Joe Horn

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally Posted by srmom

No, they exist. You just don't like what they say.

Eh...I don't know what the laws state. If the Horn case covers the scope of the home owner-burglar laws in Texas then...OK.

[TexasWSP]

The simple fact here is that laws covering home invasion and theft and what you can do about it do exist in Texas. Reiterating on what was said above, you people griping about this simply don't agree with the fact that down here, you can put these types of scum out of their misery. Guess the poor burglars will have to find a new profession.

...and I agree, I haven't seen so much as a blip about this situation in Texas either. Most discussions end with "well, shouldn't have robbed their house."

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally Posted by TexasWSP

you can put these types of scum out of their misery. Guess the poor burglars will have to find a new profession.

Despite what you all think about career criminals, this isn't a "profession" for most of these burglars.

That's an important point because people's misconception of crime and criminals has a huge impact on whether they let the police handle burglars OR whether they go out of their way to create a human gun range and call it "self-defense."

[PhiGam]

Originally Posted by TexasWSP

...and I agree, I haven't seen so much as a blip about this situation in Texas either. Most discussions end with "well, shouldn't have robbed their house."

Amen

[TexasWSP]

I was kind of joking but it's not a big deal. In this case, I believe one of the "victims" actual job title was "Illegal Colombian Drug Runner". His poor job performance led to a stint on probation so I'm just assuming that was his prior choice of employment.

One other thing......I'm not Joe Horn, neither are you. We can't really comment on whether or not he felt threatened because 1. we aren't him and 2. we weren't there. Despite his seemingly confident nature on the telephone, we still don't know.

What I do know is that if I were holding up a couple of burglars and one of them decided to run at me......I'd be startled......and he'd probably be shot. You may say, "he didn't have to hold them up", but come on. You know as well as I do that a couple of illegals who still a couple grand from a house are going to be on the bottom of the list of police's concerns.

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally Posted by TexasWSP

One other thing......I'm not Joe Horn, neither are you. We can't really comment on whether or not he felt threatened because 1. we aren't him and 2. we weren't there. Despite his seemingly confident nature on the telephone, we still don't know.

Please be "kind of joking," again.

Random but this reminded me of Joe Horn:
Christina's Court had an interesting case today. There was a Texas man who loved guns and hunting who hated his neighbor's pit bull that kept getting loose. The man said the dog was vicious, although in reality it was a relatively timid dog that growled but would run if yelled at. The neighbors kept letting the dog get out, violating the leash law. Instead of calling Animal Control, this man saw the dog outside his house one day staring at him, went INSIDE his house, came BACK outside and shot the dog FIVE times, killing it. He called 911 and calmly told the police "my neighbor's pit bull got out again today...no one's hurt...I killed it." THEN instead of telling his neighbor that he killed the dog, he dumps the dog at a dumpster. His defense is that none of this would've happened if the owners had not been negligent. The Judge ruled that this man wasn't in danger, instead he was waiting for a chance to use this dog as a target. He was accused of murdering the dog (and being evil).

This is a civil suit and not a criminal suit, but dogs' lives mean something here. Maybe the burglarers' families can get a civil suit going--or do the illegal immigrant status and Texas law thingie void that opportunity?

[TexasWSP]

So you can say with certainty that you knew how he really felt? If you have ESP let me know...I've got some questions for you. I know plenty of people who can act hard as all get out.....doesn't mean that's how they are really feeling. So no, I wasn't really joking there.

Dog = illegal Colombian ex-con burglars?

He shot a couple of criminals whom he claims he felt threatened by. A cop testified that they ran at him and veered off. Not seeing a problem here. I mean...they could have prison shanked him or something, haha.

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally Posted by TexasWSP

So you can say with certainty that you knew how he really felt?

Is it necessarily about knowing with certainty how he really felt?

Another instance:
If a police officer shoots an unarmed assailant in the head, or shoots a fleeing assailant, what potentially happens to the officer in some jurisdictions? If the officer claims to have felt threatened or to have been defending her/himself, what is the evidence that can be used to support and refute this claim? Of course, psychologists can be employed but they'd look at the circumstances. They wouldn't hire a mind reader. Even if the officer did feel threatened, the threat has to be reasonable and the actions have to be seen as justified.

[TexasWSP]

Originally Posted by DSTCHAOS

Is it necessarily about knowing with certainty how he really felt?

Another instance:
If a police officer shoots an unarmed assailant in the head, or shoots a fleeing assailant, what potentially happens to the officer in some jurisdictions? If the officer claims to have felt threatened or to have been defending her/himself, what is the evidence that can be used to support and refute this claim? Of course, psychologists can be employed but they'd look at the circumstances. They wouldn't hire a mind reader. Even if the officer did feel threatened, the threat has to be reasonable and the actions have to be seen as justified.

I'm pretty sure it doesn't matter about feeling threatened in this situation. If a cop is holding an assailant at gun point and he refuses to obey his commands......he can shoot him, given he goes through the necessary steps to reach that last-resort tactic.

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally Posted by TexasWSP

given he goes through the necessary steps to reach that last-resort tactic.

[TexasWSP]

Originally Posted by DSTCHAOS

I knew with certainty that was the portion of my statement that you would highlight and comment on. If memory serves me, Horn operated within his limits. Is that not correct? He said he felt threatened, stated why he shot them, and had an undercover cop attest to the situation that played out. End of story.

I'm not feeling that the comparison between a cop and Horn works. I don't think a cop has to feel threatened to shoot someone. 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.

...and Kevin, I am going to assume that cops follow the right procedures more times than not.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by TexasWSP

I'm pretty sure it doesn't matter about feeling threatened in this situation. If a cop is holding an assailant at gun point and he refuses to obey his commands......he can shoot him, given he goes through the necessary steps to reach that last-resort tactic.

Which always happens. Just ask the cops.

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally Posted by Kevin

Which always happens. Just ask the cops.

I assume this is sarcasm.

[EE-BO]

To third what srmom and TexasWSP said- this is just a nonissue down here.

That said, I have had some friends from up north ask me about it and express astonishment with the Texas laws. These are intelligent and educated people, and so it is really about a completely different mindset. I find the idea there are states in the US where I could not shoot someone who broke into my home equally ridiculous. So I am not being any more open-minded than my buddies in NY and Chicago.

My personal philosophy and defense of this law is this- When a person illegally enters my homestead, they are invading my privacy and sense of security in a way that goes far beyond something like mugging me on the street. And they are putting my family at risk as well. Home and family are the core of anyone's existence- whether you live in an apartment with a goldfish or on a family estate with 40 relatives within spitting distance.

And so on that basis, I feel totally justified in shooting first and asking questions later if I think it is warranted.

From a general societal perspective, I wonder (I have no idea) what the home break-in stats are in states like Texas versus states which do not have laws like ours. It would be interesting to know if the Texas law is also a true deterrent in addition to being in line with how most people down here think.

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally Posted by EE-BO

From a general societal perspective, I wonder (I have no idea) what the home break-in stats are in states like Texas versus states which do not have laws like ours. It would be interesting to know if the Texas law is also a true deterrent in addition to being in line with how most people down here think.

You can look at the UCR and similar reporting agencies of crime stats for comparisons. Even if Texas does have less burglaries, it isn't necessarily because of this law. Only a longitudinal study of crime statistics, and additional factors, before this law and after this law was implemented could find this. My educated prediction is that a study would not conclude this law is a deterrent.

With laws such as this people need to be honest about the (desired) effect. It's a very retributive law.