PDA

View Full Version : Joe Horn



Deja vu
12-04-2007, 01:01
*edited* its Joe Horn TY to Shiva-PIC for the catch

for those who are not famular with this story I will give you the "cliff notes" from what I have heard in the news.

Joe Horn was an older man living in Texas. A neibor was gone for a while and asked him to watch his house. around 1:00 pm John saw 2 men breaking in to his neibors house. He called 911 but the police where not going to be able to arive before the buglars left. When Joe saw them loading up a bag of stollen items in to there car he left the phone and went out side with his shot gun. He told the men to not move or there dead, the 2 buglars are now dead.

there is still (as of the time I post this) some facts that are not clear such as if the buglars came tward him when he steped out side and such.

So what does every one think about this? You can hear the actual 911 call on youtube.com (just do a search on Joe Horn)

Shiva-PIC
12-04-2007, 01:05
For those of you looking it up, it's Joe Horn, not John.

Deja vu
12-04-2007, 01:09
For those of you looking it up, it's Joe Horn, not John.

tyvm for the correction

Everto
12-04-2007, 02:33
I woulda shot them in the legs. Or the cars' tires.

Surly
12-04-2007, 02:37
I probably would have done the same thing he did, I believe. The outcome of the grand jury's decision would change my course of action, depending on what it is. If they find him guilty of any crime, I would fail to call 911 in the first place. Dead men tell no tales!

Ftang
12-04-2007, 02:44
in the phone call he sounds like hes pumping himself up to shoot them despite being otherwise calm and collected... depends on what really happened when he confronted them but the call is pretty damning i think

Hecubis
12-04-2007, 02:58
Personally I fail to understand what the problem is. The man should get a fucking medal or something, instead of being hauled into court.

Malhavok
12-04-2007, 04:23
I'd be inclined to turn a blind eye in the situation.

Tiberias
12-04-2007, 04:29
I'd be inclined to turn a blind eye in the situation.

Yeah, I agree. If this kind of thing happned more often you'd see a lot less robberies, I bet.

Lorth
12-04-2007, 04:45
This guy was a tough mother fucker to stand up to two possibly armed burglers. I hope he doesnt get time, but he was excited in his voice. The police told him repeatedly not shoot, but he did.

I dont know guys, this is tough

Slypieguy
12-04-2007, 04:49
What good is a castle doctrine if you can't kill the bastards? Shoot them in the leg and they could pull a gun of their own and shoot you from the ground COD4 style.

Ramses
12-04-2007, 04:54
Yeah, I agree. If this kind of thing happned more often you'd see a lot less robberies, I bet.

Well I interpreted Malhavok as saying if he was in Joe's position he'd turn a blind eye to the situation, not the authorities' position. It's just property, if he would've gotten a good description of the vehicle or something that would be better than taking life. But then there's the factor of whether or not they threatened him, which is still, as of yet, undecided.

Apex Vertigo
12-04-2007, 05:05
The men were obviously bad people. Not like they were some kids, these were grown men he shot, 38 and 30. Supposebly they were in his yard, if thats the case, he has a much better argument. Although, telling the police that he was going out there to stop them with a shot gun is not going to be pretty hard to defend against. Hopefully he can make up a story the Jury will be able to "believe" and let him off, even if its a fragment of the truth, I'm sure a jury will just be looking for a reason to let him go.

Protonix
12-04-2007, 05:12
Personally I fail to understand what the problem is. The man should get a fucking medal or something, instead of being hauled into court.

Well, while I may be able to sympathize with his position and even don't mind the two fellas laying dead, if it wasn't his property and he wasn't threatened then he should be prosecuted for whatever the law deems fit.

Tiberias
12-04-2007, 05:14
Well I interpreted Malhavok as saying if he was in Joe's position he'd turn a blind eye to the situation, not the authorities' position. It's just property, if he would've gotten a good description of the vehicle or something that would be better than taking life. But then there's the factor of whether or not they threatened him, which is still, as of yet, undecided.

I guess we could just ask Malhavok.

Also, I don't know, what is a life worth these days? A couple of pieces of shit non-contributing leaches get blown away in the act of a felony, I'd maybe ignore it, especially if that old timer was a good upstanding citizen.

