‘You Sneeze, You’re Dead Man’: Texas Man Humiliates Burglars With 12-Gauge


PDA






gunsmith
October 13, 2007, 06:50 AM
:evil:
http://www.breitbart.tv/?p=6697

If you enjoyed reading about "‘You Sneeze, You’re Dead Man’: Texas Man Humiliates Burglars With 12-Gauge" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
esheato
October 13, 2007, 06:54 AM
LOL...hey, whatever works.

FieroCDSP
October 13, 2007, 07:03 AM
Nice.... Critics would claim he's watched too many movies and shouldn't be gung-ho. Those are also the people who are screaming for you to go see their latest shootem-up action flick, so what do they know. Kudos to the guy.

Geno
October 13, 2007, 07:12 AM
Mrs. Hero said:

...I'm a newly wed now".

Ahhhhhhh!!!!! Bad images!!!!! Ah!!!!!! My ears!!!!!!! Let's just leave it at "Freeze or you're dead! or Sneeze and you're dead!" Hey, it worked! :cool:

I'm sure that if my sister saw this clip she'd proclaim "Man with a gun!" I just say good for him. Anyone want to bet the neighbors will bake the man some cookies? There's a new sheriff in town!

Doc2005

JamisJockey
October 13, 2007, 08:28 AM
[devil's advocate]
He probably shouldn't have gone running out into the wee hours to check on his possesions in his garage, facing unknown number of burglars armed with unknown number and types of firearms.
People, burglars steal firearms! We all know this. Who's to say the house before his didn't have an AK with a few full mags for the burglars to make off with?
Great way to be an obituary instead of a hero.
[/devil's advocate]


Well within his rights to protect his property, IMHO. Shooting someone over a car stereo or some tools isn't exactly morally superior, though.
This is the perfect opportunity to allow the cops to do thier job.

Mannlicher
October 13, 2007, 08:33 AM
great story. Good outcome. Two bad guys off the streets now, no one hurt, and 'his wife feels like a newlywed'. That can't be a bad thing ;)

JWarren
October 13, 2007, 08:41 AM
Well within his rights to protect his property, IMHO. Shooting someone over a car stereo or some tools isn't exactly morally superior, though.


Let's please not re-hash the defense of property debate again. This is a decision wholly based in the state statutes and the conscience of the person in question.


Let's just respect the decisions of others to apply or waive the right to defend property as they see fit.

I don't think we need any more threads calling out the morals or lack thereof of other persons' choices in how THEY choose to apply their rights.

One could as easily apply a moral compass to NOT defending property by saying that not providing resistence as a whole has emboldened criminals to the point that they EXPECT no reprecussions.

A moral compass that begins and ends with concern over a criminal's personal safety and health is short-sighted.

Now, I am not trying to advocate one position over another, per se. I am at peace with my view that I am willing to defend my property. But I will not fault another for choosing otherwise-- or for being legally limited from doing so. And I do think it would be best if everyone put their moral compasses in thier pocket.


-- John

GRB
October 13, 2007, 09:17 AM
I think he did okay, but I don't think he should have mentioned those words: Sneeze and your dead, to anyone, especially a news crew. In the future, if this guy is accosted and he shoots someone dead, and another bad guy at the scene later says this guy was trigger happy - well guess what will be used as evidence in any potential prosecution. Don't make it seem as if you were just hoping to shoot the guy for even something as trivial as a sneeze whether he actually meant to or not. Intent is often shown by our previuous actions and words. This could potentially haunt him.

All the best,
Glenn B

Pumpkinheaver
October 13, 2007, 09:28 AM
He's right, every home owner should respond the way he did.

JamisJockey
October 13, 2007, 09:29 AM
moral compass that begins and ends with concern over a criminal's personal safety and health is short-sighted.

No, no its not. At what point do you cross the line when it comes to defending property? Does someone taking your power drill and screwdriver set deserve to die? Do you deserve the aftermath of shooting someone over taking your beloved car stereo?

AndyC
October 13, 2007, 09:36 AM
Hypotheticals aside, he got the job done and nobody was shot; I'll call that a win.

ilcylic
October 13, 2007, 09:46 AM
Wow, John, it's almost like he completely ignored everything you wrote except the bit he wanted to argue with.

