Joe Horn and justification
by Owen Courrèges · 12/03/2007 8:10 amAs Bigjolly notes below, Joe Horn has the support of his neighbors. I’d also like to note that he has actual legal support as well. These two provisions of the Texas Criminal Code come to mind:
§ 9.32. DEADLY FORCE IN DEFENSE OF PERSON.
(a) A person is justified in using deadly force against another:
(1) if he would be justified in using force against the other under Section 9.31;
(2) if a reasonable person in the actor’s situation would not have retreated; and
(3) when and to the degree he reasonably believes the deadly force is immediately necessary:
(A) to protect himself against the other’s use or attempted use of unlawful deadly force; or
(B) to prevent the other’s imminent commission of aggravated kidnapping, murder, sexual assault, aggravated sexual assault, robbery, or aggravated robbery.
(b) [NOT RELEVANT HERE]
§ 9.43. PROTECTION OF THIRD PERSON’S PROPERTY.
A person is justified in using force or deadly force against another to protect land or tangible, movable property of a third person if, under the circumstances as he reasonably believes them to be, the actor would be justified under Section 9.41 or 9.42 in using force or deadly force to protect his own land or property and:
(1) the actor reasonably believes the unlawful interference constitutes attempted or consummated theft of or criminal mischief to the tangible, movable property; or
(2) [NOT RELEVANT HERE]
When Mr. Horn went outside, he did so to protect his neighbor’s property from an imminent burglary. Under Texas law, he was permitted to use deadly force in defense of his neighbor’s property the same as if it were his own.
Moreover, Mr. Horn was also allegedly protecting himself, as the men tried to rush him. He was at imminent risk of an assault. Moreover, Mr. Horn is a 61 year old man. The men burglarizing his neighbor were 30 and 38, respectively. A reasonable person in Horn’s situation would therefore not have retreated — they would be placing their own safety in jeopardy.
That’s my take on the matter. Anybody else with legal experience (or not) should feel free to offer their own impression.
UPDATE: When I originally drafted this post, I was not aware that the new “castle doctrine” law had already been in effect (it took effect 9/1/2007). Because of this law, and because Mr. Horn and the assailants were apparently on Mr. Horn’s property when the shots were fired, there was no duty for Mr. Horn to retreat. Moreover, his failure to retreat cannot be raised at trial. He had the right to stand his ground; the only question is whether or not the assailants actually moved on him.
Filed Under Front Page · · · · 
Print This Post
··
Comments
92 Responses to “Joe Horn and justification”Search
Our Sponsors
Poll
Loading ...
1)When did they attempt to use deadly force before the victim approached them? If they waved a crow bar at him only after he left the safety of his own home and approached them , does that still constitue any kind of self defense?
Since there were no witnesses except Mr. Horn and the two burglars (who are dead), we don’t know if Mr. Horn was threatened, verbally or physically, prior to his defending himself. There is obviously, “reasonable doubt” here and that is something that will play into the minds of a jury.
1. Joe Horn first called the police and waited for their arrival. Not the action of someone bent on murder.
2. Joe Horn only acted after it became clear that the BURGLARS were about to leave with stolen property prior to the arrival of the Police. The act of a good man looking out for his neighbor.
3. When confronting the burglars, the burglars chose to come after Mr. Horn rather than surrender. The action of 2 desperate criminals.
4. Mr. Horn, then shot the 2 Burglars rather than become involved in a 2 on 1 hand to hand confrontation. An act of survival.
The threat of deadly force or serious bodily injury will do. He was elderly and could have suffered serious bodily injury or death at the hands of these younger dirt bags.
Now let’s look at the bright side. No expensive trial, no cost to the taxpayers for public defenders, no costly incarceration if the police actually caught them and they were convicted.
Now if the hand wringers would put their money where their mouth is they would pay for the funerals and save the Harris County taxpayer the cost of a paupers funeral.
gadboy,
It doesn’t have to be self-defense — as my post states, you can use deadly force in defense of property. No duty to retreat is present.
One of the actors had a bag in his hand as he approached Mr. Horn. It wound up that the bag contained stolen money. However it could have contained or been used as a weapon.
Thank You Mr. Horn. These two illegal aliens will not commit Burglary of a Habitation again.
Looks as if the law is explicitly clear. A person CAN protect his neighbors property and has the right to defend themselves in the process. Refer to sect. 9.43 above.
