|
|
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 10,863
Campfire Outfitter
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 10,863 |
Not saying what Mr. Horn did was wrong, but in many states that don't have the provisions of the law as TX does. It might be a hard row to hoe, to keep a zealous DA from prosecuting you. It depends much upon the DA and the feelings of the community as a jury pool.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 50,170 Likes: 2
Campfire Kahuna
|
|
Campfire Kahuna
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 50,170 Likes: 2 |
Interesting case, don't know if you'ld get a "no bill" in every county in TX. or not? It does go to show that at times the criminal justice system does work.
Maybe if we had the provision of protection of thy neighbors property in every state, would it lower burglary rates? I've seen people in subdivisions who can't even tell you who there neighbors are. Still it's an interesting case, i'ld like to have been able to hear the Grand Jury presentation. You would get a "no bill" in every Texas county, as long as the case was presented honestly. The law requires that every homocide, justifiable or not, goes before a grand jury. Horns actions were legal, period.
The only thing worse than a liberal is a liberal that thinks they're a conservative.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 751
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 751 |
I don't believe it was personal self defense as he did advise the dispacher he was going out their to shoot them, and shoot them he did  . With that said, I believe in the saintity of inocent human life. However, I don't believe the lives of career criminals falls in that catagory. Why would anyone think that their lives are more important over hard earned property? I do know that here in California criminal life is considered worth more then our hard earned property that I have worked like a dog to purchase after taxes. However, I don't have to personally buy into that liberal oppinion. I will say that criminals in our liberal states, know they can run from cops in non-violent crimes becuase they know the cops can't shoot them (they don't always from the public, because they know the public may shoot regardless). I think that people should have the legal right to shoot criminals stealing from them. If it is known that you can be shot for stealing and you take the risk, then you have nothing coming and you would see a drastic drop in property crimes. Tennessee past a law years ago that you could shoot anyone you found in your house, who was uninvited. Burglaries dropped to almost zero. That tells you something!
Last edited by slideaction; 06/30/08.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 10,863
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 10,863 |
Interesting case, don't know if you'ld get a "no bill" in every county in TX. or not? It does go to show that at times the criminal justice system does work.
Maybe if we had the provision of protection of thy neighbors property in every state, would it lower burglary rates? I've seen people in subdivisions who can't even tell you who there neighbors are. Still it's an interesting case, i'ld like to have been able to hear the Grand Jury presentation. You would get a "no bill" in every Texas county, as long as the case was presented honestly. The law requires that every homocide, justifiable or not, goes before a grand jury. Horns actions were legal, period. +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ That's good that it would stand up in every county. I wish we had a property provision in our use of deadly force law.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 50,170 Likes: 2
Campfire Kahuna
|
|
Campfire Kahuna
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 50,170 Likes: 2 |
For those not familiar with the Texas law...
� 9.41. PROTECTION OF ONE'S OWN PROPERTY. (a) A person
in lawful possession of land or tangible, movable property is
justified in using force[0] against another when and to the degree the
actor reasonably believes the force[0] is immediately necessary to
prevent or terminate the other's trespass on the land or unlawful
interference with the property.
(b) A person unlawfully dispossessed of land or tangible,
movable property by another is justified in using force[0] against the
other when and to the degree the actor reasonably believes the force[0]
is immediately necessary to reenter the land or recover the
property if the actor uses the force[0] immediately or in fresh pursuit
after the dispossession and:
(1) the actor reasonably believes the other had no
claim of right when he dispossessed the actor; or
(2) the other accomplished the dispossession by using
force[0], threat, or fraud against the actor.
Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 883, ch. 399, � 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974.
Amended by Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 900, � 1.01, eff. Sept. 1,
1994.
� 9.42. DEADLY[0] FORCE[0] TO PROTECT PROPERTY. A person is
justified in using deadly[0] force[0] against another to protect land or
tangible, movable property:
(1) if he would be justified in using force[0] against the
other under Section 9.41; and
(2) when and to the degree he reasonably believes the
deadly[0] force[0] is immediately necessary:
(A) to prevent the other's imminent commission of
arson, burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, theft during the
nighttime, or criminal mischief during the nighttime; or
(B) to prevent the other who is fleeing
immediately after committing burglary, robbery, aggravated
robbery, or theft during the nighttime from escaping with the
property; and
(3) he reasonably believes that:
(A) the land or property cannot be protected or
recovered by any other means; or
(B) the use of force[0] other than deadly[0] force[0] to
protect or recover the land or property would expose the actor or
another to a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury.
