Property rights are one thing.
Shooting a fleeing individual in the back over a chicken is another entirely.
No, I don't agree with shooting someone over a bird.
I wouldn't shoot someone in the back if they were making off with my diamond ring, either. A firearm, possibly, as it constitutes the potential for a deadly threat, or if they were attempting to toss a firebomb into my, or another individual's, residence.
But material things can be replaced.
While Texas law supports this individual's actions, I don't. It gives anti-gunners just another peg in their board for how gunowners in general are quick to shoot over the least provocation.
Long ago the anti-gunners took the fight away from substance and converted it into a question of image. This isn't a good image, and it's one that can do immense harm to gunowners nationwide.
So I'll repeat, Houston, we have a problem.
"The gift which I am sending you is called a dog, and is in fact the most precious and valuable possession of mankind" -Theodorus Gaza
Baby Jesus cries when the fat redneck doesn't have military-grade firepower.