Hecubis
12-04-2007, 05:35
Well, while I may be able to sympathize with his position and even don't mind the two fellas laying dead, if it wasn't his property and he wasn't threatened then he should be prosecuted for whatever the law deems fit.

Whys that? Just because he didn't have a shiny badge to wave around?

losinglife
12-04-2007, 05:36
Dead men tell no tales!

pretty much what i have heard from a few police officers. If your ever forced to shoot someone, make sure you shoot to kill otherwise they can get back at you in multiple ways.

Dead people cant take you to court ;)

Lorth
12-04-2007, 06:27
I guess we could just ask Malhavok.

Also, I don't know, what is a life worth these days? A couple of pieces of shit non-contributing leaches get blown away in the act of a felony, I'd maybe ignore it, especially if that old timer was a good upstanding citizen.

I guess seven million (http://www.slate.com/id/2079475/)

sephff9
12-04-2007, 06:55
Sheesh I am glad the guy did that. You can hear at the end of the call him saying move away or you're dead. Then they have plenty of time and then you hear three shots. They prolly went after him or went to draw a weapon of their own, who knows. Haven't read any news articles about it. I'm just glad that Quanell didn't get a chance to pull the race card on this.

God that pisses me off more than anything.

Malhavok
12-04-2007, 07:13
Ahaha Michael Savage is a kick.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071204/ap_en_ot/radio_host_islam;_ylt=Ai0mouUh5jALWUT4hU KseAis0NUE

"What kind of religion is this? What kind of world are you living in when you let them in here with that throwback document in their hand, which is a book of hate," Savage said during the portion of the broadcast highlighted by CAIR. "Don't tell me I need reeducation. They need deportation."


Savage said he strongly supports freedom of speech, but "it's another thing to take away a man's millstone and try to put him out of business."
... riiight.

Malhavok
12-04-2007, 07:16
Anyway, michael savage thing was supposed to be a new thread... but it's not really worth moving so hi-jack fu

And I was saying if I were the authorities I'd turn a blind eye. It's more a total product of the situation. I mean the guy called the cops and no one was available. You need to look at the facts of the situation of course. If he just went out there shooting and asking questions later no that's not acceptable. On the other hand if they were threatening towards him it's justified imo. Even if they took off and tried to run I'd say he's more in the right. It's not like these guys were stealing a loaf of bread to feed their kids.

Protonix
12-04-2007, 07:16
Whys that? Just because he didn't have a shiny badge to wave around?

I believe I already explained.

Surly
12-04-2007, 08:26
I believe I already explained.Your belief is unfounded. What would you prefer to see as a requirement for some one defending his neighborhood from vandals and thieves?

I would hope that this sort of thing would be left handled only at the local level.

Protonix
12-04-2007, 08:44
Your belief is unfounded. What would you prefer to see as a requirement for some one defending his neighborhood from vandals and thieves?

I would hope that this sort of thing would be left handled only at the local level.

Why wouldn't it be handled at the local level?

My belief in the criminal justice system and the law is unfounded. Amazing.

Titus Ultor
12-04-2007, 09:09
Look, Surly. I've met a good chunk of my neighbors, and I sure as hell don't want them deciding whether or not someone on my property is committing a crime.

Threven
12-04-2007, 09:27
Stealing is wrong and if you get shot and killed for it I don't feel sorry for you.

Matriel
12-04-2007, 14:26
Look, Surly. I've met a good chunk of my neighbors, and I sure as hell don't want them deciding whether or not someone on my property is committing a crime.

You live in California. You don't count.

Arclyte
12-04-2007, 14:40
It sickens me how spineless some people can be, especially when they know something wrong is happening and they can stop it.

This country needs more men like Joe Horn.

gtechie
12-04-2007, 21:08
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/11/17/national/main3517564.shtml

Here's the CBS News article about it. Apparently he's not been charged with any crimes yet. Hooray for justice! I suppose they'll look at where the men were exactly when they got shot, and whether the entrance wounds are in their chests or backs.

Also, if the 911 guy would have told Mr. Horn exactly how close the cops were, he probably wouldn't have felt the need to take matters into his own hands.

