911 Tape: Man Kills Two Burglars

First Horn said "MOVE [an] you're DEAD".

Horn knew the law well enough to know he was within his rights to protect his neighborhood. He spoke of that on the phone also.

Doesnt matter what I think police would have done. I dont flee from police. I wouldnt take the chance nor do I want to pay the penalty for fleeing a police officer.

Try to twist it any way you want, but Horn did NOT shoot his neighbor. Horn had met his neighbor and there was no doubt (in Horns assessment and in reality) these people were not members of the neighborhood. Thats the fact.

You go and shoot the wrong person, in the wrong circumstance, you can be charged with a crime. That part of the reality too.

Justice can be a balancing act. In this particular case, two criminals made several decisions that resulted in their absence from society.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

So lets wonder a bit about your morality.

So if Horn had shot them in the face, you'd feel better about it?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I just got to say that looking over and over again this thread and at those magnificent good-natured faces...well I feel deeply happy that I never met either the burglars or the man who shot them...deeply happy.

 

bells that castle law in and of itself scares the shit out of me. I know i could well be going into someones house without there direct permission (or even knowlage) and the thought of some nutcase shoting first and asking questions latter scares me. It does happen anyway but at least here people know that the right to self defence ONLY aplies to direct threat to PEOPLE which does lower the chances somewhat. Still i have herd stories of ambos shot by vietnarm vets who rolled on there call direct buttons in there sleep and didnt wake up to answer dispatch.

I also have to wonder if you could get away with shooting a cop under that legislation. Cop goes to exicute a warrent on a drug dealers house, walks through the front door and gets shot by either the dealer or the 12 guage rigged up to shot the first person through the front door. Now he could well argue that he didnt KNOW they were cops and as such had the right to defend his property.

That being said this case is even WORSE than that (if thats possable) they were LEAVING, running away infact. It sickens me to think that the DPP couldnt even get this case to TRIAL let alone get a conviction on it. leaving aside this case in paticular what is this going to inspire?

Is the next person going to be someone like us breaking into there OWN house, is it going to be a race crime descised as this where a black person who has the AUDACITY to buy in a ritch white area gets shot because "ops sorry officer, i thought he was breaking in"

 

I think *I* would. I can see letting Horn walk if he felt his life was in danger (even if he contributed to that by going outside to confront the criminals). As the story stands, it still seems that he might have been fearing for his life notwithstanding that he shot them in the back...but some part of me has to wonder at that.

If he thought he was in danger, then I'm glad he's a free man. If he thought, "they're getting away!" then he should spend some time in prison. The death penalty has its place, but for a single judge, jury and executioner to exact vigilante justice on them for a non-capital offense send a bad signal.

Had they been shot in the face, my doubts about the self-defense aspects would be somewhat allayed relative to their having been shot in the back.

 

While tragedies do happen (like the Hattori incident), the general point of castle law is that a homeowner shouldn't be second guessed about decisions made in a difficult situation. I can see the merit behind that. I do prefer the duty to retreat, but mostly because it seems like common sense that if I and my family can escape without risk, that we do so, and because I o not imagine people ever would go out of their way to second guess me if I happened to feel there was a risk.

I have always imagined that some (perhaps "much") of the support for Castle Doctrine comes from people who believe, whether they admit it openly or not, that killing in defense of property is justified (as many do).

 

see thats just the point, there IS no clarity issue in the homicide act (actually i think its the crimes act but you get the idea). The right to defend the life of someone else or the right to defend YOURSELF are written VERY plainly into law. The only clarity issue is wether you have a right to defend pets (bells can probably answer that), ie if someone is torchering say a dog do you have the right to take all nessary steps to protect that dog or any other pet or animal for that matter.

You DONT however have a right to kill your partner because he\she is threatning to break your TV, you DONT have the right to kill even JW because they come onto your property and you CERTAINLY dont have a right to kill emergency service workers because they have broken into your house.

Put it this way, how would the case have gone if one of those 2 was an under cover cop because cops WILL paticipate in crimes against property?

 

On the other side, though, different states have different rules. In New York, I have no doubt Horn would have had a harder time, since John White was convicted, even though his claim of feeling threatened seems more plausible:

John White shooting

 

see that one seems to be justified so why was he convicted?

 

i really dont get the US, it makes apsolutly no sence to me. you have the cop beating of a black man (cant think of the name of the guy, really famous) where the cops get off, you have deaths in custody ON VIDEO TAPE and the cops a couple of months if convicted, you have incidents like the horn case and the nut doesnt even get tried and then you have a clear cut (going by your atical) case of self defence and the guy gets convicted.

What is it with the US????????

 

Actually no, get rid of legal guns and accidental shooting will probably stay just the same. Criminals are damn clumsy sometimes.

 

Oh yeah, real smart. Did you know that the human head can be used as an effective bludgeoning weapon. Any length of string, wire or cloth can as well.

 

Actually in the good ole USA Police actually haven't a single power or privilaige that the average law abiding citizen doesn't have. You can arrest and ticket lawbreakers if you find them and fill out the paperwork. Hell, I once told a cop he had to fix-it ticket himself for his busted taillight. He thanked me for the warning and filled out the ticket and had me sign it. Police are just the professional version of what we all should be doing, keeping each other safe.

Well, he obviously felt threatened as well. And damn it maybe that property was essential to his neighbor's profession, comfort, or even life. The Grand Jury said he was justified, so he is. End of story.

Well most people have a functioning braincell or two and wait untill they know what the hell is going on. I don't know about you, but I can tell when someone is beating the hell out of a woman. I don't know about you but i tend to tell someone to dial 911 while I reducate the ruffian a bit. Never had a cop cite me for stopping the beating, even when I busted the one guys jaw. In fact the officers once bought my next round!

 

The Rodney King case. The first trial was a travesty of justice, and was thrown out. The second time it was done properly and they were all convicted and LA had to pay Mr. King a handsome sum. .

 

even Innocence Project has a scary flip side, the fact that there are so many people convicted in the US that a system like this is NESSARY and that the court's apeals proccess cant handle it is a scary thought

 

Bells:

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0711/19/acd.01.html

"Move, you're dead."

Horn saw two criminals committing a felony and entering his property. He is well within his rights to place them under citizen's arrest, and shoot them if they don't comply (which they clearly didn't, as they attempted to break and run). This is confirmed by the grand jury clearing him.

The lesson here? Don't rob people in Texas. But feel free to do so in Australia, because Australians are unarmed and don't have the right to defend their property, or that of their neighbour.

 

MH, you have a right to defend YOURSELF you dont have the right to shoot someone in the back.

As i said what would have happened if it was an under cover cop? that guy would be on death row thats what

 

Asguard:

Well, in Texas apparently you do have the right to shoot someone in the back, in certain circumstances.

But I think what you're actually trying to say is that people 'shouldn't' have the right to shoot someone in the back. I disagree. Such a thing needs to be evaluated on a case by case basis.

Why would an undercover cop be climbing out the window along with another person, with a bag of swag over his shoulder? Why would an undercover cop run from a citizen he tells him to 'freeze', instead of showing his badge?

Asguard, I'll say this. If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, it's a duck. From everything that's been reported, those two men were behaving like sneak thieves, so it was more than reasonable for Horn to assume that they were indeed thieves, and place them under arrest.

 

You guys missed all the lol in the news when his neighborhood got protested by a hate group known as the New Black Panther Party who claimed that the only reason he shot the two criminal aliens was because they were black...