Texan 'hero' shoots and kills burglars

you can't make an omelet without breaking some eggs. just think of all the tax dollars he save us by putting down the "trash" if the police had showed up in time to catch them there would have been a trial which of course they would have plead innocent then if they were actually convicted they would have been "housed" in jail/prison at tax payer expense. he did all of us a favor. I can't stand the liberal media interviewing the criminals wife what did they expect her to say? "oh ya, my husband was a piece of crap criminal, that got what he deserved." come on spare me the B.S. if he hadn't been a low life P.O.S. stealing he wouldn't be pushing up daisys now. its the laws of inertia, for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. action: he broke into someones house to steal(not to mention what he could have done to the homeowner if they were home at the time) reaction: he got blown away by a concerned neighbor. you just gotta look at the laws theres know way around it.;)
 
wrightme43 said:
Yea Florida!!!!!
Not only do you have your own tag on Drew Curtis' FARK.com you are anti goblin.
Click to expand...

These two asses would of eventually got caught and put in jail... no one needs to shoot anyone for stealing stuff. It's not worth risking your life over protecting your stuff by confronting a burglar(s). Insurance will pay for it, anway! Some of you Americans sadden me. The ease at which you use guns to kill. Your kids are picking up on this and shooting up your high Schools.... Don't you think there's a problem here?... or you going to blame it on video games.
 
This is an emotive subject. There are many things to consider. Culture, the right to bear arms ect. USA is very ingrained in this.
The instance of crime, it probably happens more in USA than in Canada. So less crime more police resource to catch fellons.
Sentencing, jails are full so for non violent crimes people get community orders, is that a sentence?
What do you want from your judicial system. Punisment, Rehabilitation? If you can not do your time and then intergrate back into the community. The only path you have is crime.
What happens if said burgular is wounded whilst commiting the crime. He can sue you for damages. So it makes it easier if the fellon is killed out right.
Anger, how long are any of us going to put up with not feeling safe, would your morality allow you to let two fellons just walk off having done nothing.
Im not saying the man was right, but if he is then convicted. Just like Tony Martin in the UK it sends the message that its ok to steal as the law will protect you.
Finland have recently had a teenager shoot children in a school. Now this is a country that is not renowned for its gun culture.
Access to weapons how is this regulated, can it be made safer.

So all emotion aside we need to think properly and clearly about how this issue needs to be resolved.
 
Last edited:
My uncle once got charged for thumping a guy who had broken into his house and was standing on his landing in the middle of the night. The guy subsequently fell back down the stairs and broke a few bones. That guy shouldn't have been there so I thought my uncle was right for doing it. The courts said he should have given a warning. How can you even think about giving a warning when you have just woken up, got out of bed and come face to face with someone on your landing.

Now in this instance (the 2 burglars) I believe the guy was totally wrong, it was clearly premeditated, and he could have just waited for the cops. Although I do realise that America is not comparable with England or Holland, I do believe that if that guy had not had a gun he would not have even contemplated confronting the burglars. Now I know I definately couldn't influence you guys state side as you believe it is your god (and constitutional) given right to bear arms.

This is simply my view of things.
 
That no one deserves to lose thier life is a null statement.

It doesnt matter what is deserved. No one deserves to have thier home broken into. No one deserves to be raped. No one deserves to be car jacked. No one deserves to be burnt alive after being raped, by having a hair spray torch used on her private area, hang on for 3 days, then die, and have the guy that did it walk. Just in this town I can tell you about many home invasion robberies that end in a dead, beaten, or raped innocent human, that DID NOT DEFEND THEMSELVES.

Any animal that will not defend its territory, its young, its mate, and its own life will go extinct. If your trying to tell me you wont defend yourself, I pity you. How in the world can someone sit and say, I will allow this man to take my property, or rape my wife, or rape my children and I will do nothing? My mind can not even accept that possibility.


Criminals are criminals. When you commit crime you should expect a armed response using deadly force. IF you make laws where the criminal can expect something else, they become bold and you have, Oh say Washington D.C., New York, Chicago, London, Paris, Mexico City, Los Angles, I can go on. Honest citizens sit in the thier homes afraid of going into the parks after dark.

