• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Despite pleadings of 911 operator Texas man kills burglars exiting neighbor's house

BPSCG said:
God, Japan sucks.
Click to expand...

Dude, did you just grope the archives of the corners of the Internet just to find a 3-year old negative article about Japan just to counter the guy? That's... kind of sad.

robinson said:
At what point in time, in the United States, did it become a crime, to protect yourself from crime?
Click to expand...

I have little sympathy for burglars (in fact, I have none at all), but there IS such a thing as "excessive force", so please spare us your inane one-liners, okay?
 
JoeEllison said:
Nope. Still murder. There's no law that says you can kill someone robbing another person's home. I'm sure that the law limits the right of someone to kill a burglar in their own home as well.
Click to expand...

Much as I dislike burglars and such I have to agree with you. Even law enforcement cannot just shoot people for burglary. This trigger happy idiot would have been better served getting some pictures, writing a description, noting license plates. The transcript reads like he just wanted to take the opportunity to shoot some people.


From what the guy said to the 911 operator, he fully intended to murder them in cold blood, and that's what he did.
Click to expand...


damned shame.
 
robinson said:
At what point in time, in the United States, did it become a crime, to protect yourself from crime?
Click to expand...

Always, when the "protection" goes beyond reasonable behavior, and crosses into criminal territory. You can't generally gun down people for tailgating or shoplifting or overcharging you at the local deli.
 
Morrigan said:
Dude, did you just grope the archives of the corners of the Internet just to find a 3-year old negative article about Japan just to counter the guy? That's... kind of sad.
Click to expand...
You miss the point. This could have happened almost anywhere in the U.S. - you know there are people everywhere who would do the same thing, especially if they thought the law would permit it. One individual shoots a couple of burglars. He's arrested, will likely face charges, may well end up in prison. And from this, LawnOven decides, "Texas sucks." It's a ridiculous conclusion to make from one isolated incident. As ridiculous as dredging up a story about people abusing their grandparents in Japan and claiming that "Japan sucks."

In fact, you could argue that the conclusion that "Japan sucks" is more justified from the story I linked, since it cites multiple cases of abuse of the elderly, whereas the Texas guy appears to be sui generis.

For the record, I believe neither Japan nor Texas sucks, even though I've never been to Japan.
 
robinson said:
At what point in time, in the United States, did it become a crime, to protect yourself from crime?
Click to expand...
It's never a crime to protect yourself from crime.

How you protect yourself is another matter. And in this case, the gentleman involved was not protecting himself.
 
In Australia a security guard who shot a person who bashed and robbed her was charged with murder. Link
Lucky for her the jury found her not guilty Link

She had a better defence than the person in Texas.
 
BPSCG said:
It's never a crime to protect yourself from crime.
Click to expand...
Yes it is, at least in Iowa. An off duty Chicago police officer was at a party with some friends, got into an altercation with other people at the party and left. One of the other group followed them down the street, where one of them (who IIRC was a very big guy, 6'6" or so) attacked the Chicago police officer, who responded with one punch to the face. The attacker went down, and the cop is now doing 5 years in an Iowa prison. For punching a guy who attacked him as he was trying to flee.

Think this isn't true? Story here and here. Opinion coulumn here.

Compare/contrast to the Jena 6 incident, which the civil rights pimps have told us would never have happened if the attackers were white...

My favorite quote from the judge:
In a written verdict last December, Dubuque County Judge Monica Ackley says Gothard was the aggressor, but Mette failed to "retreat from the situation to avoid any problems." Because of that, the judge says she couldn't find that self-defense was justified.
Click to expand...
Apparently he didn't retreat fast enough from the drunken punk.
 
Last edited:
WildCat said:
Yes it is, at least in Iowa. An off duty Chicago police officer was at a party with some friends, got into an altercation with other people at the party and left. One of the other group followed them down the street, where one of them (who IIRC was a very big guy, 6'6" or so) attacked the Chicago police officer, who responded with one punch to the face. The attacker went down, and the cop is now doing 5 years in an Iowa prison. For punching a guy who attacked him as he was trying to flee.
Click to expand...


The quote and links seem to suggest it was a bench trial. I'm having a hard time understanding why in the world someone would not exercise their right to trial by jury on those facts.
 
Last edited:
JoeEllison said:
Nope. Still murder. There's no law that says you can kill someone robbing another person's home. I'm sure that the law limits the right of someone to kill a burglar in their own home as well.

From what the guy said to the 911 operator, he fully intended to murder them in cold blood, and that's what he did.
Click to expand...

While I personally approve of what he did, my state's self-protection law (brought about after too many people in this state were prosecuted by zealous, leftist prosecutors for protecting their lives and property) allows you to shoot to kill ANYONE on your property not invited.

NOT someone on your neighbor's property, for very good reasons--maybe the neighbor was moving and these guys were movers arriving in the wee hours?

Anyway, it's good that two more criminals have been removed from the gene pool, but from the transcript it's pretty obvious this guy stepped over the line.

Too bad he got caught.

