Sensible gun control is a dead issue, thanks to the Supreme Court and the feckless Democratic leadership. You won’t even hear Barack Obama talk about it. McCain has also shifted right on guns.
I’d like to know what the candidates think about Joe Horn, the homicidal vigilante who was acquitted by a Texas grand jury yesterday for shooting two burglars.
Your thoughts are also welcome, but don’t comment unless you’ve listened to the 911 tape.
Wow. I hadn’t heard of this case at all. Thanks for sharing the acquittal story and the video.
I don’t know that I have too much substantive to say (if anything) but I’d like to know how scared he really was for his life – the test in the statute if I’m reading correctly – if he shot both burglars in the back?
If he got them to flee – which isn’t the same thing as stopping the crime, something he seems intent on from the beginning of the 911 call – isn’t that an acceptable outcome.
If he was truly afraid, wouldn’t having them leave seem reasonable?
Plus, how could he live with himself now knowing that an officer in street clothes was on the scene?
Crazy stuff.
The grand jury were obviously idiots. Unfortunately there is no guarantee the system will protect us from idiocy. Can you say civil suit?
What’s your definition of “sensible gun control?”
Without getting into specifics, my idea of sensible gun control would entail:
Criminal background checks
No gun show loopholes
Waiting periods
Ban on assault weapons
I don’t think people should carry guns into bars or airports (as Georgia now allows). Or, as the NRA suggests, on college campuses. Drunken frat boys, armed with weapons — good idea.
From the sounds of the 911 tape I don’t have a problem with what Joe Horn did to defend his right to life, liberty and property.
I support the second amendment strongly. The Founders supported it too, not necessarily because of an occasional law breaker, but to defend oneself from tyranny.
Thanks for the clarification – which by the way was full of specifics. It helps put some perspective to your post.
I think Joe Horn is an asshat and what he did was way out of line. However, when the guy(s) came on his property and were walking towards him in what could be considered a threatening manner, Joe was handed his license to protect himself.
Let’s change the scenario some: Asshat Joe does the same exact thing, but instead of a gun he’s brandishing a Good Housekeeping Approved floor mop. When the criminal walks towards him in a threatening manner, what are the chances Joe’s going to get beat to shit? By criminals in the country illegally.
Had the two criminals had just broken into the house next door and then walked down the street ignoring Joe, the robbery would have been just one more cold case “for the books.”
I see the gun lobby shill has shown up late to the thread, having moved at the speed of Google. Posting in its wake feels somewhat like making tea with hand-me-down bags. Still, this sounds like one of those football cases, where details are buried or rejected, for fear of spreading independent thought. That being said, some notes:
Where was the getaway car and/or subdivision exit? Their location can indicate intent of the robbers: get away or hit the next house.
I keep hearing (lack of) conviction and acquittal, but were charges even filed? This was a grand jury, not a trial jury, right? IIRC, there’s a large difference between grand jury producing no charges, and a trial jury acquitting of a specific set of charges. Specifically, “no charges” means “not even manslaughter, failure to obey peace officer, obstruction, or any other charge that could stem from shooting two robbers with a 911 operator on the phone.
Heeey! I thought Joe Horn was a much younger black man, former baller for the Saints and Birds, baby. He would never do something like this!
[...] over at atlmalcontent you can read about an even dumber vigilante with much more tragic consequences. [...]
it struck me as i was linking back to this, that someone like this may now be able to bring a firearm onto the train i ride to work everyday.
just great.
There is no question in my mind that no one’s life is worth $2000 worth of jewelry and cash. But the persons who first need to hear and understand that are perpetrators of crimes. It isn’t of any value for me to think no one’s life is worth that if the person committing the crime thinks his life is worth less than $2000.
I don’t want to see anyone get the death penalty for a $200 burglary, but should they just get off scott free? I heard the tape, Horn yelled, ‘Move and you’re dead.’ He tried to hold them for the police, which is why he took his phone out to the confrontation. I think this would have never happened if a guy with a long criminal record hadn’t wanted to lengthen his record.
Our society needs to start caring more for the rights of VICTIMS than they do about the rights of CRIMINALS. Until that day arrives, I’d be glad to have Joe Horn for a neighbor. Let criminals be afraid.
All are in place, to varying extents.
Criminal background checks – all states
No gun show loopholes – see below
Waiting periods – most states
Ban on assault weapons – banned since unless purchaser has a highly exclusive Federal license requiring finger prints, extensive background checks and recommendation from local law enforcement
The supposed “gun show loophole” involves transations between private sellers, which occur outside of gun shows. ALL sales by licensed dealers, even at gun shows, require background checks. One study by the Department of Justice showed that only 2% of all firearms used by convicted criminals came from gun shows.