NO I will not accept that. I absolutley have not only a right to protect and defend my property and family. I have a DUTY to protect and defend my law abiding neighbors and friends.

If I see a someone being raped, I am not going to call the law, and wait. THEY DO NOT CAN NOT WILL NOT AND HAVE NOT prevented crime. The justice system is reactionary, not proactive. A armed population is proactive.

You know why people are respectful and friendly in TX? THE M.F.s ARE ARMED.
 
CanadianFZ6 said:
These two asses would of eventually got caught and put in jail... no one needs to shoot anyone for stealing stuff.
Click to expand...

Yeh...maybe they would have been caught eventually, but there is no guarantee that they'd serve any jail time. Our revolving-door court system will have them back on the street in no time to continue their chosen profession unimpeded.

CanadianFZ6 said:
It's not worth risking your life over protecting your stuff by confronting a burglar(s).
Click to expand...

Yes it is. Even Canadian "burglars" do not play by some ethical north-of-the-49th parallel rule book. They are scumbags and by nature lazy and cowardly. If opportunity presented itself, they would not stop at simply stealing "your stuff". The very least you could expect is a severe beating. That will not happen in my house. ;)

CanadianFZ6 said:
Insurance will pay for it, anway!
Click to expand...

How much insurance money would satisfy you if you or your family were beaten and/or killed?

CanadianFZ6 said:
Some of you Americans sadden me. The ease at which you use guns to kill. Your kids are picking up on this and shooting up your high Schools.... Don't you think there's a problem here?... or you going to blame it on video games.
Click to expand...

That's right out of Wendy Cukier's Coalition For Gun Control's playbook.
To loosely quote the late great Col. Cooper: "If criminals cannot be made to fear the police or judges, then they must be made to fear us."
 
I think we're all in agreement that we would do everything posible to protect our families. I still do believe that if everyone has guns lying about (including those cowardly burglars) it's only going to escalate the severity of the outcome whether in favour of the person defending his home or the person breaking in.

Now I am not naive and I do not pretend to understand the situation in america, but I would not recommend any western european country to go down this road.

On the other hand things have got so out of hand in America that you probably do need arms to protect yourself (only in self defence).

I have seen area's in New Orleans (pre katherina) where single women are allowed to run red lights after sundown because of the very real possibility of being car jacked at the traffic lights.

The fact of the matter is that I think that the average American household has aprox 3 fire arms (correct me if I'm wrong) in thier house, it would be impossible to ban fire arms in America without a civil war.

So in short it is what it is and things aren't going to change in America.
 
Re-think

Where is this thred going? We are not going to resolve any issues with it. We will however keep coming up with the same questions and answers?
 
perryn said:
Where is this thred going? We are not going to resolve any issues with it. We will however keep coming up with the same questions and answers?
Click to expand...

it is impressive though that it has stayed basically cival. I also liked the understanding shown of American ideals by our mate across the pond.

it will most likely die a slow death --- which in my humble opinion is better than locking it.
 
Slightly off topic, but it does show the nature of spineless politicians who refuse to take a hard line on people that shouldn't be in the bloody country anyway.


Illegal immigrants 'face NHS block'

Illegal immigrants and failed asylum seekers could be barred from all but emergency health services under plans being considered by the Home Office.

A joint Home Office and Department of Health review examining proposals to restrict free access to GP surgeries for asylum seekers whose claims have been rejected is due to be published in the New Year.

The Home Office has admitted it is reviewing "the rules governing access to the NHS by foreign nationals", but said no definite proposals had been put forward yet.

Critics have warned the move could increase community tensions by placing even greater pressure on accident and emergency departments.

Currently everyone in the UK qualifies for free primary health care services - such as access to GPs.

But asylum seekers were barred in 2004 from accessing free secondary health services, such as treatment in hospitals for HIV.

The Observer reported that the Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR) think-tank estimates there are up to 390,000 failed asylum seekers in the UK who are either unwilling or unable to return to their home countries and who would lose access to free healthcare provision if the Government approves the plan.

Jill Rutter, senior research fellow at the IPPR, told the newspaper: "This will increase community tensions. What signals are going to be sent out if queues of asylum seekers are waiting at A&E departments because they can't register with a GP?

