TX man shoots men robbing his neighbors

[DrDavidM]

I don't think this looks very good for the shooter. While I would be very upset if someone took my belongings, I don't think it would be worth killing them. Specially if it was my neighbors belongings. I really can see trying to hold them until the police arrive, but telling the police dispatcher he was going to kill them. Perhaps he felt his life was in danger, but there is no mention of this in the article (which doesn't mean it didn't happen). In reality, if so, he put himself in danger by going after them. I think he is lucky to be in TX right now.

Link Removed

 

[Mushroom]

Elevator

In my humble opinion Mr. Horn's elevator don't quite go all the way to the top. I personally don't think it is worth killing someone over some stolen property. Now if I am being physically attacked then it becomes a different ball game. But, I wasn't there so I will wait for the courts decision.

 

[kwo51]

I would bet these were repeat offenders and should have been taken care of by the powers to be. I feel sorry this man was so upset by this going on he had to take action. 911 was only 15 min away.Dirt nap for the bad guys.

 

[burley]

, but telling the police dispatcher he was going to kill them.
Link Removed

I think this is where it gets bad. Going form preemptive to premeditated. 'We' (CCW holders ) shoot to stop the threat , we do not shoot to wound or to kill. At least if we don't want to go to jail, just IMHO.

 

[Magistrate PO]

Now the trouble starts

I do understand the mans being upset with being told to just stand by and let the thieves walk away with thier loot, but unfortunately he is now going to have the worst couple years of his life. His own words from the 911conversation will come back to haunt him in court. He will be charged and taken to court, it is just a question of what they will charge him with being murder, or manslaughter, or something different. He will have to pay out thousand of dollars for an attorney, and even if he walks away from court with no jail time, it is still not over. The familys of the bad guys will find a money hungry attorney who will file a civil wrongful death lawsuit and the court action starts all over again. They will play up the bad guys as victims of a blood thirsty murder who was just looking for an excuse to shoot someone. He could lose everthing he has worked his whole life for if the verdict comes back against him.
I was advised at a street survival training I attended a few years ago that if your are involved in a fatal shooting, no matter how justified, you can expect at least $10,000 in attorney fees. Not to mention the stress from jury trials and the mark of Cain. I feel certain that when it is all over in a couple years he will wish he had just stayed out of it.

 

[kwo51]

What if they were illeagel allens?

 

[Big Bubba]

Texas Incident

You can't justify deadly force to prevent theft of personal property. I would not want to be in his shoes in a legal point of view.

 

[Red Hat]

Interesting. I hope we find out if they prosecute him or not. This will be the precedent in the case.

Under state law, Texans are allowed to defend themselves with deadly force to protect their own property. The person using deadly force must believe there is no other way to protect their belongings.

However, it is unclear whether that law extends to using deadly force to protect a neighbor's property

 

[HK4U]

If nothing else he was guilty of opeinig his mouth when he should have kept it shut. There is an old saying, "Better to keep your mouth shut and be thought of as a fool than to open it and remove all doubt."

 

[Sgt. SIG]

Well I'm afraid Mr. Horn's bacon is now in the fire!

 

[TR4A]

Texas allows use of force to protect a 3rd party’s property.



Link Removed


§ 9.43. PROTECTION OF THIRD PERSON'S PROPERTY. A person
is justified in using force or deadly force against another to
protect land or tangible, movable property of a third person if,
under the circumstances as he reasonably believes them to be, the
actor would be justified under Section 9.41 or 9.42 in using force
or deadly force to protect his own land or property and:
(1) the actor reasonably believes the unlawful
interference constitutes attempted or consummated theft of or
criminal mischief to the tangible, movable property; or
(2) the actor reasonably believes that:
(A) the third person has requested his protection
of the land or property;
(B) he has a legal duty to protect the third
person's land or property; or
(C) the third person whose land or property he
uses force or deadly force to protect is the actor's spouse, parent,
or child, resides with the actor, or is under the actor's care.

Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 883, ch. 399, § 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974.
Amended by Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 900, § 1.01, eff. Sept. 1,
1994.

 

[LeavingMass]

Texas allows use of force to protect a 3rd party’s property.



