Slowtwitch Forums: Lavender Room: was he justified in killing the burglars?: Page 3

Calendar Retailers Stack & Reach Custom Geometry Calculator (beta) More To Come...
		MAIN INDEX	RULES & LEGEND	LOG IN

Search for (options)

Newsletter Signup

Slowtwitch Forums: Lavender Room:
was he justified in killing the burglars?

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

View All

slowguy

Nov 19, 07 19:10

Post #51 of 172 (1149 views)

Re: was he justified in killing the burglars? [ajfranke] [In reply to]	Can't Post

""They jumped. Joe thought they were coming for him. It's a self-defense issue."

Now I don't know if this is true or not, but if so, he is in the clear. "

You're leaving out the important part where Joe grabs his shotgun, states that he's going to kill the burglars to keep them from getting away, racks his shotgun, then runs out the door threatening the burglars. Kind of changes the sequence. You don't get to point a loaded shotgun at someone, threaten to shoot them, and then claim self defense when they "jump." Joe was not the defender. Joe was the aggressor.

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)

TripleThreat

Nov 19, 07 20:03

Post #52 of 172 (1139 views)

Re: was he justified in killing the burglars? [ajfranke] [In reply to]	Can't Post

"They jumped. Joe thought they were coming for him. It's a self-defense issue."

Now I don't know if this is true or not, but if so, he is in the clear.

What case are you talking about that involves shooting a pair of fleeing burglars?

So, a couple of unarmed guys decided to make a move on an armed guy that intended to kill them rather than take some bullets in the back. Again, just who is acting in self-defense.

As my mom would say, "Wild horses couldn't drag this guy away from killing the burglers."

Now, he doesn't want to do the time. Where's his machismo now?

=======================

-- At 211 degrees water is hot. At 212 degrees water boils. Boiling water produces steam. You can power a locomotive with steam. Will you supply the extra degree that makes all the difference? ---

dvfmfidc

Nov 23, 07 21:48

Post #53 of 172 (1080 views)

Re: was he justified in killing the burglars? [TripleThreat] [In reply to]	Can't Post

Kinda off topic, but someone mentioned Ca law. If a home or business is entered when occupied by the residents or owners, that in itself is an intent to harm. So, yes, you can shoot them, regardless is they are armed or not. And remember, those fists can be deadly too, or the perp can pick up an item to use as a weapon.

Also, I think this guy had every right to confront the crooks. Its his hood and it being Texas, I would bet his neighbor would have done the same!

I will bet that the thefts in that area will drop off! Clem and Billy Bob have guns and a damn good "Neighborhood Watch" program!

TripleThreat

Nov 23, 07 22:36

Post #54 of 172 (1078 views)

Re: was he justified in killing the burglars? [dvfmfidc] [In reply to]	Can't Post

If a home or business is entered when occupied by the residents or owners, that in itself is an intent to harm.

I can see that ... but it's kinda hard to assume intent to harm when the criminals are leaving the scene without harming anyone.

So, yes, you can shoot them, regardless is they are armed or not.

Is that only if they are in the house with the residents? Or does it include as they are leaving the scene?

Also, I think this guy had every right to confront the crooks.

Certainly he does.

The important points, IMO are ...

[1] He was repeatedly advised by law enforcement not to go outside, and he repeatedly said "I'm going to kill them". It's clear that simply confronting them wasn't the idea he had in mind. He was looking for execution.

[2] You can't claim self-defense when YOU'RE the one that initiated the confrontation.

I'm all for standing up for yourself and your neighbors ... but what this guy did exceeded that by quite a bit. For all his remorse, the situation could have been avoided if he wasn't hellbent on killing the robbers. As I mentioned before, it doesn't seem like anythiing could have kept him from shooting the guys. He said from the onset that was his goal/desire. Makes me wonder if he would have shot them in the back if they hadn't decided to give themselves a fighting chance.

