TexasCHLforum.com

The details of this situation will obviously come out over time. Protecting life and property is our right. We all have our personal bounds for how we respond when protecting property. For me, if the threat is gone, i wouldn't shoot. I value that theif's life more than my stuff, especially a chain saw. Maybe this victim was burglarized frequently and nothing was changing that. It is understandable to be frustrated. Don't envy the victim, I hope he was within the law for his sake.

o b juan wrote:Horn was lucky because of the Grand Jury.. in refrence to my other post The above are my thoughts about property
and understaning of PC 9:42 I know many dont agree but I read as it is written.

I don't think Joe Horn was lucky. The facts did not justify his being charged and the grand jury saw it that way. I would be disappointed if a grand jury in most of these counties didn't see it that way, maybe Hippy Hollow or something.

These technicalities are there on purpose. Remember, one man's exception is another man's loophole!

The likelihood that I would shoot someone just to stop some small item(s) from being taken is almost non-existent because I don't have the money to pay a pricey lawyer over property. That said, it sickens me that people can basically take whatever they want, stealing hours of someone's life (because the owner of the property spent non-recoverable hours of their life earning money to pay for that property), and the thieves will likely get away with it, and the legal system is just fine with that. If you think that "property is just property" then maybe you never had to sweat and bleed to earn your paycheck. Most thieves could have gotten a job, they just didn't want to, they want you to do the work and they get the proceeds of your labor. I hope things come out for the best for the victim who got burgled.

o b juan wrote:(B) the use of force other than deadly force to protect or recover the land or
property would expose the actor or another to a substantial risk of death or
serious bodily injury. ---
Last amended by Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 900, Sec. 1.01, eff. September 1, 1994

If A fleeing suspect isnt endangering me or another after theft or burglary

There is no item I own that would not be covered by insurance.

Really....you don't have a deductible? Also, consider the fact that you're regularly paying for the insurance in the first place. You're already out money before anything is even stolen. I'd get nothing from insurance for a theft under $1,000 and be out $1,000 for anything over. So many items I own are effectively not covered by insurance. I'm not advocating shooting someone in this situation; I'm just pointing out that insurance does not cover everything.

K.Mooneyham wrote:The likelihood that I would shoot someone just to stop some small item(s) from being taken is almost non-existent because I don't have the money to pay a pricey lawyer over property. That said, it sickens me that people can basically take whatever they want, stealing hours of someone's life (because the owner of the property spent non-recoverable hours of their life earning money to pay for that property), and the thieves will likely get away with it, and the legal system is just fine with that. If you think that "property is just property" then maybe you never had to sweat and bleed to earn your paycheck. Most thieves could have gotten a job, they just didn't want to, they want you to do the work and they get the proceeds of your labor. I hope things come out for the best for the victim who got burgled.

Yes....BUT....let someone go steal $5 million dollars and watch the results. The wealthy people are not fine with that, therefore the guilty gets the book thrown at them. Heads would roll if it didn't happen. As I see it, one of the great failings of our justice system is the inordinate effect of money.

My opinion.

ShootDontTalk wrote:

K.Mooneyham wrote:The likelihood that I would shoot someone just to stop some small item(s) from being taken is almost non-existent because I don't have the money to pay a pricey lawyer over property. That said, it sickens me that people can basically take whatever they want, stealing hours of someone's life (because the owner of the property spent non-recoverable hours of their life earning money to pay for that property), and the thieves will likely get away with it, and the legal system is just fine with that. If you think that "property is just property" then maybe you never had to sweat and bleed to earn your paycheck. Most thieves could have gotten a job, they just didn't want to, they want you to do the work and they get the proceeds of your labor. I hope things come out for the best for the victim who got burgled.

Yes....BUT....let someone go steal $5 million dollars and watch the results. The wealthy people are not fine with that, therefore the guilty gets the book thrown at them. Heads would roll if it didn't happen. As I see it, one of the great failings of our justice system is the inordinate effect of money.

My opinion.

Maybe, but if you steal $100 million or a couple billion you're home free...just ask John Corazine.

VMI77 wrote:

o b juan wrote:(B) the use of force other than deadly force to protect or recover the land or
property would expose the actor or another to a substantial risk of death or
serious bodily injury. ---
Last amended by Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 900, Sec. 1.01, eff. September 1, 1994

If A fleeing suspect isnt endangering me or another after theft or burglary

There is no item I own that would not be covered by insurance.

Really....you don't have a deductible? Also, consider the fact that you're regularly paying for the insurance in the first place. You're already out money before anything is even stolen. I'd get nothing from insurance for a theft under $1,000 and be out $1,000 for anything over. So many items I own are effectively not covered by insurance. I'm not advocating shooting someone in this situation; I'm just pointing out that insurance does not cover everything.

rbwhatever1 wrote:This should be a non issue and hopefully it will be. Good riddance to those who steel the Labor of others...

My feelings exactly. There is one resource we are granted in this life that cannot be replenished, and that is time. If a man were tell any one of us "I know you're dying, and you've only got a few days to live, but I'm going to take one of those days away from you", I doubt there's a person here who would fault someone from stopping that person by whatever means are needed.

Theft is the same thing. Someone "spent" part of that precious allotment of time, and someone else is attempting to take it back. I know some (maybe many) will disagree with me, but I have no sympathy for a thief who gets killed stealing.

Oldgringo wrote:

jmra wrote:Will be interesting to see how this works out for the homeowner- whatever happens it's going to cost him a whole lot more than the price of replacing a chainsaw and a nail gun.

Yep, anybody remember how many years in the Big House the guy in Missoula, MT got for shooting the thief in his garage a couple years ago?

Oldgringo, that was a different set of circumstances than just a common burglary of a habitation. The Missoula guy got so much time because he set a trap for the expected thief, and then shot him, after leaving the garage door partially open with an attractive bait in full view. He got prison time for bad judgement.

o b juan wrote:" I read that if you have no expectation/ability to ever recover what's being stolen deadly force may be justified to prevent the loss"

That is not in the Texas penal code that I have. Where did you read that?

and you are correct in Penal code 9:41 you may use force to recover the property if you are in fresh pursuit..

I went back and read the code. It is part PC 9.42 and it covers theft at night. I incorrectly applied it to this daytime case.

(B) to prevent the other who is fleeing immediately after committing burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, or theft during the nighttime from escaping with the property; and(3) he reasonably believes that:(A) the land or property cannot be protected or recovered by any other means; or - See more at: http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/txstatutes/ ... Ljxfj.dpuf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

n5wd wrote:

Oldgringo wrote:

jmra wrote:Will be interesting to see how this works out for the homeowner- whatever happens it's going to cost him a whole lot more than the price of replacing a chainsaw and a nail gun.

Yep, anybody remember how many years in the Big House the guy in Missoula, MT got for shooting the thief in his garage a couple years ago?

Oldgringo, that was a different set of circumstances than just a common burglary of a habitation. The Missoula guy got so much time because he set a trap for the expected thief, and then shot him, after leaving the garage door partially open with an attractive bait in full view. He got prison time for bad judgement.

He also opened his big mouth to a third party about killing the robber ahead of time.