Joe Horn - Page 4

DaemonSeid · #46 12-06-2007, 10:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by macallan25

Personally, I don't think he broke the law either. Also, how are many of you stating that he was in no danger, didn't feel threatened, etc. Were you all there? Do you know the guy?

Macallan, I would be one...listen to the 911 call, he clearly was in no danger as long as he stayed in the house, he never made it sound as if the robbers were coming to his house, he never made it sound as if they threatened him, from the recording, as long as he stayed put and let the cops do their job, he was safe.

Kevin · #47 12-06-2007, 12:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by macallan25

Personally, I don't think he broke the law either. Also, how are many of you stating that he was in no danger, didn't feel threatened, etc. Were you all there? Do you know the guy?

More importantly, feeling "danger" and being "threatened" are not elements which are necessary to raise the defense.

Quote:

Macallan, I would be one...listen to the 911 call, he clearly was in no danger as long as he stayed in the house, he never made it sound as if the robbers were coming to his house, he never made it sound as if they threatened him, from the recording, as long as he stayed put and let the cops do their job, he was safe.

None of that stuff is necessary either. Texas doesn't have a duty to retreat, nor does it specify that you have to feel there's a danger of death or serious bodily harm, or papercuts, or that the defense can't be raised on days starting with a T. The statute is pretty clearly set up to allow homeowners to take care of situations which may potentially become dangerous, thus allowing the homeowner to avoid having to ever be in danger at all.

Weighing the equities here, I'm going to have to say that I'll place the security and safety of homeowners above burglars' lives every single time. You don't know that by calling the cops, if there had been the duty to retreat, etc., that there would have eventually been a hostage situation, or something dangerous like that. You just don't know.

In Texas, they prefer not to find out.

DaemonSeid · #48 12-06-2007, 12:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kevin

More importantly, feeling "danger" and being "threatened" are not elements which are necessary to raise the defense.

None of that stuff is necessary either. Texas doesn't have a duty to retreat, nor does it specify that you have to feel there's a danger of death or serious bodily harm, or papercuts, or that the defense can't be raised on days starting with a T. The statute is pretty clearly set up to allow homeowners to take care of situations which may potentially become dangerous, thus allowing the homeowner to avoid having to ever be in danger at all.

Weighing the equities here, I'm going to have to say that I'll place the security and safety of homeowners above burglars' lives every single time. You don't know that by calling the cops, if there had been the duty to retreat, etc., that there would have eventually been a hostage situation, or something dangerous like that. You just don't know.

In Texas, they prefer not to find out.

As I always like to say...

"Don't go to Texas and raise a ruckus...you might not come back."

Kevlar281 · #49 12-06-2007, 04:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PeppyGPhiB

OK, have any of you ever fired a SHOTGUN? I haven't either, but I've shot plenty of other guns (pistols and rifles) and learned enough about them to know that a shotgun is by no means a particularly accurate firearm. Honestly, if he cared about gun safety and being "careful" and accurate when he fired it, he wouldn't have used a shotgun. A homeowner that brings out a shotgun to confront some guys on his lawn is doing it to scare the crap out of them, not as a cautious response.

A shotgun’s accuracy varies depending on the ammunition that is being used. They are the perfect firearm for home defense. It’s dam near impossible to miss when firing in close quarters and you don’t have to worry about collateral damage. It was probably the safest firearm he could have used in this situation. If he had used a handgun and missed, then this very well could have turned into a tragedy when the bullet traversed into a neighboring house with the potential to impact an innocent resident.

macallan25 · #50 12-06-2007, 04:07 PM

Yeah, got to agree there. I pistol gripped shotgun (riot gun) is probably the best for home defense without question. You don't have to be accurate at all.

DaemonSeid · #51 12-06-2007, 04:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by macallan25

Yeah, got to agree there. I pistol gripped shotgun (riot gun) is probably the best for home defense without question. You don't have to be accurate at all.

