Quanell X humiliated, marginalized by large crowd in Pasadena

Just like shooting dip****s that break into houses is common sense.

 

no...

my point was to say that there are and should be consequences to breaking the law.

if i meant to inflame, i wouldnt have acknowledged that my example was extreme...

please dont put me in the same boat as quannell x.

 

and again, who argued that there wasn't, if you knew your point was "extreme" why even use it.

it doesn't even make sense, yeah people are put to death, after they've been caught tried and convicted.

 

whats "reasonable belief" you ask...

from: http://www.self-defender.net/law3.htm

Reasonable Belief

"It is not necessary that there should be actual danger, as a person has the right to defend his life and person from apparent danger as fully and to the same extent as he would have were the danger real, as it reasonably appeared to him from his standpoint at the time."

"In fact, Sec 9.31(a) [of the Penal Code] expressly provides that a person is justified in using deadly force against another when and to the degree he reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary."

 

and when dip ****s who want to take the law into their own hands start getting shot, will that be common sense?

 

It's a risk you take to do what is right. The evil doers who support crime and the thugs will eventually get theirs in the end.

 

you want a less extreme example...

ok so she doesnt get raped... shes robbed and then murdered...

had horn not shot these burglars, they would have gotten away scott free... and theyd probably commit the same crime but maybe next time someone is in the house and they have to kill the witness/victim... or maybe as theyre makes an escape, they cause car accidents that kill innocent people...

dont feel like getting into a typing match w/ you...

i respect your point of view that life is more precious than material goods. but im sure the burglars dont hold your same point of view bc they placed their own lives on he line for the material good that they stole.

please put this thread to rest. let the prosecutor do his job. the law concerning deadly force seems pretty clear cut to me. but like i said, this is up to the prosecutor (and judge/jury if it does go to trial).

 

who's supporting crime. I'm against vigilante justice, I don't joe six pick chasing down burglars with his daddy's shot gun down my street.

 

now youre being extreme

 

what's extreme about that? just because you have a gun doesn't mean you are trained. since you want to logically leap, here's something more reasonable, lets assume the burglars had guns, and lets assume that shot back, do you really want shoot outs like this in your neighborhood.

I can guarantee you one thing, criminals who rob houses, want stop because of this news, they'll just start packing heat.

 

what??? i have no idea what your point is...

i said youre being extreme bc you say that now there are going to be roaming mobs of vigilantes. i doubt that would happen.

 

read post #67 and then take a deep breath...

you need to take it down a notch.

 

uh, what did I say about roaming mobs of vigilantes. I said I don't want a person taking justice into his hands who isn't trained as a law enforcement official.

kind of like the story.

 

Yeah, that's a huge problem compared to burglaries and home invasions. Too bad this guy didn't live next door to Sean Taylor. Quanelly X should be protesting against those burglars and home invaders. For some reason I don't see it happening.

 

says the guy who brought up rape and murder

 

because no one knows him in miami?

 

while this man alone isn't a roaming mob...i think that's exactly what happened in this case. the authorities said, "please don't go over there." he told them he was going to anyway, because he was going to kill them. he went over with his gun and did just that. that's textbook vigilante.

 

true we dont want complete novices running around with guns. but according to texas law, he has the right to defend his neighbors property. and as far as being reckless... according to texas law, if someone is reckless, then they lose their right to use deadly force. and most likely will be prosecuted for being reckless...

from: http://www.self-defender.net/law3.htm

Justification for Using Deadly Force Can Be Lost

"Even though a person is justified in threatening or using force or deadly force against another in self defense or defense of others or property as described in the statute, if in doing so he also recklessly injures or kills an innocent third person, the justification for deadly force is unavailable."

"A person acts recklessly when he is aware of but consciously disregards a substantial and unjustifiable risk with respect to the circumstances surrounding his conduct or the results of his conduct. The risk must be of such a nature and degree that its disregard constitutes a gross deviation of the standard of care that an ordinary person would exercise, viewed from the person's standpoint under all the circumstances existing at the time."




if you dont like the law then petition the texas legislator to change it.

 

but did he break the law?

thats up to the legal system to determine.