Neither I nor anyone else can say for certain what will happen unless they've been faced with it before. Mike Tyson said it best: Everyone has a plan until they get punched in the mouth. Until you've actually responded to an adrenaline filled situation, you can't guarantee what your behavior will be. That being said, if a man is in my house that immediately raises the threat to my life. I say this because with reduced opportunity for "flight", "fight" often becomes the default drive for both thief and homeowner. An open garage is easier than a living room to run out of. Unless you're talking about my dad's garage. So my reasoning doesn't change.. What changes is the fact that there's an increased chance my life is in danger, not just my property. If property is the only risk, a TV in and of itself isn't worth a human life. It comes down to situational awareness, and if I truly believed human life was in danger. I'd be more prone to feel like human life was in danger if they were in my house trapped with me. If I was certain they had a weapon, that substantially increases the threat.RPBrown wrote:Lets throw another little hiccup into the equation. All the same except you go into the house through the garage and the thief is inside your home.
Scenario # 1--Has a TV in hand but no visible weapon
Scenario # 2--Same as # 1 but has a holstered pistol
Search found 2 matches
Return to “What would you do?”
- Mon Mar 27, 2017 10:54 am
- Forum: General Texas CHL Discussion
- Topic: What would you do?
- Replies: 44
- Views: 13417
Re: What would you do?
- Mon Mar 27, 2017 8:42 am
- Forum: General Texas CHL Discussion
- Topic: What would you do?
- Replies: 44
- Views: 13417
Re: What would you do?
I agree that I don't believe sporting goods would warrant me taking a life.
I was very specific in how I phrased that. It is my understanding that the law allows for the use of deadly force in this circumstance.
According to the statements of some on this board, it would be the perpetrator (and not the home-owner) that made the decision that their life was worth less than the bag of golf-clubs, but I honestly believe that to be a denial of truth to avoid personal accountability. If I were to pull the trigger, it would be a declaration that I agree with the value. Actions are a result of belief. I can abstain from an action if my belief runs contrary. Just as my belief states that a human life is worth more than sporting goods, it is also my belief that if another committed this action they would be subject to the law as it is written regardless of whether or not I condone it. If the law of the country, state, county, and city (as directly written) states they are not guilty of a crime, as a juror I would follow the law. I can't condone the the state convicting a man for something the state has mandated is not a crime.
I was very specific in how I phrased that. It is my understanding that the law allows for the use of deadly force in this circumstance.
According to the statements of some on this board, it would be the perpetrator (and not the home-owner) that made the decision that their life was worth less than the bag of golf-clubs, but I honestly believe that to be a denial of truth to avoid personal accountability. If I were to pull the trigger, it would be a declaration that I agree with the value. Actions are a result of belief. I can abstain from an action if my belief runs contrary. Just as my belief states that a human life is worth more than sporting goods, it is also my belief that if another committed this action they would be subject to the law as it is written regardless of whether or not I condone it. If the law of the country, state, county, and city (as directly written) states they are not guilty of a crime, as a juror I would follow the law. I can't condone the the state convicting a man for something the state has mandated is not a crime.