Jangang
12-04-2007, 21:20
He should have shot them, THEN called 911.

gtechie
12-04-2007, 21:22
He should have shot them, THEN called 911.

Nah, now everything is on tape, and there are no questions asked as to what happened (as long as those cops really were that close).

akrippler
12-04-2007, 21:23
Wow, this turned into a racism thing?? Are you fucking kidding me. He probably couldnt tell if they were black or not. Jessus christ man

IMHO the second you infringe upon somone elses rights your dont deserve them yourself

And theft, I mean cmon its theft, if you'r enough of a fucking jackass peice of shit to go around stealing shit, then fuck yeah you deserve to get your shit blown off.

Reckin Crew
07-01-2008, 16:57
Update: Joe Horn has had all the charges against him dropped.....

Brandulfr
07-01-2008, 16:59
Of course. It would be ridiculous if he would have been charged for anything.

Jezrith
07-01-2008, 17:08
Only in America... ;)

Thrill_KIll
07-01-2008, 17:13
It's a sure bet no would be theives will be going anywhere near that group of houses again.


Two less peices of shit preying on decent people in America in my opinion. Wish I lived in Texas, so I could go piss on their graves.

Indah
07-01-2008, 17:21
for once, the justice system got something right. I would love to have neighbors like that. If you will steal from someone like that, you will do anything. I bet a lot of murders are because people are home when someone trys to rob their house.

Yamamoto
07-01-2008, 17:28
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metropolitan/falkenberg/5865045.html

I laughed at the ending of this article. "Needlessly shooting two men", are you joking?

You reap what you sow, those two men deserved what was coming. It's good to hear that the charges were dropped.

Jezrith
07-01-2008, 17:54
Two less peices of shit preying on decent people in America in my opinion. Wish I lived in Texas, so I could go piss on their graves.



I would love to have neighbors like that.


Yeah roun' these parts, neighbors do shit like that for each other. Wo be the son of bitch who comes around our houses causing problems, we all know each other, we are all good friends, and we all have guns.

Deja vu
07-01-2008, 18:02
wow good update. thanks for the info

Matriel
07-01-2008, 18:09
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metropolitan/falkenberg/5865045.html

I laughed at the ending of this article. "Needlessly shooting two men", are you joking?

You reap what you sow, those two men deserved what was coming. It's good to hear that the charges were dropped.

That bitch needs a tampon and to move to the Northeast.

Mulambo
07-01-2008, 20:32
I had higher hopes (http://cache.daylife.com/imageserve/08O1gnb0lx7fO/610x.jpg) for this thread.

losinglife
07-02-2008, 06:41
Update: Joe Horn has had all the charges against him dropped.....

in the bad news section he probably lost an assload of cash to the courts, not to mention his reputation.

Desperado[1G]
07-02-2008, 07:01
I'd say his reputation was bolstered by this. (to men with spines anyway)

It probably did cost a pretty penny. I hope he got some kind of financial aid from some of the gun activists that supported him. This story sparked a bit of a political uproar when it was first announced.

Incanam
07-02-2008, 08:06
What good is a castle doctrine if you can't kill the bastards? Shoot them in the leg and they could pull a gun of their own and shoot you from the ground COD4 style.

I believe the castle doctrine only applies to your own property, but don't quote me on that...

Jezrith
07-02-2008, 08:14
I believe the castle doctrine only applies to your own property, but don't quote me on that...

It does for the most part, but we also have "stand your ground" laws roun'har as well. ;)

Matriel
07-02-2008, 13:49
It does for the most part, but we also have "stand your ground" laws roun'har as well. ;)

From what I understand, neither of those matter. It's that Texas allows the use of deadly force to protect property. Imo, more states should adopt that law.

Indah
07-02-2008, 13:52
Well, i hope no one trys to mess with this guy after that. I don't think people will steal from his neighbors anymore tho. And i hope joes neighbors are looking out for him.

Mulambo
07-02-2008, 17:20
he'd be moar badass if he didn't shoot them in the back.

Matriel
07-02-2008, 18:36
he'd be moar badass if he didn't shoot them in the back.

Didn't the police officer that got on scene state that they were running at him? I guess the media has to leave that little part out to sell the fear and crying.

