Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Joe Horn cleared.............

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_7jqLie6-Y0

This is a recording of the 911 call placed by Mr. Horn. Released by http://network.nationalpost.com/np/.../texas-shooting-joe-horn-s-911-call.aspx

Per my earlier post about 9.41/42, 9.43 covers that;
"� 9.43. PROTECTION OF THIRD PERSON'S PROPERTY. A person is justified in using force or deadly force against another to protect land or tangible, movable property of a third person if, under the circumstances as he reasonably believes them to be, the actor would be justified under Section 9.41 or 9.42 in using force or deadly force to protect his own land or property"

However, over 7 minutes passed from the beginning of the call. Officers were able to respond immediately after Mr. Horn notified the dispatcher that he had fired therefore they must have been onscene. If he had stayed inside the home and not gone outside this could have been handled by the Police. The fact of the matter is that Mr. Horn actively seeked out an engagement with these subjects when his own actions (the waiting 7 minutes to act) would seem to imply that he did not feel that there was sufficent threat to immediately react. See below and pay attention the the part between <<< >>>

� 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 against another when and to the degree the actor <<<reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary>>> to prevent or terminate the other's trespass on the land or unlawful interference with the property.

Thank you. Not too much of it has changed in my 26 years.

So?

I won't shed a tear for the bad guys. They need to put up bill boards all over Texas about this. Maby next time the bad guys will think twice before breaking into someone's house.

What is your REAL issue with what Mr. Horn did?

Is it that he didn't just wait around and watch his neighborhood be victimized, hoping the cops would show up fast enough and maybe, just maybe, that they POS illegals would actually get dealt with?

Or that he gave them exactly what they deserved?

Or, is it that he was acquitted by a jury of his peers, who likely feel the same way as he did, only they didn't get the chance to act (or wouldn't have, if they had)?

Piss on a thief; they barter their lives for someone else's property, and occasionally (though not often enough), that property is delivered in lead.

I'd like to buy Mr. Horn a beer, not sit around and piss and moan about how what he did might not be completely "legal" to some folks.

IMHO, we need to do what he did more often; there'd be a helluva lot less crime if we did.

Deerfearme
I work had for everything I have. I think at times I risk my life to get what I have. Just driving to work somedays is a risk. With that in mind, if I have to risk my life to get it, others have to risk their lives to take it. It's more than the monetary value of the items. With that in mind the death penalty may be appropriate if someone should choose to get it without my permission. kwg

This happens all the time around Texas. This was only news because it happened in the ACLU's back yard.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The good thing about this case in TX, Mr. Horn was well within the boundries of the TX law. Sadly every state doesn't have a provision of using deadly force protecting real estate or personnal property or property of a third party. Maybe in time more states will pass these laws, we can only hope.

It IS completely legal! That seems to be what people don't understand.

VAnimrod;
I do not have a problem with the use of force being used in self-defense, however I do believe that $2,000 and jewelry is not worth killing someone over.

If that's what the thief thinks his life is worth, then that's his choice, not mine. Break into my house at night, and whatever it is you THINK you might gain, is what your life WAS worth.

Very simple.

BTW - tell that to the next theif/murderer that kills someone they find during a B&E over $2k and some jewelry.....

In this case about the price of two High Brass WWs full of "00" Buck I suppose. A bargain in this case. Well done! jorge

They picked the wrong profession and the wrong neighborhood.

Every occupation has it's hazards.

No sympathy from me. Burglars are a severe nuisance.

OK, what is a good price?
(talk about a hanging curve ball........)

Yes it is. As I said, I do not have an issue with the use of force as self-defense esp in the home. If someone broke into my house, they would get shot without warning as long as I felt that there was a valid and ACTIVE IMMEDIATE threat to my own or family's wellbeing.
Personally, I believe that lethal force should only be used to protect life from immediate or suspected harm. In my book, being in my home is a threat to my family. However, once that individual has fled they cease to become an immediate threat.

I think you are missing the point....
When a person breaks into someone else's home,even if it is to steal two thousand dollars worth of stuff,they deserve to be killed,period...They entered knowing that their actions could cost them their lives and were probably prepared to kill or maim to get away....

Please tell me how "entering Mr Horn's yard" is different than "entering Mr Horn's property"

There is nothing wrong with your beliefs. You can live in Texas and be perfectly happy with those ideals. Your neighbors will watch your stuff for you.

VAnimrod;
As I said earlier (about a page ago) if they are in my house, they die. Once they leave, its the cops responsibility.
Tracks;
I think you misunderstood what I meant. What I meant was simply that money and property can be replaced. I am much more comfertable with force being used to protect someone from immediate danger such as shooting a burglar inside your own home or who is trying to break in (not afterwards) since you do not know the intent of the person attempting entry, shooting a rapist, etc.