JWarren
October 13, 2007, 09:50 AM
No, no its not. At what point do you cross the line when it comes to defending property? Does someone taking your power drill and screwdriver set deserve to die? Do you deserve the aftermath of shooting someone over taking your beloved car stereo?


Seriously, yes... it is shortsighted. When we apply more concern over the safety of one who is commiting an injurous act (stealing your property IS an injurous act) than we do to the person that decides how he/she deals with it, I see that as short-sighted.


If you do a search here, this subject comes up regularly. It gets debated for 8 or 9 pages and dies out until the next one comes up. It gets weary.


The bottom line is this.

If defending property IS allowed in your state and you choose to do so, it is between you and your conscience. What we don't need is more people attempting to apply THEIR ethos to others who live within the law.


Whether I think someone deserves to get shot over stealing from me is a personal matter as long as I am within the law. I'll argue that there is more personal responsibility to be applied to the person who CHOSE to accept whatever consequences that may come in order to STEAL my little screwdriver and drill. Remember, these situations BEGIN with an unlawful and harmful act, and if you do defend property where you are allowed to, they don't END with one.

I suspect that we will disagree on the basic premise of this topic, and I am OK with that. What I am not OK with is people attempting to overlay thier moral position on others who act within the law and make a personal choice based upon thier own moral position within the law.

This is The High Road, not The High Horse.



-- John

lanternlad1
October 13, 2007, 09:56 AM
"No, no its not. At what point do you cross the line when it comes to defending property? Does someone taking your power drill and screwdriver set deserve to die? Do you deserve the aftermath of shooting someone over taking your beloved car stereo?"


Criminals get emboldened when they commit crimes and get away with it. Its human nature. The severity of the crimes tend to escalate to violence as time progresses. These criminals will think twice before going back to their old habits when they get out. They are very lucky to be leaving the property alive. I myself would have no compunctions about killing a home invader, and it doesn't matter why he decided to invade my home.


"If defending property IS allowed in your state and you choose to do so, it is between you and your conscience. What we don't need is more people attempting to apply THEIR ethos to others who live within the law."


Defending one's property and family is outside of the rule of law. There comes a time when the basic need for survival and protection trumps words on a piece of paper. Even if it wasn't "legal" to protect my family (like in England where people go to jail for doing just that) I would still do my utmost to protect what is mine. Those criminals who get away with burglarizing the garage will come back to see whats in the house. I would rather leave them to the ages and take my chances with a jury.

rich0372
October 13, 2007, 09:56 AM
Does someone taking your power drill and screwdriver set deserve to die? Do you deserve the aftermath of shooting someone over taking your beloved car stereo

Maybe not but, if more thiefs/criminals thought that they could be shot and/or killed if the go around breaking in peoples houses and stealing they would think twice about doing so. They will think IS MY LIFE WORTH A CAR STEREO.

TexasRifleman
October 13, 2007, 10:03 AM
Shooting someone over a car stereo or some tools isn't exactly morally superior, though.

Sure it is. How do you KNOW, FOR SURE KNOW, that the guy wasn't gonna come for more than your tools. Maybe you or your wife or kid were next he just hadn't gotten that far along yet. Garages are part of the house.

A scumbag comes inside your home and you question his intentions? An armed homeowner defending his home will always have the moral, and legal, high ground.

It has been made very clear in Texas both by actions like this and the Legislature that this kind of stuff can and does result in the thief being dead.

That's ample warning. Someone that ignores that possibility takes their life into their own hands.

Does someone taking your power drill and screwdriver set deserve to die?

Anyone who comes inside my home illegally has made that decision for me.

How can you say you will protect your family if you are going to question the motives of someone who has come inside your home illegally. That hesitation is just long enough for them to gain the advantage.

springmom
October 13, 2007, 10:06 AM
God bless Texas!

John is right. In this state it is legal for the man to do what he did. You will note that the deputies praised him and his neighbors agreed that this is what homeowners should do. In that light, I'd say he's on pretty solid ground here.

And for those of you riding that high horse, please note that the man did NOT shoot over a car stereo. He went far enough to stop the behavior, and held the thieves for police. Sounds like he used enough force, and not a bit more.

And yeah....God bless Texas.