What do you think these two fellows were doing in his neighbors home? Baking them a cake? Asking them if they could cut their lawn? Wanting to hang up their Christmas lights? The taking of another life is never a prefered action. However, these two would still be alive today if they had not CHOSEN to commit a CRIME and STEAL someone elses property. Some will try to spin this as Mr.Horn’s fault. Whose fault is it that these two put themselves at risk in the first place?
gadboy,
Yes. They killed themselves thru their initial criminal act. Guess they should have read up on the law in Texas before committing such crimes.
#7 Malcom
“Some will try to spin this”
Quannie 5+5 already started the spin. And got run out of Pasadena.
If I were placed in Mr. Horn’s shoes and confronted by two younger guys, I would shoot, too. However, a prosecutor could reasonably argue that Mr. Horn created his own jeopardy by creating a confrontation that would not have otherwise existed. If he had heeded the police advisory, he would have stayed at home and two lives would not have been lost.
A person who is truly pro-life hates to see life thrown away so needlessly. Thieves they were, but I wonder, what property is truly worth the trade of a life? What makes Christian religious values superior if we use them to excuse the gunning down of two individuals who are guilty of pardonable sins? “An eye for an eye” means the punishment is never more severe than the crime.
Sure, I would shoot to protect my home or land, but what else? A car? A bicycle? An iPod? An ink pen? Where do you draw the line before your noble courage becomes materialistically minded murder?
gadboy
Liberals, always wanting to retreat…. let terrorists and criminals have the field. geez.
Ghost Rider,
My Christian values tell me to obey the law. The law in Texas as stated above (in section 9.43 of the Texas Penal Code) allows me, as a citizen, to defend the property of my neighbors. I have done the exact same thing as Mr Horn. I used a Bushmaster AR-15 to prevent a theft from my neighbor’s property. You let your values dictate what you do, I’ll do what mine tell me to do, just like Mr Horn! I’ll follow the law. The crooks took their chances and paid the price. The wages of sin are death, if you’re a crook, give yourself an out before the bill comes due….
Luckily Texas still has some people with common sense and are willing to defend their neighborhoods.
Someone last night asked a good question: If the perps had been caught by LEOs and convicted of the crime would they have received the death penalty?
Ghost Rider,
Using deadly force in protection of property isn’t meant as “punishment;” it is meant to stop the criminal act. If Mr. Horn had stayed at home, his neighbor’s property would have been stolen. Given that Mr. Horn also suspected his neighbor was in danger, as he told the 911 operator, there was also an apparent risk to the neighbor’s own safety.
Finally, Mr. Horn gave the thieves an opportunity to surrender. Instead, they apparently tried to rush him, placing Mr. Horn’s safety at risk.
Mr. Horn did the right thing. He went out to stop a crime. The men moved on him. They were shot. The people most in control here were the burglars, not Mr. Horn. Accordingly, my response to your question would be: What makes Christian religious values superior if we use them to place a man in jail for protecting his neighbor, his neighbor’s property, and his own life?
12 hamous
No, no death penalty, but citizens do not have the resources to detain crooks caught in the commission of an act other than deadly force.
And it is once heck of a deterrent.
I met a guy that was building a nice house in a bad neighborhood. His house got broken into quite a few times, AC units, copper wire, appliances, sheet rock all stolen while under construction. He would spend the night in the house to keep burglars out. He shot THREE people on two different occasions, and his father shot one too! I think they bagged every crook in the area, after this, burglaries dropped off for many years!!!
Ghost Rider #10 — It is these two thugs that took their own life when they broke into the house. Mr Horn did what is within the law. You can do the “eye for an eye” thing and let them get away and continue to rob others or you can do what Mr Horn did and say everyone alot of trouble. I prefer the “Horn Method” myself. Good for him.
hamous,
That’s not a good question.
The answer is no.
That answer isn’t enlightening because the law has always permitted deadly force to stop crimes not punishible by death. A woman about to be raped doesn’t have to think to herself “gee, I’d better not use deadly force to stop this from happening, because the death penalty doesn’t apply to aggravated rape.”
hamous,
The answer changes, of course, if you assume that Mr. Horn would have been murdered if he hadn’t fired. Even if that weren’t the case, though, we do allow people to use deadly force in defense of property. The law doesn’t demand equivalence in terms of the force being used to stop a crime and the crime itself.
