It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Pasadena police say Horn shot 2 men in the back - More on the 'Hero'

page: 13
5
<< 10  11  12    14  15 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 10 2007 @ 01:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by zerotime
If you have to analyze the 911 tape. Analyze what the 911 operator is advising. "don't go outside or you are going to get yourself shot." The operator isn't saying don't go outside and shoot them because you will go to jail. The operator knows how dangerous these criminal can be and the operator fully expects these criminals to have guns and be willing to use them against anyone who confronts them during their crimes.


What's more likely, the operator expects the robbers to be armed, or the operator knows the plain clothed officer is armed? This guy's obviously irrational to begin with, he might go outside and mistakenly shoot at the officer for some reason. Which is more likely? I'm sure you won't answer truthfully because it would contradict your position on the matter.

Peace




posted on Dec, 10 2007 @ 01:16 PM
link   
I'm on Horn's side.
We now have two fewer illegal scum in our country.
They should all be shot. Back, front, it doesn't matter.
The world does not need them.



posted on Dec, 10 2007 @ 01:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Dr Love
What's more likely, the operator expects the robbers to be armed, or the operator knows the plain clothed officer is armed? This guy's obviously irrational to begin with, he might go outside and mistakenly shoot at the officer for some reason. Which is more likely? I'm sure you won't answer truthfully because it would contradict your position on the matter.

Peace


The operator expects the CRIMINALS to be armed. Are you seriously suggesting that a 911 operator doesn't think that two men breaking to homes might be armed with some guns?

If the plain clothed cop is outside why not tell the man who keeps saying he is going outside that there is already a cop outside watching the whole thing? The cop hides when he sees a gun, but he was going to confront two criminals running away on foot? It doesn't seem like it to me. It sounds like the cop was going to take a description of the criminals and let them go because he didn't have backup to proceed and hope that they could be apprehended later.

Why isn't the cop out of the car before the shooting? He either was not there until right before the shooting or he thought that he would be out-gunned by the two criminals so he is waiting for more police to arrive.



[edit on 10-12-2007 by zerotime]



posted on Dec, 10 2007 @ 01:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by skibtz
reply to post by slackerwire
 


Now. Now.

Subversive artists and defiant minds never reveal their secrets.

And they certainly don't own up to them.


Nuff said on that matter...have you managed to form any reply on my previous rants or would you rather that we just forget I posted earlier?

Avoidance does seem to be your forte.

[edit on 10/12/2007 by skibtz]


So basically you have done nothing, but want to sound like youre actively doing something.

You know all about avoidance dont you.



posted on Dec, 10 2007 @ 01:46 PM
link   
The topic of discussion is:
» Breaking Alternative News » Pasadena police say Horn shot 2 men in the back - More on the 'Hero'

NOT individual perceptions of fellow members' character and or person.

Please keep the responses focused on the Actual topic of discussion.

Thank you.


 



posted on Dec, 10 2007 @ 02:40 PM
link   
reply to post by slackerwire
 


Still waiting slackerwire.

Your sig say's it all really.

Brilliance? No evidence yet.

Plenty o' bullets but nothing hitting the mark though


Like I'm gonna tell you what I do...:p

Get and real and stop it with all the swerving. Im getting travel sick already!




posted on Dec, 10 2007 @ 02:43 PM
link   
reply to post by 12m8keall2c
 


Will do, Sorry



posted on Dec, 10 2007 @ 02:44 PM
link   
reply to post by skibtz
 


I accept the fact that you dont actually do anything besides sit around and complain while attempting to sound like you actually are doing something else.

As pathetic as that may be, there still wasnt a question asked in your replies, so what youre waiting for is????



posted on Dec, 10 2007 @ 02:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by skibtz

Originally posted by slackerwire
Yes. I work hard for what I have, and if some lowlife scumbag wanted to steal for instance my overpriced flat panel TV, he would pay with his life


Oh please. Such bravado.


You guys have one of the most evil, corrupt, non-elected governments that has ever existed.