Springmom

JamisJockey
October 13, 2007, 10:13 AM
Whatever.
The high horse may be dead, but it needs to be beaten.

akodo
October 13, 2007, 10:16 AM
there is also a big difference between confronting a property thief while armed, and actually choosing to shoot a property theif. I think it is quite reasonable to take many steps short of lethal force to protect your property. I also think if you are going to confront an intruder, arming yourself is prudent because you don't know what he is willing to do.

TCB in TN
October 13, 2007, 10:17 AM
No, no its not. At what point do you cross the line when it comes to defending property? Does someone taking your power drill and screwdriver set deserve to die? Do you deserve the aftermath of shooting someone over taking your beloved car stereo?

See below!

Maybe not but, if more thiefs/criminals thought that they could be shot and/or killed if the go around breaking in peoples houses and stealing they would think twice about doing so. They will think IS MY LIFE WORTH A CAR STEREO.

+100000000, the willingness to arm and defend yourself and your property is often (not always) deterrent enough to stop most bad guys from the act. If a higher % of folks in this nation were to have the will and the legal right to do so them it would be even more so.

As for my moral compass, well a man breaks into your house (or living area) for your stuff then it is HIS moral compass that is broke, not yours for confronting him. Further more if you really want to talk moral compass, this guy did exactly the right thing, he stopped two thieves from robbing him w/o hurting them. Now if they had attacked him for that then shooting them would have been exactly what he should have done morally, as they would have demonstrated a willingness to not only steal but to hurt/kill someone while doing so. Removing that threat from society would certainly be the moral thing to do! What is totally imoral in my book is the insistance so many have on moral pacifism. IMHO we have a moral imperitive to protect not only those we love, but also society as a whole, and again it seams this guy did that exceptionally well in this case.

BTW big props to the local boys in blue. 2 min response time sounds like they were really on the ball there!

JWarren
October 13, 2007, 10:25 AM
Whatever.
The high horse may be dead, but it needs to be beaten.


Not really. Beating that horse is only an attempt to:

a. Impose one's own ethics on others.

b. label other law-abiding citizens as immoral if they do not conform to one's own ethical position




Be at peace with your ethical position, and I'll be at peace with mine. If we are both within the law, it becomes a matter between us and our Gods/conscience/etc. And we can all keep it to ourselves.

But one may not want to go nosing around my tools in the middle of the night.



-- John

Brian Williams
October 13, 2007, 10:29 AM
Remember, discuss the concept, not poke at the person.

Bump this back 200 years, when defending your stuff was a life or death situation, somebody stealing your seed corn or your put up meat, could mean the difference tween survival and death. Now move it forward to now, someone finds they can steal from you and with no moral compass, will either go and steal from someone else or from you again, maybe with more malice and greed.

I wish that our judicial system has not been neutered so much that the threat of hard time is nothing.

cpttango30
October 13, 2007, 10:30 AM
He did not shoot anyone. He mearly used a tool (Happend to be 12 ga) to hold criminals at bay untill police arrived. Would you be pissing and moaing if he would have grabed a 18" cresent wrench?

If you want to confront criminals that may or may not be armed and willing to kill you for a car stero without any protection what so ever you can go right ahead.

He did not run out of the house shooting his shotgun in the air yelling "I'm gona kill ya sucka".

I for one would rather be well armed and looked at like a vigilanty vs end up being the guy on the six o'cloock news who was killed in a break in.


It is there (Criminals) fault that they are breaking the law and if they get shot well too effin bad. It is that mentality that is screwing up the nation and the world. Well he did not do any thing real bad just ground him and he will learn. if these low life scum bags knew that trying to steal a $200 car stero will cost you your life then maybe we would not too many people stealing them.

Guess what some jobs have higher risks than others. If you want to rob and steal and break in to people houses well then you are going to have put up with the few of us that will arm ourselves and protect ourselves. If someone is breaking into my house then they are out to hurt my family or me there for they MUST DIE. Sorry if you do not like that.

TexasRifleman
October 13, 2007, 10:34 AM
But one may not want to go nosing around my tools in the middle of the night.

As a side note, and I wish I could find the article where I read it, tools are one of the big reasons that Texas adopted the law allowing deadly force in protection of property. Tools and livestock.

The argument goes that if a man makes his living with his tools and someone steals them, he has no way to make a living, endangering his life and the lives of his family. Stealing tools is the same as stealing food from his family. Same with livestock.

