First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next  Last
Texan ignites gun control debate
2923 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
30 / M
Offline
Posted 12/27/07

abel89 wrote:


projectcedric wrote:


abel89 wrote:


projectcedric wrote:


kingbobo100 wrote:


projectcedric wrote:


kingbobo100 wrote:


projectcedric wrote:


kingbobo100 wrote:


projectcedric wrote:

There's a couple of questions there:

1.) Is the shotgun licensed?
2.) Did he kill the man who was outside of his property?

Even if the man did step into his lawn it could still be possibly ruled as a homicide. Secondly, if he did intervene and kill the man outside his lawn, and the court pardoned him, that could be difficult. Perhaps the "burglar" wasn't really a burglar. Perhaps its a film set for an amateur video or something. It sounds ridiculous and unlikely but what if it was and he just stormed into the scene and killed people?


ill answer to the best of my ability.

i dont believe you need a license for a shot gun in texas.

and he killed two men who were burglarizing his neighbors property


You don't need a license for an obvious firearm?? WOW!!! Mad Max country!! Power!!

If it wasn't his property it should be classified as a homicide case even if under the pretext that they were burglars. Even burglars have the right to live.


lol. well the kill range for a shot gun is ineffective outside 30 feet. for any other firearm you need a license.

under texas law, a man is allowed to shoot to defend his property or a neighbors property upon request.

but another thing is that both burglars were illegal immigrants with outstanding criminal records who shouldnt have been there in the first place.


I might have mellowed at the face of all this now that i'm used to strict singaporean laws. But I really thought this kind of barbarism only happens in the philippines where it seems like every household has at least one gun, licensed or not.

Still, even if they were Nazis, isnt it a bit too far to impose the death sentence without trial just because of property issues? In which case I believe that that texas law is a tad ridiculous, if you are allowed to take a life to protect a property.


lol. i suppose that i would agree with you if i hadnt grown up in texas.
you sort of have to understand texas history to understand its culture.
Texas was kind of a stand alone state and one man country at one time.
Texas is filled with ranches and large farms. even now a majority of the land is ranches. Texans were kinda raised with "the tough" persona and that they have every right to defend themselves. Hence maybe why george bush running the country isnt such a great idea. lol

but yea, i think texans are all for self defense and property protection.


Hmm.. lemme see... I think I can probably summarize everything that you've just said about texas in one word:

Redneck.


At least no one is dumb enough to mess with a redneck
they may be on to something


Not everybody in the world lives in Texas. Or under Texan Law.


This is America, Rednecks are just about everywhere here
if not them, then gangsters and thugs, mobsters and others

There's also a butt load of heavily armed militias


Not everybody in the world lives in America. Or under American Law.
8138 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / M / North Carolina
Offline
Posted 12/27/07

projectcedric wrote:


abel89 wrote:

^yeah right

My dad shot at a punk trying to break into our house through my sisters window
Me and my sister pointed him out to him

Sneak into MY house and I catch you in the act
then I'll put the laser sight of my p226 to your skull and ask you why your here
if I don't like the anwser........


But I bet he didn't kill the punk.


But he wanted to
my dad isn't one to cross
2923 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
30 / M
Offline
Posted 12/27/07

abel89 wrote:


projectcedric wrote:


abel89 wrote:

^yeah right

My dad shot at a punk trying to break into our house through my sisters window
Me and my sister pointed him out to him

Sneak into MY house and I catch you in the act
then I'll put the laser sight of my p226 to your skull and ask you why your here
if I don't like the anwser........


But I bet he didn't kill the punk.


But he wanted to
my dad isn't one to cross


Of course. So was mine. And he actually hit the fucker. Just so lucky it was a flesh wound and he didn't die.
6858 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
34 / F / Pluto
Offline
Posted 12/27/07
They were unarmed.. you have the right to defend property.. you have the right to defend yourself. In Texas you apperantly have the right to defend your neighbors property. But the fact that he wasn't even charged just seems wrong to me. If a group of his peers had aquitted him, I could understand. But with the phone call to the police, the fact that they were unarmed and the placement of their bodies bellied his claim that they were coming onto the property with them... It warranted at least a trial I think.
2923 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
30 / M
Offline
Posted 12/27/07

hq145 wrote:

They were unarmed.. you have the right to defend property.. you have the right to defend yourself. In Texas you apperantly have the right to defend your neighbors property. But the fact that he wasn't even charged just seems wrong to me. If a group of his peers had aquitted him, I could understand. But with the phone call to the police, the fact that they were unarmed and the placement of their bodies bellied his claim that they were coming onto the property with them... It warranted at least a trial I think.


The fact that the police specifically told him to NOT do anything, and he still took action, should already be taken for something.

It just so happened that he killed them and prevented a burglary. But what if, despite intentions, he accidentally helped them escape instead. That would be some serious "impeding of justice" shit.