The Second Amendment of the Constitution enumerates the right of all citizens to keep and bear arms. The laws of the State of Texas codify the circumstances under which that right may be invoked to utilize deadly force. It does not compel a citizen to own a firearm or to use a firearm in self defense. Ghost Rider has a legitimate right to decline to exercise that right. Whether we agree with him or not, it is his choice.
Faster, I’m conflicted about this. It appears Mr. Horn’s actions were within the law. But there are so many things that could have gone wrong (see my comment #22 in the other thread). He admittedly didn’t know the neighbors. How could he have been sure that they weren’t the owners? According to all reports crime is not rampant in this neighborhood. There was no “siege” mentality. Law enforcement personnel were pleading with him not to go outside. Had the criminals had guns he could be the dead one now. I don’t think I’d want my neighbors risking their lives for my “stuff”.
Texans critical of Mr. Horns actions would do well to remember the murder of the Constable up in Garrison a few years back. He was rushed and murdered with his own sidearm by two drug runners. The same thing happened to an Officer down in South Texas not long ago during a routine traffic stop. The perp ran and after being cornered rushed the officer unarmed. The Officer after commanding him to halt in English and Spanish, shot and killed him. Despite efforts by the Austin media and activists, the Officer was cleared of any wrong doing. The Texas Ranger who investigated the shooting stated that many criminals will rely on the hesitation of an LEO or home owner to use their weapon as a means to take it away and kill them with it.
Owen, if Mr. Horn had listened to the Law Enforcement officials he would never have been in any danger. Like I said, I’m not arguing the legality of his actions. I’m just not sure it was the right thing to do in this case.
If they were shot in the front - my opinion would be horn should get off -
If they were shot in the back - more than 15 to 20 feet away - got to hear alot of evidence.
Owen
Wasn’ there a landmark case in Dallas and I think the DA was the guy who ran against Dewhurst on the dream team of 2002 (not sure about that)
I man was sitting in his pickup truck at the mall when he witnessed an ex-husband gun down his ex-wife - the pickup truck guy had a weapon pursued and killed the ex-husband
Dallas put him on trial - found innocent or thrown out
does anyone remember this case?
If this is true - wow!
Lambright’s description is partly at odds with the 911 call in which a dispatcher urges Horn to stay inside his house and not risk lives.
“Don’t go outside the house,” the 911 operator pleaded. “You’re gonna get youself shot if you go outside that house with a gun. I don’t care what you think.”
“You wanna make a bet?” Horn answered. “I’m gonna kill ‘em.”
After the shooting, he redialed 911.
“I had no choice,” he said, his voice shaking. “They came in the front yard with me, man. I had no choice. Get somebody over here quick.”
hamous,
Fair enough. I still have to disagree, though — I think we should encourage people to look out for their neighbors and protect their property. Police response times are often very poor in these situations, and oftentimes citizens themselves need to step up to keep thieves away.
If Joe Horn had of listened to Law Enforcement officials the BURGLARS would have gotten away with the stuff they were stealing. The BUGLARS would still be on the streets to STEAL from others.
What happens next time when the home owner is home and the BURGLARS kill them?
Assuming we could catch the bad guys we could then hold a murder trial.
If this happened more often, crime would happen less often. We can split hairs, but what he did was right. He took a risk to defend his neighbor’s property. He risked his life for a neighbor, and it was admirable. The crooks risked their lives to burglarize the neighbor. It’s pretty easy to see who the good guy is here. Police do not prevent crime unlike many believe. They respond to crime AFTER it has been committed and investigate the crime. Real crime fighting is done by citizens… armed citizens.
Each burglar caught (or better shot) is responsible for hundreds of other crimes!
Bannable,
That is damning; it makes it clear Mr. Horn’s blood was up, and suggests he intended to kill the men either way. However, it doesn’t change the basic facts; you can be justified in shooting somebody to keep them from getting away with the proceeds of a burglary. Moreover, if the men were in fact shot on Mr. Horn’s property, that definitely weighs in favor of his self-defense claim.
I don’t know how many of you have ever been burglarized, I have, in fact I was home at the time asleep when it happened. I only knew it as the guy bumped the side of the broken window as he exited. The guy was never caught.
I never felt safe in that place again. That S.O.B. took more than some “stuff”, he took my peace of mind, he took the security of my home.