Maybe he should have used a taser....

heh

BobbyTheDon · #52 12-28-2007, 03:52 AM

Texas is just a crappy state period

-Alabama

Kevlar281 · #53 07-01-2008, 12:05 AM

Update:

A Harris County grand jury decided today that Joe Horn should not be charged with a crime for shooting two burglary suspects he confronted outside his neighbor's home in Pasadena last fall.

Link: To Full Article

madmax · #54 07-01-2008, 11:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nittanyalum

From this article:

"Texas law allows people to use ly force to protect themselves if it is reasonable to believe they could otherwise be killed. In limited circumstances, people also can use ly force to protect their neighbor's property; for example, if a homeowner asks a neighbor to watch over his property while he's out of town.
The question will be whether it was reasonable for Horn to fear the men and whether his earlier threats on the 911 call showed he planned to no matter what, said Fred Moss, who teaches criminal law at Southern Methodist University.
"That's what makes it so hard and that's why we have juries," Moss said."

Joe Horn is a redneck and he belongs in jail. It was obvious from the 911 call that Horn planned on $hooting the burglars. Horn was not in any danger. The burglars were shot in the back.

PhiGam · #55 07-01-2008, 05:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by madmax

Joe Horn is a redneck and he belongs in jail. It was obvious from the 911 call that Horn planned on the burglars. Horn was not in any danger. The burglars were shot in the back.

This is everything thats wrong with America. How can you honestly sympathize with these criminals? It would take a "redneck" to care enough about your neighbors to risk your life for them. He even says that he barely knows them. The man is a hero, not a villain.
Whatever, have fun voting for Obama, hippie.

PhiGam · #56 07-01-2008, 05:55 PM

I just listened to the whole thing, I couldn't help loling when he killed the scumbags.

PhiGam · #57 07-01-2008, 05:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by macallan25

Yeah, got to agree there. I pistol gripped shotgun (riot gun) is probably the best for home defense without question. You don't have to be accurate at all.

Either that or a handgun with hollow points. It makes the bullets stop if they hit a wall and eliminates collateral damage.

UGAalum94 · #58 07-01-2008, 06:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PhiGam

I just listened to the whole thing, I couldn't help loling when he killed the scumbags.

If true, this worries me a little for you.

It's one thing to be relieved that the guy wasn't indicted. It's another to celebrate and laugh at loss of human life that might have been averted.

Personally, I find it troublesome that Horn declared he would shoot them before he went outside. I'm ambivalent about the failure to indict: on the one hand, I like the idea that you can protect life and property and not be criminalized; on the the other hand, I don't think that stealing should get the death penalty and the only reason Horm ended up being threatened was that he elected to go outside and confront the robbers.

PhiGam · #59 07-01-2008, 06:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by UGAalum94

If true, this worries me a little for you.

It's one thing to be relieved that the guy wasn't indicted. It's another to celebrate and laugh at loss of human life that might have been averted.

Personally, I find it troublesome that Horn declared he would shoot them before he went outside. I'm ambivalent about the failure to indict: on the one hand, I like the idea that you can protect life and property and not be criminalized; on the the other hand, I don't think that stealing should get the death penalty and the only reason Horm ended up being threatened was that he elected to go outside and confront the robbers.

I disagree, I think that the world and our country is a better place without these two illegal aliens that steal from hardworking American citizens. I'm a big picture guy, in the end it helps society to have those two dead.

UGAalum94 · #60 07-01-2008, 06:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PhiGam

I disagree, I think that the world and our country is a better place without these two illegal aliens that steal from hardworking American citizens. I'm a big picture guy, in the end it helps society to have those two dead.

I don't know. It seems like a different issue all together really to consider whether we're better off with them dead than it is to laugh at their deaths.

I'm satisfied that Ted Bundy was executed back in the day. It doesn't make his execution funny. It seems like there ought to be a dignity in regarding loss of human life, even if the humans in question are criminals. It's more about us than them.

ETA: sorry about the self-righteousness. I can see laughing if they hadn't been killed or grievously wounded. It's sort of what shows like Cops and American's funniest videos are all about, right?