Wish I had neighbors like this....

[israfael]

First, Sean Taylor is a completely different story. Those burglars broke into HIS house while he slept.

Yes, it is a different story, but maybe if his neighbor confronted the shooters when they broke in a week earlier, he'd still be alive, and it would be the same story.

As to the rest of it, yes, he did make a judgment call on whether they were civilians or criminals, and it appears to be a good call, as they were determined to be breaking into his neighbor’s house.  And yes, crimes will continue to happen everywhere. Even though statistically, crime rates are lower where people exercise their right to defend themselves and those they care about, nothing will apparently effectively deter one hundred percent of crime.

These are good points, and you may be correct on more than these.  All i was saying was that personally, regardless of law and judicial precedent, or social approval and acceptance, i would not want to know someone died, whether at that time or in the future, because i stood by and did nothing.

[Doc Hollywood]

 

Mr. Horn went outside to confront these guys, with the intent of "stopping these guys," he did not stay inside his house as instructed by the dispatcher. The problem is that he took the step to escalate the situation, he had intent, and he acted on the intent. In fact, if I were the prosecutor, I would argue that Mr. Horn could not have acted in self-defense because he was the aggressor.

Second, the hallmark of our judicial system is innocent until proven guilty. This is what our system relies on and if it fails, then our justice system goes with it. Hell, what if, hypothetically, these guys were movers? What if they went around the back first, and came out the front door with a TV? Mr. Horn wouldn't know because by his own admission he doesn't know those people very well. The outcome would be the same, but the discussion would be quite different. We would be saying that Mr. Horn overreacted, and he should be punished to the fullest extent of the law.

Finally, crimes will continue to happen everywhere. This is why people still commit capital murder, even if it means the death penalty. Unfortunately, there is no absolute in crime deterrence as even death does not scare everyone.

If you were the prosecuter you would have the benefit of a sound legal education and would think like a lawyer.  And you would see this situation very differently.  Except the judge would not allow you to present any evidence that Mr. Horn "was the aggressor" because the law does not require Mr. Horn to "retreat."  You know, rules of evidence and constitutional protections and all..... they are also a "hallmark" of our judicial system.

Innocent until proven guilty ... ?   OK, unless it applies to Mr. Horn who you have already convicted it seems.

Hey Cheese, I know you and you are a good guy.... and I even respect your opinion here ... I'm just looking for some better premise......

The clear fact is the dispatcher has no authority above the law and the law allows Mr. Horn to shoot these two guys IF the facts as alleged and reported are proven to be true.  Mr. Horn had no duty to obey the dispatcher, and no duty to remain in his house.  

In any event... the Grand Jury will decide soon enough .....  better than an angry mob at least.....

[Cheeze_IZ_G00d]

 

Mr. Horn went outside to confront these guys, with the intent of "stopping these guys," he did not stay inside his house as instructed by the dispatcher. The problem is that he took the step to escalate the situation, he had intent, and he acted on the intent. In fact, if I were the prosecutor, I would argue that Mr. Horn could not have acted in self-defense because he was the aggressor.

Second, the hallmark of our judicial system is innocent until proven guilty. This is what our system relies on and if it fails, then our justice system goes with it. Hell, what if, hypothetically, these guys were movers? What if they went around the back first, and came out the front door with a TV? Mr. Horn wouldn't know because by his own admission he doesn't know those people very well. The outcome would be the same, but the discussion would be quite different. We would be saying that Mr. Horn overreacted, and he should be punished to the fullest extent of the law.

Finally, crimes will continue to happen everywhere. This is why people still commit capital murder, even if it means the death penalty. Unfortunately, there is no absolute in crime deterrence as even death does not scare everyone.

If you were the prosecuter you would have the benefit of a sound legal education and would think like a lawyer.  And you would see this situation very differently.  Except the judge would not allow you to present any evidence that Mr. Horn "was the aggressor" because the law does not require Mr. Horn to "retreat."  You know, rules of evidence and constitutional protections and all..... they are also a "hallmark" of our judicial system.

Innocent until proven guilty ... ?   OK, unless it applies to Mr. Horn who you have already convicted it seems.

Hey Cheese, I know you and you are a good guy.... and I even respect your opinion here ... I'm just looking for some better premise......

The clear fact is the dispatcher has no authority above the law and the law allows Mr. Horn to shoot these two guys IF the facts as alleged and reported are proven to be true.  Mr. Horn had no duty to obey the dispatcher, and no duty to remain in his house.  

In any event... the Grand Jury will decide soon enough .....  better than an angry mob at least.....

I thought that you had already established the fact that the prosecution must prove that he was not acting in self-defense, right? It would seem to me that they would argue that but for the fact that Mr. Horn (I know this is cause-in-fact, but bear with me) came out of his house, there would have been no death. Although, like you said, if the statute is construed as you say it will be, then they will pin a medal on him. However, for me, castle doctrines should be for your own personal property. People should not be able to be Mr. neighborhood vigilante going around killing burglars, we already had the Wild West.

Innocent until proven guilty ... ?   OK, unless it applies to Mr. Horn who you have already convicted it seems.

Touche, sir.