Zen Bastard (jimbojones) wrote,
Zen Bastard

  • Mood:

holy shit, a non-Janis update?!

So, right now there is a giant controversy over the Joe Horn case. In a nutshell, a 61-year old retired engineer witnessed two Columbian illegal immigrants break into a neighbor's home, called 911, saw the perps leaving and still hadn't seen any cops arrive, told the 911 operator he was going to go out and shoot the perps rather than let them get away. He went outside and was heard clearly challenging the perps - who he had witnessed leaving his neighbor's house with the proverbial burglar's sack o' loot - "move and you're dead."

According to his testimony, the perps looked at each other, and one started over his lawn toward him. When he shouldered his shotgun, the perps both broke and ran instead. He shot three times and killed both men, after a long pause audible on the (unbroken) 911 call. The men turned out to be unemployed illegal Columbian immigrants, with prior felony convictions, as well as $2,000-ish in loot from Horn's neighbor's house.

Horn's case was put before a grand jury, who were given all the particulars of the case, and after deliberation refused to indict Horn. Horn's defense cited the Castle Doctrine, which is a Texas law permitting use of deadly force in defense of home and property; this was probably not applicable, strictly speaking, in Horn's case as defense of a neighbor's property is only covered with the neighbor's permission, which it is unclear that Horn had. Without this explicit permission, the grand jury's refusal to indict is an example of jury nullification, itself a hot topic all over the country as, apparently, very few American citizens understand the concept anymore.

Counter-example: also in Texas, one month ago, a different old man shot out his front window and killed an "intruder" who turned out to be a 15 year old neighbor crossing his yard with a friend. This case was also brought before a grand jury, and that grand jury promptly indicted that old man for murder.

Question: why is this "broken", and how would "fixing" it make society any "better"?

You show me a case where the old man who shoots through the window without warning and kills a neighbor doesn't get indicted, and I will promptly get outraged as fuck. But you're going to have difficulty finding a case like that to show me. In the meantime, I'm not too worried about Joe Horn - yes, he needed to be brought before a grand jury; but yes, he also probably deserved for them to refuse to indict.

Tags: 2nd amendment, law, news

  • Post a new comment


    Anonymous comments are disabled in this journal

    default userpic

    Your IP address will be recorded