Laws for us but not for them

GaryTx · Post by **GaryTx** » Thu Jul 19, 2007 9:33 pm

For those that missed it:

Editorial: Self-defense OK for me, but, sorry, not for thee

Web Posted: 07/17/2007 06:36 PM CDT

San Antonio Express-News

One of the achievements of the 80th Texas Legislature was its passage of a castle doctrine.
The measure, sponsored by Sen. Jeff Wentworth, R-San Antonio, clarifies the instances in which individuals can use deadly force in self-defense.

In some circumstances under current law, citizens are required to retreat rather than use force in self-defense.

Wentworth's bill, which takes effect Sept. 1, broadens the presumption of reasonableness for self-defense and removes the threat of civil litigation for damages.

The Senate passed the new law by a vote of 30-0. The House followed with a 133-13 approval.

One of the 13 opponents of the castle doctrine in Texas was Rep. Borris Miles, D-Houston. Miles was inspecting the construction site of his new house last week when he heard some noises downstairs. When he went to investigate, he discovered two men trying to steal copper from the work site.

An altercation ensued during which, according to the Houston Chronicle, one of the thieves threw a pocketknife at Miles. The lawmaker, who has a concealed weapon permit, opened fire. One of the pilferers received a non-life-threatening wound.

The news accounts don't seem to suggest Miles made any effort to retreat from the dangerous situation. A jury of his peers would surely judge that Miles, fearing for his safety, acted in a reasonable way. The law that Miles voted against will erase any ambiguity.

An old saw suggests that a conservative is a liberal who's been mugged by reality.

With regard to the castle doctrine, perhaps Miles will now agree with 163 of his legislative colleagues.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Online at: http://www.mysanantonio.com/opinion/edi ... 54596.html

anygunanywhere · Post by **anygunanywhere** » Fri Jul 20, 2007 7:15 am

I sent Rep. Miles an email noting the finer points of his illusion of reality as a legislator and his failure to uphold the constitution that he swore to defend.

I did not receive a reply, but then I am not in his district so my opinion isn't worth a hill of beans. I also doubt whether he regards many of his constituent's opinions as being worth the same beans.

Anygun

stevie_d_64 · Post by **stevie_d_64** » Fri Jul 20, 2007 8:41 am

Irony really stings doesn't it...

Seburiel · Post by **Seburiel** » Fri Jul 20, 2007 8:47 am

stevie_d_64 wrote:Irony really stings doesn't it...

Not to a guy like Miles - he probably hasn't even connected the two.

LedJedi · Post by **LedJedi** » Fri Jul 20, 2007 10:10 am

i'm not one to wish ill will on many folks but I hope they sue the pants off him. After all, they were just trying to make an honest buck selling that copper that was just laying around right? How dare he shoot them.

stevie_d_64 · Post by **stevie_d_64** » Fri Jul 20, 2007 10:21 am

Seburiel wrote:
stevie_d_64 wrote:Irony really stings doesn't it...
Not to a guy like Miles - he probably hasn't even connected the two.

That may be true to a certain point...

But he is an elected official in a nieghboring district to mine...And knowing the demographic of his area, that tells me they may not hold his feet to the fire about this, much less remember the particulars about the irony, hypocracy, or any other technical factor in this shooting...

I will give him that amount of leeway...What else can you do???

What will be very telling in the future, is that if he is re-elected, the votes on the bills concerning "gun-control", or other "pro 2nd Amendment" bills will be interesting to see...Where he falls on those may be indicative of how he reacts to actually having had to defend himself in this case...

Thats what I intend to remember in 2009, when they are in session again...