General Gun Discussion

[culero]

snip

Tell me, if some minority kid runs up, grabs a pot of your petunias off the front porch and takes off are you going to kill him? You'd be legal in Texas you know.

I know its rude to respond to a question without an answer, sorry.

But, consider this - thieves start their careers somewhere. If they die as a consequence early in their career, how many community members are spared being victims?

In your example, would deadly force be a proportionate response? For me, personally, no. I'm very happy with Texas law as it stands now. I'll just have to be willing to accept what my fellow Texans decide in each circumstance (both the actors involved, and those who judge their actions).

In particular, I'm glad Mr. Horn acted as he did. Who's to know in the case of burglars which ones might be violent or non-violent? I like the decision to not take any chances that they may have already done violence, or may do so in their next criminal action. If you catch 'em red-handed, then try to cause them to be arrested, shoot 'em if that's not possible. Its what Horn did and its the right thing to do in your own neighborhood, IMO.

[Hornet33]

Again with the lack of forethought. Surely we can get past the fun and satisfaction of saying "Yeah, let's kill all these motherfkrs when they break into my house" and consider the consequences of allowing this to become a widespread practice?

Or is that too complex?

And just what would the cosequences be if criminals KNEW that they stood a very good chance of getting shot and killed by a homeowner if they break into a house?  Sorry but I'm just not seeing this downside your talking about other than it violates your sense of moralty.

[lasersailor184]

Follow this to it's logical extension. Horn didn't know what if anything they had taken from the neighbor. Would you kill a man for breaking your neighbor's window?

Would you kill a man for stealing a neighbor's TV set?

Would you kill a man for stealing a neighbor's garden hoe?

Would you kill a man for stealing a neighbor's loaf of bread?

Where the hell do you guys draw the line at life vs property? Would you kill a man for stealing a neighbor's stick of Doublemint?


Would you kill a man for walking on your yard without permission? For trespassing?

 
No, it is not obvious. Yes there is a question. What did they steal? Do you know for sure they stole any item? They did apparently break and enter but I've seen nothing other than that. Do you know for sure they threatened Horn? I haven't seen anything proving that. Do you know for sure if they aggressively move towards him or did he aggressively move to block their exit path?

There's a shirtload of stuff that is not known at this point.

It relates to the threat. With no weapons it's much harder to see this as righteous self-defense. As I said, the question is open on whether they were just trying to leave and he intercepted them or whether they moved to confront him. Weapons would make the latter more plausible.

Except that he did not ignore them. He called 911 and the cops arrived pretty much right after he shot them. It's quite possible that calling 911 was all that was necesary for the cops to catch them.
 
I realize it was technically legal. IMO, it wasn't moral.

Tell me, if some minority kid runs up, grabs a pot of your petunias off the front porch and takes off are you going to kill him? You'd be legal in Texas you know.

What would I do?

Yes. Yes.  Yes.  Yes.  Yes.

The line is drawn EXACTLY where someone thinks they have the right or ability to take something that is not theirs.  Not one criminal's life is worth more than the smallest stick of gum he thinks he (or she) can steal.

As for trespassing?  Probably not, unless the man's actions were dubious or well declared.  If they are not well declared, I'd probably threaten first.


Though I am glad you are CLEARLY stating that only minorities are criminals.  We know that's what you think, but to have you say it makes our job much easier.  Past that, I'd probably wing the kid the first time.

[Toad]

Well, laser, wouldn't it be funny if someday you called your buddy, asked if you could borrow his garden hoe and he said "yeah, but I'm going to be out shopping, just go into the garage and take it."

You hang up, drive over to his place, go into his garage, take the hoe and get shotgunned in the back by an alert neighbor.

That'd be a hoot, wouldn't it?

Jeebus Cripes.

[lasersailor184]

Well, laser, wouldn't it be funny if someday you called your buddy, asked if you could borrow his garden hoe and he said "yeah, but I'm going to be out shopping, just go into the garage and take it."

You hang up, drive over to his place, go into his garage, take the hoe and get shotgunned in the back by an alert neighbor.

That'd be a hoot, wouldn't it?

Jeebus Cripes.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't the two deadbeats (zing!) not stop taking stuff / come for the shooter after being warned?

