Molon Labe !
Posted on 10/12/2002 12:33:42 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
Bernard Schwin was sick of being a victim.
And on the third day, he grabbed his gun.
Since Wednesday, the burglars had nearly cleaned out his northeast Houston home. They stole jewelry, electronics, even deodorant and cologne. They climbed into his bed. They used his toilet. They helped themselves to soft drinks from his refrigerator.
Still, they kept coming back. Now, Schwin was going to set some boundaries. So he sat in the dark of his bedroom, cradling his shotgun and holding the phone. Just waiting.
By the time the burglars returned Friday morning and kicked in his door, Schwin was ready.
The intruders -- who had the audacity to park in his driveway -- were more than surprised. They were scared.
Schwin, 55, chased them outside and stuck a gun in one man's face, forcing him to abandon his vehicle and leave it rolling backward down the driveway with no one at the wheel. By the time it was over, Schwin had fired a shot at the man, who was later caught and arrested.
Schwin missed. But he made his point.
"I've had enough," he said.
Schwin has owned the home in the 3900 block of Fulton for about 20 years and had never been burglarized there -- before this week, that is.
After the first break-in occurred Wednesday, Schwin and his girlfriend came home to find valuables missing, their bed messed up and their toilet unflushed. The burglars had changed clothes, putting on brand new Houston Texans paraphernalia belonging to Schwin's girlfriend and leaving their dirty laundry behind. They were also thirsty; an empty soda can sat on the counter.
"We just thought it was vagrants and quick bucks at a pawn shop," said Schwin's girlfriend, Carol Langley, 47.
Schwin dutifully drove Langley to work the next morning, then went to Home Depot to buy a new lock for his door. By the time he returned, the intruders had struck again.
Undeterred, Schwin bought plywood and two more locks for the door, determined to transform his home into a veritable fortress.
He stayed home Friday morning, certain the intruders were watching the house. When Langley left for work, she saw some suspicious characters down the street and told Schwin about it. He turned off the lights, grabbed his gun and crouched in the bedroom.
A half-hour later, his patience was rewarded when the burglars forced their way inside -- and "ran like rabbits" upon seeing Schwin, he said.
One intruder tore off down the block, but the other made it to his car, where Schwin stuck the shotgun in his face. "He's lucky the safety was on," Schwin growled.
That intruder bailed from the car and ran, but the vehicle's gears had already been shifted, so the unmanned vehicle rolled back into the street. Schwin gave chase and fired some birdshot at him as he fled. The man was caught down the street after residents there called police and reported him hiding in their back yard.
Because of the gunfire, nearby Burbank Elementary School was briefly locked down as a precaution, police said.
The intruder, a 29-year-old New Caney man, was arrested and charged with attempted burglary of a residence. Police said he appeared to be high on cocaine. "It makes you do stupid stuff," said Houston Police Department Sgt. J.R. Chase.
The burglar's accomplice got away, and a police search of the area turned up nothing.
Because of the potential dangers, police don't recommend that homeowners confront burglars the way Schwin did. "We'd prefer that nobody gets hurt at all. Better to make sure the place is locked up well," Chase said.
Schwin took little satisfaction in his victory because he expects that the burglars will soon be back on the street.
"Somewhere in the judicial system, they're going to get off scot-free to go get somebody else, if not kill somebody," he said.
"I'm a Yankee, I'm from north Houston," Schwin said to laughs later Friday.
"I've lived here all my life. We used to leave the door unlocked, go to the store and come back. It's a shame that in society, we've got to live like this. It reminds me of the Old West: 'Put the gun back on your hip, and let's go.' It's a shame we can't be civilized."
No, Mr. Schwin is lucky the safety was on. While I applaud his tenacity, I'm afraid he might well get himself in trouble for lying in wait for burglars. Rightly or wrongly, courts tend to frown upon such actions.
You should know this before you pull the trigger.
Also, he missed with a shotgun! At what range?
Unfortunately, you are right. I kept reading, to see where they had arrested the home owner for defending his property with a little too much zeal. He was not, but I am sure the criminals will sue him, and win. They will own his house later, so he may as well let them steal whatever they want now. What a world we live in, where a criminal can take a victim to court, and win. Kind of sucks, doesn't it?
Molon Labe !
Not in TEXAS they don't!
WAY TO GO, Mr. Schwin! Now, if we could just get the REST of the country on board.....
There would probably be about six or seven more people alive in the D.C. area if "Good Guys" were able to DEFEND THEMSELVES against "Bad Guys" like the CRIMINAL-TERRORIST-SNIPER.
With respect, I strenuously disagree with your point. Even in Communist California, they have the "Homeowners' Protection Act." I'm reasonably certain Texas has a similar law, allowing a citizen to use deadly force when protecting himself inside the place he sleeps at night- whether that is a converted garage, a motor-home on jackstands or his own bedroom.
As well, the old saying is still true: "better to be tried by twelve, than carried by six."
FReegards
No way. No jury in Texas would indict, much less convict a homeowner for 'lying in wait' in his own home.
Texas Penal Code
§ 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.
When the police show up (call them after you are sure the perp is dead), you simply say the magic words "I thought he was gonna kill me... I thought he was gonna kill me..." but otherwise say nothing and ask for a lawyer.
They may frown, but a conviction wouldn't hold up if the perp was fleeing with property the homeowner 'reasonably believes cannot be recovered by any other means'. Given that virtually nothing burglarized is ever recovered, I think shooting someone while fleeing a burglary or robbery (i.e., a burglary while someone is home) is entirely supported by Texas law.
I agree. I hate the gomers myself. I just do not trust the courts, though, as one poster said, better to be judged by 12, than carried by 6.
Sue him? Where's the damage? What harm have they suffered? They have no basis for any claim whatsoever.
Injury to their self esteem? Post tramatic burglary apprehension stress disorder?
My TV is worth more to me than a criminal's life. His life may be valuable to him or to his mother - but his disappearance from the planet won't hurt me at all. So it makes some sense that I can act to protect what is valuable to me - at the expense of his life.
That said, one's life is made much easier if one can articulate a perceived bodily threat from the perp. Which is why you always say "I thought he was gonna kill me..." and leave the rest to your lawyer.
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.