Irving homeowner shoots burglar

[stevie_d_64]

Good... Anyone notice how more and more of these are showing up in the news lately? I think we texans are tired of this crap!!!

I believe its the emails, letters and phonecalls we are making to the editors and more importantly to the advertisers of these media outlets about the shoddy reporting they are doing to these incidents that is starting to make an impact...

We'll probably still get the occasional booger-boo story that fraps all of us from time to time...But I agree with you the fairness and accuracy of the stories are starting to be a bit more balanced...

[hoss4570]

I agree................

[Venus Pax]

This is what I get from the tone/words in the article:
The homeowner didn't shoot the guy for stealing tools from his shed. He shot the BG when he dropped the tools and advanced toward him.
A person advancing on you when you have a gun pointed at them is up to no good.

[Humanphibian]

This is what I get from the tone/words in the article:
The homeowner didn't shoot the guy for stealing tools from his shed. He shot the BG when he dropped the tools and advanced toward him.
A person advancing on you when you have a gun pointed at them is up to no good.

+1

[wjmphoto]

Shooting victim?

Interesting terminology. Personally I would have gotten a good description if possible and called 911. Tools for a life is not much of a trade in my book. Especially since it was a detached shed being robbed. The homeowner while legally protected, and rightfully so, could have avoided putting himself in a situation where he had to pull the trigger. Tools, cars, etc... can be replaced and I am not willing to jeapardize my freedom for the protection of material objects. Now had the thief entered or attempted to enter his home that's a whole different story. I am sure that many will not agree and that's OK.

Although this is legally a justified shooting it's hard to say it's a good shoot. It's never good to have to take a life, regardless of the situation.
I've thought a lot about this lately since this seems to be happening more often.

Anyway just my opinion for what it's worth

I have to say that I disagree with this line of thinking. We are talking about a criminal that hops your fence, breaks into your property and is stealing from you. You have the right to stop them in the act and that is what the homeowner did. The homeowner is not at fault for defending his property. The robber is at fault for being stupid enough to commit a crime in the first place and even more so for continuing to move toward the homeowner after repeated warnings to stop.

What really gets me is that we have had so many posts on this board where people tell of robberies in which the police are unable or unwilling to get back the person's property. I'm not going to bother searching for the particular post, but one that sticks out is the one in which items were stolen from a truck and the owner actually tracked the stolen goods to the thief’s back yard, called the police and they refused to act. People were livid that the police would not act even thought he stolen items were in plain sight. But I guess that the property owner should just write off their possessions since they are not justified in stopping the robber in the act and the authorities won't take action against the criminal.

We are told over and over again that it is not the responsibility of the police to protect us or our property and yet people still think that a homeowner is wrong in doing so themselves. The simple truth is that it is our responsibility alone to protect our person and property and that is exactly what this homeowner did. There is no justification in faulting him for doing exactly what is his right to do. The moment we start telling people that they don't have the right to stop a robber from stealing from them or defend their own lives, we are stripping those same people of what makes them human. We have the right to preserve our persons and our property. Everything that a criminal steals from us represents a piece of our life that we traded to an employer so that we could possess it. What could be more vile that stealing those things from any of us that we worked and traded a portion of that very small interval of time that we have on this earth. I for one, think that the homeowner was more than justified in shooting this waste of flesh.

[LM23]

I am a new guy here and don't want to start off on the wrong foot, but this how I feel.

How many of you have had cars, tools, jewerly, gas from your vehicles, clothing, money and yes even guns stolen from you? These are items that you have worked to earn the money to buy or in some cases even inheirited from a family member. You follow the proper channels only to have, in my experiences, local law enforcement fill out a report so you can turn it into your insurance company where you HOPE to get enough money to possibly replace the item(s) and then sit and wait for the rate increase.

In this case it apparently turned into a personal threat in addition to theft of goods. But not taking some kind of action when you catch the thief is like letting them know it is okay for them to do what they are doing. In fact, they can wait a few weeks until you replace your items and come back for a repeat visit because you probably ain't gonna do nothing.

As far as shooting - maybe not depending on circumstance, but at least do "something" to hold or subdue them so they are stopped, st least for awhile, from their chosen career and you don't lose what is rightfully your property.

