You’re not trying to hit “clay pigeons” at 50 yards or something.

    https://www.walkertaylorlaw.com/mossberg-is-making-a-wave-legality-and-classification-of-the-590-shockwave/#:~:text=The%20590%20Shockwave%20is%20not,shotgun%20under%20the%20federal%20definition.

    Well, with very few exceptions I can think of – like maybe the revolver my brother has, a “Judge” or something like that, which can shoot .410 shotgun shells – anything that takes shotgun shells is a shotgun.

    • #28
  29. Basil Fawlty Member
    Basil Fawlty
    @BasilFawlty

    kedavis (View Comment):
    Well, with very few exceptions I can think of – like maybe the revolver my brother has, a “Judge” or something like that, which can shoot .410 shotgun shells – anything that takes shotgun shells is a shotgun.

    The Shockwave is one of those exceptions. It fires shotgun shells but is not designed to be fired from the shoulder. Thus, it doesn’t meet the federal definition of “shotgun”.  If it were a shotgun and had a barrel of under 18 inches (like the Shockwave’s 14 inches) it would be illegal to possess without much pain and expense.

    • #29
  30. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Basil Fawlty (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):
    Well, with very few exceptions I can think of – like maybe the revolver my brother has, a “Judge” or something like that, which can shoot .410 shotgun shells – anything that takes shotgun shells is a shotgun.

    The Shockwave is one of those exceptions. It fires shotgun shells but is not designed to be fired from the shoulder. Thus, it doesn’t meet the federal definition of “shotgun”. If it were a shotgun and had a barrel of under 18 inches (like the Shockwave’s 14 inches) it would be illegal to possess without much pain and expense.

    I’m less than not at all interested in most federal definitions.  What I bought from Walmart that’s in my fridge that says “Vlasic Pickles” might not meet a federal definition of “pickle” either.  But I don’t care.

    • #30
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.