Carl Ragadamn
07-02-2008, 18:45
From what I understand, neither of those matter. It's that Texas allows the use of deadly force to protect property. Imo, more states should adopt that law.

I would love for my state to get this into our laws, hopefully someday......

Incanam
07-02-2008, 18:52
It does for the most part, but we also have "stand your ground" laws roun'har as well. ;)

I said DON'T quote me on that. Way to listen.

He should have listened to the po po...poor dumb redneck.

Jargo
07-02-2008, 18:53
I’m for gun owner’s rights and self defense but this dude was way out of fucking line. He thought he could play the roles of judge, jury and executioner and now he’s going to pay the price. Dumb shits like this make responsible gun owners look bad.

Carl Ragadamn
07-02-2008, 18:54
I said DON'T quote me on that. Way to listen.

He should have listened to the po po...poor dumb redneck.

He was not talking to a police officer, he was talking with a low paid phone operator.

Malhavok
07-02-2008, 19:04
Didn't the police officer that got on scene state that they were running at him? I guess the media has to leave that little part out to sell the fear and crying.

Backwards? They were shot through the back. That said they supposedly entered onto his property and threatened him before turning around and running away.


I said DON'T quote me on that. Way to listen.

He should have listened to the po po...poor dumb redneck.

Well, he was acquited. Probably tough to live with yourself after killing two people even if they were guilty.

Matriel
07-02-2008, 19:08
I would love for my state to get this into our laws, hopefully someday......

Me too. I wouldn't be surprised if Oklahoma jumped on it. They seem to be in a flurry of passing legislation like that lately.


Backwards? They were shot through the back. That said they supposedly entered onto his property and threatened him before turning around and running away.

A lot of stuff can happen where you can shoot someone in the back. It never discloses amount of rounds fired or anything that I've read.

Besides that, Texas law allows deadly force to protect property, so back is irrelevant. Better believe if I caught some motherfucker in my house illegally I'd shoot him in the back. Waiting for them to turn around is just being tactically stupid.

Death's Chill
07-02-2008, 19:12
Personally I fail to understand what the problem is. The man should get a fucking medal or something, instead of being hauled into court.

Yeah, unfortunately we still don't live in a Utopian society, or even one that makes any real logic yet.

Yamamoto
07-02-2008, 19:16
From what I understand, neither of those matter. It's that Texas allows the use of deadly force to protect property. Imo, more states should adopt that law.

Agreed.

A couple blocks from where I live, an older guy shot and killed a teenager over stealing a plastic pumpkin from the porch of his house. He got tried for murder, I think he got under house arrest. California should have the Castle Doctrine, I think cases like this are BS. I don't really care the value for what gets stolen, only that the worthless POS who stole it should fucking die.

Mulambo
07-02-2008, 19:40
A lot of stuff can happen where you can shoot someone in the back. It never discloses amount of rounds fired or anything that I've read.

Besides that, Texas law allows deadly force to protect property, so back is irrelevant. Better believe if I caught some motherfucker in my house illegally I'd shoot him in the back. Waiting for them to turn around is just being tactically stupid.

They played the sound clip from the 911 call on good morning america (or some stupidass show) this morning. In the clip, there were three blasts: "Boom, Boom, ...Boom."

Could have been edited, but w/e.

I don't know. I'm kinda glad he was acquitted if he's telling the truth. The guys could have been running at him and then turned away in a hopeless self defense move right before he shot them.

But, if he shot them in the back as they were running away, that would be a lot lamer imo.

The ppl interviewing him in the morning show were bitches though (and even though they were female, I mean that in the nu/genderless meaning of the word), asking him over and over why he didn't listen to the operator and stay inside. The guy was all leik "I was alone and scared." But on the phone call he is like "Let's roll, get some cops out here or I'm taking care of it."

Matriel
07-02-2008, 19:45
They played the sound clip from the 911 call on good morning america (or some stupidass show) this morning. In the clip, there were three blasts: "Boom, Boom, ...Boom."

Could have been edited, but w/e.

I don't know. I'm kinda glad he was acquitted if he's telling the truth. The guys could have been running at him and then turned away in a hopeless self defense move right before he shot them.

