This one comes courtesy of the National Association for Gun Rights.

It describes exactly the kind of thing “progressives” force on us that makes my blood boil.

Thanks to Chicago’s gun ban, an 80-year-old Chicago man may face charges after shooting an intruder.

The Supreme Court is currently hearing McDonald v. Chicago, which could repeal Chicago’s longstanding handgun ban. But justice may come too late for an elderly Korean War vet who was simply defending his 83-year-old wife and 12-year-old grandson.

The Chicago Sun-Times reports that this man had been robbed at home “a couple of months ago” by “three intruders.” Afterwards, he “bought a gun and vowed never to be a victim again.”

Around 5:00 this morning, 30-something Anthony Nelson broke into the home by breaking out a back window that leads to the elderly couple’s unit. There was a confrontation between the home invader and the homeowner, and the invader shot at the elderly man with his revolver. The homeowner shot back with his handgun, killing the attacker.

Good for him!

WGN interviewed Nelson’s mother, who of course extolled his virtues:

“Lenora Nelson said her son loved to draw and build things. She said he obtained his GED in jail and had just signed up for an online carpentry program. “He could fix almost anything,” she said.

Nelson was supposed to start a new job next week for a company that cleans out homes before they’re remodeled, his mother said.”

WGN balanced this out by reporting that Nelson “was on parole after being sentenced to three years in prison for a 2009 drug conviction,” and “had a criminal record that includes a number of other drug or weapons convictions going back to 1998.”

ABC reports that the man may be charged under Chicago’s current law, which bans handgun ownership.

Lenora Nelson was probably one hell of a parent. Yessiree, raised her one fine criminal, the kind of scumbag who preyed on senior citizens and, in his case, has thankfully been taken out of the gene pool.

Mayor Daly believes shoving a rifle up a reporter’s buttocks might save his life.

And if escaped convicts bother him at his Michigan vacation home, his private security detail stands ready to hold them at gunpoint.

Meanwhile, an elderly couple awaits the arrival of another set of armed robbers, courtesy of Daley’s “law and order” crew.

This is one of the features of “progressivism” that most ticks me off: These wealthy elitists sit there in the safety of their well guarded estates or gated communities, immune to the tragic consequences of the laws they impose on the common man, and aren’t the least bit perturbed at the misery they cause others through their misguided and usually not un, but anticonstitutional doctrines.

Let’s say this 80+ year old Korean war veteran, his wife and grandchild had been murdered by Nelson because there wasn’t a weapon in the house, what then?

How about, “Oh, well, at least the oldster didn’t break the law by owning a handgun.”

Thankfully, the case is also drawing attention of the right kind.

Update: Joe Brodsky announced his willingness to take this case pro bono, if Daley charges the victim under the handgun ban.

Said Brodsky: “Self defense isn’t just a right, it’s a duty. If this man is prosecuted for saving his own life it’s not just a travesty, its justice turned inside out.”

If this man is prosecuted for saving his own life it’s not just a travesty, its justice turned inside out.

That’s for damn sure…

There are a number of good links in the NAGR article, which can be read here.