Abrams: Texas jury OKs shooting burglars in the back?

shooting someone for stealing *stuff*?....sorry please...fill me in i dont see the logic behind *stuff* is more important than a persons life...some people on here are frankly right wing nuts that would jump at the chance to shoot someone who was stealing their playstation just to get the blood going...silly,tribal and dark age thinking...come and evolve with the rest of humanity...

Originally posted by Lethil
shooting someone for stealing *stuff*?....sorry please...fill me in i dont see the logic behind *stuff* is more important than a persons life...some people on here are frankly right wing nuts that would jump at the chance to shoot someone who was stealing their playstation just to get the blood going...silly,tribal and dark age thinking...come and evolve with the rest of humanity...

Yes I agree, If the PERPS EVOLVE, we wont have a friggin problem now will we Scotty?

If they Don't EVOLVE, they die right?

Isn't that how EVOLUTION WORKS?

Go ahead.. let em have YOUR stuff... Dont think you can give mine away with some snide remarks about "political stances" that are nothing more than a 'catch phrase' for the masses.

I'm all for Evolution. I fully support it.


Blitzkreigen

Originally posted by Lethil
shooting someone for stealing *stuff*?....sorry please...fill me in i dont see the logic behind *stuff* is more important than a persons life...some people on here are frankly right wing nuts that would jump at the chance to shoot someone who was stealing their playstation just to get the blood going...silly,tribal and dark age thinking...come and evolve with the rest of humanity...

You know what Lethil...you are exactly correct...life is more important than stuff. So why is not the life of those who earn the stuff ...very often at RISK......important?? Why would you think you have the high moral ground here when you have no idea what RISKS were taken by the owners of the "Stuff" in earning it?? What kind of skewed morality are you proposing here. Is not the lives of the people who take RISK to earn the "Stuff " valuable?? How do you justify yourself as a beacon of morality when you leave out this view of RISK??

Your logic or lack thereof makes the people who take the original RISK to earn the property/stuff...expendable and disposable..as if they dont exist at all...nor anyone in the neighborhood. Hardly a beacon of morality or the high moral ground.

I dont know if you understand this concept where you were raised...but lots of places here in America...we are not intrested in "Wildlife" passing through our neighborhoods. In particular here we are refering to "Two Legged Wildlife."

You want to pass through our neighborhoods and be decent ...respectful..neighborly..no problem. Just dont carry on like "Wildlife."

There are those of us here who understand and respect the motives of four legged wildlife...much better than the two legged variety.
Thats just the way it is. We make no apologies for this.

Nonetheless...I take the lives and RISKS seriously ..of those who earned the property..often at great RISK....not the Wildlife. Why are you not holding their lives as valuable.....those taking RISK to acquire the propertys?? Curious omission from most of these posts against what happened down in Texas.

Orangetom

Hey Blitzkreigen,

Dont know if you have seen it as of yet..but I posted a reply to your question on 12/24 volt high volume pumps on the Survival Board...here

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Orangetom


[edit on 5-7-2008 by orangetom1999]

reply to post by Blitzkreigen


To Blitzkreigen;
In reply to your last re-reply

Wow that was a long emotionally charged speech but again failed to provide reason only justifications.
Threating to bitch slap someone in a debate only show how weak your position is in the face of fact. , morals, reason and common sense.
I will agree that if someone not of your invitation is in your home and you shoot them its not your fault but outside, Your rights over your home and property should and most likely do not give you the right to shoot living people in the back that were not in your home, stole none of your stuff, were not threatening you and in direct violation of the law telling you not to.

The facts here are so loud and clear but you simply don't want them to be so and argue passionately unsupportable justifications, but its still vigilanty justice
Fact it was not his home
Fact, were not his goods.
Fact, he is not in danger.
Fact, he was ordered by police not to go out.
Fact, he was ordered not to shoot living people.
Dictionary
A vigilante: is a person who ignores due process of law and enacts his or her own form of justice when they deem the response of the authorities. And on and on
Note: I have signed up as a regular named poster so this will be the last Mr or Ms Anonymous

Originally posted by Animal
Shameful. Killing over robbery? Shooting people in the back justified? Something about this does not seem very legitimate to me.

"Deadly force" to protect your property seems like a very slippery and dangerous slope.

Shooting someone for stealing my old broken down hibachi grill? What the hell is wrong with people today?