The only thing worse than a liberal is a liberal that thinks they're a conservative.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 13,670 Likes: 1
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 13,670 Likes: 1 |
ya know mike, the position of defending ones castle, used to be the center.
but due to the advent of bedwettin liberals, it seems far right to most folks.
heck we never moved an inch, just the rest of the world shifted to the left.
so they view us as far right.
tis a strange world we inhabit.
"This ain't dress rehearsal....it's the life you get to live, make it a good one."
TEAMWORK = a bunch of people doing what I say
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 50,170 Likes: 2
Campfire Kahuna
|
|
Campfire Kahuna
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 50,170 Likes: 2 |
...and that is above and beyond, self defense.
The only thing worse than a liberal is a liberal that thinks they're a conservative.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 12,192
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 12,192 |
Is there any property worth giving up your life in an attempt to steal. That's the choice thieves have to make.
Is it legal to execute thieves? Is it right?
I don't much care, I've had things stolen and I know well how enraged I can get. Take my stuff and you chances for a long happy life are not real good.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 26,128 Likes: 21
Campfire Ranger
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 26,128 Likes: 21 |
One must be careful of one's words in discussions of this nature. They just might be presented in a court of law some day as evidence of "mindset".
That said, I have driven down to unoccupied neighbors' houses to investigate what I thought might be suspicious activity, and I carried a rifle or shotgun in the car when I did so. Fortunately, my approaching headlights was enough to chase anyone away.
I will never hesitate to step outside in defense of what is mine. Hopefully my presence will be enough to scare away any thieves. If one is threatened with lethal force (especially on one's own property) use of lethal force to defend one's self is justified.
The article states that after confrontation, the burglars entered Mr Horn's property. That says to me "intent to do bodily harm". The shooting sounds to me like it was justified, and there must have been good reason for the grand jury to feel the same way.
People who choose to brew up their own storms bitch loudest about the rain.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 2,629
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 2,629 |
I busted my hump for everything I have. If some POS gets killed in the process of stealing from me or mine, tough cookies. Joe Horn did the right thing. Should the rest of the country adopt the Texas Law, the crime rate would plummet as, no doubt, would the criminal population.
The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary. --H. L. Mencken www.oregonfirearms.org
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 6,418
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 6,418 |
Yes it is. It gets curiouser and curiouser every year. Downright Orwellian. Helluva thing when you can't protect what's yours without your fellow citizens and the civil authorities determining that you are somehow in the wrong.
If the American People allow private banks to control the issuance of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks..., will deprive the People of all their Property,...Thomas Jefferson
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 20
New Member
|
|
New Member
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 20 |
Personally (from what I read) it would seem that Sec. 9.42 is dependant on 9.41 (Protection of ONE'S OWN Property). Which, from the title gives the owner of said stolen property the right to use force, up to and including deadly force, to protect it. I did not see anything in the law which gave a neighbor the right to use deadly force to prevent a theft.
That being said; 1) The validity of the use of force in this case is moot since he (Mr. Horn) was cleared 2) Personally, I believe it was a "bad shoot" (You can think I am an idiot for that opinion. However, it is my opinion and if you don't like it, I doubt very much I will lose much sleep over it) 3) If someone who was not known to me was INSIDE my home they get shot with no questions asked or warning given (also something I will not lose sleep over) since I don't know how many people might be there or where they are.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 844
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 844 |
"Admittedly, thieves are scum, and these particular thieves were stupid in addition to that. But what is the value of a human life?"
===========================================================
The value of a thief's life is worth exactly what the value of the property he(or she) commits to steal. For example, if a scumbag commits to hold you up for an unknown reward, his life is worth exactly what you have in your pocket, be it 5 cents or 5 grand.
