[jsalcedo]

http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/5308809.htm
Miramar shooter wants to visit teen

BY WANDA J. DeMARZO
wdemarzo@herald.com

Alejandro Avila, the man who shot a 13-year-old in the head with a shotgun as the boy tried to steal Avila's car, said Monday he is ''overcome with sorrow,''and wants to pay the hospitalized youth a visit.The teen, Anthony Campbell, remains in a coma at Memorial Regional Hospital in Hollywood.

''Anthony's family and my family have been suffering since that night,'' said Avila, 27, of Miramar. ``I had no idea who was in the car when I shot.'' Avila, flanked by two attorneys, said he's praying for Campbell and regrets hisactions at his home the night of Feb. 22.

''Hindsight is perfect,'' said his attorney Sam Burstyn. ``It was a reaction based on fear. The car windows were tinted, and the car was coming right at him.'' Tina Jones, the teen's mother, disputes Avila's account and wants nothing to do with him.

''I have nothing to say to that man,'' she said angrily. ``I don't ever want topeak to him or see him, except in a courtroom. He deliberately shot my son, while Anthony was trying to get away.''

The incident began at 8:40 p.m. Feb. 22, in the 6600 block of Coconut Drive. Avila said he looked out at his driveway and
saw glowing brake lights on his 1993 gold Saturn.

The uninsured car had been stolen six days earlier. In that case, home and quickly recovered it, but not before the unidentified driver bailed out. This time, Avila yelled to his girlfriend to call police, grabbed a 12-gauge shotgun and ran outside to confront the thief.

He told detectives he stood at the end of his driveway and yelled at the driver to stop. He said the driver accelerated,
racing toward him.

He jumped backward and fired several shots. It ''all happened so quick,'' said Avila, who works in customer service at an
auto parts store.

The shotgun blasts hit the front passenger window and the left side of the back window, witnesses said.

Dozens of pellets entered Campbell's head. Several still are lodged in his brain, his mother said.
''My first action was to protect myself,'' Avila said. ``I didn't know who was in that car, it could have been four armed
men for all I knew.''

The Jones family challenges Avila's story.

''I believe that Anthony was the one in danger, not that man,'' said Campbell's aunt, Doris Jones of Orlando, who has
been visiting the family. ``I understand his anger. His car had been stolen just a week before, but why didn't he just
stay inside his home and call police?''

Avila would not say why he ran outside to confront the car thief, only that he feared for his life and that of his girlfriend.

At Monday's press conference, Burstyn, Avila's attorney, answered that his client ``was in fear of what might happen.''
''We are not going to get into that at this time,'' Burstyn said.

Miramar police are continuing to investigate, and will turn over their findings to the state attorney's office, spokesman Bill
Robertson said.

The state attorney's office will determine if charges are warranted.

Campbell's family said the Perry Middle School seventh-grader was going through adolescent problems, ''acting out'' and
hanging out with older neighborhood kids who provided a negative influence.ill, Tina Jones said, Avila was not justified in shooting her son in the back of the head.

''I would never, ever paint a picture that showed Anthony as a perfect kid,'' Doris Jones said.
``He did something very wrong, but what price should he pay for his actions? I pray they never have to walk in our
shoes.''

[Ian]

Darwin in action. Harsh, but that's how life is. When you steal a car and then act like you're going to run down its owner, you should expect to be in serious danger. If you're too young to realize this, then too bad. Maybe you should have listened to your parents more (and maybe the parents could have been a bit more diligent at getting this point across).

[Pendragon]

I understand his anger. His car had been stolen just a week before, but why didn't he just stay inside his home and call police?

I understand the mothers anger, why didn't her little angel just stay inside his home and call for a pizza?


He did something very wrong, but what price should he pay for his actions?

As if crime should be a safe occupation for young people with a clean, safe, predictable outcome...

[Standing Wolf]

He did something very wrong, but what price should he pay for his actions?

The price he paid, obviously. Kids with incompetent parents often fail to learn the fundamentals, and suffer terrible consequences.

[Destructo6]

Sounds like a clean shooting to me. The "teen" wasn't just trying to get away, he was trying to run down Avilla and, thereby, get away.

[JohnBT]

He took a gun outside to protect property. In this state he'd be in deep, deep trouble. Stay tuned and see how it turns out.

Anyone up for a friendly wager on 5 to 10 versus 10 to 15 - or even more?

