Posted on 07/02/2008 5:42:42 PM PDT by SwinneySwitch
Just hours before a San Antonio homeowner shot and critically wounded a 21-year-old man who police said walked into his home, a Harris County grand jury cleared a Pasadena grandfather in the shooting deaths of two men suspected in a burglary of his neighbor's house last fall.
The grand jury's action in the case of Joe Horn, 62, and the shooting by San Antonio homeowner Brian K. Stevens, 30, on Monday came one week after the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed an individual's right to own a gun, striking down a longtime ban on handguns in Washington, D.C., that may lead to challenges over weapons restrictions elsewhere.
Scholars say the Supreme Court ruling won't have an immediate effect on Texas, but gun-rights advocates hope Washington residents will soon be backed by similar laws that allow gun-toting Texans to shoot home intruders without fear of criminal charges.
“In Washington, D.C., the only people who could have guns were cops and criminals,” said James Dark, executive director of the Texas State Rifle Association. “Everyone has an inherent right to self-defense like we have in Texas.”
San Antonio police said Stevens likely would not be charged in the 9:30 p.m. shooting of Stephen C. Garcia Jr. at Stevens' home in the 6500 block of Arrid Pass. Garcia survived a gunshot wound to his abdomen and was charged with burglary of a habitation. He was taken to University Hospital, where he remained in critical condition Tuesday. His bail was set at $75,000.
“It appears it was in self-defense, and that the homeowner protected his family,” said San Antonio Police Department spokesman Joe Rios.
Texas law has permitted residents to use deadly force to protect themselves and their personal property for many years. Last year, the Legislature broadened the law to include a “castle doctrine,”...
(Excerpt) Read more at mysanantonio.com ...
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
Let’s hope so. I’m tired of the scum getting all the breaks.
And DON’T MESS IN TEXAS!
We have a Castle law here in Arizona too.
I would call it building momentum.
This is a shot in the arm (if you’ll pardon the pun) to gun rights activists everywhere.
It has certainly lit a fire under the NRA. They had been slacking for some years, were being accused of becoming a bunch of self-perpetuating careerist foundation leeches, and of collaborating with the libs. They had even agitated against bringing the Heller case. That appears to be changing with a vengeance.
First Joe Horn, now this. Good.
“In Washington, D.C., the only people who could have guns were cops and criminals,” said James Dark, executive director of the Texas State Rifle Association. “Everyone has an inherent right to self-defense like we have in Texas.”
1-866-897-4353
Actually, I think they were just afraid to rock the boat too much in case the court found that it *wasn’t* a right.
Now that it has been declared a right, the NRA doesn’t have anything holding them back.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castle_Doctrine
The Castle Doctrine in Texas extends to your vehicle as well, allowing a driver to be armed; no duty to retreat anywhere.
So it would seem to me that they are trying to skirt the supreme courts ruling by restricting only specific handguns. What D.C. has done after the ruling is still illegal, but they released a pamphlet on the subject recently.
All handguns can be considered “semi automatic” unless its a single action wheel gun, and this isn't the old west.
I found that link about D.C.’s new gun laws.
Here:
http://mpdc.dc.gov/mpdc/cwp/view%2Ca%2C1237%2Cq%2C565463.asp
That’s not going to fly, either. D.C. is fighting a losing battle.
In this day and age of increasing violence and thugs running the streets, a citizen must be capable of defending life and property.
According to the Heller decision, the City can do all that crap.
The Heller decision was the worst thing to happens to guns for a long time. Horrible.
ping
I saw the idiot mayor on TV saying that semiautos were still illegal. I also heard that no guns can be loaded.
Next time aim better.
We have a castle law here in Florida.
Boy ya should have heard the howls coming from the lawyers and criminals when this was being discussed here.
“The sky is falling, the sky is falling, we’re all going to die.”
All I can say is if ya shoot a criminal breaking in to your home, kill them. Don’t allow it to go to a court where anything can and will happen. Don’t let it go to the courts or somehow some turd lawyer will try to make you out to be the bad guy or the bad guys family will take your stuff and a court will give it to them.
In Florida, our castle law says you have the right to use deadly force "any place you have a right to be". Plus, it prohibits litigation by surviving families against the defender.
http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/tlodocs/80R/billtext/html/SB00378I.htm
I double-checked the language of the Texas bill, and we have the same provisions. I would imagine that if you were out of your car or house and used deadly force to protect yourself and didn’t have a CCW, you might have a problem, IMHO. In any case, what always resonates with me is the old saw about being judged by twelve rather than carried by six.
Courts do not like being ignored. The more they try to finesse and wriggle out of honest administration of the 2nd amendment as a full enumerated, Constitutional right, the harder the Court will come down on them.
If they had just gone with what the Court said, and required a license for any handgun that is legal in the U.S., they might have got away with it for a while.
I think the circuit court, if not the DC court, will slap them down hard, and the Supreme Court will not bother to hear an appeal form the circuit.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.