1D
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 50,170 Likes: 2
Campfire Kahuna
|
|
Campfire Kahuna
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 50,170 Likes: 2 |
This may sound foreign to many, but read the statute. In Texas , you can be KILLED for messing with stuff that does not belong to you! (legally)
The only thing worse than a liberal is a liberal that thinks they're a conservative.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 20
New Member
|
|
New Member
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 20 |
Idaho_Shooter;
I think you are reading the article wrong. Yes it does say that they came out of "his window" but that was in reference to the neighbors window. Appearently the two individuals were shot when one or both entered his (Mr. Horn's) yard.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 10,863
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 10,863 |
I don't believe it was personal self defense as he did advise the dispacher he was going out their to shoot them, and shoot them he did . With that said, I believe in the saintity of inocent human life. However, I don't believe the lives of career criminals falls in that catagory. Why would anyone think that their lives are more important over hard earned property? I do know that here in California criminal life is considered worth more then our hard earned property that I have worked like a dog to purchase after taxes. However, I don't have to personally buy into that liberal oppinion. I will say that criminals in our liberal states, know they can run from cops in non-violent crimes becuase they know the cops can't shoot them (they don't always from the public, because they know the public may shoot regardless). I think that people should have the legal right to shoot criminals stealing from them. If it is known that you can be shot for stealing and you take the risk, then you have nothing coming and you would see a drastic drop in property crimes. Tennessee past a law years ago that you could shoot anyone you found in your house, who was uninvited. Burglaries dropped to almost zero. That tells you something! ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ There's a little bit more to the TN code, then just a person being in your residence and using deadly force, just because. TCA Code 39-11-611 which was amended in 2007 The protection of property TCA 39-11-614, still doesn't justify use of deadly force for trespassing on real estate or unlawful interference with personnal property. It should be changed to allow use of deadly force, but not at this time though.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 48,411
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 48,411 |
well, as you say its moot...at least as to the State of Texas. But let the Obamanation get elected, pick a well qualified (snicker) minority to be US Atty for the Southern District of Texas, and ol' Joe may be looking at a federal indictment for violating the civil rights of those two fine upstanding Columbian criminals.
Proudly representing oil companies, defense contractors, and firearms manufacturers since 1980. Because merchants of death need lawyers, too.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 22,244 Likes: 15
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 22,244 Likes: 15 |
Please, gently flush the sand from your mangina and cancel any visits to Texas. It's all good. Very nice touch... I'll second that.....
----------------------------------------
I'm a big fan of the courtesy flush.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 50,170 Likes: 2
Campfire Kahuna
|
|
Campfire Kahuna
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 50,170 Likes: 2 |
No doubt, and for those that are wondering, the law does not apply to law enforcement.
The only thing worse than a liberal is a liberal that thinks they're a conservative.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 10,863
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 10,863 |
For those not familiar with the Texas law...
� 9.41. PROTECTION OF ONE'S OWN PROPERTY. (a) A person
in lawful possession of land or tangible, movable property is
justified in using force[0] against another when and to the degree the
actor reasonably believes the force[0] is immediately necessary to
prevent or terminate the other's trespass on the land or unlawful
interference with the property.
(b) A person unlawfully dispossessed of land or tangible,
movable property by another is justified in using force[0] against the
other when and to the degree the actor reasonably believes the force[0]
is immediately necessary to reenter the land or recover the
property if the actor uses the force[0] immediately or in fresh pursuit
after the dispossession and:
(1) the actor reasonably believes the other had no
claim of right when he dispossessed the actor; or
(2) the other accomplished the dispossession by using
force[0], threat, or fraud against the actor.
Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 883, ch. 399, � 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974.
Amended by Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 900, � 1.01, eff. Sept. 1,
1994.
� 9.42. DEADLY[0] FORCE[0] TO PROTECT PROPERTY. A person is
justified in using deadly[0] force[0] against another to protect land or
tangible, movable property:
(1) if he would be justified in using force[0] against the
other under Section 9.41; and
(2) when and to the degree he reasonably believes the
deadly[0] force[0] is immediately necessary:
(A) to prevent the other's imminent commission of
arson, burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, theft during the
nighttime, or criminal mischief during the nighttime; or
(B) to prevent the other who is fleeing
immediately after committing burglary, robbery, aggravated
robbery, or theft during the nighttime from escaping with the
property; and
(3) he reasonably believes that:
(A) the land or property cannot be protected or
recovered by any other means; or
(B) the use of force[0] other than deadly[0] force[0] to
protect or recover the land or property would expose the actor or
another to a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ I truly enjoy the way TX criminal code is written. It's straight and to the point. TN. law is written with so much exceptions to this and that, and legalize. TX uses the KISS concept. 
|
|
|
|
|
490 members (222Sako, 264mag, 1badf350, 06hunter59, 2ndwind, 10gaugemag, 44 invisible),
17,365
guests, and
1,301
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums81
Topics1,194,930
Posts18,539,151
Members74,051
| |
Most Online20,796
Yesterday at 04:44 PM
|
|
|
|