John

[BigJake_old]

call me a cold hearted something or another, but screw the kid and his mother, he was old enough to know that was illegal, and did it anyway, assaulting the owner in the process, if anything, the mother should be picking up his insurance tab for fixing the car too, since it obviously wasn't the kids fault :cuss: :cuss: :cuss: :fire: :fire: :fire:

[DeltaElite]

Boo freakin hoo.
Adopt a life of crime and it may be a short life.

[JimP]

I think the dude ought to get the medical records and do an AAR on why the little rat-bast&*$ lived. Sounds like he should have been using slugs. At least go to the hospital and finish the job....:D

[synoptic]

A similar scenario happened in Houston a couple months back... Fireman walked outside to fine 4 or 5 teenagers stealing his van. He fired through the windshield and either killed or badly wounded teh kid driving. Parents came on the news the next day talking about how their son shouldn't have been shot, he was a good kid, blah blah blah. And as for the fireman, no charges against him.

[El Tejon]

JohnBT, it depends. Wait and see.

Based on the responses so far, I would bet that the tilecrawler for Avila is trying to find out how he can get a jury pool from THR.

[JohnBT]

I'm not one to run to the mods, so I'll say my piece here in public. And what goes on here is completely open to the public.

JimP - Are you really advocating that the man in question go to the hospital and MURDER someone? That's what you said...

"At least go to the hospital and finish the job...."

Is this really what The High Road is all about? Is it?

John

[MrAcheson]

He'll probably get off in the criminal suit, but he's going to get slaughtered in any civil suit.

Using lethal force to protect property is illegal in most states . Texas is one of the only exceptions and people there have gone to jail for it as well.

JimP, you are really out of line. Go shoot the kid in the hospital in cold blood... *shudder*

[COHIBA]

"why didnt he just..."
1) bend over and take it up the kiester
2) leave the windows down and the keys in the ignition
3) give all of his money away to this punk

[dave]

Why are we so angry and/or suprised at the mother's reaction? This is mostly OUR fault. We have been sending the message for years now, steal a car or rob someone and all the victims are supposed to do is "hand it over and hope nothing happens to them".

We've been sending out this message for so long now that every criminal knows the deal. They EXPECT us to roll over. They have come to believe it's the RIGHT thing to do.They have been TOLD by us and the police that it's THE thing to do. They have been lead to believe that NOTHING they do will prevoke a response. The mother, from HER point of view, is RIGHT. We have told her and others, for as long as I can remember that the "right" thing to do in these cases, is nothing. We told her, time and again, that if her son stole from someone that he would be ok. No one is supposed to fight back.

Shucks, if one was SURE that there would not be any "fighting back", robbery could be a pretty good way to make a living. If one had no morals.

So, until we send the message that someone who steals from or robs another can EXPECT to get hurt, this will continue. Right now we have an entire generation of folks that have been lead to believe that "if you steal from or rob someone, don't worry, even the police tell the victims to do nothing". They need to understand that some very bad things can happen to them if they act this way.


Steal from me, or try to rob me, and you will get hurt. THAT is what they should be hearing.

[TearsOfRage]

''I believe that Anthony was the one in danger, not that man,''


Why yes, commiting crimes against armed people can be dangerous. :rolleyes:

[moa]

In my state of Maryland, I do believe "assault" with a motor vehicle is a felony, and comparable to pointing a gun at a person at the minimum.

The car's owner would have been well advised to have stayed indoors, but after you have been ripped off, sometimes you may use poor judgement.

[JPM70535]

I am truly amazed at the attitude taken not only by the parents teen aged miscreants, but by the shear numbers of citizens, some THR subscribers included who seem to feel it is immoral or wrong to take prevenative measures against these little animals.

I seem to recall that in days gone by, Horse thieves were hung when caught. Our forefathers knew that when a man was deprived of his horse, he lost more than transportation. What is different today? Perhaps those of us fortunate enough to be financially stable to the point where loss of ones vehicle is a mere inconvenience should remember that to a large number of our citizens the loss would prove devastating.

I firmly believe that One should be able to defend ones property and I care not one Iota for the well being of the thieves attempting to relieve me of same. I honestly cannot state that faced with the choice of watching my transportation (or any other property I worked to acquire) dissapear into the sunset I would not opt to take remedial action. Of course I would be in fear of death or great bodily harm at the time.


