TexasCHLforum.com

When helmets were introduced on the modern battlefield head injuries went up drastically. Weere Helmets causing severe head injuries? No, turns out when you get shot in the head without a helmet you die. Helmets were actually preventing death. There are no solutions only trade offs. Looking at one statistic is dangerously stupid. Has robbery, murder, and forcible rape number reduced in Houston. I have the feeling the chron doesn't really care.

Charles L. Cotton wrote:

TxRVer wrote:The reporter claims Texans no longer have a duty to retreat. When was there ever a duty to retreat in Texas?

Prior to 1977: No duty to retreat anywhere in Texas
1977 - 1995: Duty to retreat everywhere, including in your home
1995 - 2007: No duty to retreat in your home, but the duty existed outside your home
2007 - Present: No duty to retreat anywhere you are legally standing when deadly force is used if: 1) you didn't provoke the person; and 2) you were not committing a crime.

Chas.

Well consider me schooled. I had no idea that we ever had a duty to retreat in our houses. Any idea how that came to be? Other than just saying democrats.

steve817 wrote:Well consider me schooled. I had no idea that we ever had a duty to retreat in our houses. Any idea how that came to be? Other than just saying democrats.

Uh... uh... um... errr....

Ya got me

This story from the Chronicle was used as a basis for a newsradio story on KTRH (has Rush and Michael Berry during the day)

Mentioned the killing of the dead beer stealer . Quoted Brady people as saying Texan's are executing people for crimes that don't have the death penalty.

But ended with a listener comment which was classic. "Better this story, than stories about more victims being killed in Texas."

Way to go lady listener who ever you are.

philip964 wrote:This story from the Chronicle was used as a basis for a newsradio story on KTRH (has Rush and Michael Berry during the day)

Mentioned the killing of the dead beer stealer . Quoted Brady people as saying Texan's are executing people for crimes that don't have the death penalty.

But ended with a listener comment which was classic. "Better this story, than stories about more victims being killed in Texas."

Way to go lady listener who ever you are.

more dead rapists > more rape victims

All this talk about justified killings is depressing. Look on the bright side of the coin. All those criminals who took their last breath actually achieved the pinnacle . It's called the Darwin Award. With any luck, they didn't procreate before they broke down the back door......

steve817 wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote:

TxRVer wrote:The reporter claims Texans no longer have a duty to retreat. When was there ever a duty to retreat in Texas?

Prior to 1977: No duty to retreat anywhere in Texas
1977 - 1995: Duty to retreat everywhere, including in your home
1995 - 2007: No duty to retreat in your home, but the duty existed outside your home
2007 - Present: No duty to retreat anywhere you are legally standing when deadly force is used if: 1) you didn't provoke the person; and 2) you were not committing a crime.

Chas.

Well consider me schooled. I had no idea that we ever had a duty to retreat in our houses. Any idea how that came to be? Other than just saying democrats.

There was a liberal Democrat sweep in the Texas elections in 1976, the same year we sent a peanut farmer to the White House and expected him to be President. Perhaps was was an airborne virus.

Chas.

Did you read this part of the article?

" Chronicle also examined times of death, gender and race of both the shooters and the dead. Citizen shootings most often happen after dark, and involve a male shooting a handgun during a home invasion.

The person doing the killing is most often a minority, as is the person killed, according to the Chronicle analysis."

Charles L. Cotton wrote:

steve817 wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote:

TxRVer wrote:The reporter claims Texans no longer have a duty to retreat. When was there ever a duty to retreat in Texas?

Prior to 1977: No duty to retreat anywhere in Texas
1977 - 1995: Duty to retreat everywhere, including in your home
1995 - 2007: No duty to retreat in your home, but the duty existed outside your home
2007 - Present: No duty to retreat anywhere you are legally standing when deadly force is used if: 1) you didn't provoke the person; and 2) you were not committing a crime.

Chas.

Well consider me schooled. I had no idea that we ever had a duty to retreat in our houses. Any idea how that came to be? Other than just saying democrats.

There was a liberal Democrat sweep in the Texas elections in 1976, the same year we sent a peanut farmer to the White House and expected him to be President. Perhaps was was an airborne virus.

Chas.

And for almost 20 years our rights were gone....wow.

Here's a thought and a question. Of those people who are the presumed "victims"--the person who was shot while committing a crime--how many of them, what percentage, were natives to Texas or who had lived here for a substantial period, and how many had been recent arrivals from other states where the application of a permanent solution to home invasion is less practiced? Just wondering if some of the "victims" had been practicing their craft in California, New York and Louisiana successfully and had branched out to Texas?? There's a research topic for some grad student.

Thanks Excalibur, I needed a good laugh. Sometimes with all the stupidity of the liberal bunch, you need a little something like what you said about the non news paper. That made my day. Some people just don't get the idea that most of us hope to never have to take someone's life. But there's a big difference between murder and a justifiable killing. And there's always some that can't or won't try to fit in with everyone else. I've sure learned a lot since I joined this forum, and maybe I can contribute some along the way. hounddog

Just remember that re-defining terms is one of the basic tricks of propaganda. That is why the anti-self-defense, anti-gun crowd refer to justifiable self-defense as "vigilantism". They want the public confused in order to advance their agenda.

77346 wrote:Not sure why Houston has so many more justified killings than Dallas, more criminals or better shooters?

It's probably because of the Chronicle's fuzzy math... it's a shame that a city as large as Houston only has one newspaper.

And one that has a problem with the truth.

The headline says it all. More guns - more crime prevented. Makes sense as in "deer harvest increases as more licensed hunters hunt"! Those libs are so smart to figure that out.

Just one more thing I wanted to say in regard to the title of this thread....GOOD!