[Xasthur]

Hornet, don't give me that watermelon I have contributed sound opinion to this thread and that was a joke.

Kaw, a tough stance on crime is required but vigilante murder will solve nothing. For example, do you think that this sort of thing won't breed retribution killings?

You guys are so keen on trusting 'your fellow Texans' with the executioners axe....

What is all this nonsense about preventative killings? Are you guys really so self-absorbed that you actually believe that your judgement is that good that you can know that you're doing society a favour by stopping the 'career of a criminal' before it gets started?

I bet you all bang on about Hitler and Stalin and how wrong they were. They were killing people for the good of their society according to their judgement. How is yours any better? It's not and you're a moron if you think otherwise. If you're going to buy into murder for the purification of society, don't discriminate. If you all had your way hundreds of thousands of petty thieves would be dead.

So if that's the way of it then, when do we organise the criminal holocaust?

Before you continue on this path consider the scale these murders would reach.

[Toad]

I'll just have to be willing to accept what my fellow Texans decide in each circumstance (both the actors involved, and those who judge their actions).

So if your fellow Texans decide killing to save a pot of petunias is acceptable and laudable, you're fully in support? Your choice. I'd speak out against that but that's just me.

I like the decision to not take any chances that they may have already done violence, or may do so in their next criminal action.

Hmmm... criminal action. Are you with Jackal1 on shooting them for simple trespass? You see two shady looking guys crossing a neighbor's lawn headed for his back yard best go ahead and shoot just to be safe, nip their lawlessness in the bud and preserve the community from being later victims of these two?


OK, enough with that.

As I said, there has to be some common sense applied in these cases. IMO, the shoot-em-on-site crowd in here is not exercising any.

Horn had the cops on the way; he was not threatened while watching from his upstairs window. He forced this confrontation and he killed two men by shooting them in the back.

If you all think that reflects well on gun owners, advances the cause of the 2nd Amendment and will lead to greater gun freedom (incorporation, CCH, Open Carry) i would have to strongly disagree.


[/quote]

[Toad]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't the two deadbeats (zing!) not stop taking stuff / come for the shooter after being warned?

I will correct you. That scenario has been offered but not proven.

This is a digression from your response to my post where you said you'd kill a man taking your neighbor's garden hoe. Wouldn't it be funny if you found yourself in the scenario I offered to you?

I mean, Laser, killed by a neighbor that didn't know the stranger had permission to borrow the garden hoe. 

I know you'd be ok with it as you died because, after all, it's what you would do yourself.

[Xasthur]

And just what would the cosequences be if criminals KNEW that they stood a very good chance of getting shot and killed by a homeowner if they break into a house?  Sorry but I'm just not seeing this downside your talking about other than it violates your sense of moralty.

Hornet, this is exactly what I'm talking about. You put the axe in the hands of your garden variety moron citizen and you get this:

Well, laser, wouldn't it be funny if someday you called your buddy, asked if you could borrow his garden hoe and he said "yeah, but I'm going to be out shopping, just go into the garage and take it."

You hang up, drive over to his place, go into his garage, take the hoe and get shotgunned in the back by an alert neighbor.

That'd be a hoot, wouldn't it?

Jeebus Cripes.

Don't bother trying to say that this sort of thing wouldn't happen. It would.

But what... that would just be collateral damage? Worthwhile loss? What if it was your son or daughter or wife that got shot by some trigger-happy idiot who was protecting society from what they thought was a 'brazen thief'.

Forethought.

[lasersailor184]

Hornet, don't give me that watermelon I have contributed sound opinion to this thread and that was a joke.

Kaw, a tough stance on crime is required but vigilante murder will solve nothing. For example, do you think that this sort of thing won't breed retribution killings?

You guys are so keen on trusting 'your fellow Texans' with the executioners axe....

What is all this nonsense about preventative killings? Are you guys really so self-absorbed that you actually believe that your judgement is that good that you can know that you're doing society a favour by stopping the 'career of a criminal' before it gets started?