GOD MADE MAN, SAM COLT MADE THEM ALL EQUAL!!!

[WilderBill]

Having your car stolen is plenty of reason to take a shotgun out to try to stop it.
Having someone try to run over you is more than enough reason to use it.
He obviously should have used larger shot or a slug, though.

[TarpleyG]

"...while Anthony was trying to get away.''
IN THIS GUY'S CAR!!! Hellooooo, they used to hang horse thieves in the good ol' days. In Texas, this shooter would be perfectly justified, by law, in shooting this stupid a$$ kid. Hope the kid learned his lesson and I hope the shooter doesn't see a day for it.

GT

[Nightfall]

Oh, my goodness. Let me get my violin and play a sad, sad song for this poor victimized child.

Boo freakin' hoo. If you're old enough to commit grand theft auto and try to drive away (through the owner, none the less), you understand possible consequences, and you deserve to be shot. By a big damn gun. Even if I had been dumb enough to act out like this during my "adolescent problems", I wouldn't blame the victim if they shot a hole in my head while I stole their car. It's called JUSTICE. If the perp survives, blaming the shooter is NOT the way to teach him his lesson. Now who's willing to bet that this kid and/or his mother start speaking out against firearms as a victim of these 'horrible instruments of war'? :rolleyes:

P.S. WilderBill.. Nice signature. ;) Great minds think alike, eh?

[Pilgrim]

Alejandro Avila, the man who shot a 13-year-old in the head with a shotgun as the boy tried to steal Avila's car, said Monday he is ''overcome with sorrow,''and wants to pay the hospitalized youth a visit.

This statement will be very damaging in a civil trial.

[BigJake_old]

Never, EVER say you're sorry, no matter what, in ANY situation involving a court, it automatic admission of guilt. i'd feel somewhat bad about killing a kid too, justified but bad none the less, but you don't say so!!

[synoptic]

It may not since Kalifornia passed that law a while back that saying "I'm sorry" is not admitting responsibility

[BB93YJ]

Wonder what the ballistic coeffecient, muzzle energy, and terminal ballistics of that saturn were when speeding towards the guy. Dumb criminal kid, idiot parents. Clean shoot. Here in the great state of Texas, it'd be a No-Bill.

[BigJake_old]

Kalifornia said that???? maybe they arent as #@*&#% in the head as i thought.

[cordex]

TarpleyG,
That was my favorite part.

[Hardtarget]

I'm sick of hearing how bad it is to use deadly force to protect property. Let me ask you this...does anybody get ANYTHING for free? I pay for everything that comes to me. How do I do that?...I WORK! I give part of my life for the money it takes to buy what I want or need. Therefore, if my property is stolen, a piece of my life is stolen( twice if I have to replace the item!) So don't try to tell me not to shoot ... I don't listen that good .
:cuss: :banghead:
Mark.

[TheProfessor]

So don't try to tell me not to shoot ... I don't listen that good .


The problem is that you have NO right to commit violence against another person, especially if your life isn't in direct danger.

[Btennison]

The problem is that you have NO right to commit violence against another person, especially if your life isn't in direct danger.

I guess you really are a professor, Berkley?

[hso]

I've got to agree that no one has a right to use deadly force to protect property from theft.

That said, if the thief used the car to come after me I'd shoot to stop the attack. Of course I wouldn't have been blocking the driveway with something as soft and gooey as my pudgy butt.

As to treating this as if the kid was some violent criminal - Do any of you remember stupid kids in high school that stole cars to go "joy riding"?

[Tamara]

Do any of you remember stupid kids in high school that stole cars to go "joy riding"?

Where I grew up that was called "Grand Theft Auto". Let's not trivialize serious property crimes with that 'boys will be boys' nonsense.

[cordex]

Do any of you remember stupid kids in high school that stole cars to go "joy riding"?
Yup. Think a couple are still in jail. ('course, I'm a young'n so that doesn't mean much)
Just because "kids" did it and do it, doesn't mean it is any less wrong.
The problem is that you have NO right to commit violence against another person, especially if your life isn't in direct danger.
Hrm .... no right to commit violence against another person? Ever? It is only made worse if your life is not in direct danger?

What if you have a badge ... does that make the violence okay? (or do you expect police to arrest someone by handing them a flower and asking them to pretty please not resist?)

[jsalcedo]

People that commit property crime should realize
that they are taking their lives into their own hands.

