TexasCHLforum.com

Although I think he is covered by the law, it doesn't matter if he is indicted or not. The DA isn't going to find 12 people together that will convict him. Maybe in Austin, but not Pasadena. My own personal code is not to (generally) shoot someone over property for a number for reasons, none of which has to do with "they don't deserve it", because they probably do.

There are just too many variables on something like this. Given the same situation would you be less likely to shoot if it was a couple of 14-16 years olds who had made a bad decision vs. a couple of 30 years olds who it appeared where at work exercising their chosen vocation of stealing.

I also have issues with discharging a high powered weapon in my neighborhood. At least he chose the right tool, a shotgun - effective up close, but unlikely to end up in the bedroom of a neighbor two houses down. Although I applaud his decision to get involved, he did place himself in more danger. Perhaps for a 70 year old man who may not still be directly responsible for feeding and housing a family? What if it was a younger man with a wife and kids to support. Would it not be irresponsible of him to unnecessarily place himself in harm's way?

Another thing I don't think anyone has thought of is the possibility that some DA of low caliber and devoid of honor may claim that the (your) property was recoverable because you had insurance. Not too much of a stretch for some prosecutors – I have heard of worse.

In general, IMHO, it is not the best idea to shoot someone over just property. Rightous, yes - smart, no!

TEX