Castle Doctrine at work.... (Ames: house, neighborhood, live) - San Antonio - Texas (TX) - City-Data Forum

firstclassflyer · 10-23-2009, 04:12 PM

This is what it was designed for...and it seems to have worked.

(Well, didn't kill the guys...but thwarted the invasion)

A pair of bold suspected burglars found more than they wanted inside a north-side home.

Most of the time the Northcrest Hills neighborhood is quiet, but late Friday morning police say two men attempted to burglarize a home on Thames St.

According to police, the suspects first tried the front door, but it was locked. So instead, the two went through a window and came face to face with the homeowner and his gun. Police said the homeowner fired one shot and told police he hit his target.

“That's scary," said longtime neighbor Linda Davis. "If somebody broke into my house and I had a gun. I'd shoot. You have to protect yourself. If they are coming in my house after me, I'm going to shoot."

North-side homeowner shoots unsuspecting burglars | Latest News | KENS5.com (http://www.kens5.com/latestnews/stories/KENS20091023-THAMESHOMEINVASION.246729ecf.html - broken link)

BamaSailor · 10-23-2009, 04:45 PM

Good on the homeowner! If someone breaks into your house they should have no rights, including their life.

LauritaM · 10-23-2009, 06:22 PM

true. they chose to break in, they chose to face whatever consequences came after.

majormadmax · 10-23-2009, 09:36 PM

And if one of them gets shot or killed, the other criminal is charged with it!

Well done to the homeowner, and God bless Texas for understanding that people should have the right to defend themselves, their family and their possessions against crime!

svg210 · 10-23-2009, 09:56 PM

Score one for the Honest Homeowner

rd2007 · 10-24-2009, 05:49 AM

wonder what type of gun he used? You would think the culprit would need to go to a hospital. I personally would've shot as many times as possible to make sure the situation ends in our favor.

svg210 · 10-24-2009, 07:40 AM

I'm guessing either a small caliber or he shot him in a non lethal area. Personally I would aim for the liver.

firstclassflyer · 10-24-2009, 07:55 AM

..which leaves me with some questions. What is the law regarding a situation such as this, where a homeowner has shot someone but didn't fell them. This invader is now obviously fleeing, but is not yet off the homeowner's property.
Does the homeowner have the right to "keep on blasting" at the intruder...shooting him/her in the back? If so, what's the reasoning behind it? I thought the Doctrine was meant for defense, not offense. If the invader is by no question "fleeing", I would tend to think that the homeowner would be in some hot water...but maybe I'm wrong.

Merovee · 10-24-2009, 08:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by svg210

I'm guessing either a small caliber or he shot him in a non lethal area. Personally I would aim for the liver.

When in fear of your life, which is the only time you can legally fire upon an intruder, it is best to aim for center mass with the intention of stopping them, if they die then they do but it should not be the intention, stopping the perceived threat to your life is.

It is best to aim at center mass for this, aiming where one might simply think are nonlethal areas might take away valuable seconds trying to deduce where a nonlethal area is, one might miss their target altogether, or worse with good intentions they do live but sue you and guess who would be stuck paying hospital bills?

On the other hand by Texas law, not part of the castle doctrine, if someone is vandalizing or committing theft on your property (cannot be someone else's property) and it is after dark but before sunrise then you are allowed to stop them if they flee in an attempt to recover the cost of damages.

This does include lethal force, this does include if they are running away, and there was a case of a juvenile dying ten years or more ago for trying to steal chickens in the south side being shot in the back as he ran down the street. Another case of someone graffitting private property comes to mind which also ended in lethal force. If someone breaks the glass to enter your property in an attempted robbery you can legally stop them to recover the cost of damages but it is not certain such an action is really worth it if they are running away not posing a threat to your life...in the era of home invasion though once someone is inside it is not wise to take chances once it is clear someone illegally entered your home.

firstclassflyer · 10-24-2009, 08:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Merovee

When in fear of your life, which is the only time you can legally fire upon an intruder, it is best to aim for center mass with the intention of stopping them, if they die then they do but it should not be the intention, stopping the perceived threat to your life is.

It is best to aim at center mass for this, aiming where one might simply think are nonlethal areas might take away valuable seconds trying to deduce where a nonlethal area is, one might miss their target altogether, or worse with good intentions they do live but sue you and guess who would be stuck paying hospital bills?

On the other hand by Texas law, not part of the castle doctrine, if someone is vandalizing or committing theft on your property (cannot be someone else's property) and it is after dark but before sunrise then you are allowed to stop them if they flee in an attempt to recover the cost of damages.

This does include lethal force, this does include if they are running away, and there was a case of a juvenile dying ten years or more ago for trying to steal chickens in the south side being shot in the back as he ran down the street. Another case of someone graffitting private property comes to mind which also ended in lethal force. If someone breaks the glass to enter your property in an attempted robbery you can legally stop them to recover the cost of damages but it is not certain such an action is really worth it if they are running away not posing a threat to your life...in the era of home invasion though once someone is inside it is not wise to take chances once it is clear someone illegally entered your home.

OK. So if it's daytime,no shooting in the back in order to recover any damages.
I guess the invader doesn't have to be on the homeowner's property either, as evidenced by the chicken-napper being shot as he was running down the street. Thanks for the clarification.