[LedJedi]

I for one, think that the homeowner was more than justified in shooting this waste of flesh.

You, sir, make me proud to be a US Citizen.

you can suck my oxygen anytime :)

[seamusTX]

Criminal mischief has a specific definition. Please look it up: http://tlo2.tlc.state.tx.us/statutes/pe.toc.htm

To paraphrase Charles Cotton, it doesn't mean knocking over your lawn gnomes.

- Jim

[Mage34]

Criminal mischief has a specific definition. Please look it up: http://tlo2.tlc.state.tx.us/statutes/pe.toc.htm

To paraphrase Charles Cotton, it doesn't mean knocking over your lawn gnomes.

- Jim

I know the truth and the law and I am a law abiding citizen.....but these days I sometimes feel like IT IS MY GNOME LEAVE IT ALONE!!!!!

[Humanphibian]

yeah PUNK.....don't touch my Little Man

[ScubaSigGuy]

This is what I get from the tone/words in the article:
The homeowner didn't shoot the guy for stealing tools from his shed. He shot the BG when he dropped the tools and advanced toward him.
A person advancing on you when you have a gun pointed at them is up to no good.

I agree 100%.

After reading the article I had to ask myself "What would I do if..." . A few years ago I would have aggressivley gone outside as well. Several years ago I came home to find my house broken into. After calling my girlfriend a the time and having her call 911, telling them that I was there and armed, I began clearing the house. Now I knew full well that there were loaded firearms inside. Even if they didn't come with a gun I could bet that they had at least a couple now. Not one of my finer moments in retrospect.

I guess looking at the situation with the little information that we have it's easy to make assumptions. If you are holding someone at gunpoint and they continue to advance on you, then force of some sort is appropriate, I agree. The questions is do you put youself in that situation to begin with? Pride can and will get you killed if you let it cloud your judgement. For me, at this point of my life, I belive that it's better to avoid the confrontation if at all possible. What if the thief was armed? Better to let the LEO's discover that, right? For me I have to think what would I do as the assailant if approached by me. I am not a little guy, so it's possible that the BG might actually act more aggressively if I approach him. There is no absolute right answer. I like debating it though because it's help me to formulate a plan.

[stevie_d_64]

I'm of the belief that if you are stupid enough to think people are not going to "protest" your thievery of their property, and they plead with you (at the point of a gun) to stop what you are doing...

And your best reponse is to drop that property and advance on that gun toating citizen you were just stealing something from...

All bets are off, you just made your last mistake...

All of these petty thieves are stealing to support other criminal and personally destructive behavior anyway...

So yes, I believe the direct challenging of these types of criminals is proper, but you do it from a position of strength...

It'll be up to them to comply at that point...Which would be a very good decision to make...

If put into the same situation, and the thief stopped, complied with my instructions, didn't make a threatening advance or attempt an assault on me, I can guarantee that person would be better off and in much better health...

Unfortunately thats a pipe dream...

[ScubaSigGuy]

Shooting victim?

Interesting terminology. Personally I would have gotten a good description if possible and called 911. Tools for a life is not much of a trade in my book. Especially since it was a detached shed being robbed. The homeowner while legally protected, and rightfully so, could have avoided putting himself in a situation where he had to pull the trigger. Tools, cars, etc... can be replaced and I am not willing to jeapardize my freedom for the protection of material objects. Now had the thief entered or attempted to enter his home that's a whole different story. I am sure that many will not agree and that's OK.

Although this is legally a justified shooting it's hard to say it's a good shoot. It's never good to have to take a life, regardless of the situation.
I've thought a lot about this lately since this seems to be happening more often.

Anyway just my opinion for what it's worth

I have to say that I disagree with this line of thinking. We are talking about a criminal that hops your fence, breaks into your property and is stealing from you. You have the right to stop them in the act and that is what the homeowner did. The homeowner is not at fault for defending his property. The robber is at fault for being stupid enough to commit a crime in the first place and even more so for continuing to move toward the homeowner after repeated warnings to stop.