This is one of those odd "ethics" things that tends to split along the Mason/Dixon line almost. I am talking state law here not residents beliefs.

States north seem to have more limits on when deadly force can be used than southern states. Seems that way to me anyway. Just an odd observation not rooted in any research.

JamisJockey
October 13, 2007, 10:37 AM
Suddenly I'm a pacifist?
This guy left his home, which was presumably secure, where he was armed and would have the immediate drop on anyone trying to enter (being he was awake and cognizant of the burglary), and rushed into a detached garage to confront them stealing property. It's a recipe for disaster and yes, I think it could have put him in a legal and morally questionable situation.
Being Texas, he's got more leeway in his actions with property thieves. However, had he been forced to shoot one of them, would the law and the bloodsuckers that call themselves Personal Injury Lawyers have a different take on his actions?
We live in a world of hypotheticals, right up until we are in the situation where we're pointing a firearm at someone debating the need to pull the trigger.

JWarren
October 13, 2007, 10:41 AM
Suddenly I'm a pacifist?


Not at all, JJ. Frankly, I don't know you. I was saying that I woud support your actions within the law based upon your set of ethics. And I made that assertion that others-- including you-- should afford the same respect to others who may not share your ethical viewpoint.

-- John

mbdolfin
October 13, 2007, 11:53 AM
you can sure bet i would be in jail if i tried that in new jersey. the second i walked outside of my house with a gun. this state is all for the bad guys. screw the homeowner.

springmom
October 13, 2007, 12:02 PM
If someone is breaking into my house then they are out to hurt my family or me there for they MUST DIE. Sorry if you do not like that.

You don't shoot to kill. You shoot to stop the threat. In this particular case stopping the threat occurred with the racking of the shotgun. No shots necessary. The homeowner handled this perfectly.

However, I would strongly recommend against putting blanket statements like yours up on the internet. What's posted here stays FOREVER and can come back to haunt you.

Springmom

koja48
October 13, 2007, 12:15 PM
The man resolved the issue, halted the threat, and 2 perps learned a lesson that the law & court system failed to impress upon them . . . breaking in to someone else's home is wrong AND now they know it can be dangerous.

sacp81170a
October 13, 2007, 12:19 PM
Does someone taking your power drill and screwdriver set deserve to die?

"Does someone posing an unknown threat to you and your family on your property deserve to be confronted with deadly force?"

There, fixed it for ya.

We live in a world of hypotheticals, right up until we are in the situation where we're pointing a firearm at someone debating the need to pull the trigger.

"Sneeze and you're a dead man." It appears to me that there was no debate about whether he was going to pull the trigger. He left the decision as to whether it would be pulled up to the perp. That is as it should be. All is well in that part of the world. Good show!

v35
October 13, 2007, 02:28 PM
No dilemma here. Two pieces of human debris enter a man's home (detached garage, whatever... it's his home) with intent to take his property deserve to be confronted with deadly force. Might they have been shot and killed? Their choice. Seems that a few earlier bad choices brought these scumbags to Mr Brooks's house, and for once they chose wisely - surrender.

Sneeze and you're dead? Probably a more effective attention-getter than "freeze". It elicited an appropriate response. I wouldn't read anything into it.

Looks like a nice neighborhood too. People like Mr. Brooks keep it that way. God bless Texas!

David904
October 13, 2007, 02:32 PM
Tell you what... Legally justified or not, I'm not going to blast someone into the next world unless I absolutely have to. But if I'm going to go check out a noise in my house/garage I'm going to be armed. To be otherwise would be foolish - and potentially suicidal. And if I see someone rooting through my belongings, you bet I'm gonna point my firearm at them and order them to stop under the threat of dire consequences. If I think that they are going to try to eliminate me as a threat, then I'll stop the threat to myself and my family. It seems to me that it would be far better to fend off the threat before they get into your house than once they have gotten inside where your family is.

If they run away, I'm not going to stop them or interfere. I'll simply try to give the best physical description I can to the police. Hopefully in running away, they drop my stuff and boogie. Cops almost never recover stolen property. Thieves usually fence their stolen goods as quickly as they can to finance their drug habits etc.

