Car owner shoots car thief

https://www.foxnews.com/us/would-be-car-burglar-shot-homeowner-texas

fox news.   this is a clear indication that maybe journalism should be teaching actual journalism rather than activism.

"The homeowner, who was armed, asked the suspect to leave the car, but the suspect became "aggressive," authorities said. The homeowner then fired twice at the suspect and died."

see the problem?

The homeowner then fired twice at the suspect and died
So the homeowner either had a heart attack or committed suicide after firing at the suspect

Leon Xiv wrote:The homeowner then fired twice at the suspect and died
So the homeowner either had a heart attack or committed suicide after firing at the suspect

he opened the thiefs wallet and there was a pic of mad maxine that he saw in their as he finger fxcked it.

This homeowner may have some legal problems.  I hope they have a good lawyer on retainer.  The law justifies shooting anybody who breaks into an "occupied vehicle".  The homeowner wasn't in the vehicle and I don't think he was committing a crime worth being shot over.  The homeowner would have to perceive a threat.  Like maybe he reached for a possible weapon before the homeowner shot him.

Edit: I see it was at 9pm. He may have grounds as criminal mischief at night is also a justification for deadly force. I'm not sure of the definition of "criminal mischief", but it sounds like a strong possibility. It's all up to the grand jury at this point.

Crusader wrote:This homeowner may have some legal problems.  I hope they have a good lawyer on retainer.  The law justifies shooting anybody who breaks into an "occupied vehicle".  The homeowner wasn't in the vehicle and I don't think he was committing a crime worth being shot over.  The homeowner would have to perceive a threat.  Like maybe he reached for a possible weapon before the homeowner shot him.

according to the article, at least one bullet bounced back and killed the homeowner. i dont think they will prosecute him as he be ded

jirqoadai wrote:

Crusader wrote:This homeowner may have some legal problems.  I hope they have a good lawyer on retainer.  The law justifies shooting anybody who breaks into an "occupied vehicle".  The homeowner wasn't in the vehicle and I don't think he was committing a crime worth being shot over.  The homeowner would have to perceive a threat.  Like maybe he reached for a possible weapon before the homeowner shot him.

according to the article, at least one bullet bounced back and killed the homeowner. i dont think they will prosecute him as he be ded

Do you have a different article? I don't see that the homeowner was shot. Only that the homeowner fired 2 shots.

Crusader wrote:

jirqoadai wrote:

Crusader wrote:This homeowner may have some legal problems.  I hope they have a good lawyer on retainer.  The law justifies shooting anybody who breaks into an "occupied vehicle".  The homeowner wasn't in the vehicle and I don't think he was committing a crime worth being shot over.  The homeowner would have to perceive a threat.  Like maybe he reached for a possible weapon before the homeowner shot him.

according to the article, at least one bullet bounced back and killed the homeowner. i dont think they will prosecute him as he be ded

Do you have a different article?  I don't see that the homeowner was shot.  Only that the homeowner fired 2 shots.

so how did the homeowner die?

jirqoadai wrote:

Crusader wrote:

jirqoadai wrote:

Crusader wrote:This homeowner may have some legal problems.  I hope they have a good lawyer on retainer.  The law justifies shooting anybody who breaks into an "occupied vehicle".  The homeowner wasn't in the vehicle and I don't think he was committing a crime worth being shot over.  The homeowner would have to perceive a threat.  Like maybe he reached for a possible weapon before the homeowner shot him.

according to the article, at least one bullet bounced back and killed the homeowner. i dont think they will prosecute him as he be ded

Do you have a different article?  I don't see that the homeowner was shot.  Only that the homeowner fired 2 shots.

so how did the homeowner die?

They fixed the article from "The homeowner then fired twice at the suspect and died" to "The homeowner then fired twice at the suspect, who died."

Crusader wrote:

jirqoadai wrote:

Crusader wrote:

jirqoadai wrote:

Crusader wrote:This homeowner may have some legal problems.  I hope they have a good lawyer on retainer.  The law justifies shooting anybody who breaks into an "occupied vehicle".  The homeowner wasn't in the vehicle and I don't think he was committing a crime worth being shot over.  The homeowner would have to perceive a threat.  Like maybe he reached for a possible weapon before the homeowner shot him.

according to the article, at least one bullet bounced back and killed the homeowner. i dont think they will prosecute him as he be ded

Do you have a different article?  I don't see that the homeowner was shot.  Only that the homeowner fired 2 shots.

so how did the homeowner die?

They fixed the article from "The homeowner then fired twice at the suspect and died" to "The homeowner then fired twice at the suspect, who died.

who died? you see, this is why almost all journalists should have their hands bound behind their backs with copper wire and a small garbage liner placed over their head.

Calypso Jones wrote:https://www.foxnews.com/us/would-be-car-burglar-shot-homeowner-texas

fox news.   this is a clear indication that maybe journalism should be teaching actual journalism rather than activism.

"The homeowner, who was armed, asked the suspect to leave the car, but the suspect became "aggressive," authorities said. The homeowner then fired twice at the suspect and died."

see the problem?  

I used to have a whole list of actual police statements like that. I'll see if I can find it.