Crack heads broke in to my Dad in laws shop and stole thousands of dollars in carpentry and electrical tools, tools that he needed for his business, took him weeks to get them replaced, all the while getting behind in his contracted work and losing new jobs to others. They were never caught.
Punks tore out the copper plumbing of my nephew and his new brides soon to be completed home.
They were never caught.
Sorry front or in the back, a large or small bag of loot. they got what they deserved.
Bannable
If the BURGLARS had not been out stealing they would be alive today.
#10 Ghost Rider, I respectfully disagree. I had a good friend tell me, several years ago, that if someone broke into his house he’d barricade himself in his bedroom with his gun and phone and only shoot if they broke the door down. After all, he said, “Is my TV/stereo worth taking someone’s life?” I said that if anyone broke into my house, knowing that I was home, he’d have to be very desperate and most likely armed; at that point, I’d say that the crook had decided how much his life was worth, not me. I’d want him out of my house as fast as I could get that accomplished, if it involved killing the Ba$tard, so be it.
BTW; My friend did a 180 when I mentioned this a few years later.
#30 sanjuro, AMEN!!
Owen,
I am not a legal expert, but I thought the defense of a neighbor’s property was valid only if one was “asked” by the neighbor to do that task.
Second, I may be incorrect but I thought there was a difference between protecting one’s property in the daytime versus the nightime.
At night…one can shoot a thief whether the individual feels threatened or not.
This provision does not apply during the daytime. One must feel threatened and cannot retreat before using deadly force.
Sadly, Mr. Horn’s comments to the 911 Operator will come back to haunt him in court. I suspect he will be indicted but we escape conviction in the long run because of hung juries. He may not be so lucky in Civil Court. In any case he might as well sign over his Social Security check to the lawyers.
Simple
Simple Simon,
You see, this is why you *really* need to read the post. I quoted the relevant portions of the statutes. You’ll note that the statute regarding use of force to protect the property of a third person allows the use of deadly force if “the actor reasonably believes the unlawful interference constitutes attempted or consummated theft of or criminal mischief to the tangible, movable property.”
I think there was with respect to old common law burglary, but not under the current Texas Criminal code.
You’re right about all of that, which is a shame.
sanjuro - I have been burglarized a couple of times and you’re right it does steal your peace of mind for a long time to come. A couple of years ago thieves broke into my (detached) garage and stole about $1500 worth of tools while I was asleep. Had I woke up they would have been looking down the barrel of a gun and may have ended up dead. I still wake up and look out the window whenever I hear a noise outside. But I still would not want my neighbor to accidentally shoot me or a family member or to put his own life in danger for a lawnmower and some wrenches.
Simple #34
I believe you are incorrect. Recent changes to law will protect him from civil suit if this gets no-billed.
Owen,
Wasn’t Mr Horn covered by the old statutes at the time of the shooting? I knew the statues were changed, but were not due to change until December 31, 2007. Again…I am not a lawyer.
As a side note….Facts not in evidence…I have seen the business end of a shotgun once. I am somewhat incredulous that any sane person would charge an anxious person holding a racked shotgun.
Personally, I am holding my judgement until I see the crime scene data post indictment. I would feel better if I know if the bad guys had wounds in the front.
Simple
#37 LoCo
Really ? I’d like to know where that is in the new code revisions. It is pretty amazing if it is correct.
Simple:
I think the legislature recently did away with the differnce day time vs. night time.
Simple the new “castle doctrine” laws went into effect on Sept. 1, I believe.
Simple Simon,
I’m not applying new law; these laws have been in place since 1974.
I’ll check later to see how the new revisions change this, if at all. I thought all it did was eliminate the duty to retreat entirely and add protections against civil suits. My analysis presumes that none of that applies here.
As a child, our garage was being burglarized. Dad grabbed the .22 which normally just made enough noise to scare them off (there had been many attempted burglaries.) Not this time. He put it down when the guy refused to stop and ran out with a substantial handgun (sorry, don’t remember the size, but it sure was loud.) 1 round into the compressor they were trying to steal and 3 rounds into the front end of the getaway car. He has always been a good shot and a firm believer in defending his property, so I have to believe he chose not to shoot the perp. I don’t know if I would have that kind of self control. BTW, the cops came by 3 days later to take a statement. He had called them as the burglar was attempting to cut the lock. Not even multiple gunshots raised an eyebrow on the block
I think the best result is that burglars will now have to think about breaking into someone else’s property, for fear of being confronted and shot. This is the same thing with “gun control”, if the crook (who doesn’t care about the law) knows that an honest citizen would not be carrying a concealed weapon if it was illegal, then he would feel free to rob at will. Not knowing if that citizen is possibly armed brings doubt and hopefully second thoughts about committing a crime.
