The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > Hogan's Alley > Tactics and Training

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old August 1, 2007, 08:44 AM   #1
xrocket
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 19, 2007
Posts: 549
Home Invasion: Did Homeowner Go Too Far?

Home Invasion: Home Owner Taken Into Custody!

This morning in Dallas Texas according to Dallas Morning News:

DALLAS — An attempted home invasion ended with what police called an all-out gun battle early Wednesday in a North Dallas residential neighborhood.

Police said four heavily-armed men attempted to break into a house in the 9000 block of Woodshore Drive near North Central Expressway and Royal Lane at 2:30 a.m.

The homeowner had a gun and opened fire on the suspects. He pursued them as they fled, hitting at least two of them, police said.

One was found dead in an SUV several blocks away from the crime scene. Another was taken to Baylor University Medical Center in very critical condition. The homeowner was not hurt.

A third suspect was taken into custody and the fourth fled the scene. An AK-47 assault rifle was found near the suspects' vehicle.

Police said a gunshot victim who showed up later at Parkland Memorial Hospital may be linked to the home invasion attempt.

While investigators said the homeowner was within his legal rights to fire on intruders, he may be subject to charges because he left his property to pursue the robbery suspects in his vehicle.

The homeowner, whose name was unavailable, was taken into custody for questioning. No charges had been filed against him.


I think the fact that he got into his car and gave chase might put his tail in the ringer. Was it reckless? Was he foolish? Yes he was, but he got three of them. JMO. :]
xrocket is offline  
Old August 1, 2007, 08:56 AM   #2
PJW001
Member
 
Join Date: February 18, 2007
Location: NYC
Posts: 81
conjecture

Quote:
I think the fact that he got into his car and gave chase might put his tail in the ringer. Was it reckless? Was he foolish? Yes he was, but he got three of them. JMO.
Based on the very preliminary details you have listed here you may be correct and I would agree with you however there still remains a void as to exactly what transpired and what ALL of the facts are and IMHO until the true details are known everything else is conjecture.
__________________
Gun control should = Using two hands
PJW001 is offline  
Old August 1, 2007, 08:57 AM   #3
SpookBoy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 29, 2006
Location: mid tennessee
Posts: 411
I say more power to him I'd have done the SAME thing. btw 3 outta 4 aint bad Imo he did not go too far.
__________________
We all love gun p*rn, weather shes skinny,fat,short or tall, God made a man to love them all!


"Once you familiarize yourself with the chains of bondage , You prepare your own limbs to wear them."
- Abraham Lincoln
SpookBoy is offline  
Old August 1, 2007, 08:58 AM   #4
nate45
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 15, 2007
Location: Illinois
Posts: 3,746
Your right he should not have pursued them but hopefully he won't be charged.

Those guys got what they deserved or at least so far one of them did.
__________________
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms."- Thomas Jefferson
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
(>_<)
nate45 is online now  
Old August 1, 2007, 09:15 AM   #5
xrocket
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 19, 2007
Posts: 549
Obviously, there will be much more details and facts to evolve from this newsflash. I thought it newsworthy enough to open a discussion on the homeowners tactical decision to leave his property and pursue the perps by auto. Raging gun battles through Dallas suburbs at 2:30 AM in this particular neighborhood are not normal. The homeowner has allot of moxie.
xrocket is offline  
Old August 1, 2007, 09:25 AM   #6
OuTcAsT
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 8, 2006
Location: Nashville, TN
Posts: 1,166
Quote:
conjecture

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote:
I think the fact that he got into his car and gave chase might put his tail in the ringer. Was it reckless? Was he foolish? Yes he was, but he got three of them. JMO.

Based on the very preliminary details you have listed here you may be correct however I would stress that there still remains a void as to exactly what transpired and what ALL of the facts are and IMHO until the true details are known everything else is conjecture.
__________________

+1 To the fact that he likely went too far, we shall see.