What really gets me is that we have had so many posts on this board where people tell of robberies in which the police are unable or unwilling to get back the person's property. I'm not going to bother searching for the particular post, but one that sticks out is the one in which items were stolen from a truck and the owner actually tracked the stolen goods to the thief’s back yard, called the police and they refused to act. People were livid that the police would not act even thought he stolen items were in plain sight. But I guess that the property owner should just write off their possessions since they are not justified in stopping the robber in the act and the authorities won't take action against the criminal.

We are told over and over again that it is not the responsibility of the police to protect us or our property and yet people still think that a homeowner is wrong in doing so themselves. The simple truth is that it is our responsibility alone to protect our person and property and that is exactly what this homeowner did. There is no justification in faulting him for doing exactly what is his right to do. The moment we start telling people that they don't have the right to stop a robber from stealing from them or defend their own lives, we are stripping those same people of what makes them human. We have the right to preserve our persons and our property. Everything that a criminal steals from us represents a piece of our life that we traded to an employer so that we could possess it. What could be more vile that stealing those things from any of us that we worked and traded a portion of that very small interval of time that we have on this earth. I for one, think that the homeowner was more than justified in shooting this waste of flesh.

That's a very good point. Everyone has to pick thier own battles and not by the same rules. I used to be hot headed and very protective of my belongings. I felt the same way when my home was broken into and when my truck was stolen on a seperate occasion. I was also single then and not worried about anybody else. I won't hesitate to do the right thing to protect a good person. but I just decided that I don't want my soon to be wife left alone because I went after a petty thief. Who is going to be around to protect my loved ones if something serious happens then? The beauty of it all is that we each have a choice to make up our own mind on how to act.

[Xander]

How many of you have had cars, tools, jewerly, gas from your vehicles, clothing, money and yes even guns stolen from you? These are items that you have worked to earn the money to buy or in some cases even inheirited from a family member. You follow the proper channels only to have, in my experiences, local law enforcement fill out a report so you can turn it into your insurance company where you HOPE to get enough money to possibly replace the item(s) and then sit and wait for the rate increase.

I have. Twice. In my early twenties my car was burglarized, and believe you me, I had homicidal thoughts about the perpetrator, particularly when the fruits of his criminal endeavours started showing up on my credit card statements. (I had canceled them all, but not quickly enough.) I now live in an apartment complex and have a detached garage, which was burglarized in the middle of the day less than six months ago. The funny thing is, I had a *really* good opportunity to catch them in the act. I was working from home that day, and if I had been working at my dining room table instead of the desk in my bedroom, I would have seen them walking out with the loot...It would have been right in my line of sight. I *would* have run out there and yelled at them to stop if I had seen it. If they had attempted to attack me, I would have protected myself. However, after much reflection, I also know with 100% confidence that if they had simply attempted to run off with my stuff, I would not have shot to stop them, regardless of any message that might send. "Legal" isn't always synonymous with "right", and it isn't my place or desire to punish the evil-doers of the world simply because I can. Dealing out death, even legally, is an action of significant consequence. Consequences that must be endured not just by the active participants, but by everyone in their lives.

This isn't to say that anyone else does or should agree with me, only a few of my personal thoughts on the matter.

-Xander

[ScubaSigGuy]

I'm of the belief that if you are stupid enough to think people are not going to "protest" your thievery of their property, and they plead with you (at the point of a gun) to stop what you are doing...

And your best reponse is to drop that property and advance on that gun toating citizen you were just stealing something from...

All bets are off, you just made your last mistake...

All of these petty thieves are stealing to support other criminal and personally destructive behavior anyway...

So yes, I believe the direct challenging of these types of criminals is proper, but you do it from a position of strength...

It'll be up to them to comply at that point...Which would be a very good decision to make...

If put into the same situation, and the thief stopped, complied with my instructions, didn't make a threatening advance or attempt an assault on me, I can guarantee that person would be better off and in much better health...

Unfortunately thats a pipe dream...

I was waiting for Stevie_d to jump in. I was just thinking that I was on a Stevie_d type rant today. Except for the differing opinions of course. I guess it come down to how much value do you place on a human life... and there is NO WAY I am going to debate that... I can't type that much.