1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Burglar calls 911 to save himself from gun-wielding homeowner

Discussion in 'General Gun Discussions' started by Apachedriver, Dec 6, 2012.

  1. Apachedriver

    Apachedriver Well-Known Member

    I just came across this article on Yahoo and wanted to share. There are more details in the video interview with the owner. Several that can be things taken from on this one.

  2. Texan Scott

    Texan Scott Well-Known Member

    LOL... please note that when all is said and done, it's not the homeowner who was arrested (or made a laughingstock in the Dallas papers).
  3. M2 Carbine

    M2 Carbine Well-Known Member

    The burglar is lucky. I'm not sue I'd be that charitable.
  4. Warp

    Warp Well-Known Member

    Everybody is lucky. If the attempted burglar got out and the resident(s) shot him...big mistake.
  5. TheCracker

    TheCracker Well-Known Member

    Probably not in Texas. In a lot of parts he would be a hero. You forget the Joe Horn shooting in Houston! Castle doctrine!
  6. mr.scott

    mr.scott Well-Known Member

    If he is still on the property, the home owner has him dead to rights. A threat still exists.
  7. Warp

    Warp Well-Known Member

    Just because a person is in your driveway that does not automatically mean you can shoot them.

    Perhaps this should be posted in the Legal section to get some good feedback.
  8. 22-rimfire

    22-rimfire Well-Known Member

    Funny stuff. Nothing like lighting a fire under law enforcement to respond to a call.
  9. Apachedriver

    Apachedriver Well-Known Member

    True, but this all started in the house and the intruder was still on the property. The man did good for himself by not shooting, but if that intruder came back out of his pickup, only he could decide if the threat was still active.

    ETA: And yes, I know, you're better off staying in the house and calling 911, and ADEE applies. I agree, but once he went outside, new decisions had to be made.

    That may be a good idea. But any legal discussion needs to keep in mind that only Texas laws apply, not CA or FL or NY, et al.
    Last edited: Dec 6, 2012
  10. Warp

    Warp Well-Known Member

    Say the guy got out...what would the resident(s) reasonably believe is being prevented by shooting him in the legs?
  11. Apachedriver

    Apachedriver Well-Known Member

    When I read that part, I stopped to think as well on it.

    My speculation leads me to think he didn't want his son killing someone. That's heavy and the kid doesn't need it. It's an assumption since I don't recall seeing the boy's age.

    Otherwise if his goal was to shoot to disable instead of to stop...I think that's a poor choice.
  12. AethelstanAegen

    AethelstanAegen Well-Known Member

    How does the resident know the attempted burglar didn't retreat to his car to retrieve a weapon? What reason would the burglar have to get out of the car? His escape would be to drive away, thus getting out of the car could be argued to be an aggressive action in the opposite direction of retreat.

    That said, would I shoot him in the leg if he got out of the car? Probably not, but it would sure depend on the context and if I could see his hands.

    Shooting the suspect in the leg could certainly stop the villain from attacking the family with a knife, etc...and would certainly allow for a follow up shot if the criminal also had a gun. I suspect the homeowner just wanted to avoid having his son kill someone.
  13. Warp

    Warp Well-Known Member

    You can't shoot people because you do not KNOW they aren't going to do something bad. That just isn't how things work, even in Texas.
  14. Apachedriver

    Apachedriver Well-Known Member

    Warp, I agree. But I think you also have to consider the potential threat was already introduced to the situation when the intruder entered the house at night uninvited. You can't just assume the threat is over. But you do have to continue to reassess as you go forward. I think that's what the homeowner did here.

    As for shooting him in the legs: 1)With a handgun or rifle, that's as realistic as a TJ Hooker just trying to "wing" the bad guy on TV, 2)If the son had a shotgun, maybe.
  15. Warp

    Warp Well-Known Member

    Exactly. Even if/just because a certain response (say lethal force) was justified at one point, that doesn't mean it continues to be.

    If the guy is trying to escape, and he is already in the driveway while you are not, and there is no weapon present or reason to believe a weapon is present, and the guy has nothing of yours, etc etc, which all seem likely to be true given what was in the article...I cannot find a justification for lethal force. And that's what shooting somebody in the leg is, regardless of the type of firearm used (even a shotgun with birdshot)...lethal force
  16. allaroundhunter

    allaroundhunter Well-Known Member

    If it was at night, the argument could be made that the man was trying to flee with stolen property.... In Texas, there is the stipulation that deadly force is justifiable in that instance (if it is the only means to keep the perpetrator from escaping).

    While it is not a good idea, and I most certainly wouldn't do it. If the man were to have gotten out of the truck and been shot, I doubt the homeowner or his son would have been indicted on any charges.
  17. brnmw

    brnmw Well-Known Member

    Sorry, but if I caught that idiot in my house I would be surprised if he ever made it out the door! >IMO and IMO only if an individual "breaks into a home" Armed or Not you are automatically a danger in any and in every respect. Even at night simply catching a thief in Texas stealing your tools out of a shed may not be reason enough to shoot him, but if he came into my home day or night "BIG TROUBLE!" I don't care what the law dictates. I did not like it when roommates would simply walk in to my room without knocking kindly let alone catching an intruder in my home! (Which they stopped doing after they found out I always had a gun next to me even if I was simply watching TV, and yes it was necessary for the record not simple paranoia. (They never locked the doors at night, we lived in a bad area & and they always went to bed late long after I was asleep.There comment to me when I confronted them about the issue was..."Okay really? What are the chances.. you are just being paranoid... not everyone is out to get you, so chill out!") True story...:fire:
  18. 22-rimfire

    22-rimfire Well-Known Member

    I would be very concerned if the perp was in his car. He could easily have a firearm inside the car and be preparing himself for his next aggressive move. It is a very unstable situation and filled with danger to both the perp and home owner.

    From my point of view, the perp has to do something aggressive to place the home owner in fear for "his" life at this point or a shooting would be more of an execution.
  19. Skribs

    Skribs Well-Known Member

    "You don't need to kill them, just shoot them in the legs" is a statement that makes me cringe every time I read it. A shot to the chest can be recovered from (some people even survive shots to the head). A shot to the leg can be fatal (femoral artery). People who say "just shoot them in the leg" got their knowledge of human anatomy from watching movies.

    That said, if I had pulled a gun on a BG and he retreated, but didn't leave completely, and he reaggressed, then the attack has recommenced and it needs to be stopped.
  20. Warp

    Warp Well-Known Member

    Who said he was ever in the house??

Share This Page