Quote:
Those guys got what they deserved or at least so far one of them did.
Quote:
I say more power to him I'd have done the SAME thing. btw 3 outta 4 aint bad
All I can say is WOW, just WOW, I hope that nate45 and SpookBoy don't really own any firearms.:barf:
__________________
WITHOUT Freedom of Thought, there can be no such Thing as Wisdom; and no such Thing as public Liberty, without Freedom of Speech. Silence Dogood

Does not morality imply the last clear chance? - WildAlaska -
OuTcAsT is offline  
Old August 1, 2007, 09:43 AM   #7
joab
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 17, 2002
Location: Orl Fla
Posts: 3,254
By Florida standard yes he went to far

Hopefully he can argue heat of the moment and get off or at least a very minimal sentence

Maybe he can make an argument that they were a danger to the community

And yes Outcast
Anyone who gets killed while invading a home with murderous intent gets what he deserves
And getting three out of four while being surprised and outnumbered four to one is good work
__________________
Joab the Bugman
Founding member- Lords of Pomposity
It's a Yankee Doodle thing
joab is offline  
Old August 1, 2007, 09:47 AM   #8
mattro
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 28, 2007
Location: Indiana
Posts: 225
more scum off the streets! good job homeowner.

LEGALLY he went too far, but that is it - "legally".
__________________
My Battle Rifle has no sporting purpose.
mattro is offline  
Old August 1, 2007, 10:00 AM   #9
zeroskillz
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 17, 2006
Location: Denton County Texas
Posts: 153
wow, I don't think I'd want to leave my property, but I can see getting caught up in the heat of the moment...

But regardless, I like the fact that these home invaders are meeting more and more armed response here in the Dallas area. Good for getting a few more off the streets and making others think twice.
zeroskillz is offline  
Old August 1, 2007, 10:09 AM   #10
The Tourist
Junior member
 
Join Date: June 20, 2005
Posts: 2,348
This is another debate (sigh) where I am pulled both ways.

First, Ayoob put it best when he stated that a citizen/homeowner/CCW licensed user is not a sworn officer. Not only would he be reacting beyond his legal limits, but far beyond his training. He is also "out in the world" and he is responsible for every shot he takes.

Having said that, I get angry when I'm attacked. I'd be furious if I was attacked in my home. That act would not only make me feel violated in my own space but it endanger my wife, my dogs and any nearby neighbors by ricochets and penetrating shots.

Like you do, I keep firearms in various places in my home. (We have no children.) One such automatic pistol is in/on a table facing the front door.

In the heat of an exchange, hoping I am still alive, I can foresee an adrenaline dump that just might want to make me hit back. It's a feeling that I have had before. I may very well give chase. Sitting here, calm, before my computer, it would be a foolish thing to do.

Yes, arresting the home owner is a very real problem, and probably correct until everything is straightened out.

In law we have The Doctrine of the Reasonable Man. Taken into account, I hope a reasonable DA or jury will consider that.
The Tourist is offline  
Old August 1, 2007, 10:20 AM   #11
Musketeer
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 12, 2005
Posts: 3,731
Legally he went too far. It is hard to make a self defense case when you chase the criminals through the streets.

Tactically he went too far. Chasing four armed men in a car with your own is not a smart idea.

This sounds fishy... He was targetted by four attackers at 2:30 in the morning with at least one AK and who knows what else... Somehow he got the drop on all of them and then saw fit to chase them down... I would be interseted to see what else comes out of this as I would be willing to be he might have known who these guys were and that there was a reason for his being targetted.
__________________
"Religions are all alike - founded upon fables and mythologies." Thomas Jefferson

"The way to see by faith is to shut the eye of reason." Benjamin Franklin
Musketeer is offline  
Old August 1, 2007, 11:43 AM   #12
Spenser
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 18, 2006
Location: Texas
Posts: 408
We'll have to see the facts. In Texas, one is allowed to use deadly force to prevent someone from fleeing after committing burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, or theft during the nighttime from escaping the property, and the actor believes (reasonably) the land or property cannot be protected or recovered by any other means, or not using deadly force would expose the actor or another to a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury. Tex. Pen. Code §9.42.

There's a newish DA in Dallas. We'll see if he's going to be a typical Democrat about self-defense issues or not.

We'll also have to see what exactly the facts were in this case. Does he fit in with any of the criteria as put forth by the above Penal Code definitions?
Spenser is offline  
Old August 1, 2007, 12:26 PM   #13
Hornett
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 1, 2006
Posts: 569
Looks like just another student of Machiavelli.

"Men ought to be either indulged or utterly destroyed, for if you merely offend them they take vengeance, but if you injure them greatly they are unable to retaliate, so that the injury done to a man ought to be such that vengeance cannot be feared."

