Posted: 11/29/2007 6:59:13 AM EDT
|
HOU news link Think twice before using deadly force 06:10 AM CST on Thursday, November 29, 2007 By Dave Fehling / 11 News The Pasadena case where a homeowner gunned down two burglars who were ripping off his neighbor, has put a spotlight on Texas' Castle Law. You may have one at home right now: a gun. Would you use it to stop someone who’s stealing from you or from your neighbor? It’s what happened earlier this month in Pasadena, but using deadly force can have repercussions that could cost you far more than whatever it was the thieves were after. It’s one thing to know how to shoot a gun at a target, but what if you were shooting at a real person? It’s what Joe Horn did when he said he saw two men burglarizing his neighbor’s house in Pasadena. “I can’t take a chance on getting kill over this,” he was heard saying on a call to 911. “I’m going to shoot. I’m going to shoot.” The deadly blasts from his shotgun caught on the 911 tape. It’s one thing to be for the right to bear arms, to protect you or your property. But what if you really did it? Shooting someone is about as serious as it gets, legally, financially and even emotionally. Take Jerry Casey. One night 13 years ago, he thought a thief was trying to steal his pickup from in front of his home in north Houston. He got his rifle and fired, killing the man who was in a wrecker and turned out to be a repo man just doing his job. A grand jury though did not indict Casey, but eight months later, he nonetheless killed himself, citing the repo tragedy in a suicide note. In cases like these where it’s not a clear cut case of self-defense, the legal costs can soar. “The average price today to be represented before a grand jury is about $8,000,” Greg Smith said. “If they no-bill you, you’re still open to civil litigation.” Smith isn’t a lawyer. He’s an instructor for people wanting to get licensed to carry a concealed gun. “The bottom line is, I don’t want them to ever have to use their gun,” Smith said. He said after he explains the legal and financial liability for shooting someone, the majority of his students decide not to pack a pistol. “They realize going through this class all the repercussions, all the implications,” Smith said. “There’s an attorney attached to every bullet you fire,” lawyer Tom Nixon said. Nixon is a lawyer. He’s also a card-carrying concealed handgun owner and has a company that provides licensed gun owners legal help for $10 a month. “And if God forbid, you ever have to go to trial, we defend you at trial,” Nixon said. How much would that cost? “For murder? Probably between $75,000 and a $100,000 because you’re going to have to hire expert witnesses, and they’re never cheap,” he said. You can get free advice on his Web site: Like, “Do not tell the 911 dispatcher” any details about the shooting because it’s “being recorded” and will be used “against you.” And instructor Smith said, “If someone breaks into your house, you don’t go hunting for them … defend yourself if necessary, but hide or run.” The point: Minimize the chance you’ll have to shoot because pulling the trigger can carry extraordinary costs. E-mail 11 News reporter Dave Fehling |
|
Good info to know. But, I personally feel that the financial risk of defending your life or the life of someone you love, is nothing. I would prefer to be around and owe $100k then dead PERIOD. Also, here in FL the following is on the books to protect you: One: It establishes, in law, the presumption that a criminal who forcibly enters or intrudes into your home or occupied vehicle is there to cause death or great bodily harm, therefore a person may use any manner of force, including deadly force, against that person. Two: It removes the "duty to retreat" if you are attacked in any place you have a right to be. You no longer have to turn your back on a criminal and try to run when attacked. Instead, you may stand your ground and fight back, meeting force with force, including deadly force, if you reasonably believe it is necessary to prevent death or great bodily harm to yourself or others. [This is an American right repeatedly recognized in Supreme Court gun cases.] Three: It provides that persons using force authorized by law shall not be prosecuted for using such force. It also prohibits criminals and their families from suing victims for injuring or killing the criminals who have attacked them. In short, it gives rights back to law-abiding people and forces judges and prosecutors who are prone to coddling criminals to instead focus on protecting victims. With these laws on the books I feel confident that if the time ever came to use a firearm in the defense of myself or a family member that I would be protected. The emotional/ mental ramifications are unknown though. Last IMHO, as far as Joe Horn in TX, he was way out of line by going after those guys. He was not in any danger and was acting as a wanna-be cop. He should have gotten descriptions and a tag number and let them go. Who knows, the police may have been right around the corner and could have apprehended the criminals and Mr. Horn would not have anything to worry about. |