This to me is a perfect example of why state sovereignty should be trumped by the federal government.

imo this is a great example of why we need state sovereignty

what if the federal govt decided this was ok? then you would have no one to oppose them

it seems to me keeping freedom decentralized keeps a decent balance...

Originally posted by Anonymous ATS
reply to post by Blitzkreigen


To Blitzkreigen;
In reply to your last re-reply

Wow that was a long emotionally charged speech but again failed to provide reason only justifications.
Threating to bitch slap someone in a debate only show how weak your position is in the face of fact. , morals, reason and common sense.





No... You simply still Need Bitch Slapped for suggesting that I feel guilty and whatever ( Remorseful? ) for DEFENDING MY PROPERTY! Like I have No Right to do that? Any your Telling me I cant?

When you start Signing My Checks you can take those and give them away.... nothing else is yours to give to a perp, or anyone else, including MY RIGHTS under the LAW to DEFEND my SELF AND MY NEIGHBORS, or ANY OTHER 3rd Party by request. Even An 'Implied' Request.







I will agree that if someone not of your invitation is in your home and you shoot them its not your fault but outside, Your rights over your home and property should and most likely do not give you the right to shoot living people in the back that were not in your home, stole none of your stuff, were not threatening you and in direct violation of the law telling you not to.







The 911 OPERATOR HAS NO AUTHORITY TO TELL ME TO DO ANYTHING.
Neither Does a Red Light 'Camera' Ticket.

Neither ONE IS A LAW enforceable by a 'Legal Hearing' or a 'WARRANT'.

The Red Light Camera Just goes on your CREDIT.. they cant Arrest you for NOT PAYING IT, or even issue a WARRANT!

No LAW IS Being BROKEN by NOT Listening to "ORDERS" from a 911 OPERATOR! They Have No LEGAL AUTHORITY. They are just as Powerful as a 7-11 Clerk.








The facts here are so loud and clear but you simply don't want them to be so and argue passionately unsupportable justifications, but its still vigilanty justice

Fact it was not his home

Does NOT MATTER... We have the RIGHT in Texas to Protect an Innocent 3rd Party Bystander, our neighbors or their PROPERTY with DEADLY FORCE-- JUSTIFIABLY-- under the LAWS of the STATE. WE VOTED ON THEM! Your 'FACT' does not hold a Drop of Water. He can ACT as a Protector For his Neighbors Property LEAGLLY as if IT Was His OWN!

We can Also DEFEND our VEHICLES with Deadly Force.




Fact, were not his goods.

Does Not Matter. See above.





Fact, he is not in danger.

DOES NOT MATTER, but thats EVEN DEBATABLE because either one could have had a pistol in their belt, or in their car, or would come back LATER to ROB His HOUSE or Find His Grandaughter walking home form the store. He WAS IN DANGER! Immediately! Not To Mention the Return Visit at 3:30 AM to his Garage Door, or Backyard Window or his Driveway bushes.






Fact, he was ordered by police not to go out.

NO, He was WRONGFULLY, and with out authority, 'ORDERED' by the 911 OPERATOR to 'not go out'.

911 OPERATORS HAVE NO LEGAL AUTHORITY!






Fact, he was ordered not to shoot living people.

SEE ABOVE. ORDERED? BY WHO? Could he Shoot Dead People? Would that have been "ok" with the 911 Operator ??

Could he put it on "SpeakerPhone" And have the 911 operator ORDER the Perps to WAIT for the COPS? In SPANISH TOO?


You can take orders from whomever you like, but I'm not LEGALLY BOUND to FOLLOW ORDERS from ANYONE other than a Law Enforcement Officer "In Front of Me", or a Firefighter/ EMT responding to a call scene.

My Orders Come From MYSELF, My LEGAL RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES bestowed upon me. Including the RESPONSIBILITY to Render AID in an Accident and Protect My Neighbors House ( By Request or Necessity ) anytime I'm home. Also the RESPONSIBILITY to NOT STEAL.






Dictionary
A vigilante: is a person who ignores due process of law and enacts his or her own form of justice when they deem the response of the authorities. And on and on



OK FINE...WHERE IS THE BROKEN LAW?

It ISNT 'VIGILANTE' ITS SUPPORTED BY THE LAWS of the STATE AND THE JUDICIAL SYSTEM. Did I Mention WE ALL VOTED ON IT? Now Our VOTES do not count either?

God I'm GLAD I LIVE HERE!

More So Every Day.

Thank you for pointing that out to me again.