Tokie
 
WildCat said:
Yes it is, at least in Iowa. An off duty Chicago police officer was at a party with some friends, got into an altercation with other people at the party and left. One of the other group followed them down the street, where one of them (who IIRC was a very big guy, 6'6" or so) attacked the Chicago police officer, who responded with one punch to the face. The attacker went down, and the cop is now doing 5 years in an Iowa prison. For punching a guy who attacked him as he was trying to flee.

Think this isn't true? Story here and here. Opinion coulumn here.

Compare/contrast to the Jena 6 incident, which the civil rights pimps have told us would never have happened if the attackers were white...

My favorite quote from the judge:

Apparently he didn't retreat fast enough from the drunken punk.
Click to expand...

On the other paw: an off-duty county mounty here got into a traffic altercation with some young guys; a fistfight ensued, the cop pulled his service piece and killed one of them.

He will--and should--likely to go to prison for a very long time.

Tokie
 
BPSCG said:
It's never a crime to protect yourself from crime.

How you protect yourself is another matter. And in this case, the gentleman involved was not protecting himself.
Click to expand...


LOL! I LOVE this sort of naivete!

Actually, it was very much a crime to protect yourself in most cities in the US from the 1960s until the 1980s. In fact, most states had "in-kind" statutes, meaning that you could only protect yourself with a similar degree of force, which meant that leftist prosecutors would zealously prosecute homeowners who used a knife on a burglar when the burglar had a crowbar...couldn't the homeowner have gotten his tire iron out and used that, instead?

And leftists today are even MORE in favor of rolling back "make my day" laws, especialy since they permit citizens to use guns whether or not their attacker has one.

Leftists believe that citizens should allow themselves to be killed and then let the police and courts handle punishment of the poor, misguided person who murdered them, their loved ones, etc.

Tokie
 
shuize said:
The quote and links seem to suggest it was a bench trial. I'm having a hard time understanding why in the world someone would not exercise their right to trial by jury on those facts.
Click to expand...
Perhaps the lawyer felt Iowa juries would be sympathetic to one of their own instead of the dirty cop from that big-city cesspool of corruption that is Chicago.

Apparently judges can be biased also.
 
So, TC - you approve of a mandatory death sentence for minor property crime? That's the kind of society you want to live in?
 
Tokenconservative said:
LOL! I LOVE this sort of naivete!

Actually, it was very much a crime to protect yourself in most cities in the US from the 1960s until the 1980s. In fact, most states had "in-kind" statutes, meaning that you could only protect yourself with a similar degree of force, which meant that leftist prosecutors would zealously prosecute homeowners who used a knife on a burglar when the burglar had a crowbar...couldn't the homeowner have gotten his tire iron out and used that, instead?
Click to expand...

Has this happened? Do you have a site?

Responding "in-kind" means that the use of deadly force is permitted if you have a reasonable belief that deadly force will be used. That means it is OK to use a knife when a crowbar is being used on you. Both are deadly weapons.
 
BPSCG said:
You miss the point. This could have happened almost anywhere in the U.S. - you know there are people everywhere who would do the same thing, especially if they thought the law would permit it. One individual shoots a couple of burglars. He's arrested, will likely face charges, may well end up in prison. And from this, LawnOven decides, "Texas sucks." It's a ridiculous conclusion to make from one isolated incident. As ridiculous as dredging up a story about people abusing their grandparents in Japan and claiming that "Japan sucks."

In fact, you could argue that the conclusion that "Japan sucks" is more justified from the story I linked, since it cites multiple cases of abuse of the elderly, whereas the Texas guy appears to be sui generis.

For the record, I believe neither Japan nor Texas sucks, even though I've never been to Japan.
Click to expand...

Fair enough. I did get your point, but it seemed sad to me that you had to dig through Google just to find a 3-year old article to make it. Also, I'm pretty sure that LawnOven isn't 100% serious in his general statement, and was just expressing disgust and discouragement at the incident. Of course, I can't speak for him. :)
 
From the link above:

"Horn's attorney said it was self-defense.

"He told them to stop. They stopped and looked at him and became terrified. Then they jumped and he fired," attorney Tom Lambright said Friday."

Sounds like a good pair of doubles, he shot them out of the air.

Mr Horn told the burglars to stop. They jumped. While the article doesn't say in which direction, they then must have jumped AT him, for his lawyer to be claiming self defense. I which case not only did Mr Horn defend himself, the two burglars were felony stupid- contenders for a Darwin award.

Also from the link given above, the article headline reads

" ACTIVIST calls incident murder"

So the activist may be inflaming the evidence, for his own fame.


And an additional thought: After the death of the first burglar shot, the second one became a murderer, since he was involved in the commission of a crime in which someone had died. So at the least Mr Horn killed one murderer, and one burglar- who was also involved in crime in which someone was killed. Two murderers.
 
Last edited:
Tokenconservative said:
Leftists believe that citizens should allow themselves to be killed and then let the police and courts handle punishment of the poor, misguided person who murdered them, their loved ones, etc.
Click to expand...

No they don't. That is just your uninformed opinion. I am a "leftist" as you like to call it and I don't believe any of the BS you think I do.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom