• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Was This Shooting/Killing Justified?

Something is not right if she was breaking into his home with a crowbar but found dead on the side walk would she not be by the door or close to the home . I have many questions that need to be answered so I can pass judgment .

It was an apartment, not a house. Therefore it would be easy to find her on the sidewalk.
 
It was an apartment, not a house. Therefore it would be easy to find her on the sidewalk.

So would she not be closer to the apartment ? I think she may have been trying to get away from the place since she may have seen the guy with the gun but the guy just shoot her when she was running away therefore not justifiable since she would not be a threat to his safety as well as since the sidewalk is public property and not a crime to be on , but that is just assumptions .
 
Thank heavens the kids across the hall weren't injured or killed by the bullets that pierced their apartment. From KHOU readers' comments, it appears that the complex is in a less-than-desirable neighborhood, and this perhaps explains why the shooter fired. What it doesn't explain, as observed by one of the readers, is why he didn't call 9-11. There's not much info available yet, but what if one of those teens had been killed?
In my Utah CCW class they told us to never call 911.

We were told to have someone else call.

The reason being is a 911 call made by the shooter is admisable as evidence against the shooter, while a 911 call made by someone else is circomstanchial at best, if not hearsay.

We were also told not to talk to the responding police except to identify ourselves and say "let me talk to my lawyer and I will submit a full statement". Do not say anything else to anyone. Not just the police, but anyone, as all that stuff can be subpoenaed.

About that full statement, it should read: "On <date> at approximately <time> someone tried to force their way into my home. I was in fear for my life and fired my legaly owned firearm to stop the assult". ***end of statement***

Give the prosecution nothing.
 
So would she not be closer to the apartment ? I think she may have been trying to get away from the place since she may have seen the guy with the gun but the guy just shoot her when she was running away therefore not justifiable since she would not be a threat to his safety as well as since the sidewalk is public property and not a crime to be on , but that is just assumptions .

My point was, I used to live in an apartment that was right up against the sidewalk.
 
My point was, I used to live in an apartment that was right up against the sidewalk.

Well I guess their is much more info to the location of the apartment to the sidewalk .
 
Well I guess their is much more info to the location of the apartment to the sidewalk .

True. But we can't make assumptions, the question was about an opinion based on what we know, not hypotheticals.
 
True. But we can't make assumptions, the question was about an opinion based on what we know, not hypotheticals.

I did say it was a assumption but a educated one the guy was shooting from his door not inside of his house .
 
Not enough information given for me to decide. Firing without knowing what (or who) your rounds may hit is not justified IMHO.
I'm with you on this one. Even the US military (typically) verifies their target before firing. Shooting through a closed door because something sounds funny is not target verification.

yes, she had a crowbar and it was reasonable to preceive her as a threat.
The shooter couldn't see the crowbar or the would-be theif when they fired. The only "threat" here was a suspicious sound, not nearly enough evidence to take someone's life.
 
Last edited:
Yes, it is justified. In Texas, you have the right to defend yourself and your property. If anyone was trying to force themselves into my home at night, I would shoot.
Would you actually fire through a closed door because you heard some funny sounds? That doesn't sound like you.
 
I'm with you on this one. Even the US military (typically) verifies their target before firing. Shooting through a closed door because something sounds funny is not target verification.

The shooter couldn't see the crowbar or the would-be theif when they fired. The only "threat" here was a suspicious sound, not nearly enough evidence to take someone's life.
The only time we're allowed to fire on a target we can't see is when applying supressive fire so other assult elements can manuver.

Otherwise we absolutly have to identify a target before firing.
 
It's a really bad idea to take the shot before the suspect is through the door. We hear all to often about someone taking out a loved one who was "trying to make a point" or taking out a drunk who happened to be at the wrong door. Apartments are notorious for drunks showing up at the wrong place.
 
The way I read it the first time I thought the crow bar was seen. I stand corrected, I am beginning to think this was not a justifiable shooting.
 
The only time we're allowed to fire on a target we can't see is when applying supressive fire so other assult elements can manuver.

Otherwise we absolutly have to identify a target before firing.

Your fellow friendlies appreciate that!!!
 
Would you actually fire through a closed door because you heard some funny sounds? That doesn't sound like you.

No. I said if someone was trying to force their way into my home, I would shoot. There's a difference between funny sounds, and forcible entry.
 
No. I said if someone was trying to force their way into my home, I would shoot. There's a difference between funny sounds, and forcible entry.
The the thing is, even when you are in all otherways right and justified to shoot, you can't aim if you cannot see your target. You can mis, like the shooter in OP missed, and risk hitting innocent people.
 
The the thing is, even when you are in all otherways right and justified to shoot, you can't aim if you cannot see your target. You can mis, like the shooter in OP missed, and risk hitting innocent people.

In my home, that would not be the case.
 
Found this which may give some insight.

Homeowner Shoots Tourist by Mistake In Texas, Police Say
Published: January 08, 1994

A businessman from Aberdeen, Scotland, wandering a wealthy neighborhood in search of a telephone after a night of drinking, was shot and killed early this morning by a homeowner who took him for a burglar, the police said.