|
You can help Joe Horn out here, if so inclined: www.joehornformyneighbor.com/ mike |
Fixed. I didn't bother reading through before posting, with good reason as well. There are two places DF is used... authorized and unauthorized. If it's authorized, there should be NO hesitation. You do what you must to stop the threat, and if you have time to think twice, then your soon to be dead ass is diverting well-needed attention away from the front sight, necessary to neutralize the threat with the most efficiency. I hear Ayoob is a damn good shot. But for all his PAID advice, I have never heard of him being in a shoot. Well, I have, and I am still here, and my advice doesn't come with a "shooter's weekly" paycheck attached to it... Legal nuances and all the other angles be damned when you are in the red. You want to play devil's advocate and argue about carrying reloaded ammo or a "modified" gun having extra liability in court until you are blue in the face? Have at it. Carry factory ammo, do (or don't do) whatever to your weapon, and consider all the angles NOW. But when SHTF, you better fucking bring down that threat without hesitation, whether that means an aggressive approach as you brandish, causing the threat to stop cold, or whether that means dropping the MF and his friend for good measure. You have the rest of your life to make up for what the second-guessing jury may/may not impose on you. OTOH, you may not have a life to ruin if you fuck up. Carry with the right mindset and act accordingly, or don't carry and figure out the best way to stay alive without resorting to self defense. That is all. |
|
I always say, it's better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6. You cannot put a price on your life.
I believe we got something like this recently. |
|
The only problem I have with this is that it was his neighbors house, not his. Now don't get me wrong, if I knew my neighbors were in their house and in danger sure I would act.........But now you start running into problems such as how do you know that the person you just saw crawling through the window doesn't belong at that house? Might be a friend of the family or their daughters new boyfriend. If it was me I would be prepared to protect a neighbor but would approach from the angle of calling local LE and just being a good witness. Like I said only in the most extreme circumstances would I engage. Now if it is my own house, the trigger gets pulled NO QUESTIONS ASKED! I will not retreat and nor should I have to if they ENTER my house. I have a wife and two daughters under 3. My 2 cents. |
Exactly. I feel for Mr. Horn. I guess he did what HE thinks was right. But, it was his neighbor's house and he is not LE. He should have left that up to the police. Now, if he had an elderly neighbor who was incapable of protecting his/herself, then that might be a little different. But, if that was the case he should have went over and confronted the BG's while they were in the house. Not shoot them as they are trying to get away. |
The only question I have here is how do you determine if it's authorized without taking a second or two to evaluate the situation? If you are in your home or if your out and someone is threatening you that's an easy one to figure out. If you defending someone else, a neighbor perhaps, it may not be black and white. I also like the idea of 10 bucks a month for legal defense. |
Best post on this subject EVER right here. Way to go Pulpsmack. |
but at least I wouldnt be. Financial trouble will eventually go away. And with me I have good friends and family that I know would help me out. So for me, being in financial trouble would suck, but I would still be alive. ETA:I remember hearing about this case, and what I think he did was not necassarily a justified shoot. And my first response was if it was considered a legit shooting. |
|
It just boils down to plain old " right and wrong ". They were stealing shit, and he should not have to justify doing the right thing. People are getting pretty damn tired of the BG. If the cops had shot them... it would be " justified ". Since the state cannot guarantee law and order with the existing laws, I feel the perps or the state should foot his legal bill. |
| I've carried more days than not for the last thirty five years. I live by a very simple rule when it comes to when to use my gun. Never draw youw weapon to take a life, only draw your weapon to save a life. I took a class once where the instructor was describing senarios where you could legally shoot someone and when you could not. He said if someone was running out your back door with your tv on his shoulder, you would not be justified in shooting him. I asked him if it would be ok to shoot the tv. |
It would be nice to let him carry it 800 yards or so ... before you placed the shot. 