In my home state I'm fully within my rights to
protect my possesions with deadly force.

Do I leave rolex watches on a lighted pedestal in my front yard?

No, of course not.

When someone invades my property and commits a crime it is my duty to stop them.

If the perpetrator does not cease his activity
and leave then it is time to follow up with force.

I'm sure as heck not going to hide under the bed while my home is being ransacked.

Car theft is a serious felony; the car thief knows it and should be fully aware that his life is forfeit as a result.


It might sound extreme to some but it seems the immediate fear of death or serious injury is the only thing that will deter criminals from robbery,
buglery, vandalism, rape, home invasion, and Auto theft.

[seeker_two]

Here in the great state of Texas, it'd be a No-Bill.

In many parts of Texas, the DA wouldn't even bother taking it to the Grand Jury...:cool:

Kid steals car. Owner comes to confront. Brings shotgun to protect self from unknown danger. Kid attempts to run down owner w/ stolen car. Man fires in self-defense. Kid in hospital.

Clean shoot.

The REAL CRIME would be if the DA for the area decides to prosecute. And I'd be sure to remind the voters of that at the next election...:fire:

[Viking6]

The guy will probably be indicted because he came outside with a gun vice calling the cops. Morally right or wrong, toss up; but the law will probably prosecute. Jury on criminal and/or civil case is another toss up. I must be completely mechanically disinclined, but a thirteen year old "hot-wiring" a car seems a little difficult to me. Or is it easier than I thought? As for the mother, she's upset, understandibly so. I can only hope that down in the deep, dark recesses of her heart that part of the reason is guilt at not having done her job right. Lastly, killing someone for stealing something unless it's a canteen of water in the desert or similar situation is well below my tolerance limit.

[hso]

No Tam, that's stupid boys will be stupid boys, but it doesn't warrant a death sentance.

[NewShooter78]

Well boys being boys is one thing, but less boys would act like that if they thought they were in danger of forfeiting their lives for that type of action.

And it seems we've got our first troll. :rolleyes:

[Tamara]

I gotta agree with seeker_two's assessment of the situation.

You have every right in the world to walk out into your driveway and say "Dude, stop stealing my car." If Mister Car Thief responds by attemting to run you over (with your own auto, no less!), you have every right to protect yourself.

This is no more a "death sentence for 'boys will be boys'" than shooting a mugger is a death sentence for petty theft.

[T.Stahl]

No Tam, that's stupid boys will be stupid boys, but it doesn't warrant a death sentance.

Can't be all that stupid if he's able to break into a car, short-circuit it and drive away, all at thirteen years.

Cars are among the most expensive and valuable mobile things people own. I feel a lot of sympathy for people who try to protect for what they've worked and saved money for several years.

During the last ten years my car was burgled three or four times (I lost count) and once they stole the headlights and grill. Result? Not a single one of the *beep* was caught. :(

My next car will have detcord behind the trims at knee height. :evil:

[blades67]

If some stupid teenage punk tries to steal my car and then attempts to run me down (with my own car! because I'm trying to stop him, he should expect to recieve incoming fire. :cuss: him in his neck! His family too!

Unless the local police are going to place an officer near my car the only thing the police will do is take a report. Police officers are just secretaries with guns who sometimes get lucky and find a criminal (almost always after a crime has been commited) and arrest them. Even that doesn't mean justice will be rendered.

[hso]

Folks,

Remember the car owner said he was in the driveway, jumped out of the way when the driver tried to run over him, and shot through the driver's side window without being able to see into the car because of tinted windows. When I took my CCW the training emphasized that I had a legal right to shoot someone to protect my life (or that of another), but that I didn't have a legal right to shoot someone fleelng after having been at risk nor did I have a legal right to shoot someone to protect my property from theft. The vehicle was headed out of the driveway and the owner had jumped out of the way. Sounds like the owner took the shot after he was clear of the car and the car was making for the street to get out of there without knowing exactly what his shot was going to hit. If he had shot through the front or rear window I'd better understand the perceived threat to his life.

Did the car owner know that there was some dumb kid behind the wheel trying to get out of there with his car instead of getting caught, some hardened "banger" that would shoot him and take the car, or a car load of the same that would all gun him down? Who knows? What I did read was that he couldn't see into the car and that he wasn't in the way of the car at the time. And that's whyt I can't "see" in my mind's eye the guy being in a position to make a shot from the side into the side window and still be under threat of being run over at the time.

