Murder over property in TX not legal for shoplifting

[EVT1]

Oct 2, 2013 8:09:27 GMT -5 frankq said:

Maybe taking the beer wasn't the real crime. Maybe this has been an ongoing thing between this store owner and this guy and his "bros". Maybe there is a history not mentioned in the couple of paragraphs from a newspaper. Maybe this store owner was in fear every day. Maybe these gangbangers have been using his store as their own personal pantry. Maybe the storeowner got tired of living in fear every day and just snapped. You don't know, so why don't we let the details come out before we call this guy a cold blooded killer. Maybe there is a better reason he shot the guy than the taking of some beer. But then again, the facts are really not the issue to some people as we've seen on other threads. Better to decide one's fate from reading a news story than through trial. I'll remind you that the bail is $35K. That means $3500 and you're out after posting some collateral with the bondsman, Pretty light for a "murderer". Let's see how it plays out.

Maybe so- still don't get to shoot someone not posing a threat to you.  I get the other few posters that support the killing of the 'bad guy'- but they are all missing the point.  When you make laws regarding the justifiable use of deadly force- you do not get to assume any specific scenario- whether it is the most violent gang member in the hood or some Mormon on a bike- it does not matter when it comes down to killing someone that has stole some junk.

I would add a lot of people talk big on this issue- how they would shoot someone running off with their stuff.  I say bullshit- you do not know what you would do if it actually happened.  You could have some 'thug' right in your sights filled with all of the hate you can muster over their theft of your shit- but pulling that trigger is another ball of wax.  Bet most of you would not.

This post was really to point out that even in TX where in some cases you can murder someone over property- Joe Horne case for example- it isn't some free for all to shoot petty thieves.

[EVT1]

I'm a little off- apparently he was headed out the door with 2 cases of beer (so we are up to maybe $40)- going to assume that is two suitcases of cheap beer- one in each hand or he had a tall stack he was balancing and dude shot him in the head as he was trying to leave.  Not really looking good for a self-defense claim- although he did shoot a guy named Garcia so that should help with a TX jury.

[zibazinski]

Potential good? That wasted piece of DNA? Seriously?

[frankq]

Oct 2, 2013 21:49:44 GMT -5 EVT1 said:

Oct 2, 2013 8:09:27 GMT -5 frankq said:

Maybe taking the beer wasn't the real crime. Maybe this has been an ongoing thing between this store owner and this guy and his "bros". Maybe there is a history not mentioned in the couple of paragraphs from a newspaper. Maybe this store owner was in fear every day. Maybe these gangbangers have been using his store as their own personal pantry. Maybe the storeowner got tired of living in fear every day and just snapped. You don't know, so why don't we let the details come out before we call this guy a cold blooded killer. Maybe there is a better reason he shot the guy than the taking of some beer. But then again, the facts are really not the issue to some people as we've seen on other threads. Better to decide one's fate from reading a news story than through trial. I'll remind you that the bail is $35K. That means $3500 and you're out after posting some collateral with the bondsman, Pretty light for a "murderer". Let's see how it plays out.

Maybe so- still don't get to shoot someone not posing a threat to you.  I get the other few posters that support the killing of the 'bad guy'- but they are all missing the point.  When you make laws regarding the justifiable use of deadly force- you do not get to assume any specific scenario- whether it is the most violent gang member in the hood or some Mormon on a bike- it does not matter when it comes down to killing someone that has stole some junk.

I would add a lot of people talk big on this issue- how they would shoot someone running off with their stuff.  I say bullshit- you do not know what you would do if it actually happened.  You could have some 'thug' right in your sights filled with all of the hate you can muster over their theft of your shit- but pulling that trigger is another ball of wax.  Bet most of you would not.

This post was really to point out that even in TX where in some cases you can murder someone over property- Joe Horne case for example- it isn't some free for all to shoot petty thieves.

And what some of us are saying is that this may be a case of a man, who, over time, was pushed over the edge by this guy and his buddies. The POINT is, you, nor anyone else knows the whole story at this point. You guys are a little too quick with the noose. You, pat, and a few others throw around the term "murderer" like the word the.  Lets see what happens at trial when ALL the facts come out, and lets not make another mistake and have trial by media. Sorry if the situation pushes your sensitivity button, but the guy is out on only $35K. That's not "heinous murderer" money. I'd be willing to bet there is more to the story. Let's see.....

[frankq]

Oct 2, 2013 21:58:46 GMT -5 EVT1 said:

I'm a little off- apparently he was headed out the door with 2 cases of beer (so we are up to maybe $40)- going to assume that is two suitcases of cheap beer- one in each hand or he had a tall stack he was balancing and dude shot him in the head as he was trying to leave.  Not really looking good for a self-defense claim- although he did shoot a guy named Garcia so that should help with a TX jury.