__________________
Guns don't kill people, Jack Bauer kills people.
Hornett is offline  
Old August 1, 2007, 01:07 PM   #14
Creature
Junior member
 
Join Date: April 8, 2007
Location: Virginia
Posts: 3,769
Did he go too far? Probably.

But because we really don't know all the details and background involved in this incident, we'll just have to wait to see what the jury says.
Creature is offline  
Old August 1, 2007, 01:16 PM   #15
Hobie
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 14, 2005
Location: Staunton, VA
Posts: 100
I happened to wake up the other night to use the pot. Looked out the back and saw the motion detector light on. Told the who/whatever in the back yard to get going and now. Heard what sounded like a kid say "aw ****" and a single set of footsteps head down the drive.

If I'm ever on a jury and a fellow who otherwise was acting in self-defense and a gun fight started in his home but he pushed them out of his house (off the objective), he has my vote for not guilty.
__________________
Sincerely,

Hobie
Shooting With Hobie
Hobie is offline  
Old August 1, 2007, 01:49 PM   #16
SpookBoy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 29, 2006
Location: mid tennessee
Posts: 411
Well outcast I really dont care if i offended you :barf:what right does that give you to discern anyones firearm ownership?,all I have to say is shame on the people that come to my place in the middle of the night,we cant all offer them tea and crumpets!
And on the subject of legality what about the 4 armed assailants who drove to his house,at 2:30 in the morning with concealed weapons (maybe stolen) with the intention of commiting a felony,no one seems to be worried about that legal issue.
__________________
We all love gun p*rn, weather shes skinny,fat,short or tall, God made a man to love them all!


"Once you familiarize yourself with the chains of bondage , You prepare your own limbs to wear them."
- Abraham Lincoln

Last edited by SpookBoy; August 1, 2007 at 02:29 PM.
SpookBoy is offline  
Old August 1, 2007, 03:04 PM   #17
BillCA
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 28, 2004
Location: Silicon Valley, Ca
Posts: 7,087
If a person's home is invaded by four "heavily armed" thugs and that person manages to drive them out of the house is the job done?

Not hardly.

Even if the invaders are "in flight" across the front lawn, they still pose a substantial danger to the homeowner. You don't know if their motives are to rob you or to kill everyone in the house. Since they did fire, you have to presume the worst (murder intent) in which case the homeowner cannot relax until they have been driven off.

So the homeowner stands on his porch, firing his uber-tactical gun as the thugs pile into a car parked in front of the house next door. In technical legalese, some lawyers will argue that defense rights stop at the property line. However, in realistic terms, the threat to the homeowner does NOT stop simply because the thugs have run to the street.

As the car drives off, should the homeowner fire parting shots at the fleeing thugs? Some will raise the liklihood of injuring "innocent parties" if the car goes out of control, though this seems thin for a residential zone at 2:30am. But I think a case can be made that thugs who are this brazen and violent certainly are a danger to the community and actions taken to stop them are justifiable under the law. A departing car still holds danger for the homeowner as it may contain heavier weaponry. They may use it for a final drive-by before leaving the area.

And there is the recognition that in such dramatic life-threatening events it is very difficult to try to "shut off" the defensive mode upon crossing some imaginary boundary.

Jumping into one's car and pursuing for blocks is, I'll agree, a bit overboard. But I'd still be likely to vote "not guilty" for a homeowner defending himself and family.
__________________
BillCA in CA (Unfortunately)
BillCA is offline  
Old August 1, 2007, 03:05 PM   #18
dyoun06
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 21, 2007
Posts: 133
No he did not go to far as far as the info in the report...