[bigjim]

JohnBT said:I'm not one to run to the mods, so I'll say my piece here in public. And what goes on here is completely open to the public.

JimP - Are you really advocating that the man in question go to the hospital and MURDER someone? That's what you said...

"At least go to the hospital and finish the job...."

Is this really what The High Road is all about? Is it?

John

Hyperbole

Main Entry: hy·per·bo·le
Pronunciation: hI-'p&r-b&-(")lE
Function: noun
Etymology: Latin, from Greek hyperbolE excess, hyperbole, hyperbola, from hyperballein to exceed, from hyper- + ballein to throw -- more at DEVIL
Date: 15th century
: extravagant exaggeration (as "mile-high ice-cream cones")
- hy·per·bo·list /-list/ noun

[BigJake_old]

"Car theft is a serious felony; the car thief knows it and should be fully aware that his life is forfeit as a result."

I think he got what was coming, but don't take this as "shoot whoever wanders into your lawn" i mean, break into a house and expect death, its the risk connected with crime. i can't honestly say i'd shoot at a car just pulling out, but like they said, he was trying to run the guy down.

"Sounds like the owner took the shot after he was clear of the car and the car was making for the street to get out of there without knowing exactly what his shot was going to hit"

well, would he have stood in front of the car and then fired? not me..... IMO there one less dangerous criminal off the streets and thats a good thing.

[benewton]

Just to stir things up a bit...

Somebody needs to introduce a law making car owners responsible for the damage done by their stolen vehicles.

Just like the one the anti's want for stolen weapons...

That'd justify the shooting at car thieves!

Now, if I could come up with something similiar for the Denver Boot types...

[ACP]

What's the "typical media reaction" here? Sounds like a follow-up story. A guy who shot someone with a shotgun and now feels apologetic about it is newsworthy.

[jsalcedo]

The article goes on and on about the mothers reaction to her poor shot up son and how the shooter had no right to shoot her "baby" and really did not touch on the fact the little punk had put himself in harms way.

Yeah, the shooter was sorry but it doesn't go far enough to give an accurate representation and downplayed the reason the fellow would ever dream of defending his property and his life. All we get is the blubbering aftermath where everyone is sad about the thief.

Most of us are used to the subtle way the media depicts gun owners and are numbed by it.

Ever see the graphics of a revolver on every newscast about a murder even though it was a stabbing or a beating?

I'm sure you've noticed that the news always quotes the police officer as saying we don't recommend people take the law into their own hands, just call 911 when you are attacked folks.

Do you notice that articles and newscasts always depict self defense shooters in a negative light, talking about how their guns were not registered even though that state has no registration or how the shooter used a MAGNUM then does a human interest story of the poor family of the felon that was shot in the act of his crime.

That is what I am talking about in regards to a "typical media reaction.

[Russ]

If it were a LEO and the kid even thought about running over the LEO he would be dead and no charges would be filed against him. Doesn't Avila have the right to protect himself as well? I think he did. If the kid wasn't coming at him then he has a problem. Sounds like a big drag for all involved any way you look at it.

[JohnBT]

Hyperbole usually comes with a smilie after it. Otherwise it simply sounds like what it says.

John

[bigjim]

JohnBt said: Hyperbole usually comes with a smilie after it. Otherwise it simply sounds like what it says.

I thought hyperbole was around before the Internet and Smilie faces..... How did people ever get along?

[rick458]

The police WERE being called by the Man's wife

[Harold Mayo]

I guess the kid shouldn't have been stealing his car, huh?

[Hypnogator]

I simply fail to see what some THR members find wrong with this situation. Are we entitled to attempt to thwart the theft of our property? Yes! Are we entitled to arm ourselves to protect ourselves when we do so? Yes! (As long as we don't live in MA, NJ, MD, IL, or CA, I guess.) Are we entitled to use deadly force to protect ourselves if our lives are threatened? Of Course (even in the preceding states).

Had the thief abandoned his crime and run off, I doubt he would have been shot. He chose to endanger the life of his intended victim in a deadly game of "chicken." What happened to him was an entirely foreseeable result of his actions.

The case, too, is illustrative of the fact that we must think through the consequences of our actions. Not just the perp, in this case, but the victim, as well. He went out to confront a criminal armed with a deadly weapon that he actually wasn't mentally and emotionally prepared to use. As others before me have stated, it would have been more prudent to remain in the house and call 911.

