And he should consider himself lucky to have gotten off so lightly. The homeowner could have easily shot him as is their right.
---
I don't know what the laws are in Missouri; they may not be the same as in Texas, where I understand it is legal under state law to use deadly force to protect property. -rc
Posted by
Robert in Missouri on May 6, 2010:
@Grace:
Roger your comments. According to one story I read, deadly force is authorized in defense of property in Missouri.
Posted by
Jeff, Northern California on May 7, 2010:
Regardless of state laws regarding deadly force to protect property, I believe it's pretty much universal that it's OK to use deadly force to protect your own life or that of another person. This guy is going around stabbing people in the kidney; I'd say that deadly force is authorized, even warranted.
It would certainly aid the human gene pool to have this guy ejected.
Posted by
Rohin, New Zealand on May 9, 2010:
@Jeff I think Grace was saying that they could have shot him when he was trying to steal the X-Box, before he stabbed someone. Hence the mention of the laws about defence of property. Self-defence is pretty universal, but you can't get away with shooting someone over property around here.
Posted by
Mike from Dallas on June 4, 2010:
Deadly force in defense of your own life, or someone else's, is fairly common concept in the U.S. There actually are a few places that demand the victim use all possible means to retreat first, including if one has been injured (New York, anyone?) But those are rare. It's telling, though, that out of 50 states, only 20 have the Castle Doctrine in which the victim is not required to retreat first.
But while Texas law does authorize the use of deadly force to protect property, there are severe limitations. And even in Texas, theft of an Xbox, alone, just doesn't make the grade.
Subdued But Good - Comments
Posted by Grace in Houston on May 6, 2010:
And he should consider himself lucky to have gotten off so lightly. The homeowner could have easily shot him as is their right.
---
I don't know what the laws are in Missouri; they may not be the same as in Texas, where I understand it is legal under state law to use deadly force to protect property. -rc
Posted by Robert in Missouri on May 6, 2010:
@Grace:
Roger your comments. According to one story I read, deadly force is authorized in defense of property in Missouri.
Posted by Jeff, Northern California on May 7, 2010:
Regardless of state laws regarding deadly force to protect property, I believe it's pretty much universal that it's OK to use deadly force to protect your own life or that of another person. This guy is going around stabbing people in the kidney; I'd say that deadly force is authorized, even warranted.
It would certainly aid the human gene pool to have this guy ejected.
Posted by Rohin, New Zealand on May 9, 2010:
@Jeff I think Grace was saying that they could have shot him when he was trying to steal the X-Box, before he stabbed someone. Hence the mention of the laws about defence of property. Self-defence is pretty universal, but you can't get away with shooting someone over property around here.
Posted by Mike from Dallas on June 4, 2010:
Deadly force in defense of your own life, or someone else's, is fairly common concept in the U.S. There actually are a few places that demand the victim use all possible means to retreat first, including if one has been injured (New York, anyone?) But those are rare. It's telling, though, that out of 50 states, only 20 have the Castle Doctrine in which the victim is not required to retreat first.
But while Texas law does authorize the use of deadly force to protect property, there are severe limitations. And even in Texas, theft of an Xbox, alone, just doesn't make the grade.
Read the article that everyone's commenting on, or post a comment about it.