=======================

-- At 211 degrees water is hot. At 212 degrees water boils. Boiling water produces steam. You can power a locomotive with steam. Will you supply the extra degree that makes all the difference? ---

Kentiger

Nov 24, 07 8:19

Post #55 of 172 (1062 views)

Re: was he justified in killing the burglars? [TripleThreat] [In reply to]	Can't Post

not replying to you TT..just in general..kind of moot at this point but..would things have been different if the perps has seen the gun and layed face down on the grass? Running from and the gun toter wants to stop them..shoots...run towards with intent to take the gun away..shoots...lay down knowing you're busted..I dunno. Not an easy call either way..was he right in shooting them? No (depending on legal perspective). People that claim..they were misguided kids who could have changed given the chance are just as right. Were they right in robbing the house? No (anyone have a different perspective on that one). There are just too many what-ifs in the whole ordeal to come to any solid rational conclusion in my book. Am I sad that two people with known criminal records (sure they COULD change but it doesn't appear as they were making a great deal of effort to try) are now no longer on the streets with potential to rob my house (or anyone I know or care about)...not in the least. Am I sad they didn't get caught, stand trial, serve a term of however long the law allows for robbery, all at a tax payers expense..not even remotely. Someone wrote..if they were in church (or school..or at work..whatever works for your belief system) instead of robbing a house this wouldn't be an issue. To say that the true instigators in this story are victims it a load of crap to me. It's time people started taking accountability for their actions..if stealing things that don't belong to you could get you hurt you should SmartenTFU and not steal. That simple. Was he justified in killing them..no (unless his life was truly in iminent danger). Was this an accident? No..they thieves had a choice..they made it. If it had been a police officer that pulled the trigger would that have been okay with everyone? Even if the officer had been, himself, robber recently and had a vendetta against thieves? The world is a few fools shy today..sad they had to die to learn a lesson.

albush1

Nov 24, 07 9:00

Post #56 of 172 (1056 views)

Re: was he justified in killing the burglars? [Kentiger] [In reply to]	Can't Post

Dead men tell no lies. This guy saved the legal system both time and money in addition to ridding the world of scum. He also prevented future robberies these individuals would have committed. Guns save lives. Everyone has the right to carry one if you are a legal, law abiding citizen. Don't let the nay-sayers take away your freedom to carry because they are scared and ill-informed. Let natural selection prevail. Protect your property and this will be the best deterrent for people who break the law and threaten others.

Tri N OC

Nov 24, 07 12:23

Post #57 of 172 (1040 views)

Re: was he justified in killing the burglars? [TripleThreat] [In reply to]	Can't Post

[2] You can't claim self-defense when YOU'RE the one that initiated the confrontation.

Jumping in late, but oddly enough, this is just not true. I don't know that it applies in this case, but you certainly can be the initial aggressor, retreat, and if the soon to be dead guy comes after you, kill in self-defense.

Tridiot

Nov 24, 07 12:32

Post #58 of 172 (1038 views)

Re: was he justified in killing the burglars? [Tri N OC] [In reply to]	Can't Post

You may be right, but in this situation that's not what happened. The assailant pursued the burglars of another residence. And expressed his intent to kill, to a 911 operator.

And he had a sweet Texas accent.

brandonecpt

Nov 24, 07 13:30

Post #59 of 172 (1031 views)

Re: was he justified in killing the burglars? [dvfmfidc] [In reply to]	Can't Post

"If a home or business is entered when occupied by the residents or owners, that in itself is an intent to harm"

I don't remember all of the details exactly, but didn't the perps enter the neighbors house, not the shooters? Also, I don't remember reading that anyone was home. Correct me if I am wrong.

--------------------------------------------------------------------
"Lemond is cycling's version of Rev Jessie Jackson." -johnnyperu 5/18/07
"Just because I suck doesn't mean my bike has to" -rickn 9/2/08

YaHey

Nov 24, 07 13:55

Post #60 of 172 (1027 views)

Re: was he justified in killing the burglars? [jana] [In reply to]	Can't Post

Actually, if you read the law, every person has a mandatory obligation to try and flee from a self defense situation. For example, if someone breaks into your home and you have the ability and opportunity to escape through the backdoor or window or whatever, and you don't take it, then you will have some legal problems with a self defense argument. Horn did not try and get away from the situation, the two burglars were not armed, and he was under no life threatening situation. I would be really surprised if he was not charged with manslaughter.

-------------------------------------

Tri N OC

Nov 24, 07 14:58

Post #61 of 172 (1014 views)

Re: was he justified in killing the burglars? [YaHey] [In reply to]	Can't Post

TripleThreat

Nov 24, 07 14:58

Post #62 of 172 (1014 views)

Re: was he justified in killing the burglars? [albush1] [In reply to]	Can't Post

I'm not understanding your logic. A man became a murderer to stop some burglers.