Note: I have signed up as a regular named poster so this will be the last Mr or Ms Anonymous



Thank you for that respect to all of us. Anonymous Posting Is New Here and brings a lot of "Drive By" posters. I personally will take you a bit more serious, because you never know "Which" Anonymous your talking to.




Blitzkreigen

[edit on 8-7-2008 by Blitzkreigen]

reply to post by Blitzkreigen


Great post Blitzkreigen,

Lots of Salt in it..not sugary like many in here.

Sad to say but we need more Salt in our lives. Not just from the Wildlife as Mr Horn encountered but also against much of the sugar out here which trys to pass for excellence ..even normal....when it is mostly in support of the wildlife.

I do not believe most of the sugary types recognize that they are in fact aiding and abetting the wildlife in thier feel good positions.

I do so desire that it could be different out here rather than having to use Salt but our human natures among most of us dont allow for anything different.

The sad thing to me ...that I so often find among the sugary types is in thier quest to make the world the perfect sugary utopia/eden...they use such veiled entitlement strategys. I do not approve of entitlement strategys.

To me ..one has to live or dwell in a social structure which offers alot of tit...breastfeeding at the expense of others...to afford such sugary philosophys.
Dont misunderstand me here Blitzkreigen..I like the tit too..but also recognize that I cannot stay there or count on others to get it for me.....as if tit was something owed to me. Hence.....I'd rather be ....Salty.

Keep up the Good work Blitzkreigen....keep them in the X-ring and keep that Salt dispenser close. We know how to put salt on slugs when needed.

Thanks,
Orangetom

I concur, that was an excellent post blitzkriegen

If the question is . Is there a circumstance where you should be allowed to shoot a robbery suspect in the back .

I say there are a few instances .
(This is all hypothetical obviously)

Say your in a bank robbery . You have your 25 on your ankle. Gunman has a hostage.
He releases said hostage to grab another that is freaking out .
As he turns away from you he raises his weapon hand .
Do you sit there in your own self pity ?

Hell not you slide that pistol out of your holster and drill that prick in the back of the head ..

If there is a credible threat to yours or someone else life . I feel you have an obligation to help.
I'm quite liberal . But i would probably shoot someone in the back if i thought it would protect me or someone else.

Originally posted by d11_m_na_c05
If the question is . Is there a circumstance where you should be allowed to shoot a robbery suspect in the back .

I say there are a few instances .
(This is all hypothetical obviously)

Snipped remainder of post... I'm not directly speaking to this poster, just replying to make another point. I actually liked this post I'm replying to.

BUT....

Allowed to shoot in the back? ALLOWED? The LAW does not Differentiate between a Head shot or a back shot, or a foot or mouth shot.
( unless you only INJURE them, then YOU get SUED and YOU are NOW the bad guy!)

Your either legally justified in shooting or not... its not the 'shot placement' that makes the differance.

ALLOWED should not even enter the Equation. You either Protect Yourself and Your Neighbors, or you Hide Under a rock. As I See it I Dont NEED PERMISSION to defend my property or my Neighborhood. I Have a Legal RIGHT that ALLOWS me to SHOOT anywhere I dam well can hit.

The Question IS... WHEN should I put MySelf In further Danger waiting for a better shot? When should I second guess myself and Hesitate?

Answer = NOT EVER...

If I have to shoot-- I'm shooting. I'm not asking them to "turn around" for the "best angle". I'm not waiting for a better line of sight. Hell I might even shoot through the WALL for that Matter. If its a 13 year old breaking into my house, tough # for him. I'm not asking for ID first.

Do you think the Guys In Iraq wait for a Taliban or Al Quaeda to 'Turn Around' before they Pop em with a 20 MM from a C-130 at 1 mile up?

I dont think so.

Do you think KIDS carry guns in America and IRAQ? YES THEY DO.

They walk down the street with the Long Tee Shirts and their hand in their belt LIKE THEY ARE PACKING. More ARE than you would think as well.

As far as I'm concerned I'm not Hesitating or even letting that BAD IDEA begin to sink in.

If I Have to Shoot, I'm just hitting them. I dont care where. Why should I care?

Its Not Honorable? I got news for ya, this is not Feudal Japan anymore where Samurai Had 'Honor' in their PAID defense of others.

Honor Means absolutely nothing when it comes to protecting my space from unauthorized intruders. The "Honor Factor" was Breached when they crossed that line. They dont deserve any Honor or mercy when they initiate the situation. Honor is what should have kept them in line, and honest, but it didnt work now did it?