"The Government is in danger of normalising what many people will see as a breach of human rights - someone's right to basic health care provision. The Government is saying people who aren't entitled to healthcare should pay for it but asylum seekers are the very people who can't afford to pay for these services."

A spokesman for the Home Office said: "We are fulfilling our commitment to review, jointly with the Department of Health, the rules governing access to the NHS by foreign nationals.


IMO the State should cure the cause not satify the effect. Prevent illegal aliens from entering the country & if you do find them, send them home; Then providing health care or not wouldn't be an issue.

Sh*t! that came out a bit ultra right wing. Perhaps I'm becoming a Grumpy Old Man
 
mikenbern said:
it is impressive though that it has stayed basically cival. I also liked the understanding shown of American ideals by our mate across the pond.

it will most likely die a slow death --- which in my humble opinion is better than locking it.
Click to expand...

I would like to appologise for my earlier posting, it was not intended to offend, I was simply airing my opinions, and as Neil rightly said it was taking it nowhere.
 
pedwards89 said:
Slightly off topic, but it does show the nature of spineless politicians who refuse to take a hard line on people that shouldn't be in the bloody country anyway.

Illegal immigrants 'face NHS block'

Illegal immigrants and failed asylum seekers could be barred from all but emergency health services under plans being considered by the Home Office.
Click to expand...

I totally agree, when in England I carry my E111 which will pay for any treatment necessary (via my Dutch health insurance) . If you pay your contributions in my mind you should have a E111 and use this to "pay" for any treatment. Anyone else should get a bill or let their insurance pay for it. Why should the British public have to pay for non contributors, especially illegal ones.
 
Last edited:
Pseudo Cloggy said:
I would like to appologise for my earlier posting, it was not intended to offend, I was simply airing my opinions, and as Neil rightly said it was taking it nowhere.
Click to expand...
As Mike states this thread has been civil through out. IMO you have not caused offense to anyone. I think Ped could actually start another thread with his post. Possibly entitled "why Im a pi$$ed of Englishman". We all face the same problems in our respective countries. Our constitutions all give us a different way to deal with it. Thats why there will not be a unanimous conclusion as to wether the neighbour was wrong or right. Lets see what happens with in the letter of the law where the incident occured.

Neil
 
Last edited:
When I recently had a gent from Bristol England stay with us for a few days (He was a cross country bicyclist and we are on a list to provide hospitality)

I learned many of the differences in thought and attitiudes between our country.... we are similar in some ways and vastly different in others.

a very pleasant and educational lesson for me.
 
1. If you choose to commit a crime, you choose to abandon your rights. This includes your right to life.

2. If you see a crime being committed, you have an obligation to act in such a way as to stop it if you have the ability.

3. If you see a crime being committed, are able to act and yet do not act, you are aiding and abetting.

4. That old man can live next door to me anytime.

My two cents, respectfully submitted.

Fred
 
I live in texas also and own four different guns with a fence around my two ackers of property with two big dogs no problems in 16 years. Except about 15 years ago two kids from down the street was going thru my stuff in the garage all I did was open the side door and sent in the dogs and no more problems
 
There are a number of good thoughts here. Having work for the government for a number of years I can tell you I would be very surprised if this man gets off free. Many of our laws, regardless of federal or state, are based on the principles of a "reasonable man" and "reasonable force." In this case, the man was not threatened, nor was his property. As a citizen he did the right thing by calling 911 but this is where his responsibility ended. Rather, he did the opposite thing he was instructed to do by the 911 dispatcher. Now, lets go one farther here. Did this man have the authority to fire his weapon across property lines? Did he have the authority to use deadly force? What actions by the perps led him to believe he was using reasonable force? There are more than a few questions that really need to be addressed here. At face value, I think this guy needs some jail time......
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Gary in NJ
Marc’s FZ6
Replies
3
Views
1K
EastcoastRN
E
D
2004 FZ6 starts and stalls
Replies
5
Views
1K
Motogiro
Motogiro
Monica A
The Long Way Up and Around
Replies
16
Views
1K
Cloggy
Cloggy
FinalImpact
R's Traffic Rant
2
Replies
21
Views
2K
Ssky0078
Ssky0078
B
Inversion Layers and Reflective Explosions
Replies
3
Views
445
Botch
B
Back
Top