Now, who's going to step up and stop the murderer from killing again by killing him?

If we just kill everyone that looks suspicious then we won't have any crime to worry about ... I mean except for all the murderers that is.

A small crime was made into a major crime, and your logic says that's a good thing.

=======================

-- At 211 degrees water is hot. At 212 degrees water boils. Boiling water produces steam. You can power a locomotive with steam. Will you supply the extra degree that makes all the difference? ---

TripleThreat

Nov 24, 07 15:01

Post #63 of 172 (1010 views)

Re: was he justified in killing the burglars? [YaHey] [In reply to]	Can't Post

You've accurately described it. Now the guy with "big hanging balls" (in his mind) doesn't want to accept the responsibility for his "bravado" actions.

If you're gonna be a "big man" and take the law into your own hands then don't cry like a kitten when the law comes down. Have it one way or another. Don't intend to kill someone, carry it out, and then cry crocodile tears as you're facing some serious punishment.

My guess is that this guy isn't half as tough as he originally acted. But, that tends to be how folks are.

=======================

-- At 211 degrees water is hot. At 212 degrees water boils. Boiling water produces steam. You can power a locomotive with steam. Will you supply the extra degree that makes all the difference? ---

ironman18

Nov 24, 07 15:15

Post #64 of 172 (1006 views)

Re: was he justified in killing the burglars? [Kentiger] [In reply to]	Can't Post

Imagine this:

The police arrive to the crime scene and find that inside of the house, these two men had killed an entire family and mutilated their bodies. This man would have been put on a pedestal and held high for all to see. He would have been called a hero and Larry King or Nancy Grace would have done a special with him titled something like "Talking with justice, the story of a small town hero".

Its all in what we decided is right and wrong. In many other parts of the world, people are the judge, jury and executioner. Americans have lost sight of this. We are also sticking up for these two men who decided to steal from an innocent family. Maybe its just me, but if losing these two robbers to an over excited gun wielding texan makes 50 more people think twice about robbing a family and potentially harming a woman or child, than I am happy.

I lost a good family friend just over 3 weeks ago. Two men broke into her house in the middle of the night to steal a computer, when she woke up to see what was going on, they shot this beautiful, smart and innocent 26 year old female in the face and then again in the head. Is it ok if he killed then just to try out his gun? No. But after have been through what I have for the past three weeks, I can honestly say I would have done the same thing.
impossible is nothing

petalduck

Nov 24, 07 15:45

Post #65 of 172 (1004 views)

Re: was he justified in killing the burglars? [YaHey] [In reply to]	Can't Post

As others have pointed out, Texas is a Castle Doctrine state (A link for Castle Doctrine http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castle_Doctrine ) and he has no obligation to flee. The way I read this it is not a crime whatsoever if the shooter has permission from the landowner to be on the property. So yes the penalty for burglary could be death if you are caught by a citizen and not the police.

From the Texas Bill:

Sec. 9.32. DEADLY FORCE IN DEFENSE OF PERSON. (a) A person is justified in using deadly force against another:

(B) to prevent the other's imminent commission of aggravated kidnapping, murder, sexual assault, aggravated sexual assault, robbery, or aggravated robbery

(C) A person who has a right to be present at the location where the deadly force is used, who has not provoked the person against whom the deadly force is used, and who is not engaged in criminal activity at the time the deadly force is used is not required to retreat before using deadly force as described by this section.

http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/...xt/html/SB00378I.htm

TripleThreat

Nov 24, 07 16:03

Post #66 of 172 (1000 views)

Re: was he justified in killing the burglars? [ironman18] [In reply to]	Can't Post

The police arrive to the crime scene and find that inside of the house, these two men had killed an entire family and mutilated their bodies. This man would have been put on a pedestal and held high for all to see. He would have been called a hero and Larry King or Nancy Grace would have done a special with him titled something like "Talking with justice, the story of a small town hero".

Okay. But, that wasn't the situation.

If I was 7'2 I'd probably be in the NBA.

Its all in what we decided is right and wrong.

In this case both parties are WRONG. The robbers were wrong for breaking and entering, and the man was was wrong for intentionally going outside to kill two unarmed robbers.

It is not a dichotomoy where one is wrong and the other has to be right.

