Joe Horn

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally Posted by TexasWSP

If memory serves me, Horn operated within his limits. Is that not correct?

If a cop tells you to do something, especially after you just committed a fairly serious crime, and you disobey and run.......you are running a great risk of getting shot.

No and cops especially can't shoot to kill, just because.

[TexasWSP]

Originally Posted by DSTCHAOS

No and cops especially can't shoot to kill, just because.

So no?.........Joe Horn didn't operate within the limits of the law here in Texas? Didn't we establish that he did?

I don't think he shot them "just because". Apparently you do. I think he shot them because they ran at him and he robbed his neighbor's home.

Furthermore, your original post asked about a cop shooting a fleeing assailant and what the outcome would be......not shooting someone "just because". Pretty sure there is a huge difference.

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally Posted by TexasWSP

operate within the limits of the law here in Texas?

You're talking about Texas law. I'm not.

Originally Posted by TexasWSP

I don't think he shot them "just because". Apparently you do. I think he shot them because they ran at him.

It is often the case that cops can't shoot alleged assailants in the back or shoot to kill when there is no clear and present threat. That's what my original post addressed.

Horn shot and killed "just because" he wanted to and felt that he could. If they ran from him then they were no longer his problem. They weren't his problem in the first place but especially if they were running.

Originally Posted by TexasWSP

Furthermore, your original post asked about a cop shooting a fleeing assailant and what the outcome would be......not shooting someone "just because". Pretty sure there is a huge difference.

No, I provided a rhetorical question about cops shooting alleged assailants who present no clear and present threat, whether they are unarmed or fleeing.