You laugh. My neighbor across the street in Houston was probably 80, and had some kind of 'Reserve Deputy' badge. Pretty sure it was legit, although mostly honorary. Didn't stop the old gent from carrying his pistol on his walks though.

c.

burglary is, and should be, an extremely dangerous profession.

Well, the thing is, what do they charge him with? 'Illegal possession of a firearm' is not applicable. 'Negligently discharging a firearm within city limits' might hold up, but I think it's a misd. Most likely anything else they could realistically charge him with has mandatory jail time.
That's all I meant: they couldn't (or just didn't) find a way to administer some degree of punishment without invoking a mandatory prison term. That law, pesky business, y'know?

c.

Can't they just pin an old Ranger badge on him and put him to work?

burglary is, and should be, an extremely dangerous profession.

Regarding the part I underlined: but he gets cleared? Does that make sense?

In case you missed this part:

The suspected burglars, Hernando Riascos Torres, 38, and Diego Ortiz, 30, were unemployed illegal immigrants from Colombia. Torres was deported to Colombia in 1999 after a 1994 cocaine-related conviction.

Why, oh why, do people cry RACISM when a couple of SCUMBAGS get blasted WHILE PERPETRATING A CRIME?!?!

Scumbags are scumbags, period. Since our government was clearly not capable of defending us from these two particular scumbags, what are we supposed to do?

Again: I think the guy made a bad decision. I'm not sure he shoulda been entirely no-billed, although since there were two dead guys on his lawn, the law's hands may be tied: there may not be a way to recommend probation or whatnot.

c.

In case you missed this part:

The suspected burglars, Hernando Riascos Torres, 38, and Diego Ortiz, 30, were unemployed illegal immigrants from Colombia. Torres was deported to Colombia in 1999 after a 1994 cocaine-related conviction.

Why, oh why, do people cry RACISM when a couple of SCUMBAGS get blasted WHILE PERPETRATING A CRIME?!?!

Scumbags are scumbags, period. Since our government was clearly not capable of defending us from these two particular scumbags, what are we supposed to do?

Again: I think the guy made a bad decision. I'm not sure he shoulda been entirely no-billed, although since there were two dead guys on his lawn, the law's hands may be tied: there may not be a way to recommend probation or whatnot.

c.

This will get me shunned for sure but I kind of like some of those Texas laws about protecting property.

I think it's a tad more complicated than that. If I remember it correctly, a police detective had JUST pulled up to the scene, and witnessed the two crooks coming at the man. Yeah, he could've cowered in his house and HOPED the police caught the bad guys: in my experience that has happened, well, not at all.

I lived in Houston for six years, in a nice older neighborhood, and I can easily picture myself in the same situation. Why? Because in my neighborhood we looked out for each other.

Here in Austin I had my home burglarized: they kicked in the back door and took lots of small stuff, broad daylight one weekday. Cops said don't expect anything: file your insurance and forget about it. Thanks.

I think the guy made a bad choice. And I think the two stiffs made a whole bunch of bad choices. Maybe the guy shoulda gotten probation, I don't know. But to condemn him outright is a gross oversimplification.

Peace,

c.

This guy was CLEARED?? I couldn't listen to the whole 911 call, but the operator told him at least 8 times NOT to go outside. And yet he did, with the express purpose of killing the two alleged burglars. He wasn't being threatened (until he went outside) and neither was his property.

I think this is just outrageous.

I agree. That's Texas justice, I guess.

This guy was CLEARED?? I couldn't listen to the whole 911 call, but the operator told him at least 8 times NOT to go outside. And yet he did, with the express purpose of killing the two alleged burglars. He wasn't being threatened (until he went outside) and neither was his property.

I think this is just outrageous.

HOUSTON - A Texas man who shot and killed two men he suspected of burglarizing his neighbor's home cleared in the shootings Monday by a grand jury.

Joe Horn, 61, shot the two men in November after he saw them crawling out the windows of a neighbor's house in the Houston suburb of Pasadena.

Horn called 911 and told the dispatcher he had a shotgun and was going to kill the men. The dispatcher pleaded with him not to go outside, but Horn confronted the men with a 12-gauge shotgun and shot both in the back.

"The message we're trying to send today is the criminal justice system works," Harris County District Attorney Kenneth Magidson said.

Horn's attorney, Tom Lambright, has said his client believed the two men had broken into his neighbor's home and that he shot them only when they came into his yard and threatened him.

The suspected burglars, Hernando Riascos Torres, 38, and Diego Ortiz, 30, were unemployed illegal immigrants from Colombia. Torres was deported to Colombia in 1999 after a 1994 cocaine-related conviction.

The episode touched off protests from civil rights activists who said the shooting was racially motivated and that Horn took the law into his own hands. Horn's supporters defended his actions, saying he was protecting himself and being a good neighbor to a homeowner who was out of town.

"I understand the concerns of some in the community regarding Mr. Horn's conduct," Magidson said. "The use of deadly force is carefully limited in Texas law to certain circumstances ... In this case, however, the grand jury concluded that Mr. Horn's use of deadly force did not rise to a criminal offense."

Lambright did not immediately return a phone call seeking comment from The Associated Press.

Texas law allows people to use deadly force to protect themselves if it is reasonable to believe they are in mortal danger. In limited circumstances, people also can use deadly force to protect a neighbor's property; for example, if a homeowner asks a neighbor to watch over his property while he's out of town.

It's not clear whether the neighbor whose home was burglarized asked Horn to watch over his house.

Good points, every one.



..."be knowledgeable about gun laws"... Indeed: ignorance and good ol'fashioned stupidity contribute mightily to the deaths you noted.

My HP40 came from the factory with a discharged casing for that very reason: it's not required in Texas, but FN Herstal figures it's better to cover that base from the git-go. I assume if it HAD been required, the transferring FFL holder would be required to submit it. Paperwork paperwork paperwork, as some have noted, but I would have no problem with it.

c.

The point of my *bump* post was to see if anybody actually read my original post which made several(I think interesting) comments about Guns 'n America, specifically from the perspective of my time in Florida, a state where it's pretty easy to get a permit and which, according to Sunday's Indian River Press Journal, has the highest number of concealed-carry permits in the United States.

I also commented on the SCOTUS decision which ignored the first 13 words of the Second Amendment. As well, I commented on the coming into force on July 1 of a Florida State law that overturns the right of private property-owning businesses to ban guns in the cars of employees and customers parked in their parking lots. You see, lots of people carry their guns under the front seat of their vehicle, which is quite legal down there, and some business owners worry about the safety of people on their property and wished to reduce the possibility of gun violence where they run their businesses.

My comments were really directed at the larger issue of a gun-culture in America riding on the shoulders of the Right to Bear Arms.

But then I am a Canucker, after all, and I have been told by some RPeeps that my opinions about la vida Americana are largely irrelevant and don't matter.

So, Mugs, my self-deprecating *bump* post was more in that vein than any comment about the right to own guns in Canada or any other country. Your reply to my *bump* confirms my suspicion that nobody read the original post.

...
The District intends to require that the person be knowledgeable about the District's gun laws and that the guns be subject to a ballistics test which will be kept on record so as to match that gun to any fuure crimes, and will consider many other options.
...