"Neighbors Defend Texan Accused of Murdering Teen Over Snacks" - from foxnews.com

[Defensory]

Posted by Carl Levitian:
I've always thought it was pretty hard to shoot somebody in the back while they were lunging at you.

I've always thought it was pretty hard to make an accurate judgement about a gun owner, based on articles by the anti-gun news media, which has a proven record of slanting stories to make gun owners look bad.

Anybody who believes those kids were just in there for "snacks", is two bricks shy of a full load. It's not uncommon for burglars to grab a quick "snack" in a victim's home, BEFORE carting off the TV, stereo etc.

Also, I can think of at least one plausible scenario where the defendant's story could be true. The kid could've panicked, thinking he was going to be shot, so he quickly raises his arm and attempts to swing around and grab the gun. The homeowner proves too fast for him, and shoots him before he can get turned around. A burglar attempting to grab your gun is a legitimate shoot under Texas law.

I'm not advocating this, but if somebody feels the urge to steal some snacks, going to the grocery or convenience store and shoplifting some is a whole lot smarter than breaking into private residences. You avoid felony breaking-and-entering charges, as well as armed homeowners in a high stress state-of-mind. About the worst that can happen at a store, is you'll be caught and face misdemeanor shoplifting charges.

 

[crebralfix]

First, HOW was he shot in the back? What does the wound look like? For example, it would make sense if the robber lunged at him that the shot would have entered the body from above the head and penetrated at an angle downward toward his feet.

Additionally, I believe it was Massad Ayoob who demonstrated, in court, just how quickly a human body can turn. If the robber realized at the last instant that he was going to get shot, perhaps he turned. Maybe the wound is more at an angle from the side.

Additional thoughts:

These things go really quickly...just watch any youtube video. Controlling several people is very, very difficult...one on one...sure. But several? Hands can move to belts in the blink of an eye...or a simple distraction. If they start moving, or refuse to stop moving, then there's a whole different problem. You have to decide if they're going for weapons, prepping their positions for an attack, or any number of scenarios.

Add darkness into the equation (not sure if the lights were on, dim, or off) and now everything is ten times more difficult.

Shooting may have been the only reasonable option at the time given the actions and locations of the robbers and the home owner.

 

[Run&Shoot]

It seems that there would be a huge difference between a homeowner responding to a break-in to his house and a police officer responding to a burglary call.

The policeman has the advantage of knowing that he is going into a certain situation and has at least a few minutes to orientate his mindset. When he arrives he has no idea who is the homeowner and who is the perp. He also has little concern for property damage or loss. The site is not his sanctuary of safety, it is a dangerous place in the field, for him. He also has a range of lethal and non-lethal tools that he carries everyday for a range of responses. He also has means to quickly restrain individuals and when he calls for backup it likely won't take 30 minutes for backup to arrive.

A homeowner suddenly discovers four perps in his house, his refuge of safety. He has zero time to orient his mindset. If he is lucky enough to gain control of the perps he is going to be highly agitated trying to keep track of all four perps while calling for help. If help takes 30 minutes to arrive then in his mind it could be forever. As far as he is concerned, he is out there on his own against four people brazen enough to break into his home.

If one of them makes a sudden move, out of the corner of his eye it could register as a threat even if the lunge was away from him. His brain might have just registered sudden movement and registered "Danger". Or the criminal could have been lungin for a kitchen knife or some other object to use against the homeowner. Who knows what the four criminals were saying to each other and to the man? Werre they compliant and apologizing and say, Please call my mommy? Or were they punks that were talking trash and threatening to over power the homeowner and kill his butt?

The fact that the majority of the local community appears to be on the homeowner side seems to indicate these criminals have a reputation and are seen as a threat by lots of homeowners. Laredo and Nuevo Laredo across the border are hot spots for drug cartel crimes and I can imagine homeowners are always a bit jumpy about any type of home threat situation.

Whether the homeowner is justified in the shooting will be determined in the courts, but the criminals took their chances when they broke in to the other man's home as to what kind of conflict they would create. why they broke in, what they had destroyed or stolen to that point is totally irrelevant.

If only we once again lived in a world where it was inconceivable that 11-15 yr old boys could pose a threat to a grown man. Sadly those days are long gone and today we have numerous examples of boys that age killing and maiming adults on a whim. Some of them have actually killed other kids or adults for pocket change or a pair of sneakers.

 

[rapid1]

...and Francisco would be alive today if they hadn't broken into mr. Gonzalez' home...

this is the one fact I think we can all agree on.

no one that has posted was there, so all we have here is opinions, based on hearsay, and questionable at that. I am amazed at how many want to hang the guy based on a media story.

now you know why a guy like Obama even has a chance...

 

[zminer]

no one that has posted was there, so all we have here is opinions, based on hearsay, and questionable at that. I am amazed at how many want to hang the guy based on a media story

now you know why a guy like Obama even has a chance...

Either he felt his life was in danger and he shot someone he felt was threatening him (possible, if four kids were in his house and he didn't know their intentions) or else he had them on their knees at gunpoint and he started beating them and then shot one of them at point-blank range. I think most people would agree that the former case is okay, and that the latter one is not. Is there really anything more to say about this, without additional facts?

Bold added. And mine was by far not the only post which said, "we don't know what actually happened here."

Also, I don't really see how this has anything to do with the presidential race.

 

[cassandrasdaddy]

i think we could use more info. how big were the kids? the homeowner? my foster son was 16 6'2 and 185. was the homeowner sober? were the kids?what kinda history/record do any of the players have?

as to lunging one can definitley lunge backwards so i can't rule that out.

the idea of someone that age getting shot puts one off a bit on principle but boys that age can be very very dangerous

 

[mgkdrgn]

I really hope it happened differently than what I'm reading.

If that testimony is accurate then he should go to prison. Plain and simple.

As much as I would like not to, I tend to agree.

1) he wasn't in the dwelling when it was broken into
2) I see no mention of calling the police
3) the teens had "surrendered", and then were beaten and one killed

This smells really really bad.

 

[Carlos Cabeza]

Dads, teach your kids not to break into other peoples houses ! To have respect for others and their right to life and liberty.

 

[Defensory]

Posted by Carlos Cabeza:
Dads, teach your kids not to break into other peoples houses ! To have respect for others and their right to life and liberty.

Well said, Carlos. I agree.

Unfortunately, so many kids these days grow up without a dad in the home.

 

[mikitsubizunizu]

I never grew up with a dad, and I don't go around stealing snacks.

Children (Teens) are dangerous, they have no fear of death because they think nobody will dare harm them if they get caught because of their age. Maybe the police need to be a little bit harsher on children who commit crimes to discourage them in the first place.

 

[Jeff White]

There is no sense in speculating on what happened. It's a waste of bandwidth. Someone can start this discussion again after the trial when more information is available.