But, if he shot them in the back as they were running away, that would be a lot lamer imo.

The ppl interviewing him in the morning show were bitches though (and even though they were female, I mean that in the nu/genderless meaning of the word), asking him over and over why he didn't listen to the operator and stay inside. The guy was all leik "I was alone and scared." But on the phone call he is like "Let's roll, get some cops out here or I'm taking care of it."

So 3 shots. Coulda missed first shot and they turned. Who knows. Even if running away, he was still justified if I understand the Texas statutes anyway though. Since it was deadly force to protect property and not self-defense.

I'm glad it turned out as it did as well. I hope more crying ensues because of it.

Indah
07-02-2008, 20:16
bring on the tears. But people wont fuck with him again. They better be rolling deep is they do.

Malhavok
07-02-2008, 20:53
So 3 shots. Coulda missed first shot and they turned. Who knows. Even if running away, he was still justified if I understand the Texas statutes anyway though. Since it was deadly force to protect property and not self-defense.

I'm glad it turned out as it did as well. I hope more crying ensues because of it.

It was boom boom..... boom. Not that it really matters.

It was indeed ruled self-defense. Deadly force to protect property would not apply as it was not his property that grew a pair of legs and was walking off. They stepped onto his property and threatened him = self defense.

Castle doctrine is a bit sketchy and definitely needs to be applied case by case. You can't go shooting the door to door salesman and teenagers picking the oranges in your backyard. On the other hand I don't have a problem with acting as judge, jury, and executor to protect yourself.

Matriel
07-02-2008, 21:03
It was boom boom..... boom. Not that it really matters.

It was indeed ruled self-defense. Deadly force to protect property would not apply as it was not his property that grew a pair of legs and was walking off. They stepped onto his property and threatened him = self defense.

Castle doctrine is a bit sketchy and definitely needs to be applied case by case. You can't go shooting the door to door salesman and teenagers picking the oranges in your backyard. On the other hand I don't have a problem with acting as judge, jury, and executor to protect yourself.

Texas law allows deadly force to be used to protect the property of another individual.

Miss, quick follow up, aimed followup (any variation thereof). For all he knew they had guns and were going for cover.


§ 9.42. DEADLY FORCE TO PROTECT PROPERTY. A person is
justified in using deadly force against another to protect land or
tangible, movable property:
(1) if he would be justified in using force against the
other under Section 9.41; and
(2) when and to the degree he reasonably believes the
deadly force is immediately necessary:
(A) to prevent the other's imminent commission of
arson, burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, theft during the
nighttime, or criminal mischief during the nighttime; or
(B) to prevent the other who is fleeing
immediately after committing burglary, robbery, aggravated
robbery, or theft during the nighttime from escaping with the
property; and
(3) he reasonably believes that:
(A) the land or property cannot be protected or
recovered by any other means; or
(B) the use of force other than deadly force to
protect or recover the land or property would expose the actor or
another to a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury.

Malhavok
07-02-2008, 21:08
Can you post up section 9.41 assuming you still have it open? I'm rather lazy and don't feel like digging =D

Matriel
07-02-2008, 21:27
Can you post up section 9.41 assuming you still have it open? I'm rather lazy and don't feel like digging =D

Don't have it open. Just had that saved from another argument on a gun board. I think 9.31 is their section on self-defense though, so I'm not sure what 9.41 is. Probably something in between.

losinglife
07-03-2008, 05:54
Castle doctrine is a bit sketchy and definitely needs to be applied case by case. You can't go shooting the door to door salesman and teenagers picking the oranges in your backyard. On the other hand I don't have a problem with acting as judge, jury, and executor to protect yourself.

i actually agree with this sorta. My real life mortal enemy from when i was a kid pretty much got his life fucked up (more that it was suprisingly) becuase his neighbor killed like half his family over a tomato dispute or something.

Shadowcreep
07-03-2008, 06:44
There is absolutely nothing wrong with stopping people from ripping off your property or the property of those you care about. If you stop them with your words, your body, or your weapon, it matters not. If anyone tried to invade my home and I was in a position to stop them, they would be dead. 'Course, times like those are few and far inbetween.