In many other parts of the world, people are the judge, jury and executioner. Americans have lost sight of this.

What happens in the rest of the world and what is outlined by American law may be two very different things. When I look around, I don't see too many folks I trust to be judge, jury, and executioner in terms of administering justice that fits the crime.

Maybe its just me, but if losing these two robbers to an over excited gun wielding texan makes 50 more people think twice about robbing a family and potentially harming a woman or child, than I am happy.

Am I the only one that's just as concerned about a middle-aged man who feels that he's not only compelled but justified in murdering two others folks, than I am about two guys that robbed a house with no one in it?

------------------------------------------

I could live in virtually any society. I could live by the rules of wild west, I could live by the rules of middle-eastern countries, and I can live by American law. But, what we're seeing (in this thread) is people willingly accepting severe breaking of American law just because they don't like the act of the victims. Again, I'm MUCH MORE concerned about a guy that feels he's justified (and can't be convinced not to) in killing two unarmed men than I am of the two unarmed robbers. Maybe that's just me.

Some are acting as if the gunman ISN'T a criminal just because he shot criminals. I don't get that. I think my neighbors are stealing cable. That doesn't give me the right to burn their house down.

Should I be looking out for vigilante snipers on the overpass shooting cars that they feel are speeding or driving drunk? Come to think of, I don't really have anything planned tomorrow. Drive safe.

=======================

-- At 211 degrees water is hot. At 212 degrees water boils. Boiling water produces steam. You can power a locomotive with steam. Will you supply the extra degree that makes all the difference? ---

TripleThreat

Nov 24, 07 16:05

Post #67 of 172 (999 views)

Re: was he justified in killing the burglars? [petalduck] [In reply to]	Can't Post

C) A person who has a right to be present at the location where the deadly force is used, who has not provoked the person against whom the deadly force is used, and who is not engaged in criminal activity at the time the deadly force is used is not required to retreat before using deadly force as described by this section.

Seems that could be interepreted a lot of different ways.

=======================

-- At 211 degrees water is hot. At 212 degrees water boils. Boiling water produces steam. You can power a locomotive with steam. Will you supply the extra degree that makes all the difference? ---

Tri N OC

Nov 24, 07 16:21

Post #68 of 172 (994 views)

Re: was he justified in killing the burglars? [TripleThreat] [In reply to]	Can't Post

Some are acting as if the gunman ISN'T a criminal just because he shot criminals. I don't get that.

I understand your outrage, but I am not sure that you have your terms right. It appears as if the shooter may NOT be a criminal under TX law. (I say may not because we don't have the result yet.)

Aren't you really saying that you believe the shooter was morally wrong to shoot? That you deplore the shooting more than the robbery?

brandonecpt

Nov 24, 07 17:07

Post #69 of 172 (978 views)

Re: was he justified in killing the burglars? [TripleThreat] [In reply to]	Can't Post

"Should I be looking out for vigilante snipers on the overpass shooting cars that they feel are speeding or driving drunk? Come to think of, I don't really have anything planned tomorrow. Drive safe."

Priceless!! :-)

Either way, I'm with you. I certainly don't agree with robbery, but I don't think death is a proper sentence for it. And I surely don't feel comfortable thinking about people running around thinking they are judge, jury, and executioner on a daily basis.

--------------------------------------------------------------------
"Lemond is cycling's version of Rev Jessie Jackson." -johnnyperu 5/18/07
"Just because I suck doesn't mean my bike has to" -rickn 9/2/08

TripleThreat

Nov 24, 07 17:25

Post #70 of 172 (974 views)

Re: was he justified in killing the burglars? [Tri N OC] [In reply to]	Can't Post

I understand your outrage

I'm not outraged at all. Concerned, but not outraged. If one of the robbers would have been my son, then I'd be outraged. I'm concerned that the guy is claiming "self defense" when he had the beforehand intent to kill them. I'm concerned that it might inspire other "well doers" to do similar things in scenarios where a crime might be taking place. I'm also conerned that law enforcement advised the guy to do one thing, but he was hell-bent on doing his own thing ... which in this case was VERY severe.

------------------------------------------

I'm referring specifically to his use of the term "I'm going to kill them" to the 9-1-1 operator who was suggesting for him to stay inside. He didn't say he was going to try and stop them, try to get them to surrender, or follow them so authorities could easily apprehend them, etc. He said he was going to kill them. Then he went and got his gun, shot them, and is now trying to claim self-defense. The guy seemingly thought that he was going to decide the fate of the two robbers. In our society, I do have objections against that.

