Kingofpain89 wrote:
Apprehended.  Exactly how was the criminal apprehended?  Did one of the guys pin him to the ground while the other beat the hell out of him?   Or did they tie him up with the same ropes that the family was tied up with and then take turns wailing on him?

If a man breaks into my house and I pull a gun on him and he drops his weapon and tries to run away, I can still legally shoot and kill him as long as he is in my house.  I might not...but then again, if I was scared and not thinking rationally, I might just shoot the idiot instead of letting him run off.

"Hilary Neville, prosecuting, said: "What started as reasonable self defence by Munir Hussain then turned into excessive force by virtue of a sustained attack by Munir, Tokeer and at least two others."  The prosecutor and the judge have more information than you or I.  What I'm saying is that they subdued him and then they beat him causing brain damage.  That is supported by the quote above.

Yes, you can do this only because you live in Texas.  In a many other states if he drops his gun he is then no longer a deadly threat to you.  And if you shoot him (especially is you shoot him in the back), then you will go to jail.  I, also believe that if the intruder gives up and you still shoot him then I think the local prosecutor is going to come after your ass.  Take the emotion out of it.  Once they give up you cannot beat or kill them.

Pipswich wrote:If society were to allow vicitims to beat their attacker senseless (or kill them) once the immediate threat was resolved...

Our main problem would not be with vigilantes, who intended to redress wrongs...  (although they would sometimes pick the wrong person)

Our problem would be with criminals/gangs/mafia who beat people to death in the street and provided a dozen witnesses testifying that the deceased posed a threat.

We would descend to barbarism, near immediately, in some areas.

I guess Texans can fend for themselves!  That's the legend anyway.  At least until Mark Ingram either runs 165 yards and two touchdowns on them.  Or causes such double teaming that Jones catches one in the endzone and Richardson and Upchurch run in one each.  hehe.  Roll Tide

No, the problem is with criminals who can break into a home, rob and threaten murder on citizens, and a criminal justice system that punishes the victim of such attacks.

Barbarism has always existed, it just that it is once again on the rise coupled with a decadent legal system. Civilization is based on free citizens smashing barbarians in the head to protect civilization, once that is no longer possible, once civilization is no longer defended on its most basic level, then you have a quick return to barbarism.

Barbarians attack civilization, cultures seeking a return to a pre-1st millenia culture, homegrown barbarians seeking to rob, rape , beat and murder for the hell of it, gangs and individuals more than savy of the corrupt and lax legal system in the USA and abroad.

Texas is seeking to uphold civilization by allowing the Householder, the productive member of society who works and pays taxes, to defend their home. Creating a deadline, a point which crossed will result in deadly force, is a product of civilization, not barbarism. Removing such a deadline is an invitation to chaos and barbarity.

JasonZavoda wrote:
No, the problem is with criminals who can break into a home, rob and threaten murder on citizens, and a criminal justice system that punishes the victim of such attacks.

Barbarism has always existed, it just that it is once again on the rise coupled with a decadent legal system. Civilization is based on free citizens smashing barbarians in the head to protect civilization, once that is no longer possible, once civilization is no longer defended on its most basic level, then you have a quick return to barbarism.

Barbarians attack civilization, cultures seeking a return to a pre-1st millenia culture, homegrown barbarians seeking to rob, rape , beat and murder for the hell of it, gangs and individuals more than savy of the corrupt and lax legal system in the USA and abroad.

Texas is seeking to uphold civilization by allowing the Householder, the productive member of society who works and pays taxes, to defend their home. Creating a deadline, a point which crossed will result in deadly force, is a product of civilization, not barbarism. Removing such a deadline is an invitation to chaos and barbarity.

All the Castle Law has done is made official what had been unofficial policy for decades...namely, before you shoot the guy, make sure he's in the house or you'll be the one in trouble.  A sick commentary on a society that had become more interested and accomodating of a criminal's rights than that of ordinary citizen (and how about the law of "equal force"?  The guy coming at me with a knife, I can't shoot him, I have to take him on with a knife.  Are you kidding me????).  

All the expected hoopla over the law being passed, however, has never materialized...no one has planned a murder by inviting someone in his home, no one has become a serial killer in their basement and used the Castle Law as a defense, etc.  One of the main purposes of the law was to prevent career criminals and their lawyer flunkies from suing for damages should they be injured while burglarizing or terrorizing a home and it's residents (this really has happened, many times, and the criminal sometimes gets a settlement).  Even if such lawsuits are frivolous, they cost time and money to someone who shouldn't have to deal with it. Another sad legacy of the 70's and the overshift to protecting criminal's rights over law abiding citizens.

Besides, a DA who thinks he has evidence of a crime can always prosecute the homeowner.  

Read this and tell me if you'd rather have the Castle Law, or this Euro-trash nonsense governing your actions the next time a nut smashes in your door and starts toward you with a baseball bat, your young daughter and son behind you screaming in fear. The Euro version:

What is the law on defending your home?

If you use force which is 'not excessive' against burglars then the law is on your side.

Last year's Criminal Justice and Immigration Bill contained clauses to protect people from prosecution if they act instinctively and out of fear for their safety.

