Hugs for thugs
This may be one of the most bizarre things I've ever read:
A grand feast of marinated steaks and jumbo shrimp was winding down, and a group of friends was sitting on the back patio of a Capitol Hill home, sipping red wine. Suddenly, a hooded man slid in through an open gate and put the barrel of a handgun to the head of a 14-year-old guest.
"Give me your money, or I'll start shooting," he demanded, according to D.C. police and witness accounts.
Ah, but thankfully, there's a happy ending...after offering the would-be robber some of their fine wine ("Damn, that's good wine," the intruder is quoted as saying...who knew that armed thugs could also be wine connoisseurs?):
[t]he girl's father, Michael Rabdau, 51, who described the harrowing evening in an interview, told the intruder, described as being in his 20s, to take the whole glass. Rowan offered him the bottle. The would-be robber, his hood now down, took another sip and had a bite of Camembert cheese that was on the table.
Then he tucked the gun into the pocket of his nylon sweatpants.
"I think I may have come to the wrong house," he said, looking around the patio of the home in the 1300 block of Constitution Avenue NE.
"I'm sorry," he told the group. "Can I get a hug?"
Rowan, who lives in Falls Church and works part time at her children's school, stood up and wrapped her arms around him. Then it was Rabdau's turn. Then his wife's. The other two guests complied.
"That's really good wine," the man said, taking another sip. He had a final request: "Can we have a group hug?"
The five adults surrounded him, arms out.
With that, the man walked out with a crystal wine glass in hand, filled with Chateau Malescot. No one was hurt, and nothing was stolen.
Just makes you want to sing kumbaya, doesn't it?
While it's wonderful that the family made it through this safe and sound, it's also just plain lucky. The idea, supported by many on the comments thread of the article, that all the would-be robber needed was a little love, and that this incident somehow "proves" that nonviolence is a better answer than violence in the face of such an incident is naive at best, even assuming that the incident actually occurred as reported (several readers expressed skepticism, given the timing of this article and the ongoing debate on gun rights in the District of Columbia).
Of course, individuals are entitled to their own opinions as to the proper response to crime, but I believe that if someone points a gun at you or your loved one, you should respond as though that person fully intends to use it. To my mind, that means subduing or disarming that person by whatever means necessary. To do otherwise is to rely on the charity of someone who, by the very act of threatening you with a deadly weapon, has demonstrated that they are distinctly lacking in that grace.
In the end, these folks made it through safely, and they seem to have done the best they could with the situation, given that they were clearly unarmed (as they must be, if they were following DC law). But it could have turned out very differently...unless, of course, you're one of the folks who believe that inside every robber or killer is a little kid who just needs a hug.