Posted on 06/19/2006 2:26:13 PM PDT by rw4site
I wasn't hoping for anything, but previous journalistic patterns usually dictate that no mention of that fact is a red flag for a possible un-PC "hate crime". I was just making that observation.
Do you want me to say that I'm glad that it was some white boys getting themselves into trouble? Thugs are thugs.
Well, this should be interesting.
Also, I believe that you will find it easier to communicate with adults if you learn to write in complete sentences, and to spell correctly.
May God fill your life with His superabundant Grace.
Good Day.
I doubt you even knew them, I think you are a troll. But just in case, you will be much better off in the long run if you choose friends who are not criminals. Find a better group to hang with!
It went bye-bye.
That's OK. Troll isn't very tasty.
I'm actually hoping you'll stop asking the question, as if the answer makes a bit of difference.
___________________________________________________________________________
http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/statutes/docs/PE/content/htm/pe.002.00.000009.00.htm
SUBCHAPTER D. PROTECTION OF PROPERTY
§ 9.41. PROTECTION OF ONE'S OWN PROPERTY. (a) A person
in lawful possession of land or tangible, movable property is
justified in using force against another when and to the degree the
actor reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary to
prevent or terminate the other's trespass on the land or unlawful
interference with the property.
(b) A person unlawfully dispossessed of land or tangible,
movable property by another is justified in using force against the
other when and to the degree the actor reasonably believes the force
is immediately necessary to reenter the land or recover the
property if the actor uses the force immediately or in fresh pursuit
after the dispossession and:
(1) the actor reasonably believes the other had no
claim of right when he dispossessed the actor; or
(2) the other accomplished the dispossession by using
force, threat, or fraud against the actor.
Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 883, ch. 399, § 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974.
Amended by Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 900, § 1.01, eff. Sept. 1,
1994.
§ 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.
Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 883, ch. 399, § 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974.
Amended by Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 900, § 1.01, eff. Sept. 1,
1994.
§ 9.43. PROTECTION OF THIRD PERSON'S PROPERTY. A person
is justified in using force or deadly force against another to
protect land or tangible, movable property of a third person if,
under the circumstances as he reasonably believes them to be, the
actor would be justified under Section 9.41 or 9.42 in using force
or deadly force to protect his own land or property and:
(1) the actor reasonably believes the unlawful
interference constitutes attempted or consummated theft of or
criminal mischief to the tangible, movable property; or
(2) the actor reasonably believes that:
(A) the third person has requested his protection
of the land or property;
(B) he has a legal duty to protect the third
person's land or property; or
(C) the third person whose land or property he
uses force or deadly force to protect is the actor's spouse, parent,
or child, resides with the actor, or is under the actor's care.
Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 883, ch. 399, § 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974.
Amended by Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 900, § 1.01, eff. Sept. 1,
1994.
§ 9.44. USE OF DEVICE TO PROTECT PROPERTY. The
justification afforded by Sections 9.41 and 9.43 applies to the use
of a device to protect land or tangible, movable property if:
(1) the device is not designed to cause, or known by
the actor to create a substantial risk of causing, death or serious
bodily injury; and
(2) use of the device is reasonable under all the
circumstances as the actor reasonably believes them to be when he
installs the device.
Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 883, ch. 399, § 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974.
Amended by Acts 1975, 64th Leg., p. 913, ch. 342, § 6, eff. Sept.
1, 1975. Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 900, § 1.01, eff. Sept. 1,
1994.
____________________________________________________________________________________
My sister's email below, I hope the formatting is good.
|
Re: the Parade of Homes owner shooting intruders.
After reading this mornings report of the mother and others I am deeply concerned that the fact is being overlooked that these supposedly "good boys" were out at that time of night and at the age when responsible parents should have seen to it that the sons were at home after a curfew and home rules that is not the late hours of night or the wee hours of the morning. Parents should not be trying to shift the blame for the lack of control they should have over these "good" sons. I do feel for the loss of the boy, but at the same time the blame should not be on the home owner. Parents need to be parents !!!!! Is it not possible that when the boys heard movement in the house that was maybe as the finger was on the trigger and very possible/probable that the owner was shooting away from them to scare them off and firing away from where they were and they at the same moment they turned to run which sadly was into the line of fire resulting in the back shooting ???!!! It seems to be a popular trend to blame others for our transgressions....
I am concerned that in reading this mornings paper and hearing news comments from the boys mother and the slant the news seems to be following, the marks of a man of integrity, honesty, compassion and concern may help you to understand that James Pitre is no heartless, cold, hard, careless, out to get you man. I personally know and have known him for over 25 years. He is one of the most conscientious, caring, compassionate men I know...in the years since his salvation, in his adulthood, he has been passionately involved in the ministry of our Lord in different capacities. As a one on one, hands on, in the jail ministry, in community, area, home, church and foreign mission trips to reach others for Christ while at the same time realizing there are material and medical needs that need to be met and providing the needs as our Lord showed us. Many times these needs are/were met from his own private family income. When I speak of James, please know that his wife is of same character and heart, The young daughter who they adopted is Mayan, one of numerous children from one family he came across who the single mother was not able to care for and he and his wife began the process for adoption. At the same time James provided home, appliances/furnishings which would make it easier on the mother and other family members. He continues to see that she is provided for and does not live in squalor. The young daughter is now in the second grade and is a delight to know and to her family. James also has grown children and grandchildren who love and support him in his passion. They are all a very dedicated moral Christian family. He worked in a local power plant working his way up to supervision, until the business of his wife seemed to be where he felt he was needed. Her business had prospered by her providing quality honest, dependable work . This is a characteristic of that family, realizing they are accountable to God for how they treat people. In light of his firm faith and beliefs and moral character he and his family are torn terribly by this tragedy and loss of life....because of his belief that God created man and man is precious to Him. He and his family need our prayers in this, along with prayers for the families of the young boys and for these boys to turn their lives around to being young men who are living admirable lives and upstanding citizens of the community.
These young people were/are old enough to know that what they were doing is criminal and wrong. I do not believe for a minute that this is just a sudden one time lawless event in their lives. They just got caught this time. And it is foolish for the relatives of these boys to think that they would tell them the truth about their criminal activities..They are NOT good boys !!! Good boys/girls do not do things like this. When will we all wake up and begin to realize that we are accountable for the actions in our lives. Mrs. name removed |
|||
|
Sis/Mom/Ganny
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.