Big ups to the homeowner on his handling of the situation. Well done sir! And you have renewed the admiration and respect of your longtime wife. Not a bad bonus there. I thought it was awfully cool to see his wife acting "all girlie" over her husband whom she obviously regarded as a hero.

Kudos to the local PD as well. Great response time and attitude. It was really nice to hear them lauding the gentleman's actions and giving him credit for stopping a serial burglar.

Nobody died. Nobody hurt. Homeowner lost nothing. PD reinforced what is good about them. Criminals are off the street. Win/Win situation!!!

JamisJockey
October 13, 2007, 02:37 PM
"Does someone posing an unknown threat to you and your family on your property deserve to be confronted with deadly force?"

There, fixed it for ya.

Variables aside, someone that is outside your domicile, not trying to break in, does not justify being confronted with deadly force.

moderator Justin summed up my sentiments in alot fewer words than I've used in the spinoff thread that got closed. I think that says enough and I'm done with this one. We might as well be debating Glock vs. 1911, cause this idiocy aint goin' anywhere productive.

anygunanywhere
October 13, 2007, 03:02 PM
There but for the grace of God go I.

The sound of a racking shotgun is unmistakeable. The the spoken words were appropriate. He was well within Texas law to grease the burglars but he chose not to. No Monday morning quarterbacking from me. The next time may turn out differently. Who knows? Anyone else's encounter will be different.

Texas law would have prevented libility on his part as of this past Sept. 1.

Anygun

migoi
October 13, 2007, 03:11 PM
issue arises I always wonder if there is any state that prohibits armed armoured car guards.

If defense of your personal property to the point of lethal force is not allowed why would the state allow armoured car guards to be armed. It would seem to me to that an armoured car guard, unarmed, could simply retreat to the safety of the armoured car and call the police.

If the state is asking private individuals to take these actions when their private possessions are being stolen then it should ask the same of it's corporate masters and their property/money. Banks and such are insured afterall.

migoi

sm
October 13, 2007, 03:28 PM
Dealing with the aftermath of a Serious Situation.

Ever been the innocent victim of having your vehicle hit at in a parking lot, or stop sign?

Police showed up, Insurance Companies invlolved (yours and the person that hit you) getting the car fixed and having to deal with a Rental Car, or being out of pocket for a vehicle to use.
Maybe even Lawyers to get a settlement.

It was a hassle was it not? Shock, surprise, adrenalin rush when it happened, be it a minor fender bump or more serious requiring a EMT to appear and make a run to the ER, maybe even the OR for surgery.

Time, money, stress, concerns...

Serious Situations have consequences, compounded by local regulations, statues, political flavor, politics, and so on and so forth.

Insurance is just a hedge against life matters, such as cars, personal property being taken, vandalized, destroyed and the like.


I would advise folks to actually attend a Jury Trial.

One can read Law and Statutes, one can read definitions of these.
Grand Juries and Jury of one's peers - adds a whole new dimension to all this.
How Attorney's present and defend cases - adds dimensions to all this.
Judges add a new dimension.

You know how you "think" you feel and how matters "should be".

Problem 2 does not always agree, interpret or play out quite as one thinks and feel matters should be.

Go attend a Jury Trial, as a spectator if nothing else.
Take family, especially kids old enough to appreciate and comprehend best can.

If you have done Jury duty, you understand exactly what I am sharing.

ShooterMcGavin
October 13, 2007, 04:38 PM
I love the last thing he said...
Don't go to my house. I wouldn't go to my house if I was you.
Classic. Just the way it should be!

Double Naught Spy
October 13, 2007, 04:50 PM
If you are a burglar in somebody's property at night in Texas, then you should be worried about the morals of what you are doing and the fact that it may cost you your life. The law protects the homeowner in the use of lethal force in such a situation.

Those of you who don't think you should use lethal force in such situations because of your perception of morals, then don't. That's your call. My call is to operate within the limits of the law. Your morals won't protect you in court and they won't protect you from harm late at night.

TCB in TN
October 13, 2007, 05:12 PM
Variables aside, someone that is outside your domicile, not trying to break in, does not justify being confronted with deadly force.

You are free to your opinion, but as for myself I will certainly protect mine the best way I can. Please put a sign up in your yard saying that you will only use deadly force for those coming into your house and see how long your car and any of your belonging that are not in your house remain yours. Any man who comes onto my property uninvited in the middle of the night justifies my confronting them with deadly force. I will not use it unless they force it, but I will certainly be there ready to use it if the need arises.

