- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Carjacking Victim Shoots and Kills Carjacker in Downtown Houston
Posted on 4/30/15 at 11:36 am to Tiger Ryno
Posted on 4/30/15 at 11:36 am to Tiger Ryno
If the carjacker is black and the victim white, expect riots in a short while. Cops won't arrest the victim and then people will claim racism
Posted on 4/30/15 at 11:36 am to UpToPar
Does Texas have a law where you can shot a robber in your house?
If so, this should be similar. They were in his property and he was trying to stop them from taking it.
If so, this should be similar. They were in his property and he was trying to stop them from taking it.
Posted on 4/30/15 at 11:38 am to carhartt
I don't know how the law applies, but I doubt it lets you shoot someone that is inside your house while you are standing outside your house assuming no family or anyone else is in the house.
Posted on 4/30/15 at 11:51 am to HoustonTiger2008
Would this same exact scenario fly in Louisiana? I know Texas is alot more victim friendly than we are.
Posted on 4/30/15 at 11:51 am to UpToPar
You seem to be mistaken. If I'm on the porch outside my home and the perp is in my home trying to shoot me or I feel like he's trying to shoot me, he's free game. I'm not required to run off the porch just to be shot in the back.
Posted on 4/30/15 at 12:03 pm to Tbonepatron
This is bullshite, some one needs to activate the StrongSafety Signal. Racism has reared it's ugly face, and he's the help this World needs.
Posted on 4/30/15 at 12:29 pm to DoUrden
quote:
No charges SHOULD be filed, but it will depend on the Texas Laws. The threat was over when he killed him, some states don't allow the vehicle to be an extension of the home as far as defense of property goes.
It's freaking Texas.
Even if they charge him for doing the community a good deed, a jury won't ever convict him.
Posted on 4/30/15 at 12:30 pm to TigernMS12
quote:
He cannot claim self-defense
May be able to. It'd help if he said he heard them say "yo man lets off this dude" right before.
Posted on 4/30/15 at 12:57 pm to roadGator
That he should have relinquished the vehicle, keep paying the note and gasoline for free for a year
Posted on 4/30/15 at 12:59 pm to TigernMS12
quote:
and I'm not sure if TX extends their Defense of Habitation laws to include vehicles.
i'm pretty sure TX authorizes deadly force for any theft crime, even misdemeanor
Posted on 5/1/15 at 6:53 pm to SlowFlowPro
You can use deadly force to stop/prevent theft at night, only. However, aggravated robbery is on the list and I'm pretty sure 9.42.3 B. Applies in this case.
LINK
quote:
the use of force other than deadly force to protect or recover the land or property would expose the actor or another to a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury.
LINK
This post was edited on 5/1/15 at 6:55 pm
Posted on 5/1/15 at 6:55 pm to soccerfüt
quote:
He was a good boy.
Somewhere a college admissions spot just freed up
Posted on 5/1/15 at 8:25 pm to Tiger Ryno
The shooter shouldn't be in trouble for this shooting unless a lot has changed since 1996. The first guy that legally killed someone in Texas traffic, after they passes their conceal carry laws, shot an unarmed guy and wasn't indicted. Happened right outside my old office at Mockingbird & Stemmons.
Baltimore Sun
They were stopped at the red light with cars in front and behind when he pulled the gun and shot him. I heard the main reason the guy got off was because he couldn't get away from the other unarmed guy. Texas, got to love it.
quote:
Motorist who shot dead unarmed man goes free Jury refuses to indict him in test of new Texas law allowing concealed guns
March 21, 1996|By NEW YORK TIMES NEWS SERVICE
DALLAS - In a test of Texas' new concealed weapons law, a grand jury yesterday refused to indict a man who pulled out a concealed handgun and used it to fatally shoot an unarmed man who had attacked him after a minor traffic accident.
The grand jury determined that Gordon Hale III, a 42-year-old welding supply repairman, had used justifiable force in defending himself Feb. 21 against an attack from Kenny Tavai, a 33-year-old delivery man.
Witnesses said Mr. Tavai approached Mr. Hale's pickup truck at a traffic light after the truck and his car made contact. Mr. Tavai began arguing and then punching Mr. Hale through an open window.
Mr. Hale, who was carrying his weapon legally under the new state law, then reached for his .40-caliber handgun and shot Mr. Tavai once in the chest, investigators and witnesses said. Mr. Tavai died several hours later.
Opponents of the state's new weapons law which allows ordinary citizens to carry a concealed weapon but limits its use against other people to extreme circumstances cited the incident as an example of what could go wrong with the new law.
But Mr. Hale's father said the new measure worked effectively.
"The law acted as it was supposed to," said Gordon Hale Jr. "My son was attacked and he defended himself legally, in a legal manner with a legal weapon."
Mr. Hale says his son was pummeled on the head by Mr. Tavai, and now suffers from blurred vision in one eye because of the beating. Although there is some dispute over whether an individual must fear for his life to use a concealed handgun in self-defense, Mr. Hale said his son's life was in danger.
Elizabeth Tamez, the assistant district attorney who prosecuted the case, could not be reached for comment.
But Nina Butts, a spokeswoman for Texans Against Gun Violence, said the decision sends a dangerous message: "The grand jury says the murder was justifiable, but is it necessary to kill each other over broken side-view mirrors?"
Ms. Butts said Texans do not want a state in which ordinary citizens settle disputes with guns. "This law is not about public safety," she said. "It's about selling and promoting guns."
Baltimore Sun
They were stopped at the red light with cars in front and behind when he pulled the gun and shot him. I heard the main reason the guy got off was because he couldn't get away from the other unarmed guy. Texas, got to love it.
This post was edited on 5/1/15 at 8:32 pm
Posted on 5/1/15 at 10:01 pm to Tbonepatron
The stand your ground and threat neutralized laws frustrate me.
Someone breaks in your house with a weapon. You disarm them and or chase them off with your own weaponry. Just because they run out the confines of your 4 walls and are a few footsteps outside doesnt mean the threat is eliminated.
Im sure they won't come back another day for you. Fortunately I've never been in that spot, but it's shoot to kill IMO, at that time.
Not being e-tough guy, I hope I never shoot my gun at someone
Someone breaks in your house with a weapon. You disarm them and or chase them off with your own weaponry. Just because they run out the confines of your 4 walls and are a few footsteps outside doesnt mean the threat is eliminated.
Im sure they won't come back another day for you. Fortunately I've never been in that spot, but it's shoot to kill IMO, at that time.
Not being e-tough guy, I hope I never shoot my gun at someone
Posted on 5/1/15 at 10:26 pm to Tiger Ryno
Posted on 5/1/15 at 10:30 pm to roadGator
quote:
You seem to be mistaken. If I'm on the porch outside my home and the perp is in my home trying to shoot me or I feel like he's trying to shoot me, he's free game. I'm not required to run off the porch just to be shot in the back.
I'm obviously assuming that you don't have a reasonable fear for your life. You can shoot someone anywhere if you think they are about to shoot you.
Posted on 5/1/15 at 10:40 pm to UpToPar
quote:
It isn't a cut and dry self defense as some are suggesting.
Obviously if you can and do shoot them, they could have shot you. A carjacker almost would be liable to shoot the owner, just to eliminate a witness.
At no point would I consider charges against the car owner here.
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News