Andrew De Vries, 28, who was in Houston on a business trip, was shot twice after he pounded "in a furious manner" on the back door of a home in an exclusive neighborhood on the city's west side about 4 A.M., said Alvin Wright, a spokesman for the Houston Police Department.

"The homeowner saw two men at his back fence," Mr. Gamino said. "He then saw one of the men climb over his fence and hit the back door." The homeowner, believing that his home was being invaded, fired a pistol three times through the door. Mr. De Vries died at the scene, but Mr. Graves was not harmed.

The police said they had no plans to charge the homeowner with a crime, although the case, like all shootings in Texas, will be referred to a grand jury.

In deciding not to press charges in the case today, the Houston police appeared to regard the shooting as misguided self-defense. In the past year, there have been several incidents in Houston in which burglars have knocked down doors in the middle of the night to rob or assault residents.

Homeowner Shoots Tourist by Mistake In Texas, Police Say - NYTimes.com

The shooter, however, should pay handsomely for shooting into another apartment dweller's abode.
 
HOUSTON – A northwest Houston apartment resident shot and killed a woman who was trying to break into his home early Tuesday, according to Houston police.
Police received a call about a suspicious person at a complex in the 6000 block of Hollister, just north of W. Tidwell Road, around 4 a.m.
Officers arrived to find a woman, who was in her 20s, lying on the sidewalk with a crowbar in her hand. She had been shot to death.
Police said the woman had been trying to pry open the front door of an apartment when the 23-year-old resident, who feared for his safety, fired three shots through the front door. Two of them hit the woman and the other went into the bedroom of teenagers who lived in a separate unit. Luckily, they were not harmed.
The woman’s identity is being withheld pending verification from the Harris County Institute of Forensic Sciences.
The case is being referred to the Harris County grand jury.

This is from the Houston Chroncile and it happened on June 18, 2013. QUESTION: Is this shooting justified? Was the resident's life in jeoprody? To me the resident was justified because one does not wiat to make certain they will be attacked instead one has to make the life or death decision.

Right as rain!
 
Cause he damn near shot the neighbors, poor form.

Optimal words: damn near

IF the stray bullet had struck someone else, then he would be accountable for this action.
 
It's a really bad idea to take the shot before the suspect is through the door. We hear all to often about someone taking out a loved one who was "trying to make a point" or taking out a drunk who happened to be at the wrong door. Apartments are notorious for drunks showing up at the wrong place.

With a crowbar in hand? I doubt it.
 
HOUSTON – A northwest Houston apartment resident shot and killed a woman who was trying to break into his home early Tuesday, according to Houston police.
Police received a call about a suspicious person at a complex in the 6000 block of Hollister, just north of W. Tidwell Road, around 4 a.m.
Officers arrived to find a woman, who was in her 20s, lying on the sidewalk with a crowbar in her hand. She had been shot to death.
Police said the woman had been trying to pry open the front door of an apartment when the 23-year-old resident, who feared for his safety, fired three shots through the front door. Two of them hit the woman and the other went into the bedroom of teenagers who lived in a separate unit. Luckily, they were not harmed.
The woman’s identity is being withheld pending verification from the Harris County Institute of Forensic Sciences.
The case is being referred to the Harris County grand jury.

This is from the Houston Chroncile and it happened on June 18, 2013. QUESTION: Is this shooting justified? Was the resident's life in jeoprody? To me the resident was justified because one does not wiat to make certain they will be attacked instead one has to make the life or death decision.



It is going to depend on the exact letter of state laws on self-defense, and also to some degree on jury perceptions.

In very broad terms, this was justifiable self-defense by the standards of many states. There was a forcible break-in attempt (prying the door), the intruder was armed (crowbar), the resident was in fear of bodily harm (reasonably by most standards).

However, the devil is in the details. Some states have specific rules about when intruders are shootable; for instance my home state of SC assumes they are shootable simply from the act of breaking in. Just north of us, however, NC has far more elaborate protocols about break-ins and use of force... in NC this action might have been called into question for a number of reasons.

The single biggest problem is shooting through the door without a clear target visible in sight. This is generally a bad idea, both on a pragmatic level and on a legal level. While most states with reasonable home-defense laws do not actively require you to identify your target prior to shooting, it is always a good idea.

Also if he'd had an actual target to shoot at he might not have come perilously close to harming a bystander as he nearly did.


On the whole I expect a finding of self-defense, unless there's something unusual about TX law I am unaware of.... but shooting through the door is generally a bad idea folks. Wait until you have an identifiable target.
 
With a crowbar in hand? I doubt it.

The crowbar would be an indication of a threat and would warrant the wielder getting ventilated.....once they made it through the door and the target could be identified.
 
The crowbar would be an indication of a threat and would warrant the wielder getting ventilated.....once they made it through the door and the target could be identified.

Not true in Texas, thank God!
 
Μολὼν λαβέ;1061948272 said:
Found this which may give some insight.

Homeowner Shoots Tourist by Mistake In Texas, Police Say - NYTimes.com

The shooter, however, should pay handsomely for shooting into another apartment dweller's abode.
So the guy just knocked on the door? See this is why you need to see him and identify your target. That could have been a cop, or someone running from an assault, or medical emergency.
 
Back
Top Bottom