Posted on 05/25/2010 4:58:51 AM PDT by marktwain
In “TEXAS” the shooting of the “ILLEGALS” during a home invastion was “JUSTIFIABLE”.
Read the state laws, each State is different.
You can’t shoot somebody standing in a public street unless he’s armed and threatening you. The fact that you disapprove of the WORDS coming out of his mouth, is no justification. Had the man acted properly and they came onto his property after them, it would be different.
You find it acceptable because you’re offended by the words.
Name calling is not a life threatening attack. If the home owner believed an attack was coming by an armed group, why would he expose himself to attack at the end of the driveway? I would have defended from inside the house, where I could return fire from cover.
The charge of manslaughter seems to fit the facts perfectly, imo. Seems to be the very definition of manslaughter in the U.S.
“Put yourself in the homeowners position. He doesn’t know they don’t have any weapons. He doesn’t know they don’t have knives are even small pistols hidden away on their person somewhere”
Then how do you justify going out to the edge of the property to meet them? Why didn’t he call the cops ( maybe he was afraid they would shoot his dog)?
Any threat could be eliminated/avoided by not going out to the street.
He took the life of a kid showing bad judgment but was not a threat.
You can’t help but contrast this situation with the SEIU mob attack on the banker’s home in DC...
I agree. As I'm sure he now agrees in hindsight, the father should have called the police at the outset. But the fact remains that a mob descended on this man's home and threatened his son. Any reasonable person in this day and time should assume that such a group might be armed, and their refusal to back down in the face of armed resistance sent a clear signal that they indeed might have been.
Sad that it ended this way, but the kid chose his own path when he joined a mob and went to somebody's home. I would acquit in a New York minute...
Why would you go outside if you didn’t know if they were armed? Heck it would be better to assume there were armed and stay away from the threat.
I wonder how this would play out if I was a banker and 500 thugs showed up at my house? They were screaming slurs because of who I was, my 14 year old was home alone, they actually came on the property to the front door, the cops were called and refused to enforce the law because they did not want to inflame the situation. Could I then defend my family and home? After all 500 sounds like more of a lynch mob than 4 not to mention premeditated due to the fact it would take organization to hire 14 buses to get these 500 thugs to my house. Just something to think about!
You’ve got to know the laws of your state re deadly force ... NY and Texas definitely differ.
This case was a real tragedy. A teenager who died for being low-class and stupid. A father whose conduct wouldn’t qualify as self-defense, even by Texas standards.
Long Island’s not the paragon of the judicial system, but it seems like the judge and jury came to a good outcome here: a conviction with a very reduced sentence (2-4 years). Not so much as to make thugs feel that homeowners will hesitate to defend themselves, not so little as to send the message that self-defense with deadly force has no boundaries.
I agree. Everyone of those SEIU and Acorn punks disgust me!!! The banker needed an M-2 .50 cal!!
Read the state laws, each State is different.
I think this one would be justifiable as well. Pulling up in front of somebody's house, yelling challenges and racial epithets, etc., could be taken as assault, a felony. You are legally permitted to use deadly force to stop a felony in progress in Texas, or to prevent a felon from fleeing.
The colors of the respective parties is immaterial, other than that race was an element.
Continuing to yell and threaten when they saw the homeowner was armed is really, really stupid. Continuing to yell and threaten after shots had been fired is suicidal.
I'm on the homeowner's side.
“Pulling up in front of somebody’s house, yelling challenges and racial epithets, etc., could be taken as assault, a felony. You are legally permitted to use deadly force to stop a felony in progress in Texas, or to prevent a felon from fleeing.”
Sitting in a car and yelling threats and challenges does not give anyone the right to shoot you dead... either in NY or Texas or anywhere in the US. Thats only in Quentin Taratino movies.
This is likely to be an unconstitutional law after SCOTUS decides the Chicago case. The other possession law might be too. He should appeal both of these on Constitutional grounds.
Typical Lawn Guyland Coogines. Its amazing that they would have considered having a trial in Suffolk County in the past, as the majority of those on the jury would have been folks like these meatballs.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.