|
|
You have to consider the fiancial ramifications of not defending yourself. Let's say you get mugged and beaten to within an inch of you life by two thugs. You will have: medical costs, lost time from work (if you can go back to work at all), ID theft from the info in wallet, you have to change residences (the BG know where you life because of the DL in your wallet, and if you testify against them they may be the types to even the score), the cost of counseling for your PTSD and that of your loved ones, possible lifelong disfigurement, etc. All this stuff costs money. And what are your chances of suing the BG for your costs? In the long run, the money probably evens out. Liability is reduced through being smart, not by decreasing your options. |
I doubt very seriously that the "cops" would have been justified. No threat to life existed. You pull the trigger to save your life, that life of another, or have profound knowledge that the life of another is threatened. You had best be able to articulate your knowledge and the situation very, very well. And keep in mind, civil liability is much different than criminal liability. |
|
As has been mentioned, a LEO has much more restrictive rules regarding the use of force than John Q Public. What may be a good shoot for a Non-LEO may bring civil or criminal liability to a LEO. Make sure you use your CCW to protect life or prevent a violent felony and you are safe. Know your state rules regarding the use of force. They are different (ahem, Texas) |
Funny you also have to same amount of time to lose a gunfight. |
|
One thing the bleeding hearts want to gloss over is those two criminals entered a residence where a family lives, not a deserted warehouse. It doesn't matter that no one was at home, the crooks may have believed the house to be empty, but there was no way they could be positive. When you enter someone's home with the intention of committing a crime and you get killed in the process, whether you're still inside or leaving with the loot, it's your own damn fault and not the person who ended your life of crime. The next house they enter may be occupied and they may kill the people living there. While I doubt I would have done what Horne did (he knew the house was empty and the police were on the way), I commend him for his actions. Considering it's Texas, I doubt he'll go to trial. |
| He was technically wrong but the DA is going to have a tough time getting the Grand Jury to indict him. Lots of burglaries in Houston, too many while the residents are home. Add that to perps being illegals with previous criminal history, I am betting he skates. We had another similar shooting about a week later but this time the shooter didn't call 911 first and in his interviews after the fact he went on and on about how he feared for his life. Quick learner! |
Funny, in my state required CCW class the instructor was going around the room giving students a scenario and then asking if it would be a good shoot or bad shoot. When it got to my turn my scenario was, "You return home from a night out with your wife and two kids, as you unlock the front door to your house you are confronted by a man holding your TV set, good shoot or bad shoot" I answered, "good shoot" to which he tried to correct me, "No, bad shoot, your life was not in danger" I responded, "No, good shoot, if he were to throw that TV it could cause great bodily harm to me or my family members, a 40+ pound TV set is deadly if used right, I bet if it were a 40lb. rock there would be no argument" My CCW instructor agreed and told the class he would rephrase the question and answer to that scenario.