Justice Secretary Jack Straw said:

'Law-abiding citizens should not be put off tackling criminals by fear of excessive investigation.

'For a passer-by witnessing a street crime or a householder faced with a burglar, we are reassuring them that if they use force which is not excessive or disproportionate, the law really is behind them.'

So do you want a judge or jury deciding if you used "excessive" force, or "disproportionate" force (he only has a baseball bat, so you should only fight him with a baseball bat, etc), or trying to figure out if you were acting "instinctively and out of fear" because, you know, YOU WERE THERE AND THEY WERENT, so their opinion is more important...

Or the Castle Law:

BLAM BLAM BLAM BLAM BLAM BLAM "click" (as I only have a revolver).

Was he in your house?  Yes.  Not invited? Yes. Any more questions?  Uh, when does someone come by to haul this piece of trash out of my foyer...?

Thanks anyway, glad to be living here in Texas....  

Mike B.

Regardless of what happened in this case, the justice systems of the West are sick and perverted.  Way to put all the onus on the VICTIM of a violent crime to act responsibly and exactly according to the letter of the law, and to put that onus on him in the chaotic, desperate moments while that crime is perpetrated upon him.  

The people writing these laws are the same people who lined up to light candles for "Tookie."

Go Texas!

Reminds me of when Texas first passed a right to carry law. The liberal pundits were wailing doom and gloom from the rooftops of how law abiding citizens carrying handguns was going to lead to mass killings and the collapse of civilization, chaos, cats sleeping with dogs, etc.

A "citizen committee" was formed in Dallas that promised to independently review every killing and scream from the rooftops when the expected mass killings broke out immediately after people started randomly shooting each other. Turns out this so-called "citizen's committee" is backed by a well financed, well known anti-handgun group and is a bit of a sham (not really a local grassroots organization).  They rub their hands together gleefully anticipating the political windfall they will have when mass carnage breaks out (cause, you know, us Texans just luv shootin each other! Yehaw!)

First handgun shooting:  A guy at a stoplight was attacked through an open window.  The guy in the car shot his attacker as he was being dragged out through the window.  The attacker had stopped behind the car and told his buddy sitting next to him "Watch this, I'm going to beat some ass" before heading over to the car and trying to drag the driver out. Turned out he was a career criminal and a drifter, and such a scumbag his own family had disowned him and refused to come to the funeral.  Quote along the lines of: "We always knew he'd die violently, good riddance". Citizens Committee reluctantly agrees this may have been justified....The guy is no-billed.

Second handgun shooting:  Distraught ex-husband decides to off his ex-wife. He drives up to a local mall, walks in with a rifle, and proceeds to hunt down his wife who is working there. She tries to run when she sees him coming, he shoots her and she still runs, he stalks her through the mall into the parking lot firing shots until he finally brings her down. He walks back to his car.  In the parking lot, he is shot and killed by a guy who just got back from the range and had his handgun in the car, and saw the ex-husband shoot down his wife.  When the killer's car is searched, a "murder list' is found listing his ex-wife, ex-wife's mother and several other people on it....turns out the handgun wielding citizen probably saved a half dozen lives when he killed the scumbag. Guy is no-billed.

Citizen's committee is desperate now, tries to paint the hero as a gun toting lunatic that should have waited for police instead of killing the murderer himself. Citizen's committee is roundly lambasted, lampooned and criticized by media and anyone else with a brain. Support for the fake grassroots group dries up and soon the so-called "citizen's committee" finds itself marginalized and ineffective, and closes up shop.

I don't know how his applies, but I just love a good story with a happy ending!

Mike B.

Glad that one had a happy ending but he got lucky.

And, I really don't feel bad for the guy who was beaten.  He needed to be punished.  But, holding him down and sending him to a cell with inmates, would have been easy enough with several guys there to help hold him down.

Pulling the trigger when faced with imminent danger is one thing.  Exercising capital (or near capital) punishment outside of the courts, really should be discouraged.  

Nonetheless, I think it's a bit hard to contextualize this from the U.S. side.  Three men with knifes would likely get themselves shot over here, since, in general, we can and do have guns.  

Alabama is a lot like Texas in some respects.  Three guys with knives can find themselves facing big fast guns in a hurry around here.

You are assuming the criminal is the dead one in the floor and the victim is standing there alive in his home.  I don't necessarily know how to tell consistently.  Granted, the courts are probably too lenient in many cases.  But, assuming that someone was dangerously threatening simply because the guy holding the smoking gun says so... is loony in my opinion.

This is a matter of perspective.  If I knew the criminal was dead and the victim vindicated consistently, I would 100% agree with you.  But, I envision nasty people getting away with murder routinely, if we allow excessive force.

It probably works out decently if everyone is a bit hesitant to pull the trigger.  Fewer dead bodies.

Anyone know of any lulu.com deals/coupons/etc out there I could use?

ShaneG.

Plaag wrote:Anyone know of any lulu.com deals/coupons/etc out there I could use?

ShaneG.

Use "HOHOHO". I believe it's 20% off.