Hamous, I respect your choice of action if that’s how you want to approach it. God knows I would defend my home but as to how far I would go I really can’t say. Would past events effect my decision? you bet. It all depends on the situation.
But I strongly believe lawbreakers are betting on just such hesitation on the part of homeowners and to some extent our law enforcement community.(see #20)
It’s like some kind of endless game: crooks break in, Crooks get away, homeowner calls Police, Police take report, Crooks break in yada yada.
(This is in no way a slight on the police by the way. They can’t be everywhere, nor should they be unless we want a police state.))
But now individuals like Mr. Horn and others are throwing a monkey wrench into the works, they’ve had enough and are willing to use deadly force to keep their property and that of their neighbors.
Dave D had it right in #32 The CROOKS decided on how much their life was worth when they went into that line of business, (not only that, they decided also on just what YOUR life is worth when they broke in.) They were betting that they wouldn’t get shot for a piece of property and they were wrong.
Simple Simon,
Ok. I checked the new law and added an update to the post accordingly. The only thing this changes is that, with respect to the self-defense claim, Mr. Horn was not required to retreat and his failure to do so cannot be mentioned at trial.
For years - no, for DECADES - the librals have been feeding us the propaganda “Don’t approch the (fill in the blank). Don’t fight back. Stand like a sheep, and let the robbing/murdering scum do to you what they will.”
Do you think the criminals have got the message?
It is a good bet that this is not the first time these 2 thugs have stolen someone else’s property.
It is also a good bet that this would have not been the last time they stole some one else’s property had they got away.
Lastly it is a better than even bet that if confronted they would not hesitate to eliminate anyone standing between them and continuing their chosen career.
I think it is just good fortune that it is the burglars and not a home owner that is dead.
#24 - The 911 dispatcher’s orders carry zero weight. They can yell and threaten all they want but they do not have the authority to make anyone do anything. Joe Horn had every legal right to go outside onto his property to defend it regardless of what the dispatcher said to him.
If the facts surrounding this case are accurate, then I believe there are probably not twelve rational people in the state of Texas who would vote to convict this guy. I’ll be surprised if he isn’t no-billed.
Yep Maltboy! Mr. Horn can be thankful those 12 rational people will be from Texas and NOT from somewhere in the northeast part of our nation.
However, I did hear a female on the west side of Houston comment that it was “A typical reaction for THAT part of town.” sniff.
Probably disappointed it didn’t take place in a trailer park.
Dov: re UR #9 Just what if the shoes were on the other feet?
Say just for the sake of saying….Mr. Horn, trying to protect his neighbors property from two criminals, meets his demise at the hands/crowbars/whatever of the two burglars. What do you think the outcry would be then? Would Quannel X be protesting his murder? I think not. Would he be crying racism? I think not. Would he be calling for the capture and punishment of the two thugs/criminals? I think not. Would it show that he is a hyprocrit of the highest order? You betcha. Of course, any rationally thinking, sane human being with a lick of common sense would have already come to that conclusion a long time ago.
/It was great to hear that motorcycles are louder than a bull horn.
I don’t want Mr. Horn jailed either, but the bottom line is with all your Christian “pro-life” values, you are all eager to see people dead over a simple theft. That’s what you keep saying, over and over again, like you wish you could have pulled the trigger yourselves. Are you really so bloodthirsty? Did Jesus truly value material goods over life? I must have missed that Scripture. Tell me again, would an ink pen be worth killing over? Other than abortions, where would you draw the line?
No offense but atheists preaching about Jesus always rings hollow ; - )
Ghost Rider,
Why are you trying to make this about your view of “Christian values”? This seems to be a recurring theme for you.
Ghost Rider, I for one am against killing. That being said, I am also in favor of protecting myself and others. While I would hesitate to ever use the excuse that “He just needed a little killing,” I also know that sometimes, citizens are required to stand up and protect themselves from the lawless. I will have no problem standing before the Judgment Seat if I ever have to pull the trigger to defend myself.