Fburgtx
October 13, 2007, 05:14 PM
Things cost money. In order to make money, I have to work. Work takes time. Stealing my things=stealing my time. Burglars (as well as everyone else) in Texas know what the score is before they go stealing stuff. They are risking their lives doing such things. Don't ask property owners whether it's worth taking a life to protect their property. Ask the burglar whether it's worth LOSING his life taking someone's property. Stealing someone's things (esp. something expensive like a car) is just like stealing a year or two of someone's life, when you consider how hard they had to work to get it.

Clipper
October 13, 2007, 05:25 PM
I don't see what the problem is...Even in a state where deadly force can't be used to defend property, taking a shotgun into your own garage is no crime, and the "sneeze and you're dead" comment is just a (first ammendment protected) comment that he might or might not have been willing to enforce. It never came to that, did it? Those guys didn't HAVE to believe him, did they? of course, if they would have made a move, he MIGHT have felt he was under attack on his own property, which would change the whole picture...If you're approached by some punk who says "gimme your money", you're still within your rights to say "Up yours", arent you? the aggression ball is now in the other guy's court, isn't it? And he has the choice of dropping it or escalating, which is the situation here...Good on 'im.

v35
October 13, 2007, 05:49 PM
Variables aside, someone that is outside your domicile, not trying to break in, does not justify being confronted with deadly force.This guy left his home, ... and rushed into a detached garage to confront them stealing property.
:confused:

I don't understand. The perps were inside his garage. Detached or not, it's still his home. Garage, barn, toolshed, henhouse, doesn't matter, they're all his home and property. What if the dirtbags walked into his backyard, where his children are playing? Would it matter if the backyard were surrounded by a fence? What's he supposed to do, stay in his house so he can hide behind a locked door?

I don't know about you, but the value of stuff in my garage far exceeds the value of stuff in the rest of my house. :eek:

Intruders can expect to encounter deadly force when entering either. I also would expect to defend my actions in a court of law if criminal or civil charges would be brought against me. I think Mr. Brooks's actions are laudable. I hope that under similar circumstances I could exhibit the same composure.

Sounding like a Capital One commercial, "What's in your garage?"

Jamie C.
October 13, 2007, 06:44 PM
I don't know about you, but the value of stuff in my garage far exceeds the value of stuff in the rest of my house.

Many years ago, myself and a friend of mine had to go over to my girlfriend's parent's house. Nobody was home, but I had been given a key to the door that was accessed through the attached garage.

Upon entering the garage and wading through to the entrance to the house, my buddy looked around, then looked at me fiddling with the key to open the door and commented "Dunno why they lock this door and not the other one... every damn thing they own seems to be out here".

Anyway, as other have said, if you don't want me to shoot you, stay off my property and out of my stuff. If you do that, all will be well, and you won't end up with any extra holes in your hide.

As for anybody questioning my morals... How do you know that you're right and I'm wrong? ( It's a rhetorical question. I don't really want you to bother trying to answer 'cause I know you can't. ;) )

Besides, as long as I'm staying within the confines of the law, I'm obviously no more morally bankrupt than whoever passed those laws, and the people that elected them.


J.C.

koja48
October 13, 2007, 07:31 PM
My simple rules:

1) Mess with me & I'll attempt to walk away.
2) Continue to mess with me, and I'll hurt you.
3) Break in to my home and I'll confront you with the means to levy deadly force.
4) Comply with the commands "Freeze" and " On the Floor" and I'll hold you until the law arrives.
5) Run and I'll leave it to the law to find you.
6) Advance toward me & I WILL stop you.

Once I held 2 dirtbags at "coach gun-point" (most effective, I might add) on the floor, in my attached GARAGE (wherein there are a variety of tools that could well be used to inflict serious harm upon my loved ones or myself) until the law arrived. Once I broke a scumbag's wrist when he opted to attempt to punch me; somehow, he sustained a variety of "other" bruises. When the deputies picked him up, they said "Good job. Want to press charges?" I replied, "Most definitely." I've been in "you or me" situations outside of those described above . . . thankfulness for being alive at the end was far more prevalent than feelings of remorse. As I've stated before, paying for a lawyer beats me or mine paying for a mortician hands-down, every time. As an old Montana cowboy told me one time . . . "Mess with the bull & you get the horn." What's mine is mine & I AM "the bull."