|
A cornered theif with your family between him and his escape? I don't care if hes holding a stick of butter! |
|
Joe Horn didnt do the right thing IMO. That being said, I believe he did a GOOD dead. He took two pieces of crap off the street. I dont give a shit about how their families say they're good people. They're criminals who were up to no good. They got more than what should have came to them, but I really could care less. When it comes to putting a price on my family's life, Im in the same boat as the rest of you. HOWEVER, I completely agree that legal costs are not worth chasing after the intruder in my house. Im going to get my gun, round up my family into one room, have my wife call 911, and sit at a point where I feel I have good cover and wont let the intruder get to my family, and that's it. I MIGHT try and get somewhere that I can get a glimpse of the intruder so the cops know who to look for, and I will probably yell at the intruder that I have a gun and am ready to use it if they dont leave, but that's it until my family's lives are at stake. Only then do I willingly use deadly force. If an intruder wants my big screen TV, if they want my car, if they want my computer, if they want my jewelery, Im not going to shoot them to prevent it from happening and claim that my life was in danger. A GOOD intruder might steal 20k worth of stuff out of my house, but they arent entitled to it. If I end up shooting him, and he wins a lawsuit against me (most criminals have nothing better to do than try and sue people while in jail/prison, so he will sue me Im sure), not only does he now have a chance of bankrupting me, but he's ENTITLED to be able to do so. I absolutely refuse to give some worthless piece of shit the right to come take anything and everything of value away from me because I was too hot-headed to just sit back and PROTECT my family. Joe Horn went over-the-top in my opinion, but two people who I firmly believe were nothing more than career criminals are now dead because of his efforts, so I believe he has made the world a better place at the same time. |
It's all but guaranteed that their families will. Most criminals who break into houses arent well off financially, and neither are their families. When you kill one of the family members, you can bet they'll see dollar signs when they sue you. |
A guy I work with is being sued by a poor family for his daughter using "excessive force" in a fight the poor family's daughter started. He is looking a $5K in legal bills and it isn't even close to being over. His daughter kicked a girl in the face when she was down (still mouthing off) after she was sucker punched from behind and quickly got the upper hand in the fight. He has had his bank account frozen and a boot put on his car by the local sheriff. Crazy. 
|
|
That't the problem with our country. Nobody takes responsibility for their own actions anymore. It's never their own fault. Everybody wants to make a quick buck, but dont want to have to work hard for it. It's the sad reality of the American way, when one girl can start a fight, but also end up suing for medical costs. I say bull crap. Once you initiate a fight, you should have no rights to sue whatsoever for medical costs. Don't get me wrong, I love living in the U.S. Im just getting sick and tired of seeing people having a "me me me" attitude and not having an attitude where they feel the need to do the right thing and take responsibilty for their own actions. |
Not trying to be the spelling Nazi on this one. I think this might have been a Freudian slip.  A friend's wife got into some fisticuffs in a road rage incident a few years back. She wasn't the aggressor, but she did meet the guy half way. She beat the trash out of a guy twice her size w/ a souvenir baseball bat in the middle of the street. Between the criminal and civil legal fees as well as the final settlement, my friend was out about $30k. He also couldn't keep any firearms in his house for the year or so she was on probation. She was able to plead down to a misdemeanor. |
|
Always something good to think about. Having been involved in many civil lawsuits I understand how costly they can be as well as how mentally draining it can be being sued. Surviving the shooting and living is great. You might easily beat criminal prosecution but many states (including mine, Pennsylvania) do not have civil immunity yet. Furthermore if your shooting is not legally justified you can and probably will get the double whammy of criminal prosecution and then civil prosecution. Lawyers can be snakes and they can be your best friend. Hopefully you don't deal with them much because you don't have a reason to. Even the ones that are your "friends" are dealing with a political process that requires legal negotiations something that I know I am not capable of doing. That's why we begin to hate lawyers. You don't understand their language, their strategy, and why they cost so much but sometimes if you need a good one you will pay for it and hopefully will win. |
That is true only in a few states so far, most of them still leave you open to civil liability. And of course the real kicker is the whole "if it is a good shoot" situation. Unless you have a statute that specifically exempts you from civil liability if found not guilty of criminal liability there is still a lot of opportunity for trouble. FWIW, also keep in mind that usually YOU won't be the only one impacted by the whole mess. Your family can be impoverished, you can lose your home, and other nasty little things. |
lol, it wasnt an intentional pun, but it certainly fit the situation now that I re-read it! |
|
This day and time, if you use deadly force without being threatened by deadly force, you will need plenty of money and attorneys. The two Border Patrol agents going to jail for shooting a Mexican drug smuggler comes to mind. I know a guy who didn't stop at a "beat down" on the side of the road for just the reasons cited here. He read in the paper the next day that the guy on the ground died in the local ER of severe brain damage. What do you do? RS |
You protect you and your loved ones. Everyone else is on their own unless it is a blatant case of someone needing help. It's a shame it is this way but I am not risking everything I have earned in life and leaving my family without protection due to somebody else's situation. 
|
 Then it's discharging a weapon in city limits.
|