It deserves a trial.
4344 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
31 / M / auckland
Offline
Posted 12/27/07
There are many bad people in this world that posseses firearms. Unless everybody is stripped off theirs I'm gonna get mine too in case i need to protect myself against those bad people.

Back to the topic though. It's wrong if he killed them. But if it's an injuring shot to the legs, i'd say he did an acceptably moral action.
49717 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
76 / Unreachable Dream...
Offline
Posted 12/27/07
I would actually say it was wrong! Killing a life doesnt solve anything, he couldve waited for the police, they can trace those guys and put them in jail, and maybe he could earn by suing them. The only thing that couldve given him the actual right to shoot them was when they also tried to hurt him, that would be a reasonable self-defense. I mean, he couldve threatened him if he had a shot gun. Point the gun, shoot at the ceiling, thatll do to scare cowardly bastards. I still think, even though that life was a sinful one, it shouldve been spared. I am a true believer of the pacifying characteristic, and wants to render such thing and become a pacifist myself, killing/murder is NOT and NEVER was a way for me!
6858 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
34 / F / Pluto
Offline
Posted 12/28/07

supermalv wrote:

There are many bad people in this world that posseses firearms. Unless everybody is stripped off theirs I'm gonna get mine too in case i need to protect myself against those bad people.

Back to the topic though. It's wrong if he killed them. But if it's an injuring shot to the legs, i'd say he did an acceptably moral action.


Well then it's wrong, because he killed them. Intentionally. He told the dispatcher he was going to and then he did.


mikomiko123 wrote:

I would actually say it was wrong! Killing a life doesnt solve anything, he couldve waited for the police, they can trace those guys and put them in jail, and maybe he could earn by suing them. The only thing that couldve given him the actual right to shoot them was when they also tried to hurt him, that would be a reasonable self-defense. I mean, he couldve threatened him if he had a shot gun. Point the gun, shoot at the ceiling, thatll do to scare cowardly bastards. I still think, even though that life was a sinful one, it shouldve been spared. I am a true believer of the pacifying characteristic, and wants to render such thing and become a pacifist myself, killing/murder is NOT and NEVER was a way for me!


That's a bit too soft hearted to line up with my views, but I understand why you'd feel that way. Life is sacred and all that. The punishment didn't fit the crime and was given out by a man that had no grounds to do so.
4344 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
31 / M / auckland
Offline
Posted 12/28/07

hq145 wrote:


supermalv wrote:

There are many bad people in this world that posseses firearms. Unless everybody is stripped off theirs I'm gonna get mine too in case i need to protect myself against those bad people.

Back to the topic though. It's wrong if he killed them. But if it's an injuring shot to the legs, i'd say he did an acceptably moral action.


Well then it's wrong, because he killed them. Intentionally. He told the dispatcher he was going to and then he did.


Then yeah, I agree. I don't think he should be charged with manslaughter. But he should be prosecuted.
Posted 12/28/07
i dunno. i dont agree with him killin the two but they shouldnt have been there in the first place. i mean they were both illegal, but killin was a bit harsh too. maybe a leg shot was justifiable

www.click2houston.com/news/14597826/detail.html

here is a telephone conversation

www.click2houston.com/news/14615114/detail.html
2706 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / California
Offline
Posted 12/28/07
Yeah, that's pretty messed up. How can anyone justify the use of the gun? It's made for killing. There are other courses of action he could have taken. He could have taken down their license plate numbers. He could have checked on his neighbors to check if they were safe first. But since he's such a man of action, he could have just straight up tackled the guy.
6858 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
34 / F / Pluto
Offline
Posted 12/28/07


I'm not so sure about that. This is an old man that knew his neighbors weren't home.. it was like 2pm... he didn't know if they were armed. The liscence plate might have worked, but there would be no way of knowing if thier van was stolen.

kingbobo - your links don't work unless you copy and paste
Posted 12/28/07
here you go. sorry about that

http://www.click2houston.com/news/14615114/detail.html


www.click2houston.com/news/14597826/detail.html
1433 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
29 / M / New York
Offline
Posted 2/19/08
Allowing this man to take justice into his own hands sets a precedent for similar behavior in others that is even crazier. Furthermore, where is the justice in being killed for stealing?

I strongly disapprove.
1007 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / Sweden
Offline
Posted 2/19/08
See this is a problem.
Most burglars aren't murderers and will probably at most tie you up will they rob your place. Of course they could rape you but most of em won't go as far as to enter a house were they know someones awake.
This man thought that: Oh i have a gun i can shoot people that might be a threat to me, and so he blows out their brains. And of course the cops were coming any minute which means that as long as he stayed inside he wasn't
in such great danger, these guys must've been preparing to take off anyway so i'm guessing they weren't much of a threat anymore... unless you go outside flailing your gun wildly all over the place...
What i wanna say: Don't give guns to trigger happy morons... in fact don't give guns to anyone (excluding the cops of course).
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.