Why should I be held to a differant level of 'Honor' than the Perp causing the trouble when the rubber hits the road?

I Should Not Be , If I do devalue My Personal Honor, and act like a Perp I deserve what I get. Same for the Perp in my neighbors yard.

I think its really dangerous to start to second guess yourself, or wait for a full 'head on' shot. I'll take the 'chastizing' from Anonymous ATS Posters later on, without a hospital stay involved for me.

I really cant believe that we are even having this discussion.

As another poster pointed out, CARING for the Poor Defenseless PERP and wanting to sing Kum By Ya is just backwards.

A symptom of what this country is internally imploding from as we speak.

Laws dont Stop Criminals, people with Guns do who are not chicken shiet scared to protect their families or their neighborhood.

Criminals DONT FEAR THE LAW, they FEAR the Pissed Off Homeowner at 3:30 am who is ARMED and within his RIGHTS to defend the entire area.

I think thats called "appeasement by lack of action", which makes you just as guilty and dishonorable as the perp, if you dont stand up for your Rights and your Property. They may get the Old Lady Next door if you dont stop them now, and that will be "on you".

( Once again , not directed to this poster that I replied to, just the first few lines were )

Blitzkreigen

With apologies aside wouldn't it be a much more interesting world if we could hear the first thing that pops into ones head...mine was "good, shoot them all".

I tried to keep up with this event from day one. Here is something I posted in one of the other threads. I do not recall when it became a solid 'shot in the back' story. A lot of the links to the Houston Chronicle are no longer active. Does any one have a link when the 'shot in back' was stated by the ME?

According to a final ruling, Ortiz died of shotgun wounds to his neck and torso, said Ellie Wallace, an investigator at the Harris County Medical Examiner's Office.

The report said that Torres died of shotgun wounds to his torso and upper left extremity.

Wallace could not confirm whether the men were shot in the back, saying the autopsy report only indicated they were shot in the torso

No link as it is no loner working (404).

Just a "Pop Up" to make an observation.

Today in My City, A group of Gang Members were in a Apartment Parking lot area Spray Painting Cars, Walls, Fences, Bricks, with Gang Tags.

Two Renters in the Apartments went out to ask them to stop.

A fight ensued, and the Gang Members Left and the Renters went back inside.











Minutes later the Gang Members returned, Kicked in the doors of the renters and shot them both . I think 1 Died.


Moral of the Story is.........


Stop em when you have the opportunity, or they will simply come back for you later, even MINUTES later.

Now its a Home Invasion and Murder scene, and the ones Murdered were the renters, not the Gang Members.


www.myfoxdfw.com...

Blitzkreigen






[edit on 12-7-2008 by Blitzkreigen]

reply to post by Blitzkreigen



yeah..Blitzkreigen,

This is begining to be a thing around here several times a month. People are kicking in the doors of others homes and robbing them..sometimes hurting or killing them if they are home. It doesnt seem to make any difference that the people are home...they just come on in.

Orangetom

Had Mr. Horn Simply "Let Em Go", who knows 'who' would have been the next target.

Maybe Him, 5 minutes later.

Its Already Out of hand.... time for Evolution.

There is Natural Selection, sexual selection and stupidity selection right?

They didnt call it a "DoDO bird" for nothing.... now its extinct.

Around here its just the daily news.

Blitzkreigen

[edit on 12-7-2008 by Blitzkreigen]

reply to post by Blitzkreigen


Great story to post and Im glad you posted it. It just goes to show you even more this guy was justified. In fact in my post above I said what if the guys leave get guns come back and kill that guy. He did the right thing. I want to see the Anonymous ATS guy respond to this.

Dead gang members, dead illegal aliens, and dead criminals make the country a better place for everyone.

People like Mr. Horn should be rewarded, not chastised, for his actions.

The obvious inefficiency of both government and the judicial system in this nation will only lead to more actions like this. Society will clean up since government has failed to do so, we can only hope no law abiding citizens suffer the wrath of politically motivated prosecutions.

Originally posted by mybigunit
reply to post by Blitzkreigen

 

Great story to post and Im glad you posted it. It just goes to show you even more this guy was justified. In fact in my post above I said what if the guys leave get guns come back and kill that guy. He did the right thing. I want to see the Anonymous ATS guy respond to this.

I have a feeling that Anonymous person was a Woman.

If you find one ant in your kitchen, and you dont "remove" it, there will be 200 in the next few hours.

