White Texas Property Owner Avoids Arrest After Killing Moroccan Driver

And what point is it that you think I'm making? Quote my post and explain.

Because I have pointed out that: 1) the homeowner's statement indicates he was chasing a trespasser, which you're not allowed to do under 9.42. According to the reporting the car starts in the driveway and ends up in the street; and 2) that you are allowed to chase a thief absconding with property even though they might be running away under 9.42.

So what is it that you think I've refuted and proven for you?

 

Your point is just your opinion. You are simply trying to prop it up with name dropping.

 

You claimed you knew what they knew. Not what they documented.

What are you a psychic?

 

I wont be copying other posts but my point is that you cant use a gun to detain someone and your claim that this isnt so in Texas. You still cant despite your protests.

 

Except you can use a gun to detain someone and even kill them for attempting to abscond with stolen property at night. See TPC 9.42.
Its just that here the crime occurring at night is not one covered by 9.42 making the use of force illegal.

My points are both correct.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Horn_shooting_controversy
^ For your edification

 

That would be killing them to prevent your property from being stolen, NOT killing them because you want to detain them.

 

Look at the other crimes in 9.42. Notice how some of them require only an attempt and then you can shoot them to hold them if they flee?

Sure you do.

Please stop this foolishness.

 

I'll wait for the trial and then we will see who is the fool.

 

I said the exact same thing and the same guy harassed the hell out of me for it.

 

What do you mean? This guy in the OP thread is going in, his statement indicates he was relying on trespass or mischief which is not covered by 9.42.

You seem somewhat confused and unable to follow the conversation.

 

O please. Both of you pronounced your opinion on the likely final outcome of the trial, as did I, and we are discussing it and disagreeing. Neither of you are awaiting the jury finding, you've both made your decision.
No one harassed you, how hyperbolic can you get?

 

I will wait for the Jury to render their verdict.

 

As will we all. That doesn't mean its exactly a mystery as to what the law provides for facts as we have them now.
And you've already given your opinion you think the dude is going to walk so don't play pretend like you haven't.

 

I never said any such thing - I stated what the law IS in Texas with respect to the use of deadly force, by a reasonable person, with respect to the protection of property.

I am not going to go through 700-posts with you, over this, again.

 

Please simply scroll back to my multi quoted post response to you compiling your stated decision. It was only a few days ago at this point, you should be able to find it easily.
I'm certainly not going to do it again, I already showed you making the decision I have no need to do it twice.

 

Ah, you were speaking of hypotheticals. In such hypothetical situations you cant use a gun to detain someone and shoot them if they fail to remain, because you believe they committed a crime and need to see the police.

 

In such a hypothetical you actually very much can see 9.42 for the list.

 

It's in the statement of a liar, and nowhere does he remotely claim he was blinded. You know my argument, and you remain to have no rebuttal why I should trust a liar, and your inventing he was blinded. Hence my point stands that he was able to see who he was going to kill. And I fail to see a problem to pop the race card over it.

How about you go quote the cops, and I will look at it.

That is indeed a fact. Yet you are pushing in fiction to come up with excuses.

Point remains that your random violent far right winger got no problem distinguishing Berbers from ethnic Europeans... due to skin color. All you got going is hide behind a paperwal, that is hardly there since the US considers Berbers to be Arabs as well.

 

You mean the US government that sometimes does and sometimes does not differentiate if Arabs / Berbers are white or not.... which does not prove at all you can not be racist as an ethnic European towards an Arab / Berber. What matters is that the US government keeps track of racist attacks against Arabs / Berbers .... https://www.justice.gov/crt/combating-post-911-discriminatory-backlash-6

 

My point is what the University of Stanford has to say... which is absolutely not my opinion. lol
Your rebuttal is only just you puny little opinion.

 

You don't need to be a psychic when you read the report of Stanford university.

 

All you have is name dropping that name doesn't equal truth you have to have some more to prove what you're claiming.

I'm not impressed that you state the name of a university.

 

You've lost what you were talking about I understand stating the phrase Stanford University fills you with pride but it doesn't mean anything.

 

The point you are making, doesn't have nearly the strength you think it does.

 

It's not name dropping when I sourced their research. Research that you were unable to debunk with a source.