There is a reason the punishment for stealing is not the death penalty. It would be very interested to discover how many of those chanting have a family member that has stolen something–would they want them killed?
By the way the “USA” chant makes zero sense. Chanting the name of the country we all live in doesn’t change the facts.
Ghost Rider
It will be the criminals action that decide. Break into my house while I am there expect to confronted. Surrender and receive a trial.
Threaten me during the confrontation or fail to follow the order to surrender and wait for the authorities to arrive; 2 to the chest 1 to the head, I want them alive but I will take them …
#57
Yes, I do, and no I did not want him shot. On the other hand when stealing he took a risk and when confronted I would rather the innocent always come out on the winning end no matter who the perp is.
theamericanway,
You are missing the same point that many others here are. The two thieves were not killed for the “stuff” they stole.
They were killed because an American citizen chose to defend a way of life that has long been cherished in this country. Dare I say “the American way”?
An American citizen saw a wrong being committed. He tried to stop the wrong. The thieves chose to ignore his warnings.
They were killed because of the choices they made. Not for the “stuff” they stole.
http://www.blogsofwar.com/ has the video posting of the media whore and race baiter Quannelll the tenth trying to make a statement in front of the house.. Hilarity..
Good riddance to these burglarizing pond scum.. I’d suggest a different career if you don’t want your head taken off..
HAL either does not like my use of colourful language, or my URLs..
Zippy, its the “wh” followed by “ore” that caught you.
ah.. sorry..
USA USA USA!
These two crooks weren’t youngsters stealing Snicker bars at the corner store, they were both in their 30s, who broke into a private home to rob. What we’ll probably never know is did these two men know for sure that the house was empty and what was their plans had they been confronted inside the home? A person mean enough to break into a house to steal is a person mean enough to kill or hurt someone to get away. Who’s to say their next break in wouldn’t have ended in tragedy for the home owner?
Ghost Rider
Simple theft? Not quite. They broke and entered a person’s home to steal. Not the same as stealing a pen off your desk. You sound a lot like wobblehead.
You would defend the burglar over the homeowner? Trying to equate this with abortion? Man, must get confusing trying to keep all that “logic” straight.
Texas law allows us to protect ourselves, ’nuff said. Burglary is a hazardous business, burglars get shot. Some have said being a cop or soldier is dangerous and they know what they are getting into when they do it, well…. same goes for burglars. Only the burglars are the BAD GUYS. There is a line between doing wrong and doing right. Good and Evil. Equating an abortion and shooting a burglar is just silly. Babies good, burglars evil.
amway
If one of my family members got shot burglarizing a home, so be it! Burglary is obviously a hazardous profession.
Excessive force or not, the 2 crooks made a choice. They chose poorly. Now the New Black Panthers want to confront Joe Horn. Now they have made a bad choice. This all started with a “Thug” mentality. Much Kudos to Mr. Horn for doing what most of us only hope we could do if we were in the same situation. Thank You Mr. Horn.
Ghost Rider; Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil; for you are with me; thy Rod and Saff, they comfort me. Psalm 23, 4
AS far as Christian beliefs and self defense…
“The Bible couldn’t be clearer on the right – even the duty – we have as believers to self-defense.”
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=25442
Exodus 22:2
“If a thief is caught breaking in and is struck so that he dies, the defender is not guilty of bloodshed”
You cannot worry about what ifs. What if something had gone wrong. It didn’t. Maybe it’s a miracle or a blessing, but it didn’t. All turned out for the good. Two bad guys are dead, who had priors and the odds say would end up killing someone some day. We don’t have to pay for incarcerating the bad guys or their lawyers, or their trial.
You better worry about the what ifs now so you don’t have to think about them if you ever find yourself in a similar situation.
Two things Hamous, my neighbors across the street have a key to both my doors. Second, if I should find myself climbing in my window in the wee hours, I have a mouth and can yell, ” hey it’s me, I locked myself out” And I can repeat the yell as needed until I find my hiney safe inside.
#71 hamous
Precisely the reason I have tried to encourage this public discussion. I sincerely want everyone to seriously consider all the “what ifs” now. What if I were in Joe Horn’s situation ? What if the situation were slightly different ? Conditions different ? What if I thought the perps were no more than 15 years old ? If I yell freeze and they don’t stop, am I going to shoot someone in the back ?
