TexasCHLforum.com

Molon_labe wrote:
Well I really don't know my neighbors much either..yet in passing one time the guy was leaving on vacation and said "Hey, keep an eye on the place"

Can someone prove he DIDN'T say that?

Would a neighborhood watch be implied consent?

SCone wrote:

Molon_labe wrote:committing a burglary of a habitation he was requested to watch out for

When the operator asked him if he knew them, he said, "No I really don't know these neighbors"

Seems like it'd been a good time to tell them he was watching their house for them, don't 'ya think?

Molon_labe wrote:It wasn't self defense as in it was preventing the criminals from fleeing immediately after committing a burglary of a habitation he was requested to watch out for

Apparently in the state of Texas, stealing stuff from people and peoples homes is a hazardous job!

KBCraig wrote:

LedJedi wrote:ummm, actually i think lightning is technically correct here. I remember TXI once saying that even in a self defense shooting that if you kill someone you technically committed murder, however you have a positive defense against prosecution in that it's self defense.

I think that must have been a discussion about homicide, not murder (homicide is often mistakenly used as a synonym for murder, when it's not).

The statutory definition of murder:
§ 19.02. MURDER.
(b) A person commits an offense if he:
(1) intentionally or knowingly causes the death of an
individual;

In a self defense shooting, a person does not intentionally or knowingly cause the death of an individual. Death might be a likely and foreseeable outcome, but it's not the goal. The goal is to stop the other person from doing whatever justifies shooting them.

stevie_d_64 wrote:Ready for more misunderstanding...

I have heard that Shiela Jackson-Lee is stirring the pot of a Federal investigation into Harris County Judicial proceedings, the Harris County DA's office and the Sherrif's department...

Way to go Shiela!!! [/sarcasm]

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/met ... 74193.html

LedJedi wrote:......SNIP........I just want it understood that you're talking about your own personal moral code, not the law. I suppose you can pass moral judgement on others for how they feel. You have a right to your own opinion, but try and understand that not everyone shares your perspective on the situation and that when you're talking about ethics and morality (which is essentially what we're talking about here, not law, because we all agree on the law i think. that's clear)... ethics and morality are often matters of perspective and opinion. What one man considers a travesty another considers justice. Who is to judge what is right and wrong in the realm of ethics? I dont think anyone is qualified in that. That's why we have laws to establish the confines of what is right and wrong. And, in Texas our laws allow for DF in defense of property.

LedJedi wrote:

03Lightningrocks wrote:

LedJedi wrote:
if you see my kid doing that... yep.. fire away. if she survives maybe it'll ingrain a lesson that i have apparently been unable to given what you just caught her doing.

I appreciate your candor...but I would have to let her run away. I am a bit old fashioned about murder. I really can't imagine killing a person over material possessions. Our society is going to get pretty messed up if we all just start blasting each other over TV sets, stereos and yard ornaments.

in the long run i like to think it would get sorted out and folks would realize you just can't get away with that kinda thing. Once that message got across and folks started to realize they might actually get shot for breaking into your car and jacking your stereo maybe they'll realize their life is worth more than that. They have to realize that for themselves though. It's not my place to let them run off with my hard earned property while they try and figure that out.

I don't go out and break my back every day but I've studied a LOT to be able to do what I do for a living. There is a lot of my time in my work and I will not step back and someone run off with my stereo which amounts to a certain amount of my time spent earning it.

I will be the fist to step up and give someone the shirt off my back if they're hungry and to whatever I can to "teach a man to fish" but i cannot and will not abide thieves. If that means i have to put some 00 in someone's behind to protect my property (or yours for that matter) then I will do so without hesitation so long as I can do that within the confines of the law and my right as a property owner.

Life is worth more than property. My life is worth more than my property. The life of a thief is not. They chose that vocation of their own accord. They chose to put themselves in a risky situation and they should know the law allows DF in defense of that property they're running off with. You may have moral objections to using DF for property but I do not (as well as many others I know). If you don't agree with DF over property I wholeheartedly respect that and defend your right to NOT use DF if you so choose, but please do no chagrin others of our lawful right to defend property because you consider our lawful defense outside your moral code of ethics.

I'm not trying to pick a fight here. I just want it understood that you're talking about your own personal moral code, not the law. I suppose you can pass moral judgement on others for how they feel. You have a right to your own opinion, but try and understand that not everyone shares your perspective on the situation and that when you're talking about ethics and morality (which is essentially what we're talking about here, not law, because we all agree on the law i think. that's clear)... ethics and morality are often matters of perspective and opinion. What one man considers a travesty another considers justice. Who is to judge what is right and wrong in the realm of ethics? I dont think anyone is qualified in that. That's why we have laws to establish the confines of what is right and wrong. And, in Texas our laws allow for DF in defense of property.

LedJedi wrote:
if you see my kid doing that... yep.. fire away. if she survives maybe it'll ingrain a lesson that i have apparently been unable to given what you just caught her doing.

Mike1951 wrote:Anyone know of a site where folks can talk about concealed carry?

You know, without the hostility and arguing.

HerbM wrote:

KD5NRH wrote:

03Lightningrocks wrote:I have been hunting and using guns all my life, my experience with shooting game animals tells me one cannot turn sideways at the sound of a shotgun blast from a few feet away quick enough to cause the impact to change from the front of the chest to the side of the back. But I guess I am letting the facts influence my beliefs again.

And, since one cannot jump up at the sound of a gun quickly enough to get into the path of the shot, Cheney must have intended to shoot his buddy in the head?

Or more direction: One can turn, dodge, duck based on seeing a muzzle orient on you (especially at 10-15 feet) and seeing the body language and facial expressions, even the hand movements of someone in the process of firing.

Martial artists who were said to "dodge bullets" don't dodge the bullet, they dodge the aim.

Paradoxically, it is easily to dodge (less distance needed for a larger angle) the CLOSER you are to the shooter. (But don't try this at home children. )