Would-Be Thief Tries To Smash His Way Into A Jewelry Store – A Concealed Carry Permit Holder Shows Why The Seconds Amendment Saves Lives (Video)

On Friday night, a suspected would-be thief was caught on camera trying to smash his way into a Chicago jewelry store with a heavy metal chain – but instead came face-to-face with the barrel of a gun.

Surveillance video captured the shocking moment of the man in the blue coat lurking first. When people walked by along Jewelers Row just before 1 a.m., he waited for them to pass – and then peeked in the window of The Jewels of Chicago.

He then left for a second, only to come back with a heavy metal chain. He threw that chain at the glass door and smashed part of the glass.

Jason Quach, who manages the building, told that the man stepped back and appeared to be checking to see if he would hear an alarm. He was in the office and heard the commotion.

“I don’t think he expected anyone to be inside,” Quach said.

When no alarm goes off, the man prepares to heave the metal chain at the door again. But before he could break the second panel of glass, Quach came running at him with his gun pointed.

“The moment he saw me come out with my firearm drawn, he quickly ran away, and I just heard ‘No. No No. No,” Quach said. “I didn’t get a chance to say anything to him.”

Quach said he was ready to fire a shot if he needed to, but no shots were fired and no injuries were reported. Check out the video here

1 thought on “Would-Be Thief Tries To Smash His Way Into A Jewelry Store – A Concealed Carry Permit Holder Shows Why The Seconds Amendment Saves Lives (Video)”

  1. WRONG!

    The Second Amendment did not save any lives in this or any similar instance.

    The weapon saved lives despite the impotent Second Amendment!

    America was sold down the river when the 18th-century founding fathers replaced Biblical responsibilities (based upon the moral law of God) for Enlightenment rights, and nothing demonstrates it better than the Second Amendment.

    Think about it: The Amendment WITH the wording “shall not be infringed” is the MOST infringed, licensed, and limited Amendment of the entire twenty seven. Furthermore, a future generation of our posterity is likely to see the Second Amendment whittled away entirely or repealed altogether. This is inherent nature and danger of optional Enlightenment rights versus non-optional Biblical responsibilities, such as the following:

    “Let the high praises of God be in their mouth, and a two-edged sword [or today’s equivalent] in their hand … this honor have all his saints. Praise ye Yah.” (Psalm 149:6-9)

    “But if any provide not for his own, and especially for those of his own house [beginning with spiritual and physical protection], he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel.” (1 Timothy 5:8)

    Which is more potent: 1) An optional right, or 2) A non-optional responsibility?

    Which is more likely to be infringed, licensed, and ultimately abolished altogether?

    Which did the pre-Second Amendment Americans look to for their authority to bear arms, with little or nor infringement?

    For more, listen to “The Second Amendment: A Knife in a Gunfight,” delivered at the Springfield, Missouri Firearms and Freedom Symposium, at http://www.bibleversusconstitution.ORG/#FeaturedMessages

    At this same location, you will also find a radio interview Larry Pratt (Executive Director of Gun Owners of America) conducted with me on this same subject. I think you’ll find Mr. Pratt’s remarks especially interesting.

    See also online Chapter 12 “Amendment 2: Constitutional vs. Biblical Self-Defense” of “Bible Law vs. the United States Constitution: The Christian Perspective” at http://www.bibleversusconstitution.ORG/BlvcOnline/biblelaw-constitutionalism-pt12.html

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published.