I could go on.
I’d really like to know if he shot them in the front, or back. He warned them to stop. I’m not sure age has a lot to do with it. A burglar is in a dangerous job….. Teenage boys kill just as adults do.
The what if…. what if one of them pulled a gun and shot Mr. Horn, killed him. Would that stop people from trying to defend themselves and others? What if the despatcher had said, Mr. Horn, the police are a minute from your house. Just hang on. What if the dispatcher had kept Mr. Horn updated on how many police were coming etc. Of this I am certain, if Mr. Horn had died at the hands of one of those thugs. Quanell fool wouldn’t have made a peep.
Again, you guys can twist yourselves into salty pretzel knots but the fact is:
Mr. Horn was right about the two thieves.
As Phil_M says in the other thread, I might not go to the local pub or church with my neighbors. But I have a cursory knowledge of who they are.
Mr. Horn knew that the two guys kicking down the door of his neighbors home were not his neighbors.
Mr. Horn did not kill two innocent men.
After that great piece, I am leaning towards casting my vote for BigJ…….. ( sideways glance at Texpat)
What if the burglars decided not to burgle that day? Hmmmm….
AW: Go for Squawk! We know that he will follow through on the deal. Rumor has it that BJ is in the witness relocation program and his photo’s shouldn’t be published. Then again, it’s JUST a rumor.
ST…… I posted on the blog with the contestant pictures, the problem with voting for Squawk.
Sean Taylor was killed by burglars. It wasn’t these two guys, though, thanks to Joe Horn.
Folks…………when ya git through talkin…..very few of us I daresay truly know how we’d each react in such a situation - this one apparently turned out well for Joe’s neighbor and really crappy for those 2 would-be thieves, and we’ll see how it turns out for Joe Horn.
But no matter WHAT transpires it will be the result of choices made - just like the choice to break and enter which resulted in death.
Joe we saLUTE you sir!
Exactly correct. Each of us is responsible for our actions. Those two guys would be alive today if it weren’t for the choices that they made. Joe Horn didn’t drive anywhere to go huntin’ him some po’ folks to shoot.
Great point Wino!!
Better question:
If it was an LEO instead of a civilian, he had a shotgun pointed at them, and they advanced upon him, would he have shot them?
And if so, would we ven be having this discussion now?
bigjolly,
Easily the quote of the day.
Knotjammin2 Says:
December 3rd, 2007 at 3:18 pm
Excessive force or not, the 2 crooks made a choice. They chose poorly. Now the New Black Panthers want to confront Joe Horn. Now they have made a bad choice. This all started with a “Thug” mentality. Much Kudos to Mr. Horn for doing what most of us only hope we could do if we were in the same situation. Thank You Mr. Horn.
malcolm Says:
December 3rd, 2007 at 1:49 pm
Scroll up and look around. The shoes are on the right feet. The criminals are dead. The victim is alive. Joe did the right thing and we supporters stand behind him.
Dov: Re-read my post. I am in agreement with you. I was merely trying to point out the hypocracy of Quannel what ever his letter is…..
The two criminals commited sucide that day on Mr. Horns street.
I predict that Q#10 will get more of the same.
Q#10 and his boys and nothing more than over infated punk thugs.
It’s a good thing for Pasadena and the neighborhood that Q#10 and his thugs didn’t bring their guns.
Someone broke into my ex-husband’s house when no one was home. My son had an asthma attack at school that morning and was with me and since I was home from work I picked his brother up from school too that day. That’s the only thing that kept them from walking in on that crime in progress. And while the perp’s intention was to rob an empty house, we have no idea how he would have reacted to being interrupted. It was over a year ago and my kids still have trouble sleeping at night. It turns out that when they finally caught the guy, he had burglarized over 30 homes. I wish that one of those homeowners had a neighbor like Hood.
I hate when people use race to look at a situation because i am Black and i hate when everything turns out to be race related.The reality is the burglar deserved what they got, probably been doing it for years. Although Horn must be angry but you never know he might have been the next victim. it’as a different scenario if the men was just walking and he shot them but they were stealing. i dont care what color you are if u are caught doing the wrong thing and you mess with the wrong guy you deserve it that’s just what you get for stealing people’s property that they have worked for all their lives.