CannonFodder
October 13, 2007, 07:42 PM
Quite simply this:
The burglars knowingly entered his domicile without his permission and were up to mischief. The man in question had no proof whatsoever that they were benign, and every reason to believe that, if left unchecked, they might do further harm. Within his own domicile, he held two intruders, threatened them in response to their previous hostile actions, and detained them until the police arrived.

Now, if he sounded overly threatening in doing so.... well, I'm of the opinion that if you decide to invade someone's home, then your opinions of proper conduct and etiquette are a bit irrelevant.

jerkface11
October 13, 2007, 07:57 PM
The real question isn't "does someone stealing your power drill deserve to die" it's "is a power drill worth getting shot over"

Citroen
October 13, 2007, 07:59 PM
A few of you may be old enough to remember the radio program (yes, at one time radio had programs) "The Shadow". I believe the opening line was always, "Who knows what evil lurks in the hearts of men ---- the Shadow knows!"

The two criminals who tortured and murdered the wife and daughters of Dr. Petit had broken into a number of other homes prior to the Petit house. They got away with their crimes and finally became bold enough to move from stealing property to stealing life.

Any time a criminal decides that they can break the law they lose all sympathy for their actions. Life is full of choices. Wrong choices cause some people to die.

Trying to inject some so-called moral platitudes to justify criminal actions is one reason why crime has risen to such high levels.

If you enter a man's property with the intent to cause harm you deserve whatever happens when you are caught.

JWarren, I admire your restraint and your calm, reasoned logic. Well said.

John
Charlotte, NC

Outlaws
October 13, 2007, 08:35 PM
Does someone taking your power drill and screwdriver set deserve to die?

Buy some tools off a Snap On truck and tell me if you still think this way.

Wheeler44
October 13, 2007, 08:38 PM
Okay I'll play. How can anyone know what exactly was stolen from the last place these fellers broke into? AK-47s, AR-15s, some other deadly weapon?(I just used those firearms for reference, I don't think that they are any more or less dangerous than any other firearm). How can anyone know what those fellers (the perps) were looking for in the homeowners garage, gasoline to start the place on fire? something to use as a club or possibly an edged weapon? Rope to tie them up? We cannot know and neither did the homeowner. He did what many heads of households would do. He armed himself and went to go see.

At that point was he supposed to ask politely " will you boys be planning on harming my family or me tonight?" and if they answered "no" what then, ask if they want fries with that? Oh please.

Fellas that break into folks homes in the middle of the night are usually up to no good. And they should be dealt with accordingly.

He didn't shoot them he just promised to, if they sneezed. Maybe he was worried about contagious disease or sumthin'.

The idea that he should wait inside to see what the badguys had in mind is patently ridiculous.

Just my opinion.

Wheeler44

RoadkingLarry
October 13, 2007, 09:10 PM
A buddy of mine has a sign on his garage door: "There is nothing in here worth YOUR life" The tools and materials in his garage are how he makes his living. Even insured to the penny(like that is possible for most folks) how many days work will he loose till the stuff is replaced? His property is his life.

Standing Wolf
October 13, 2007, 09:42 PM
Does someone taking your power drill and screwdriver set deserve to die?

The thief is the one who made the decision his life is of no value by risking it for $100 worth of tools. That was his decision, not mine.

Outlaws
October 13, 2007, 09:57 PM
Even insured to the penny(like that is possible for most folks) how many days work will he loose till the stuff is replaced?

I would venture that just this 8 piece screw driver set is more than a lot of people make in one day...and a little less than the tech who bought them does.
http://buy1.snapon.com/catalog/item.asp?P65=&tool=all&item_ID=6146&group_ID=2658&store=snapon-store&dir=catalog

Now you want to steal a full on wrench set with those screw drivers....put you money someone is coming out guns blazing.
http://buy1.snapon.com/catalog/item.asp?P65=&tool=all&item_ID=4545&group_ID=521&store=snapon-store&dir=catalog

If you enjoyed reading about "‘You Sneeze, You’re Dead Man’: Texas Man Humiliates Burglars With 12-Gauge" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!