If someone invades my home he does it with the risk of loosing his life. Im not saying i will automatically shoot to kill, but that is a real possibility. Especially if they dont follow the instructions i give them.

1) Where are you getting the idea that they would do more harm if they stayed alive, especially killing someone - that's really a bad, bad assumption. It's imaginable, but not provable in any way.

2) I believe in human rights, but I also believe that some human rights are more important than others. To me the human right to life is more important then the right to property. Property can be replaced or compensated for to a person that lost it; life cannot be replaced and compensation for it will never be more than symbolic. Likewise, I consider modern notions of justice and fair trial to be more important to a healthy society than the supposed "sacredness" of property. A society that lets petty crimes go unpunished is in for trouble and needs more efficient response methods, but a society that values property above life is just rotten.

Well it could certainly be construed as invading your property (driveway), and threatening your loved ones (does this model of human rights apply to those who live alone?). But that's silly and beside the point.

Steel-Tomb & elite's interesting ideas concerning human rights don't mean much, thankfully, because no respectable government shares them. Sadly there are a lot of nasty countries in the world who think this way.

1.)
if criminals commit a crime and get away with it , they have a good chance of doing it again..., and they ALMOST killed the grand parent's stepson.... imagine what they would do to their next victim???, shoot to kill, better having no criminals in this world then to let them run off.

2. well did you read the part where they beat the living daylights out of their stepson?? leaving him with severe head trauma, even causing BRAIN DAMAGE...., those criminals automatically lose their rights for attempting to kill the stepson,

when someone breaks into your house ready to steal whatever is of value and murder your family what will you do?? call the cops and wait till they come a few minutes later while you are being shot at.( hope that never happens), you will think differently...

Ehm,

what the hell are you talking about?
its about a Neighbour in pasadena Texas shooting 2 burglas as they robbed something

so why the hell do you bring up a case about a homeowner in N.California shooting and killing 2 black people after they beat the stepson and 1 escaped
really elite, what are you talking about?

get your news straight first.

...stepson?

I have a good friend who is now a truly honest gentleman as well as a avid
subsimmer who visits this forum.

In his youth he engaged in petty theft.

He now has a respectable job, a wife and child.

If you could have justifyed shooting my friend as he ran away from a crime scene all
those years ago, then you would have made the world a poorer place. Further more,
there would be little to say against shooting him now.

You can no judge someone on their future actions.


*edit* and what CCIP said.

It sounds like he wanted to shoot them regardless of what was going on, and that does seem unecessary. Even so, I've not much sympathy for the thieves who got shot, as even though what the guy did was over the top and probably unecessary, they put themselves in the position which brought about that act, so that's their tough luck. The simple fact is, if they had not been breaking and entering and stealing stuff in the first place, they'd not have been shot by him, and since they know that what they were doing was wrong, but they still did it, then they must have known that what happened to them was always a possibility.

I can understand frustration at reporting this kind of thing and the cops taking ages to turn up to a crime in progress, as I have had the same thing happen to me, where they took almost three hours to do something about it, but six minutes to respond is not actually that bad, the police can't be everywhere.

:D Chock

oops, must have gotten a mixup :oops:

between this
http://cbs11tv.com/texaswire/TX--Bur...rces_news_html

and this
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php...cle=1&catnum=0

Again you try to minimize peoples judgement as to a threat. Beyond that the cocept of self-defense has existed for millenia. So yes someone who lives alone not only can but has a duty to protect him/herself.

+2 for this post. It is right on.

In the perfect world, people wouldn't need to defend ones life/limb/property, but Utopia is about as far away now as it can possbily get too. The 1950's is probably as close to Utopia as one is ever going to get without re-wiring the human brain, but if you re-wire the human brain, you are also no longer human, so this idea is out. Welcome to the 2000's. Buy a gun. You're gonna need one.

-S

Then why did he call the police and wait six/seven minutes. If the man really wanted to take justice into his own hands, he'd have just waited until they emerged from the house and shot them witout warning.

As the call shows he did niether.

There is self defense, and there is shooting two men trying to exscape your neighbors property.


The self defense option is usualy to remain unseen or leave the area.

Do i understand that you think it is better to run away or hide if something like this happens?

Too much mixing I think. In this case (Mr. Horn of Pasedina, TX)we aren't talking self defense but defense of property which is a legal action in the state of Texas as of September.

Yes, it is usually most effective method of defense, especially when the threat is not immanent.

If the threat is immanent, but not premeditated, then compliance is usually the best defense.


Deterrence and punishment are the jobs assigned to the police and courts.

Are you really willing to give up your right to life to the police and the courts?

Look at his first sentences, he definitely wants to shoot these guys. All the call seems to do is let the police know about what he wants to do.

If they attempt to enter my house I'll protect my family and property, lethally if necessary. I have that right and I consider it my duty to my family.

But Mr Horn shot two people over a bag of stolen goods. He was in no danger. No one was in any danger.

He was a vigilante. He was legally right under the law but I cannot condone his actions. Way, way overboard.

So you are now saying that calling the authorities was the wrong thing for him to do? He certainly didn't run outside immediately. He waited six minutes.

Again I come back to the fact that when seconds count, one cannot count on the police.