Joe Horn found Not Guilty (Houston: crimes, law, legal)

[Huckleberry3911948]

Originally Posted by Big A

It's a sick world when we are joyous over a man who shot two unarmed men in the back because they were stealing material things. So sick!

stealing material things is called robbery. why do you say unarmed?
how did they get in the house? walk in?
you need tools to break in a house.
they threatened him and were on his property.

[SDQT]

Originally Posted by Big A

It's a sick world when we are joyous over a man who shot two unarmed men in the back because they were stealing material things. So sick!

So, I guess he should've helped them move the stuff then.

[ryneone]

Originally Posted by Kofi713

So why not just discuss it over there?

Was just wondering...

And not everyone is jumping with joy. It is like a 60/40 split, with those favoring Horn at 60 and those opposed at 40.

Those 40 live in STONE OAK or Austin!

[Sweetie Pie]

Originally Posted by ryneone

Those 40 live in STONE OAK or Austin!

Now we're bringing Austin into this place??????

Kewl, I love us

[Kofi713]

Originally Posted by Huckleberry3911948

stealing material things is called robbery. why do you say unarmed?
how did they get in the house? walk in?
you need tools to break in a house.
they threatened him and were on his property.

Stealing material things is wrong.

But it was not Horn's things. They were not on his property. Horn said he felt he was in danger, but he should have stayed inside like the 911 operator told him. The operator even said "Mr. Horn, it is not worth killing over property". Horn already had the mindset of killing them before heading outside. It was predetermined.

What if Horn missed and hit an innocent bystander?

[1StarRanch]

Sorry buddy the law is the law. The criminals know the law and chose to take that risk, just like that other idiot the other night here in SA and the other idiot who tried to car jack someone with a knife, they new the price they could pay and chose to pay it with their life. Let's not make excuses for the criminal.

[SDQT]

Originally Posted by Kofi713

Stealing material things is wrong.

But it was not Horn's things. They were not on his property. Horn said he felt he was in danger, but he should have stayed inside like the 911 operator told him. The operator even said "Mr. Horn, it is not worth killing over property". Horn already had the mindset of killing them before heading outside. It was predetermined.

What if Horn missed and hit an innocent bystander?

Didn't you get the memo? Mr. Horn was also threatened! I would also have made the predetermination to kill someone, if I was being threatened. They were already breaking the law, so what makes you think they wouldn't have gone one step further and harmed Mr. Horn?

[majormadmax]

Originally Posted by Kofi713

Stealing material things is wrong.

But it was not Horn's things. They were not on his property. Horn said he felt he was in danger, but he should have stayed inside like the 911 operator told him. The operator even said "Mr. Horn, it is not worth killing over property". Horn already had the mindset of killing them before heading outside. It was predetermined.

What if Horn missed and hit an innocent bystander?

I think you mean 'premeditated,' not 'predetermined;' and either way, it was neither.

Texas law allowed him to intervene, even if it was someone else's property; and a Grand Jury found that he acted within the law. And, once again, the criminals WERE ON MR HORN'S PROPERTY THREATENING HIM when he shot them, which was confirmed by the Pasedena police department. He had every right to defend himself.

Plus, the 911 operator cannot order a law-abiding citizen what to do in such a situation, and was wrong to even tell him that he could not intervene. Horn was well within his rights and the Texas judicial system backed him up. You may not like that fact, but that is the law.

M2

[majormadmax]

Proven facts from Gun Facts (v5.0)...

Fact: 60% of convicted felons admitted that they avoided committing crimes when they knew the victim was armed. 40% of convicted felons admitted that they avoided committing crimes when they thought the victim might be armed.
Fact: Felons report that they avoid entering houses where people are at home because they fear being shot.
Fact: 59% of the burglaries in Britain, which has tough gun control laws, are “hot burglaries” which are burglaries committed while the home is occupied by the owner/renter. By contrast, the U.S., with more lenient gun control laws, has a “hot burglary” rate of only 13%.
Fact: Washington D.C. has essentially banned gun ownership since 1976 and has a murder rate of 56.9 per 100,000. Across the river in Arlington, Virginia, gun ownership is less restricted. There, the murder rate is just 1.6 per 100,000, less than three percent of the Washington, D.C. rate.
Fact: 26% of all retail businesses report keeping a gun on the premises for crime control.
Fact: In 1982, Kennesaw, GA passed a law requiring heads of households to keep at least one firearm in the house. The residential burglary rate dropped 89% the following year.
Fact: A survey of felons revealed the following:
• 74% of felons agreed that "one reason burglars avoid houses when people are at home is that they fear being shot during the crime."
• 57% of felons polled agreed, "criminals are more worried about meeting an armed victim than they are about running into the police."

You cannot argue with the facts.

Cheers! M2

[rd2007]

some people don't have a problem arguing with facts.. I don't know why, but they definitely don't let the facts get in the way of their logic train