I bet you all bang on about Hitler and Stalin and how wrong they were. They were killing people for the good of their society according to their judgement. How is yours any better? It's not and you're a moron if you think otherwise. If you're going to buy into murder for the purification of society, don't discriminate. If you all had your way hundreds of thousands of petty thieves would be dead.

So if that's the way of it then, when do we organise the criminal holocaust?

Before you continue on this path consider the scale these murders would reach.

You're ultra foolish if you think the judgement of the masses is any better than the judgement of a single person.  It wasn't just Hitler who wandered around the streets shooting all jews and untermensch.  It was hundreds of thousands of people doing it. 

It wasn't just Stalin killing the tens of MILLIONS of political dissidents.  It was his millions of supporters.


Given all of what we have seen of history, it is downright childish to think that a group of people has better judgement than one single man.

[Toad]

Given all of what we have seen of history, it is downright childish to think that a group of people has better judgement than one single man.

Damn! We could have save billions over the years if we had just started with one man juries way back when!

[uptown]

Toad, you are wrong and if you were my neighbor ......well lets just say you wouldn't want to live near me too long. Us folks in the country do things a little bit different. We lookout for and help are neighbors because it's just common respect and descenticy. The crimials in this case have no respect for someones home and probably the lives in that home. Nor would they have any for you or yours.
Too many people in this country turn the other way when dope dealers are pushing their drugs to our kids or stealing us blind, because they "don't want to get involved". You sir are part of the problem. If you sat and watched as my home get invaded and did nothing, I'd replace my stuff with your stuff the very second you left for work.And crap in the sink on the way out.

[Hornet33]

There is a HUGE differance between breaking a window, crawling into a house and then start tossing bags full of stuff back out the window like in the Horn case, vs Laz pulling into the driveway in his car, getting out, opening the garage door and walking back out with a garden hose in his hand. You also have consider one little fact of human nature here. If Laz's friend knows him well enough to tell him to just go over and get the hose while he's out to the store it stands to reason that Laz has been over there many times and most likely KNOWS the neighbors as well, at least by sight.

I'm not on the bandwagon of shoot first ask questions later. I've caught several crooks breaking into my garage and truck. Never had to fire a shot, but I was armed and I was able to detain them until the police arrived. However if they had made any move the wrong way I was ready to pull the trigger. In both of my cases I had them cornered with no where to go except through me and Mr. Remington 870.

A sensless death is something to regret but I'll NEVER shed a tear over someone who was killed while committing a crime against anouther person, and YES robbery falls into what I consider to be a personal attack.

[bustr]

All of you guys who think Mr. Horn is wrong, don't live in Texas.

The duely elected government of Texas gave the citizens of Texas the law they wanted in response to criminal scum like Mr. Horn shot. So far it seems the law is working. Bad guys are dieing. It's a traditional Texan kind of attituide.

Too many of those responding to this thread in outrage want to continue the kinds of government that encourages criminals to think they are a special class of citizen who can act with impunity against the law abiding citizenry of where ever they call home. You will argue that in the end it's the best for all sides "just in case an innocent gets blown away". In that case don't move to Texas. The citizens of Texas have decided criminals who violate their property or threaten their person have made the choice to stand outside the law and accept the conciquences.

In the face of Mr. Horn's 911 open call, a grand jury of his peers "We the People" found his actions within Texas law.

To you LEO's in this thread who are pronouncing Mr. Horn a murderer, or his actions simply wrong. Do you ever wonder why so many citizens have a low opinion of LEO's in america. We are tired of being assaulted, raped, robbed, murdered and everything else that goes along with crime. After all there are 400 million of us citizens while only 1 million LEO. If we had 50 million LEO then you might have a chance at protecting most of us. But then you LEO would be a domestic standing army of 50 million with the massed power to dictate law to "We the People".

In Texas "We the People" voted. Are "We the People" ultimatly the law, or are you LEO's the Law?

[Kaw1000]

Xasthur  Point taken and respect your opinion...but.....this crime thing is really out of hand and the law is
not doing what it takes to stop it. So we have to. I am so sick of seeing people suffer because some no brain scum
does whatever they want And gets away with it
 Again put yourself in the victims shoes.....how does it feel to work so hard from something and
then have it taken from you. People are scared, it should not be that way in this country.