'Justified homicides' more than doubled

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

One hour after revelers welcomed the new year in 2008, a motorist at a Northwest Side intersection fired three shots into 24-year-old Tomas Garza, moments after authorities said Garza threatened the motorist with a baseball bat in an apparent road-rage incident. The killing, the first of 137 recorded in San Antonio last year, was an act of self-defense, police later determined, and was classified by department officials as a justified homicide.

While the total number of killings in San Antonio barely budged in 2008 — up only slightly from the 134 recorded the prior year — detectives noted an upswing in cases in which the shooter was found to be within his rights, from instances of apparent self-defense to protecting one's home and family.

snip

Several of the Alamo City's justified homicide cases were classified as such under the state's “castle doctrine,” a law that allows property owners to resort to deadly force to protect themselves and their homes. Police Chief William McManus said San Antonians may have been more willing to protect themselves and their homes after gaining a better understanding of their rights. In last year's cases, McManus said, it appeared that “people are abiding by the law and acting within the law.”

snip

Link here: http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/37051824.html


Interesting stuff.

David

[Hugabear]

1. Who could have ever predicted this?

Surely nobody could have ever foreseen that these "Castle Doctrine" laws would lead to an increase in "justifiable" murders. What this does is basically condone vigilantism. Instead of trying to find another way out of a situation, just reach for your gun and kill the motherfucker. :sarcasm:

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

3. Rationalizing with armed criminals who kick in your front door isn't a very good idea.

[Hugabear]

10. The story in the OP doesn't involve "armed criminal kicking in your door"

It involved a motorist armed with a baseball bat.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

12. The story is about justifiable homicides not just the one case highlighted.

[Hugabear]

13. Exactly - and not every case involves someone breaking into your house

If you read further down the story, there's another case of a man killing somebody who hadn't broken into his house.

These new laws allow you to KILL somebody if you feel threatened - regardless of where you are. The old standard was that you had to try to find an alternate solution, flee, etc - deadly force was supposed to be a last resort. Now, you can resort to deadly force as your FIRST resort. Even if you have a chance to easily escape, you can still kill the person if you feel threatened.

You really think it's a surprise that with these more lenient laws, that "justifiable" homicides have doubled?

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

When did I say I was surprised?

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

15. When did I say I was surprised?

[ManiacJoe]

16. You seem to misunderstand the new laws.

Although it could be just bad phrasing in your short post.

The reasonableness test of the old laws still holds. However, you are now not required to use the bad tactics of "always fleeing".

[tburnsten]

21. "alternate solution"

Like being beaten to death, coma, or permament disability? Funny sense of what is "right"

[krispos42]

26. Not just feel threatened... feel in immediate danger of death or serious bodily harm

The other driver in a fender-bender scream at you probably doesn't count. The other driver screaming at you and trying to yank your door open or break in a window while you're inside waiting for the cops probably does count.

If you just "feel threatened" you'll be up on murder charges, because that's not enough.

[michreject]

20. Armed is armed

He shouldn't have brought a bat to a gun fight.

[AtheistCrusader]

27. Sure, being threatened with a baseball bat is no concern at all.

I wouldn't be worried. Can't kill me with one of those. If someone ever tries it, I'll just talk to them. That should do the trick.

[Fovea]

9. When in that situation

I had a gun, and did not shoot the MoFo.

But if I'd had a stick, I would have more than likely beaten him to death,
because I would have hit him, and then probably would not have stopped.

As it was, he left knowing that if I ever saw him again, I *would* shoot him.
And I got to work on time.

[slackmaster]

22. If it's justifiable, it's not a murder

HTH

[chrisa]

29. Another way, like...

Begging the guy with a bat to not bash your head in before he does it?

Do you really think a maniac charging at you with a baseball bat would stop?

[tucsonlib]

2. Justified Homicide?

Don't you mean "Righteous Shoot"?

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

4. Call them what you will.

[tucsonlib]

6. Then How About "Righteous Murder"?

Ask those extremists in Iraq to justify the beheading of hostages. Like you, they'll defend it as a "righteous" thing to have done.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

7. Sorry another poster already took that one.

[jeepnstein]

25. I prefer the term "Paid For"

[AtheistCrusader]

28. Justifiable Homicide

is the legal term. No point obfuscating.

[rrneck]

5. I wonder

how much of the increase in violent incidents are the result of a deteriorating economy?

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

8. There was only a slight increase in total murder numbers 134 to 137.

Hopefully the good guys just won more often.