A government that is stealing from you every second of every day and yet you do nothing.

Stop embarrassing yourself with the rhetoric, engage your brain, move your legs and make a difference.

Go get the real criminals in your society - your government.

p.s. I actively disrupt my government when I disagree with them over here so don't go bleating about 'what do you do?' and 'the UK suck as well'

I know and I act accordingly.


What do you do?!!!!

[edit on 10/12/2007 by skibtz]

[edit on 10/12/2007 by skibtz]


A response to this perhaps?

The question is at the end with a question mark after it.

You know you dont have to, but it is frustrating when your only response is to totally ignore it and create new subjects.

p.s. you're right. all i do is sit on my jack complaining pretending to be an activist.

[edit on 10/12/2007 by skibtz]



posted on Dec, 10 2007 @ 02:57 PM
link   
reply to post by skibtz
 


I actively educate others on the abuses perpetuated by our government, through websites, as well as forums such as this.

I also avoid paying into their extortionist tax code through the use of LLC's, and other entities.

Now, your turn Mr. Activist.



posted on Dec, 10 2007 @ 03:08 PM
link   
reply to post by slackerwire
 


You got it right the first time Mr Professional Activist With A Website:

All i do is sit on my jack complaining while pretending to be an activist

In a nut shell.

Honest


Now why is it that some people see no problem in killing small time criminals in a Texas home when you have a burglar in the Whitehouse that needs dealing with?

I even know the guys name. I know where he lives!

Edit: changed when you have a burgar in the Whitehouse - it just didnt seem right!

[edit on 10/12/2007 by skibtz]

[edit on 10/12/2007 by skibtz]



posted on Dec, 10 2007 @ 03:11 PM
link   
reply to post by OKT
 


The suspects were not there to burglarize Horn's home. Re-read the OP. If you are going to comment, know what you are talking about. Don't confuse matters.



posted on Dec, 10 2007 @ 03:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by skibtz
reply to post by slackerwire
 


You got it right the first time Mr Professional Activist With A Website:

All i do is sit on my jack complaining while pretending to be an activist

In a nut shell.

Honest


Now why is it the the Amercian people see no problem in killing small time criminals in a Texas home when you have a burgar in the Whitehouse that needs dealing with?

I even know the guys name. I know where he lives!


Criminals of all types needs to be punished, as for the "burgar" in the White House, we could either a) eat him, or b) continue the worthless effort of contacting local rep's and senators and telling them he should be charged with treason for a number of his actions, as well as inactions.

Now, why is your queen still sitting in Buckingham?



posted on Dec, 10 2007 @ 03:20 PM
link   
reply to post by slackerwire
 


The queen is redundant. A relic for people to look at and chuckle with outdated romanticism.

It may actually be that the only thing keeping her ass on the throne is the money coming in from the tourists - and that includes you guys


We tried burning her buildings down but we ended up paying for the repairs thourgh our taxes.

As a person, the queen may be a nice old lady - as a symbol - she is empty.

I use art as much as possible in public places to highlight the problems in government and the the monarchy.

The Bush Burger?!!



posted on Dec, 10 2007 @ 03:21 PM
link   
Zerotime,

Thanks goodness..someone else gets it. Another poster correctly summed it up..when you steal someone elses property you steal their labor.
Also disgusting to me is the concept that so many here are wont to disregard the labor and risk taken in labor of those whose property is taken. As if this does not exist or needn't be factored in. Astonishing.

I do not necessarily approve of shooting someone period..but on the other hand I am aware that when this happens in circumstances like this it is more effective than all the politicians, social engineers, police, and lawyers put together.

What is happening in the Houston Chronicle is to be expected. This is the absolute best that most newspapers and media can do in this country now days. I do not believe that the Houston Chronicle would be expounding on the concept of risk among those whose property was taken. Only social/feel good positions.

However..once again what would a jury of working peoples do.

This recent post is the first I had heard or read that the people whose house was broken into were themselves aliens or immigrants. Intresting.

Nonetheless what will a jury do?? Not what will the absolute truth of wild speculation and opinion on a blog do.

