TexasCHLforum.com

The problems I see with using a firearm are (a) the guy may be too brain-damaged to make a rational decision about that, and (2) if you had to shoot, in downtown Houston, knowing what your backstop was.

- Jim

Most homeless people who are keeping their lives together live in their cars.

When I was in college the library was open 24 hours a day, and I suspect some people lived there.

But getting back to the subject, when people say "homeless" they usually mean a bum.

- Jim

We don't know anything beyond what is in this sketchy second-hand e-mail. We're all making assumptions.

How did anyone know it was a homeless man? Obviously it was impossible to know whether he had a fixed residence. "Homeless" has become a synonym for disheveled, unkempt, and dirty—in other words, a bum. (In fact, there are homeless people that you would never know are homeless. Some have jobs.)

We have no idea who the woman was, either. She might have been on her way to work at 7 a.m., or she might have been another street person.

We don't know whether "putting his hand on her neck" meant a simple assault or strangulation. If it was the latter, it really is necessary to act quickly to prevent serious injury or death. The danger is not only suffocation but a crushed trachea or similar injury.

I'm as allergic to intervening in domestic disputes as anyone, but watching a woman be killed or crippled without trying to intervene would be intolerable.

You really would have to be on the scene and evaluate the situation quickly to decide.

- Jim

philip964 wrote:Story in the paper today in the USAtoday about a crazy young man (36) who lived on the street....Police could not subdue him with six shots from the tazer. They ended up beating him, but he died.

There's a big difference between stealing junk from cars and strangling a real live woman.

That said, everyone (except the Salvation Army) seems to despise homeless mentally ill people until they get killed. Then they have thousands of friends.

- Jim

It really is a problem. Shooting an unarmed man never looks good in retrospect, however justified it may have been under the circumstances. Prosecutors, grand juries, and courts react to public opinion, even if they are not supposed to.

Jurors in the Casey Anthony trial have received death threats after finding her not guilty of murder. That factoid is going to be in the minds of some jurors in future cases.

Deadly force is deadly force, but there is a subjective difference between using a weapon recognized as such versus an improvised tool.

- Jim

You won't often see me write this kind of thing: Given the scenario presented, a lunatic strangling a woman, he would get a punch to the temple followed by a generous helping of pepper spray. Mr. Tire Iron would be there if that didn't do the job.

I think there's no legitimate legal question about the level of force used to stop a man from choking a woman. This is not like slapping or shoving. It could result in death in the time it takes to place a call to 911—which, I might add, sometimes gets overloaded in Houston.

Shooting lunatics is problematic. They seem to develop posthumous fan clubs. Ask Harold Fish.

Also it is very difficult to shoot the perpetrator in a close dynamic situation and avoid collateral damage.

I would not grapple with anyone. It's too risky. Even if the guy does not have chemically assisted strength, he could stick a knife in my guts.

- Jim