David

[tularetom]

11. Don't expect the cops to kiss your ass if you take action against some creep

who comes onto your property with bad intentions. I've been there and if it weren't for the fact that our local sheriff had publicly announced that people in our part of the county couldn't expect any help or protection from his department I would have been charged with a felony. Nobody was killed or even injured but a firearm of sorts (actually a pellet gun) was discharged and a burglar struck. In the end they settled for giving me a four hour ass chewing while reiterating that they could not get a deputy to our home in less than 45 minutes.

[rrneck]

14. Aye, there's the rub.

If civil authourities can't get to you in time to help you, it's not right for them to hold it against you for defending yourself if you have to.

[jeepnstein]

24. It wasn't self-defense at that point...

The guy was running away, with stolen property, but he was running. So the poster shoots him, with a stinking pellet gun, in order to retrieve the stolen chain saw. I can appreciate the impulse to do this but it was a poor plan of action. If the poster had shot him with a real firearm he might very well have been looking at a murder charge. As it stood, I would think the most they could have hung on the poster was some level of assault and that probably would get laughed out of the court room.

The police have no duty to protect you or your property. It's just not their problem. You do have a duty to understand the law and what you can and cannot do to defend your life and your property. What passes as a good shooting in Texas may not fly in New Jersey. Some states just want you to hand over your stuff to every thief that comes along.

What if your thief had been all jacked up on meth? He could have just as easily turned around and butchered you like a poached deer with your own saw. Pellet gun...

I knew a guy once who was a training officer for our Sheriff's Department back in the seventies. He had this young guy who was riding with him learning the ropes. The kid looked good in uniform, handled the paperwork perfectly, and had a good way of dealing with the public. After a few weeks the senior deputy asked the kid what kind of gun he was carrying, thinking it was a Colt. "Crossman!", the kid replied. No kidding, he had been taking calls carrying a BB gun... Much hilarity ensued.

[Brucie Kibbutz]

17. You shot a burglar with a pellet gun...

... while he was on your own property, and the cops actually considered charging you with a felony? Where do you live, Mayberry?

[tularetom]

18. I think they were just tryin to scare me

What happened was that the sheriff was poor mouthing to the county board during budget hearings and he told them he was woefully short on deputies. I happened to be in the audience on another matter and I confronted him during a break and asked him what level of protection we could expect in our fairly remote area of the county. Of course he said, basically none, you're on your own, because these guys won't give me the money to hire more people.

About a month later, I came home one evening to find a guy in my garage in the process of grabbing a chain saw. I happened to have this pellet gun under the seat of my pickup so I grabbed it and ran after him hollering at him to stop. Of course he didn't. He ran around the corner of the garage with me chasing him. I kept yelling at him to drop the saw, but he didn't so I pumped the gun a couple of times and tried to shoot it out of his hands from a distance of about 10 feet. Of course with both of us running and his hand moving around I missed. The pellet hit him in the ass and he yelled and dropped the saw. I chased him down the hill and onto the road but he jumped the fence and got away. I called the sheriff's office to report the incident and a deputy came to the house and got the description. They caught the guy a mile or so down the road hiding in a culvert. Next day the sheriff calls me and tells me he wants me to come to his office ASAP. When I get there he and his second in command start screaming at me about how they aren't going to tolerate vigilantism and that's what we have a sheriff department for and if people just took the law into their own hands it would lead to anarchy and they were going to make an example of me. I didn't back down although I was pretty scared and I reminded him of our conversation where he had told me I was pretty much on my own. We argued for most of the morning and he finally backed off the threats and asked me if I would go to the politicians and plead his case for more cops. At that point I would have agreed to almost anything because I thought I was in deep shit. So I went and told my tale to the board. It didn't help, he never did get as many additional deputies as he wanted and he retired a couple years later at the end of his term.

BTW the burglar wasn't even hurt although he made noises about suing for awhile. Two or three pumps on a pellet gun that has a maximum muzzle velocity of 400 fps probably didn't even penetrate his jeans. I see the sheriff now and then on the golf course and he admits he was trying to use me as a ploy to force the politicians to get him some additional help.

[Brucie Kibbutz]

19. He jerked you around like that

and then had the nerve to ask you to lobby the local politicians for him? On top of that, he admitted that he was using you all along. Next time you see him on the golf course, wait until he's not looking. Grab your heaviest club and bust his fucking head open. He deserves it.

[slackmaster]

23. Sounds like you need a new Sheriff

Good luck in the next election.



Or maybe things would go better if the Sheriff and the Coroner weren't the same person.

[old mark]

30. Sounds like a few more aggressive criminals who won't threaten anyone anymore.

Fuck them.

mark

[Taitertots]

31. That is great

It is good to see more people defending themselves and their property. I don't see how anyone could complain about righteous shootings. If you can convince the legal system that it was justified, than I'm fairly confident that it was.