It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
HOUSTON (AP) -- Houston police say a group of thieves broke into a house and forced a resident into a closet so they could ransack the place.
The closet chosen during the Tuesday afternoon home invasion was the one where the resident kept his guns.
Houston police Sgt. Jerri Brandon said the man, now armed, confronted the thieves and exchanged shots with them, wounding one and flushing all three from the home.
Originally posted by Ameilia
....3. Fleeing from one dude when there are three of you...
Originally posted by thedeadtruth
reply to post by ExCommando
Couple of points...
(1) I have attended plenty of hone invasions where the person was not killed until the end of the robbery. Either because some drugged up crim gets itching. Or they did not want to fire off a shot, then hang around to see if someone heard it.
(2) I think he had the right to defend his entire house. Not just the closet.
Fair play - again, I'm not from the US, so I don't know what the statistics are.
Originally posted by RedParrotHead
Unbelievable that some are suggesting that the victim/hero did anything wrong. Had there been any fatalities the blame goes 100% to the home invaders ... no matter what.edit on 5/16/2013 by RedParrotHead because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by ExCommando
I guess the problem with this story is the man was relatively safe in his closet - if the robbers were going to harm him, surely they would have done so at the start?
He busted out and exchanged shots - he could easily have been killed, for what? The possessions in his home?
Surely the most sensible option would have been to arm himself but stay in the closet. Avoiding the risk of death, but also being in a great position if they attempted to harm him during the process.
I'm all for self defence, but was this guy acting in self defence?