Now, if the neighbors were home and were being harmed or looked as if they were going to be harmed, then that's another scenario altogether.

I ask again, would another neighbor have been justified in shooting the gunman to make sure he "didn't get away with it"? Where does that behavior stop? That's another concern.

=======================

-- At 211 degrees water is hot. At 212 degrees water boils. Boiling water produces steam. You can power a locomotive with steam. Will you supply the extra degree that makes all the difference? ---

(This post was edited by TripleThreat on Nov 24, 07 17:32)

albush1

Nov 24, 07 17:41

Post #71 of 172 (969 views)

Re: was he justified in killing the burglars? [TripleThreat] [In reply to]	Can't Post

My biggest concern is people not protecting themselves in the heat of the moment because they are worried that they, while the victim at the time of the incident, will become the victim of the law which seems all too often side with the criminals. With a family, I am not willing to take chances and would rather be judged by a jury of six than by the man in heaven. There should always be an escalation of force used, but too many people are fearful of detering and then ramping it up as appropriate It seems as if most people would seemingly allow harm upon themselves or others and act like a helpless victim when they are perfectly able to assist in some way. There are Good Samaritan laws that require us to help, and I will.

petalduck

Nov 24, 07 17:58

Post #72 of 172 (964 views)

Re: was he justified in killing the burglars? [TripleThreat] [In reply to]	Can't Post

Quote

"I ask again, would another neighbor have been justified in shooting the gunman to make sure he "didn't get away with it"?"

No, they would not have been justified. Joe Horn committed justifiable homicide. He was the good guy defending his neighbors property, less than 20 % of all crimes are solved in the US Joe Horn just solved this one quick.

Again most states that have the "Castle Doctrine" or "Stand-your-ground-law" are expanding that law.

This is also from Texas: This guy was just drunk and beating on his neighbors door, got shot in the head, no charges were filed, closed case

http://www.wfaa.com/...brecht.9e9145ee.html

YaHey

Nov 24, 07 18:07

Post #73 of 172 (960 views)

Re: was he justified in killing the burglars? [Tri N OC] [In reply to]	Can't Post

Actually, if you read the law, every person has a mandatory obligation to try and flee from a self defense situation.

Nope. Not true at all, at all. Generally true east of the Mississippi. Generally NOT true in the wild, wild west.

I don't know the law in Texas, but I would be extremely surprised if he did not have an obligation to flee. Certainly, walking outside of your house to imminent danger and confronting two persons who maybe didn't even have an intent to harm you hardly constitues self defense in any State. Again, I will be extremely surprised if he is not charged with manslaugher - he wasn't in any danger and was not defending himself.

-------------------------------------

Tri N OC

Nov 24, 07 20:05

Post #74 of 172 (947 views)

Re: was he justified in killing the burglars? [YaHey] [In reply to]	Can't Post

I don't know the law in Texas, but I would be extremely surprised if he did not have an obligation to flee.

Surprise!!! Someone earlier in this very thread quoted TX law, no requirement of retreating or fleeing.

Certainly, walking outside of your house to imminent danger and confronting two persons who maybe didn't even have an intent to harm you hardly constitues self defense in any State.

Not to be too flip, but you are assuming facts. You are assuming that dead guys did not have intent to harm. In TX and in other States, the shooter MAY confront crime and MAY shoot in defense of others and even defense of property. In this particular case, there may be a filing simply because the 911 call has received a lot of press play. But the principle, defense of others and defense of property is really well established. So much so that I doubt there would be any issue if not for the existence and wide distribution of the 911 tape.

YaHey

Nov 24, 07 20:43

Post #75 of 172 (942 views)

Re: was he justified in killing the burglars? [Tri N OC] [In reply to]	Can't Post

Surprise!!! Someone earlier in this very thread quoted TX law, no requirement of retreating or fleeing.

Do you know how many ways Texas law can be interpreted? Answer: in as many ways as there are lawyers in Texas. The texas Supreme Court could take this case and 4 would interpret the law one way, and the other 3 would intepret it another way. My point is that this guy, in my reading of the article was under no dander and should have fled. I will be surprised if he is not charged with something.

-------------------------------------

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

View All