Irving homeowner shoots burglar

[LM23]

I don't care if it's a cell phone, a wallet, or 5 year old rusted out rims in my back yard. It's still theft, it still doesn't belong to them. In one way or another I paid for it, they didn't. I will defend that.


Thank you very much. Those are my thoughts exactly. Where and why is now politcality correct to allow "our things" to be taken from us?

[Xander]

How many roberies must he suffer before shooting this scum? Do you wait until he harms you or a loved one?

How 'bout learning to lock the shed? I know after my car was burglarized, I learned to stop leaving the windows cracked open for air.

Killing burglars isn't the only way to prevent future burglaries. Since they're not likely to be the same burglars in any case, it's in fact probably one of the more ineffective deterrents you can choose.


-Xander

[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.

You better watch out with thinking that goes outside the norm here. Pretty soon someone will be calling you an ANTI and Liberal for your differing views.

I will only shoot for defense of myself or loved ones, and depending on the situation a call for help. I will not take a life for material things that can be replaced with a phone call to the insurance company. As with all rules there are exceptions and I reserve the right to change my mind at any given moment.

THE CHOICES WE MAKE ARE THE ONE WE HAVE TO LIVE WITH!

I think you were joking anyway. I am so far from being a liberal anti that I am laughing out loud right now as is my buddy that I am on the phone with. Not that there's anything wrong with being a liberal... it's just not for me.

Hey, it's a controversial issue. I carry to be prepared in the event of <<insert situation here>>, and every day I hope that I don't have to use it. If I said prayers for myself I would probably include that every day as well. I don't mind if someone doesn't agree, I just felt that I had to say what was on my mind. And like anything else there are very few absolutes, and that applies here as well. There have been a lot of great points brought up during this post, many of which I had not previuosly thought of. Some of those ideas caused me to change my plan of action slightly. I was talking to a buddy of mine and explained the situation to him. HIs first comment was in my state (OH) the homeowner would be in jail since they don't have any provisions for protecting property with deadly force no matter what time it is. HE MAY BE MOVING TO TEXAS SOON NOW.

My dilemma is this: If you used deadly force to protect your tools, lawnmower, ladder...etc, when the confrontation could have been avoided, could you look back one, two or five years from now and live with that.? I don't think that I could under most circumstances. Now if it's the tools that you use to earn a living and you don't have insurance on them and that effects your family's well being...then that's a completely different ballpark... maybe.

What if there had been more than one BG? One carrying the goods and one or more waiting for him to come outside. BG's are more clever than ever nowadays. Maybe, just maybe they were trying to lure you outside so they could get to the real valuables.

What if I was having a monumentally bad day and was already pushed to the limits... who knows?

It just seems like, and I have said this before, some people are a little too eager and willing to pull the trigger. And that's a decision they have to live with not me.

One of the forum members has a signature that reads I believe "There are no answers only options". if I could remeber whose it was I would give proper credit because I like it. There are of course also consequences but I have gone on long enough.

The funny thing about the forum format of conversation is that the tone of the post can perceived differently by each member depending on their opinion on the matter and other associated variables.

There is no intended tone in any of this... just sharing ideas and opinions with like minded individuals, so please don't take anything the wrong way.

[KRM45]

Now, I can't say I would personally shoot someone in head for making off with my garden hoe, but I just might put some lead in their buttocks. My intent may not be to kill then at that point, but I wouldn't lose sleep if they died from the wound. If you don't nip that stuff in the bud when it happens the next thing you know they're stealing your car and then breaking into your house to make off with your green eggs and ham and lord knows what else.

Wow

I sure hope this is said toung in cheek...

The use of deadly force is just that. You will not have the opportunity to say in court that you were just trying to wound him, you know as punishment for taking your stuff...

Shoot to STOP the action....not to punish.....

I didn't say a scrap about punishing. i said nip it in the bud.

nip it in the bud: it means to stop someting before it grows/gets worse. sort of like nipping a flower when it's still a bud so it can't grow. Urbandictionary.com

I don't care one way or the other that he learns his/her lesson so long as they put my gear down. That is the definition of stopping. To cease doing what you were doing (running off to the pawn shop with my stuff). I might think about yelling stop once or twice, but i'm not going to ask nicely and make him a pot of tea. If it's justified I will use the amount of force necessary to stop the situation. His moral lessons are the business of his mommy and his daddy. Not mine.

I don't care if it's a cell phone, a wallet, or 5 year old rusted out rims in my back yard. It's still theft, it still doesn't belong to them. In one way or another I paid for it, they didn't. I will defend that.

I wouldn't miss a wink of sleep. They made the choice to take from me or mine. If they have a problem with the consequences they should have considered that before they tried jacking me. If that attitude makes me less moral or less human then i'm A-OK with that.

I just think it's intersting that you would aim the gun at one location if it's theft and another if it's a life and death situation.

I'm not going to debate your moral decision to shoot or not shoot. Quite frankly that's a very personal chice, and I won't try to change your mind on it... My issue was the legal justification, and the difference between theft, buglary, and robbery. Then of course there is that little bit about immediately necesarry...

[txinvestigator]

According to the first report in this thread, the thief dropped the tools. No deadly force justified.

The guy then advanced on the homewoner at O dark thirty. ;)

[KRM45]

One last thought... All the excepts from chapter 9 of the penal code about use of force and deadly force in defence of property are correct, but there is one section that still concerns me and that is 9.02

§ 9.02. JUSTIFICATION AS A DEFENSE. It is a defense to
prosecution that the conduct in question is justified under this
chapter.