[TexasVet]

I've got to agree that no one has a right to use deadly force to protect property from theft.
_________________________________

Texas law acknowledges that EXACT right in the circumstances presented here. It is exercised reguarly here and nobody except the poor whiny liberals and university profs ever think twice about it.:neener:

[Matthew Courtney]

This criminal was not shot for stealing a car. He was shot for behaving in a manner that caused the car's owner to reasonably fear for his life.

To the poster who said he had no right to fire after the car passed him, that is absurd. If someone shoots at me and I dive out of the way, you would have me wait until he again points his gun at me before I can fire.

If someone has just used deadly force in a manner likely to kill me, and still is in control of that medium of force, I may act now in self defense. You suggest that the shooter should have waited until the kid had put the car into reverse and approached him again before shooting. By then it would have been too late! He may have shot the kid and then been crushed to death by the car.

This is a good shooting. As far as the expression of sorrow, I am sure that we are all sorry that parents who fail to adequately supervise their teenagers allow these sorts of tragedies to occur. I'm pretty sure that is what he meant.

[lbmii]

I am bringing this thread back up because I would like to know what happened to Alejandro Avila. Did he go to jail? Did he get sued and if he did what happened?

What came of the 13 year old car thief who was shot?

I cannot find any follow up news stories.

[Bear Gulch]

"Dozens of pellets entered Campbell's head. Several still are lodged in his brain". Please get me his address, I'd like to mail him some slugs.

[richyoung]

"I've got to agree that no one has a right to use deadly force to protect property from theft. "


HORSEPUCKY! Why do banks and armored cars have armed guards? Why is their property more important than mine? KILL THIEVES!

[Standing Wolf]

''I believe that Anthony was the one in danger, not that man,'' said Campbell's aunt...

Somewhere on this earth, there's a criminal's relative with enough integrity and courage to say: "He was a vicious, unprincipled vermin who got what he deserved." There's got to be.

[ceetee]

Y'know, not that you've mentioned it, I never heard any follow up either. Florida's courts are notoriously slowly moving beasts.

This case is remarkably similar to one even now wending it's way through the legal process. (Forgive me if this has already been reported on...)

Manslaughter charge recommended against officer (http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/local/southflorida/sfl-421inquestruling,0,7637191.story?coll=sfla-home-headlines)

DELRAY BEACH -- County Judge Debra Moses Stephens Thursday morning recommended manslaughter charges be filed against a Delray Beach police officer for shooting a 16-year-old boy in the back of the head as the teen drove a car down a walkway at a school dance.


White cop. Black teenager. Teen "borrows" his uncle's car, and takes it to the high school dance. The only problem is, the teen (who lacks a driver's license) doesn't stop in the parking lot. He drives the car through the open areas of the school campus, on sidewalks, etc. (Probably just trying to show off.)

This school happens to serve "troubled youths". Because of this, a decent supply of off-duty officers have been hired to oversee the dance. One officer, in his first year of employment, gives numerous orders to the teen to halt, which the teen ignores. The officer sees the teen heading for a crowd of other kids, so he draws his weapon and fires two shots. One shot enters the teens head, killing him. Good shoot, except that there are no witnesses that will corroborate the officer's statement that he had to save the "crowd" of other teens. No one will even say they were part of the "crowd" that was threatened.

How it will play out is a crapshoot, mainly because under Florida law, you can only use lethal force in defense of life, or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony. Both cases hinge on a lawyer's ability to convince a jury that his client felt that he (or an innocent bystander) was in danger.

Vegas gives much better odds...

[insidious_calm]

HORSEPUCKY! Why do banks and armored cars have armed guards? Why is their property more important than mine? KILL THIEVES!


I have asked that same question to numerous politicians, cops, attorneys, etc. and never have I been given an answer that didn't resemble "Uh, well, you're just a SERF, and uh, those people are HIRED TO PROTECT PROPERTY." You see, it's OK to shoot people over property if you're paid to do it and it's not your property you're protecting, or if you're a cop and the theft equates to a felony. :rolleyes: This country was founded on the idea that personal property ownership WAS sacrosanct. How far Political Correctness has taken us.....


I.C.

[Crosshair]

I know this thread is getting long, but I have to ad my $.02.

