If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
What part of that sentence doesn't say death sentence?
LOL
Seriously? The entire part.
ARe you serious?
Mr. HOrn didnt' go out and point the gun and say stop or firing a warning shot...he stated his intentions...and followed thru.
Sorry, i guess i just take people at their word...especially when they are consistent.
Did you listen to the tape? He gave them a clear warning to freeze.
Has anybody here read any of the news stories beyond the NY Times article? Both of the deceased were convicted felons. Both had been previously convicted and one (Ortiz, I believe), was sentenced to 25 years for dealing cocaine and was deported in 1999. Both were members of a Houston burglary ring which was also selling illegal weapons. That probably has something to do with why there aren't more people angry with Joe Horn.
The plainclothes detective who was on the scene when the two men were shot (but for some reason wasn't doing anything) attested that Ortiz began running towards Horn when he came outside, then began angling away when he was shot in the back (probably because he saw the shotgun), which is why Horn felt threatened (and why he didn't go to trial).
I'm moving about 20 minutes away from where this happened, and I sure as hell am glad these two aren't around to break into my future home. Knowing Houston PD and the American legal system, if they were to catch them, they definitely would be back on the streets by now.
As someone I was discussing this with said to me, "What is a human life worth? Apparently these two thought it was worth risking for $2,000."
...is that not a death sentence? Did he not carry it out?
Ok Mr. Bigguns. A death sentence is handed down by the state, and carried out by the state. Those two dudes just got themselves shot in a botched robbery attempt. There's a HUGE difference - even in crackhead land.
Don't be stupid here Ty.
A better analogy of a death sentence would be you trying to defend your silly statement.
I'm fleeing this thread. How's that? And I didn't take anything so there's no need to shoot. I think I'm siding with the logic that says if you don't wanna get shot, stay out of other people's houses in areas where they likely have shotguns...
"Greatness is not an act... but a habit.Greatness is not an act... but a habit." -Greg Jennings
I'm fleeing this thread. How's that? And I didn't take anything so there's no need to shoot. I think I'm siding with the logic that says if you don't wanna get shot, stay out of other people's houses in areas where they likely have shotguns...
I feel safer already knowing that you're giving up your life of crime.
I'm fleeing this thread. How's that? And I didn't take anything so there's no need to shoot. I think I'm siding with the logic that says if you don't wanna get shot, stay out of other people's houses in areas where they likely have shotguns...
I feel safer already knowing that you're giving up your life of crime.
If we have be be afraid of MJZiggy's "life of crime," then the whole country is going to pot!"
The NYT article makes a big deal out of race. I don't think race has anything to do with it. Would a black homeowner who shot a burglar get off scot free? Yes. See the following link for evidence (about 1 minute into the video):
Is what the guy did legal? I'm not too familiar with the castle doctrine, but it sounds like what he did was within the law.
Is what the guy did morally right? That's for each individual to decide, but I think everyone can agree that robbing a house isn't within good morals, so I guess the guys got what was coming to them.
"I've got one word for you- Dallas, Texas, Super Bowl"- Jermichael Finley
Is what the guy did legal? I'm not too familiar with the castle doctrine, but it sounds like what he did was within the law.
Well, a Grand Jury looked at the evidence and declined to indict him. I'll take their word for it that what he did was within the law. It was probably right at the edge of legal/illegal, but apparently they decided it was on the legal side of that line.
I read a story once about a man who was in a similar situation and didn't shoot because they were fleeing. 3 nights later the same burglers broke into his house when he left for bowling night. His teenage daughter came home from her part time job and surprised the poor burglers who didn't deserve the death sentence 3 days earlier. They raped and killed her.
I guess this guy did the "moral" thing...but I'm not so sure he is happy with his decision. After all, no way those guys deserved the death sentence for a mere non violent break in.
The only time success comes before work is in the dictionary -- Vince Lombardi
I think this situation is the perfect illustration of the problem with guns. You start with the argument that people need guns for self-defense. OK, the effectiveness is debatable, but I can buy into that argument. Then you have a redneck state like Texas that extends the law to include protection of property under the concept of "self-defense."
Now we're at the point where if you see teenagers stealing beer out of your neighbor's garage, you can waste them with a shotgun. LAter on, if it turns out they were just cleaning out the garage you are in trouble, but otherwise, cool.
You can not trust people to limit the use of guns to "self defense." If you lsiten to this incident, its perfectly clear that this guy was just angry that some black guys (who turned out to be brown) might get away with burglary of his neighbor. Anger is now a justification for murder.
It is not shocking what this guy did. What is shocking is the number of people that think its OK. We really have lost our way.
Comment