I still do not know if this fellow has been charged with anything as of yet...any of you know??

Thanks,
Orangetom

[edit on 10-12-2007 by orangetom1999]



posted on Dec, 10 2007 @ 03:30 PM
link   
I love this 'holier than thou" attitude people have when it comes to someone doing what Horn does. People try to act like they are above any sort of violence regardless of what someone else is doing. After you have been in a similar situation, then you can run your mouth (or keyboard in this instance). Who cares if they were shot in the back? If they weren't trying to break into people's houses, they would still be alive.

Calling Horn a Redneck does nothing but make you sound ignorant. Just because Horn is from Texas doesn't make him a redneck. He is a citizen tired of being a victim. I hope more people follow this guy's lead and defend themselves.



posted on Dec, 10 2007 @ 03:30 PM
link   
reply to post by zerotime
 


The part that's hard to understand is that you consider those who are quoting the law as being sympathizers for the criminals. Why is that? The two burglary suspects are dead! The law pertains to Mr. Horn who is alive! This should be easy to recognize as it was Mr. Horn who shot and killed the two suspects. So this case is about whether Mr. Horn was justified in killing the two suspects. It has nothing to do with sympathy for whom he killed. If anything, it is yourself who sympathize with Mr. Horn because you agree with his actions, and because you do not see him as a criminal that he is not a criminal. The thing is this, how do you explain Mr. Horn's actions as being consistent with the law? How can he be legally determined to have been justified in his actions? So, far no one has offered a compelling explanation. As far as the LAW is concerned, not opinion, Horn's actions seem to be unjustified. The LAW says that most likely Horn is a criminal to some extent. Now if you want to accuse those who penned the laws of Texas as criminal sympathizers, fine. But you do not have good reason to accuse those who quote the law as being criminal sympathizers.



posted on Dec, 10 2007 @ 03:40 PM
link   
reply to post by orangetom1999
 


I don't know if any charges have been filed against Mr. Horn. All I do know is that this thread is about what should happen to Mr. Horn regarding his actions. Any explanations or opinions on the matter should be supported by the laws of Texas.

It's very simple

Should Mr. Horn's actions be considered justified? Then explain that in accordance with the laws of Texas.

Should Mr. Horn be tried in court for his actions? Then explain that in accordance with the laws of Texas.

This case has nothing to do with what we like or prefer, it has to do with the law. Period.







[edit on 10-12-2007 by Areal51]



posted on Dec, 10 2007 @ 04:00 PM
link   
reply to post by skoalman88
 


Defending yourself is different than what Horn did, so don't make it sound like 'Horn defended himself and everyone else'. It's ridiculous.

And people who keep saying 'if you were in a different situation, you would change your mind too' are being completely one-sided. How about this, if YOU were in a different situation, let's say you're son/brother/whatever broke into someone's house and got shot in the back after trying to leave, YOU might think a little differently too.

Think about more than just the one scenario. Defending yourself and shooting someone in the back for trying to leave are 2 different things.



posted on Dec, 10 2007 @ 04:04 PM
link   
Area51,

Thanks for your summation. I would like to add ...before the law in the form of a jury. Unless the prosecution can get Mr Horn and his attorney to wave a jury trial I dont think a jury will be sympathetic either to the law or legalism or the dead burgulars.

Jury is the key. Not the law per se. Remember what happened in the Duke University Lacrosse case with these fraternity members and a over zealous prosecuter. I am sure that this extreme example is hard on the mind of the prosecuters in this case as far as going to trial.

It is very intresting to me that almost a month later ..nothing has been charged that I know of concerning this case. It should be as stated by so many of the posters here on this board..cut and dried.... but is it?? To me this is very unusual.

Smaller details seem to be coming out but once again ...what will happen before a jury. I doubt that the city of Pasadena has the funds to try this case over and over....nor the intrest.

Thanks again for your summation.

Orangetom

[edit on 10-12-2007 by orangetom1999]



new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 10  11  12    14  15 >>

log in

join