Why do not people get this?

Its simply amazing how far we have let criminals get by with no repercussions.

I'm to the point that..... well, we just need to clean the slate.

I'm not afraid of getting chalk on me to have another day of learning and progressing tomorrow.

Blitzkreigen

Originally posted by orangetom1999

Originally posted by Lethil
shooting someone for stealing *stuff*?....sorry please...fill me in i dont see the logic behind *stuff* is more important than a persons life...some people on here are frankly right wing nuts that would jump at the chance to shoot someone who was stealing their playstation just to get the blood going...silly,tribal and dark age thinking...come and evolve with the rest of humanity...

You know what Lethil...you are exactly correct...life is more important than stuff. So why is not the life of those who earn the stuff ...very often at RISK......important?? Why would you think you have the high moral ground here when you have no idea what RISKS were taken by the owners of the "Stuff" in earning it?? What kind of skewed morality are you proposing here. Is not the lives of the people who take RISK to earn the "Stuff " valuable?? How do you justify yourself as a beacon of morality when you leave out this view of RISK??

Your logic or lack thereof makes the people who take the original RISK to earn the property/stuff...expendable and disposable..as if they dont exist at all...nor anyone in the neighborhood. Hardly a beacon of morality or the high moral ground.

I dont know if you understand this concept where you were raised...but lots of places here in America...we are not intrested in "Wildlife" passing through our neighborhoods. In particular here we are refering to "Two Legged Wildlife."

You want to pass through our neighborhoods and be decent ...respectful..neighborly..no problem. Just dont carry on like "Wildlife."

There are those of us here who understand and respect the motives of four legged wildlife...much better than the two legged variety.
Thats just the way it is. We make no apologies for this.

Nonetheless...I take the lives and RISKS seriously ..of those who earned the property..often at great RISK....not the Wildlife. Why are you not holding their lives as valuable.....those taking RISK to acquire the propertys?? Curious omission from most of these posts against what happened down in Texas.

Orangetom

Hey Blitzkreigen,

Dont know if you have seen it as of yet..but I posted a reply to your question on 12/24 volt high volume pumps on the Survival Board...here

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Orangetom


[edit on 5-7-2008 by orangetom1999]

Woopsie...forgot i posted in this thread! Anyway my first post sounded a tad mean,apologies,but this kind of thing gets me fired up.But my view remains the same...nothing is worth someones life...NOTHING! Case Closed...but key on the table for anyone that wants to reply.I dont care if its 30 billlion vs a crackhead thief who is a burglar with less than average IQ...noone has the right to take someone else life except nature..or circumstances/luck(getting knocked over) my views are a tad in the minority...but i dont think anyone should be killed...not serial killers,paedophiles,burglars,rapists etc etc unless in self defence,which this clearly wasnt...although who knows whats gpoing through someones head ina situation like this...but....this guys actions make me feel uneasy...i think it was avoidable.

reply to post by Lethil


Lethil,

You posted....

But my view remains the same...nothing is worth someones life...NOTHING! Case Closed...but key on the table for anyone that wants to reply.I dont care if its 30 billlion vs a crackhead thief who is a burglar with less than average IQ...noone has the right to take someone else life except nature..or circumstances/luck(getting knocked over) my views are a tad in the minority...but i dont think anyone should be killed...not serial killers,paedophiles,burglars,rapists etc etc unless in self defence,which this clearly wasnt...although who knows whats gpoing through someones head ina situation like this...but....this guys actions make me feel uneasy...i think it was avoidable.

Nothing is worth someones life.....than why do you not hold the lives of those who earn the property as valuable in the first place? Why would you put these people in the position of having to cede to such wildlife as would take their propertys only to have them earn or re earn the propertys over and over...even at great risk to themselves in earning or re earning it??
Why is not the lives/risks of those earning the propertys assigned any value in your system of beliefs? Why would you choose to default these peoples lives/risks in such a cheap and degrading way ...only to have them RISK for the property ..over and over and over and over and over...to such wildlife?

Your very lack of mentioning this view indicates that you dont hold the original owners lives and RISKS as valuable and denys your belief system that life is valuable...simply because the original owners lives/risks are not valuable.
You would have them by default ...take the RISKS ..over and over and over......a very intresting double standard.
While this may seam rational....and satisfy your emotions and feelings it is not logical..nor moral.
To those of us who can see it..rationalizing and logical are not the same.

Thanks,
Orangetom