So the story changes? I though someone said he chased the guy down by car and was shooting as they went? You don't need to necessarily be defending yourself in Texas. You can, in certain circumstances, use deadly force to protect property and livelihood. Read Chapter 9 of the Texas penal code. I'm sure we have a couple of lawyers out here that can weigh in. And your comment that race could be a factor is another example of the huge chip you carry on your shoulder caused by your own biased perception of the world around you. Why don't you just start a "Hating the Southern Border" thread and be done with it...

[djAdvocate]

Oct 2, 2013 19:20:39 GMT -5 frankq said:

think of all of the potential good he might have done, and don't cheer so boldly. or, to put it another way:

Didn't look like a whole lot of potential good brewing to me......

you never can tell.  ever hear of General ButtNaked?

[djAdvocate]

Oct 3, 2013 7:32:00 GMT -5 zibazinski said:

Potential good? That wasted piece of DNA? Seriously?

seriously.  i could give (20) examples of "criminal garbage" that have gone on to do great things.

redemption
forgiveness
healing

our government has no business being in the death business.

[workpublic]

our government has no business being in the death business.

our govt didn't kill him. an equally equal human did.

[djAdvocate]

Oct 3, 2013 14:19:09 GMT -5 workpublic said:

our government has no business being in the death business.

our govt didn't kill him. an equally equal human did.

human's shouldn't deal in death either.  that goes without saying.

[zibazinski]

I view it as doing the job the police are hired to do. Saves them the trouble for more important things like ticket writing.

[workpublic]

dj,

don't kid yourself, you'd kill someone with your teeth if you had to. or be killed.

[djAdvocate]

Oct 3, 2013 15:51:28 GMT -5 workpublic said:

dj,

don't kid yourself, you'd kill someone with your teeth if you had to. or be killed.

sure.  but i wouldn't waste 10 seconds or one round of ammo on someone stealing $40 of my stuff.  it is just stuff, after all. 

[EVT1]

Oct 3, 2013 8:29:26 GMT -5 frankq said:

Oct 2, 2013 21:58:46 GMT -5 EVT1 said:

I'm a little off- apparently he was headed out the door with 2 cases of beer (so we are up to maybe $40)- going to assume that is two suitcases of cheap beer- one in each hand or he had a tall stack he was balancing and dude shot him in the head as he was trying to leave.  Not really looking good for a self-defense claim- although he did shoot a guy named Garcia so that should help with a TX jury.

So the story changes? I though someone said he chased the guy down by car and was shooting as they went? You don't need to necessarily be defending yourself in Texas. You can, in certain circumstances, use deadly force to protect property and livelihood. Read Chapter 9 of the Texas penal code. I'm sure we have a couple of lawyers out here that can weigh in. And your comment that race could be a factor is another example of the huge chip you carry on your shoulder caused by your own biased perception of the world around you. Why don't you just start a "Hating the Southern Border" thread and be done with it...

Didn't hear about any chase And I brought it up specifically because of the TX law- and the ethnic (not race) factor because of the Joe Horne case where he didn't get indicted- and it is very likely because of who the victims were.

The border is fine, it is the people that bother me- the ones that see thugs and criminals behind every bush and think that a shoot first policy is appropriate. No wonder they elect Republicans since they merely expand that policy to the globe.

[Deleted]

Oct 2, 2013 18:31:18 GMT -5 billisonboard said:

Oct 2, 2013 11:11:07 GMT -5 @jma23 said:

The next gang member heading out to pick up some free beer might think twice before grabbing and running, thinking that police response times gives him (her) a window of opportunity.  This is a definate deterrent to future criminal activity.  Get a job, buy your beer.

Grabbing and running, which leaves the store owner able to shoot you, was demonstrated to be not such a good idea. The law abiding citizen sees the shooting as a deterrent to crime. The criminal sees that a pipe along side the owner's head solves the problem nicely.

As in bringing a pipe to a gun fight ?

[billisonboard]

Oct 4, 2013 11:29:21 GMT -5 @jma23 said:

Oct 2, 2013 18:31:18 GMT -5 billisonboard said:

Grabbing and running, which leaves the store owner able to shoot you, was demonstrated to be not such a good idea. The law abiding citizen sees the shooting as a deterrent to crime. The criminal sees that a pipe along side the owner's head solves the problem nicely.

As in bringing a pipe to a gun fight ?

More like bringing a pipe to a customer encounter and using it before the owner is able to realize he might be in need of a gun.

[Deleted]

Oct 4, 2013 14:20:08 GMT -5 billisonboard said:

Oct 4, 2013 11:29:21 GMT -5 @jma23 said:

As in bringing a pipe to a gun fight ?

More like bringing a pipe to a customer encounter and using it before the owner is able to realize he might be in need of a gun.

A pipe big enough to due effective damage is hard to hide, or step back, draw, fire. You do know this can go on forever don't you ? Hypothetical situations only test story telling creativity, doesn't really apply to real occurrences

[billisonboard]

Oct 4, 2013 15:04:34 GMT -5 @jma23 said:

... You do know this can go on forever don't you ? ...

Yes.