Link Removed


§ 9.43. PROTECTION OF THIRD PERSON'S PROPERTY. A person
is justified in using force or deadly force against another to
protect land or tangible, movable property of a third person if,
under the circumstances as he reasonably believes them to be, the
actor would be justified under Section 9.41 or 9.42 in using force
or deadly force to protect his own land or property and:
(1) the actor reasonably believes the unlawful
interference constitutes attempted or consummated theft of or
criminal mischief to the tangible, movable property; or
(2) the actor reasonably believes that:
(A) the third person has requested his protection
of the land or property;
(B) he has a legal duty to protect the third
person's land or property; or
(C) the third person whose land or property he
uses force or deadly force to protect is the actor's spouse, parent,
or child, resides with the actor, or is under the actor's care.

Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 883, ch. 399, § 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974.
Amended by Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 900, § 1.01, eff. Sept. 1,
1994.

I don't believe any of those applied to the actor ( shooter )


he gives PRO-GUN carriers a bad name and gives the antis ammo

he was a trigger happy fool ( to say the least )

 

[TR4A]

I don't believe any of those applied to the actor ( shooter )

We don't know all the details. All I am pointing out is there is a law in Texas for protecting someone elses property. The legal system will sort it out instead of a bunch forum lawyers.

 

[Tarzan1888]

They were shot on his property and they were carrying crowbars. It is a legal defense.

Tarzan

 

[HK4U]

Even in the most justified of shootings it would be best to keep your mouth shut untill you have a chance to talk to an attorney. Once you start talking and the press gets a hold of it there is no telling where it will go from there. You shure don't want to be shooting off your mouth on the phone to a 911 operator that is recording your call.

 

[Tarzan1888]

Even in the most justified of shootings it would be best to keep your mouth shut untill you have a chance to talk to an attorney. Once you start talking and the press gets a hold of it there is no telling where it will go from there. You shure don't want to be shooting off your mouth on the phone to a 911 operator that is recording your call.

Well said.

BANG! BANG! BANG!

I feared for my life.

I stopped the threat.

My lawyer will answer all other questions.



Tarzan

 

[flounder22]

I wish him the best, hope he gets off scott free.

 

[HK4U]

When to shoot?

I don't know folks, the law varies from state to state so we'll see what the state of TX has to say. Just because something is legal doesn't mean its right. I don't know about you all, but I carry to keep a attacker from killing me. If a man walks up with a knife and tells me give me all your money then fine he can have it. I don't see the need to shoot a man over 50 bucks which is about all the cash I carry. Now, if he says I'm fixing to kill you and take your money, or even hint he is going to hurt me, then I will unload and sleep like a baby that night. Its really sad that there are those out there that would rather steal than work. I understand that and hate a freaking thief worse than anything, but for real now that is what we pay insurance for. The law does a fairly good job at getting your things back and if not you'll be paid for them. I have always had the opinion that a man is his own worst enemy and Mr. Horn has a long road ahead of him as MagistratePO stated. I bet if you talk to Mr. Horn this time next year, he will say he wished he would have minded his own business, did his civil duty by calling the police, and told them which direction they left in.

I used to think pretty much as you do but then I got to thinking. What if someone robs me and I don't shoot? What if I let him go and the next day, week or month the guy I let go kills someone for their money? I know there are a lot of what if's and each case is different but when the BG decides to pull a weapon of any kind on someone then being killed is the chance he takes. Non the less the decission to pull the trigger on anyone is not something to take lightly.

 

[kwo51]

Needless to say they will not do it again. The problem with most crimes is when they are gotten away with , the next one will esclate. I don't know how much inssurance youall carry but in florida your lucky to have any. My home is insured by gun power are us.

 

[PascalFleischman]

I don't know folks, the law varies from state to state so we'll see what the state of TX has to say. Just because something is legal doesn't mean its right. I don't know about you all, but I carry to keep a attacker from killing me. If a man walks up with a knife and tells me give me all your money then fine he can have it. I don't see the need to shoot a man over 50 bucks which is about all the cash I carry. Now, if he says I'm fixing to kill you and take your money, or even hint he is going to hurt me, then I will unload and sleep like a baby that night. Its really sad that there are those out there that would rather steal than work. I understand that and hate a freaking thief worse than anything, but for real now that is what we pay insurance for. The law does a fairly good job at getting your things back and if not you'll be paid for them. I have always had the opinion that a man is his own worst enemy and Mr. Horn has a long road ahead of him as MagistratePO stated. I bet if you talk to Mr. Horn this time next year, he will say he wished he would have minded his own business, did his civil duty by calling the police, and told them which direction they left in.

It seems to me that a man with a knife DOES have the intent to hurt you. Just the difference in 2 opinions, but I'd take any sort of armed threat to me as what it is...an armed threat. A threat that will draw a deadly reaction on my part.