I am in college, my car is one of my most valuable possessions. If anyone tries to take it and run me down in the prosess, I will do whatever it takes to stop them. If I loose my car, then I can't get to work, I can't get to the college. I own a bike, but even that wouldn't work. The amount of time I have between end of class and work is a half hour on many day's. Getting 7 miles across town in heavy traffic on a bike and arriving to work on time is a dream at best. That would cut down on my income and further hamper me. In the winter I would be completley screwed. I can't use my bike and bus service here stinks. I would probably be able to get to work, but school would be out of the question. The U is over 5 miles away and with winters in ND, that is just not going to happen.

I agree, hang the horse thieves. If he survives, well, let it be a lesson.

[mfree]

"The problem is that you have NO right to commit violence against another person, especially if your life isn't in direct danger."

I'll give you a loaded shotgun. Here, stand in front of your car and give me the keys. I'll gun the engine a bit and launch pretty quickly straight towards you, and I dare you *not* to shoot me. Or you'll simply get run over.

Is your moral code up to the point where you'd allow someone to break several of your bones and do permanent damage, perhaps kill you, before you'd hurt them?

I have the right to preserve my life, period.

[HankB]

You can argue back and forth all day about what the law is, but let's take a look at what Texas Penal Code section 9.42 actually states:§ 9.42. DEADLY FORCE TO PROTECT PROPERTY. A person is
justified in using deadly force against another to protect land or tangible, movable property:
(1) if he would be justified in using force against the other under Section 9.41; and
(2) when and to the degree he reasonably believes the deadly force is immediately necessary:
(A) to prevent the other's imminent commission of arson, burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, theft during the nighttime, or criminal mischief during the nighttime; or
(B) to prevent the other who is fleeing immediately after committing burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, or theft during the nighttime from escaping with the property; and
(3) he reasonably believes that:
(A) the land or property cannot be protected or recovered by any other means; or
(B) 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.
I'm not a lawyer, and in places like Commifornia the guy would be in deep you-know-what, but it would appear to be a good shoot under Texas criminal law. (God bless Texas! :D )

I do expect a civil suit will be filed.

[Evil_Ed]

Let me point out something here... an average family car is going to cost anywhere from $13,000 (Saturn base model) to $30,000 (mini-van)... that vehicle may be the only way they can get back and forth to work... How much of your life is spent working to pay for that car? How much of your life will be screwed if you can't get to work and get the money necessary to support your family?? I submit that the criminal is not just stealing an item, he is stealing part of your life. I don't know about you but $30,000 is close to 3/4 of a year of my life.

[Gung-Ho]

Kalifornia said that???? maybe they arent as #@*&#% in the head as i thought.

No, they are.

[Gung-Ho]

"I've got to agree that no one has a right to use deadly force to protect property from theft. "

The above is a prime example of why this country is going to hell in a handbasket.

[Gunpacker]

You hit the nail on the head Rich. Rich or important folks can protect their money or valuables, but we unwashed are not supposed to. A bank will kill to protect their money if possible, as in the case of armored car guards. It really is reasonable. In NY, if you have money or diamonds to protect, then step up and get your permit. If poor and your life is in danger, don't worry, the law will spare no effort for 15 minutes to try to find out who killed you. Only money is worthy of use of deadly force. How sick is that. What that does is to put "important, rich" folks in a different category, worthy of having guns, and worthy of using them. Case in point, Carl Rowan. Black anti gun zealot in Washington DC where no one is even supposed to have a personal handgun, much less protect property with one. He went out at nite to confront a brazen criminal that was SWIMMING IN HIS POOL, proceeded to shoot him. (can't remember if fatally, but I don't think so) Now you know that you or I would be dead meat in those circumstances. But Carl? NO CHARGES. Them and us, and only them are worthy.

[jsalcedo]

Carl Rowan. Black anti gun zealot in Washington DC where no one is even supposed to have a personal handgun, much less protect property with one. He went out at nite to confront a brazen criminal that was SWIMMING IN HIS POOL, proceeded to shoot him.

Rowan shot the kid in the butt as he swam. No charges

Another frothing at the mouth anti gun columnist Art Buchwald ran off some
teenagers who were breaking into his New York City townhouse. No permit
no license. When asked why he had an ilegal gun in NYC even though he was
an advocate of banning all guns Buchwald said:

"People need something to defend themselves"

No charges for him either

I guess its the "all for me and none for thee" syndrome.

Going back to the original article I too am curious on what happened to the car theft victim now that it is two years later.