Skip to comments.Police: Levelland homeowner kills intruder with shotgun blast(TX)
Posted on 09/22/2012 3:32:32 PM PDT by marktwain
Picture of of Paul Ochoa
LEVELLAND, TX (KCBD) -
Police are investigating a shooting that occurred in northwest Levelland on Friday afternoon. Police say a man was found shot to death around 4:30 p.m.
Investigators say a man named Paul Ochoa - also known as "The Joker" possibly attempted to break into a home in the 300 block of North Avenue M, where the homeowner shot the intruder point blank in the chest with a shotgun.
It is unknown if Ochoa was shot inside the home or in the street where he was found.
"The person who made the call apparently claimed to be the shooter. He is in our custody and that is still under investigation," Levelland Sergeant Daniel Hancock said.
(Excerpt) Read more at kcbd.com ...
Just a hunch. But i bet we are going to find out the victim was just as shady as the shot guy, and this might not be a classic burglary.
That area isn’t known for law enforcement and DA’s being hostile to self defense.
one bad apple gone.
Bet the family will not be trying to get the money back for that $2.00 tat.
“The Joker”. Looks like the joke is on him.
“It is unknown if Ochoa was shot inside the home or in the street where he was found.”
Uhmmmm....a blood trail from the house to the street would clear up the mystery.
Depends. Perjury, felony vandalism, stole a TV, then maybe i can see they can have gun rights again. Especially after a specified reasonable period of proven clean living.
Armed robbery, rape, murder, felony agg assault or battery with a deadly weapon, etc. I’m thinking they need to maybe just deal with it as another consequence of what they did.
If they are that worried about their gun rights, then it behooves them to not commit violent felonies.
“Uhmmmm....a blood trail from the house to the street would clear up the mystery.”
Yeah, if he was shot point-blank with a shotgun I guarantee there’s a lot of blood *somewhere*.
Couple of tidbits from the local news. First that the police are still trying to determine whether or not the decedent was trying to break into the mobile home; and second, he was found with a single shotgun blast to the chest lying in the middle of the street.
If they can't be trusted with a firearm, kill them or keep them in jail.
Maybe they hosed down the crime scene prior to investigation...would put it past them.
A blood trail would be the easiest thing to ascertain.
. . shall NOT be infringed
Those were some pretty smart guys . . if they'd meant to stick an 'except' in there, they'd have prolly done so.
This is how every home invasion / burglary / robbery story should end.
Somehow, I don’t think he’ll be missed, even if his mother says he was on the verge of “turning his life around.”
Most of the Mexican on Mexican murders are gang-related.
That creates a whole new subset of issues of "who" should be able to own a firearm and becomes totally subjective.
Too many people thought it was okay to deny felons their right, now it has crept to domestic violence, "mental issues", restraining orders and what ever else politicians can convince the people what is "reasonable"....not to mention activist judges.
The 2nd Amendment is the only one that specifically says shall not be infringed, it is either a right, or it is not.
I say if it can be taken away for "reasonable" whims, then it is not a right after all.
Looks like another person taking out the trash for the rest of the community. Really need some civic awards for this.
If the Food Stamp President had an illegal immigrant son, he would be like Paul Ochoa.
I heard that tat is called “aim here”.
My first thought was “Latin Kings”.
The problem is that it is we, the law-abiding, who end up paying the price in the form of draconian gun laws, intended to prevent felons from getting firearms, but instead empower thugs like the BATFE.
If the Founders intended to deny freed felons from keeping and bearing arms, they could easily have included that exception.
My guess is that such a law would have been unthinkable and unenforceable at the time. The Founders certainly would not have supported a federal system for accomplishing prior-restraint in the purchase of a firearm.