Article

2021-07-01 -Lurid Crime Tales-

Texas father shoots a 'Peeping Tom' after catching him performing a sex act outside his 10-year-old daughter's window

Posted by Skidmark 2021-07-01 00:00|| || Front Page|| [13 views ] Top

#1 High five to shootist father.

Posted by Dron66046 2021-07-01 01:24|| 2021-07-01 01:24|| Front Page Top

#2

Will say it again and again.

We need a RE-AMMO ME type site to reward citizens who LEGALLY defended themselves, their family and/or others. Whether it be just a $10 gift card to a National ammo carrying sporting goods store or AMMO-SEEK.COM.

Posted by NN2N1 2021-07-01 08:09|| 2021-07-01 08:09|| Front Page Top

#3 Peeper observed.
Ma and Pa get their guns.
Peeper runs to gas station.
Ma approaches, Peeper goes for her gun.
Pa shoots Peeper.

So instead of a minor felony and public nuisance charge, the Peeper goes for robbery and attempted murder and Pa stands in self-defense.

A good story. Hope it's true.

Posted by Skidmark 2021-07-01 09:09|| 2021-07-01 09:09|| Front Page Top

#4 The story doesn't quite match the headline. There were a lot of things that happened besides the Peeping Tom before the father ended up shooting.

This will go to the grand jury which will "No Bill" the charge and the father will get his gun back and be free.

Posted by Woozle Theamble4130 2021-07-01 09:28|| 2021-07-01 09:28|| Front Page Top

#5 Honestly, in Texas, if he's on the property, after dark and unknown to the residents, requirements for lethal force are met. He COULD have simply been shot where he was.

Sec. 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.

Posted by Silentbrick 2021-07-01 10:16|| 2021-07-01 10:16|| Front Page Top

#6 I hope they've got Concealed Carry liability insurance, and lots of it. Sadly, due to our litigate society and the courts, they may soon discover their problems have only just begun.

Concealed Carry insurance. If you don't have it, get it. Be sure and read the small print. As you might imagine, not all instances are covered.

Posted by Besoeker 2021-07-01 10:22|| 2021-07-01 10:22|| Front Page Top

#7 Given it's Texas, they're not as likely to need it as much. Still, I wouldn't have followed them off the property unless he'd breached the house or touched a kid. On my property the above law applies, once I'm off, it's way different.

Posted by Silentbrick 2021-07-01 11:35|| 2021-07-01 11:35|| Front Page Top

#8 in Texas, if he's on the property, after dark and unknown to the residents, requirements for lethal force are met.

There was an incident in Houston where a homeowner shot the guy trying to repo his car at night. It was a legal repo, but the "you can shoot 'em at night" law was upheld.

Posted by SteveS 2021-07-01 11:43|| 2021-07-01 11:43|| Front Page Top

#9 In many, many discussions of civilian shootings, it has been well hashed out that, whatever a criminal might be doing, if he walks away, following him and then shooting him will not make your lawyer's job any easier. Get video. Get witnesses. File a complaint. Let the cops do the apprehending. Yes, every situation is different, but there are people in jail for shooting a shoplifter in a parking lot. That's just not a proper application of defensive firearms use.

Posted by M. Murcek 2021-07-01 12:17|| 2021-07-01 12:17|| Front Page Top

#10 In the instance of the repo wrecker driver that was killed, the key piece was a 'fenced yard'. Inside your fence, you're felt to be justified. The wrecker driver open the gate and backed up to the guy's car.
The sad irony was that the guy had been behind on his payments, but had gone down and caught up that very day. The repo guy saw the car, but didn't call it in to check.

Posted by ed in texas 2021-07-01 19:16|| 2021-07-01 19:16|| Front Page Top

#11 Thanks for the details, ed. I did not know that.

Posted by SteveS 2021-07-01 19:52|| 2021-07-01 19:52|| Front Page Top

14:10 Grom the Reflective
14:05 James
13:56 M. Murcek
13:55 Angealing+B.+Hayes4677
13:35 Elmeack Chinens3270
13:34 Besoeker
13:24 DarthVader
13:24 Besoeker
13:01 Super Hose
12:56 Super Hose
12:54 Super Hose
12:51 M. Murcek
12:45 Grom the Reflective
12:44 trailing wife
12:26 mossomo
12:25 Grom the Reflective
12:20 Tom
12:19 SteveS
12:08 M. Murcek
12:04 Frank G
12:04 Whiskey Mike
11:17 SteveS
11:08 Abu Uluque
11:04 Abu Uluque