This means you don't necesarrily get a free ride because the guy had your tools, or he was "rolling" your house at night. You could very well spend a lot of time and money defending yourself in court.

[Wildscar]

According to the first report in this thread, the thief dropped the tools. No deadly force justified.

The guy then advanced on the homewoner at O dark thirty. ;)

This is the key part of this story. Had he dropped the tools and ran off I doubt we would have ever heard about it.

[Right-Wing-Nut]

A lot of scum count on honest people to not shoot over a car radio, BBQ pit or garden hose which keeps them in business. Many of these vermin take our stuff to sell and buy meth or other drugs. While it MAY be true we could get our propertly replaced by filling an insurance claim or having the cops catch the guy later I KNOW I could get my gear back instantly after I give him a taste of a Cor-Bon 135gr. 40 round. My wife disagrees and thinks no piece of propertly is worth a human life. I think we were all born equal but my $60 real rubber dollar garden hose never robbed anyone, bought meth, or car jacked a family. I'd probably pick getting my hose back over some meth freak with a mile-long rap sheet. Don't steal other people's gear- keep on breathing. I applaud these Texas laws that let honest citizens keep what they have earned.

[wjmphoto]

People keep referring to the value of human life versus property but that is not the true trade off here. The real trade-off is the loss of security in your person and home as well as our loss of human dignity. When we allow these scumbags to enter our property, break in and steal our possessions without fear of being confronted or shot in the process of committing a crime while we cower inside and call the police, they are not simply taking our property but also our self-respect and natural right to be secure in our homes. This is much more than simple theft it degrades us as human beings and instills the idea that some piece of filth has the right to be secure that they won't be killed while committing a crime but we do not have the right to guarantee our own security by defending our homestead with force.

People forget how they love to call the people in other nations victims because they are stripped of the right to bear arms in defense of themselves and their homes. In the same breath they are willing to strip themselves and their neighbors of the right to be secure in their homes and defend their property because of some distorted vies of the value of human life. Yes, life is precious, but the right to live that life happily and secure without fear of being victimized without the right to prevent being a victim ultimately means living an existence that is somehow less than human.

Everyone has the right to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness as long as they don't seek those at the expense of the security and dignity of others. Criminals do not only steal our possessions, they also steal our sense of security and safety, which are basic human rights. The moment a criminal chooses to commit an act against a citizen, they lose their right to be secure in their act even thought he sheep of the world appear to be hell bent on guaranteeing them more rights than an honest citizen would have. It's warped and twisted thinking that has gotten us to this point in our history and it is about time that people used a little common sense and realized that the only party in this transaction who should be living in fear is the criminal. They are the one who should fear being shot and they are the ones who should learn the value of human life and personal dignity and stop terrorizing people in their homes all the while expecting to get away without a scratch.

What I do know is that the moment some human refuse hops my fence with intent to illegally enter my home, regardless of time of day, they may or may not get a verbal warning before I fire my weapon. I also know that if I am working a photo shoot and I catch someone stealing the tools of my trade (which often consist of a bag of gear costing $20 - $30K plus the memories of a family that I have recorded) I will stop them with whatever force necessary. I will not live my life as a victim and I will choose to value my own human life, dignity and security over that of some piece of filth that is too damn lazy or evil to live an honest life.

[ScubaSigGuy]

Not to but the value of a human life reference is in regard to your own life as well as the BG's. There are few material possessions if any that I am willing to risk my life over, or take a life over, but that doesn't mean that I want to be a "victim". If I am on the street being robbed, well then some very quick assumptions have to be made about the intent of the BG, and I will not hesitate to take action. But, if I have the opportunity to observe a crime and avoid confrontation safely from inside my own home, that is what I will choose because my priorities involve me living to tell the story. In many situations the outcome cannot be predicted based on the overwhelming number of variables. In the story that started this post I can absolutely guarantee that I will survive the encounter while I dial 911 from my safe inside my home. (Unless I trip and hit my head on the way to the phone ) That doesn't make me a coward or mean that I don't have self respect or dignity, anymore than it means someone who acts more aggressively is an idiot. It simply means our values and priorities are different. I only say this because I don't want anyone reading this post and formulating their own opinion to think that they are forfeiting their dignity or self-respect by not engaging in a confrontation that could be easily avoided.

[LedJedi]

I only say this because I don't want anyone reading this post and formulating their own opinion to think that they are forfeiting their dignity or self-respect by not engaging in a confrontation that could be easily avoided.

Well said and good point. I don't want folks thinking less of themselves for avoiding the conflict either if they want to do that.

At the same time though, neither should they think less of the folks that stand up for themselves either.

[ScubaSigGuy]

I only say this because I don't want anyone reading this post and formulating their own opinion to think that they are forfeiting their dignity or self-respect by not engaging in a confrontation that could be easily avoided.

Well said and good point. I don't want folks thinking less of themselves for avoiding the conflict either if they want to do that.

At the same time though, neither should they think less of the folks that stand up for themselves either.

EXACTLY!

It's an individual decsion. Mine is based on the situation as told in the article. Different situations require different plans of action. There are no absolutes in this regard.

[pbandjelly]

. When we allow these scumbags to enter our property, break in and steal our possessions without fear of being confronted or shot in the process of committing a crime while we cower inside and call the police, they are not simply taking our property but also our self-respect and natural right to be secure in our homes.

Werd.