Quote:
Police said four heavily-armed men attempted to break into a house in the 9000 block of Woodshore Drive
Four men break into your home... (I have a 2 year in mine) that are heavily armed and engage you are beggin to come back, especially after you shoot 1, 2, 3, of them. While I don't wish this on anyone he did what he thought best -- remember he did not initiate this. Now he will worry about retaliation from family (gang members) until he can safely move. WAY TO GO PROTECTING YOURSELF (AND PROBABLY FAMILY).
dyoun06 is offline  
Old August 1, 2007, 03:19 PM   #19
Birdville2011
Member
 
Join Date: August 1, 2007
Location: Texas
Posts: 69
He shouldn't have pursued, but i hope he isn't charged
__________________
Marlin 336W .30-30
Remington 870 Express Synthetic 12ga
Remington 597 .22lr
Springfield 20ga (old)
Birdville2011 is offline  
Old August 1, 2007, 03:52 PM   #20
JWT
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 16, 2007
Location: Tucson, AZ
Posts: 3,059
Even though the thugs weren't exactly driving home from Sunday school when the homeowner shot them, he probably overstepped his boundaries and shouldn't have gone that far.

That being said, it would be hard not to want to pursue them.

Hopefully the 'authorities' will be lenient.
JWT is offline  
Old August 1, 2007, 03:57 PM   #21
JunyTuck
Member
 
Join Date: June 26, 2007
Posts: 92
Yes he went way TOO far. Chasing four heavily armed men into the streets is not the smartest thing to do. Secondly, their's the issue of collateral casualties. If he avoids criminal charges, ( which I doubt ), he will most likely face a civil trial from the families of those shot. I'm afraid he will pay dearly for the momentary lapse of judgement and control.Some of you commando types may see his actions as heroic, but I think it's just plain dumb. Let's follow the story and see if I,m right. Wouldn't want to be in this guys shoes, because he needs a good lawyer now!
JunyTuck is offline  
Old August 1, 2007, 04:01 PM   #22
45Marlin carbine
Junior member
 
Join Date: January 26, 2007
Location: South-Western North Carolina
Posts: 1,124
He may face charges but depending on the circumstances and jury sympathy he probably won't be convicted of felony charges. I'd be interested in knowing more details and particularly what firearm he was using. wanna bet a shotgun and maybe a pistol?
45Marlin carbine is offline  
Old August 1, 2007, 04:27 PM   #23
brickeyee
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 29, 2004
Posts: 3,342
“In Texas, one is allowed to use deadly force to prevent someone from fleeing after committing burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, or theft during the nighttime from escaping the property, and the actor believes (reasonably) the land or property cannot be protected or recovered by any other means, or not using deadly force would expose the actor or another to a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury. Tex. Pen. Code §9.42.”

Except they did not have any property if he drove them off before they entered so he could not “believes (reasonably) the land or property cannot be protected or recovered by any other means”


“He pursued them as they fled, hitting at least two of them, police said.”

This is going to come down to the DA and possibly a grand jury.
brickeyee is offline  
Old August 1, 2007, 04:45 PM   #24
xrocket
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 19, 2007
Posts: 549
OK fellows and here is the update.....

Here is the rest of the story updated by the Dallas Morning News @ 2:45 PM this afternoon. It clarifies and sheds some new light for consideration.


A robbery gone bad in northeast Dallas turned into a gun battle early Wednesday that ended with one man dead, another injured and another facing charges.

Police found small amounts of marijuana during their investigation and were looking into whether the events were drug-related.

Police said Wednesday afternoon they had not confirmed the identity of the man who died.

It started about 2 a.m. at a home on the 9000 block of Woodshore Drive, in a neighborhood near where Greenville Avenue intersects Royal Lane. Four or five intruders broke into the home and surprised its owner, 25-year-old Mark Stinson, while he was sleeping.

They forced him at gunpoint to open a safe containing several thousands of dollars, police say, and then they tried to flee in an SUV. But Mr. Stinson had a gun of his own and fired it as they tried to drive away.

It was unclear whether they fired back, Dallas police homicide Sgt. Larry Lewis said. “But we did pick up different caliber rounds out there so we know at least more than one gun was being shot.”

The sergeant said at least 30 rounds were fired in all.

Less then a mile away, the occupants of the SUV pulled over because tires were shot out. They called 911 as one of the occupants died of gunshot wounds. Another, a 17-year-old boy, was arrested at the scene. The others fled.

Another man, 18-year-old Davane Jones, soon showed up at a local hospital with gunshot wounds. Police arrested him and the 17-year-old on charges of aggravated robbery.

As for the homeowner, Mr. Stinson, police say they will leave any possible charges up to the district attorney’s office and a grand jury. “Even though by our investigation it appears he was justified under Texas law to defend his house and his property...we don’t make that decision,” Sgt. Lewis said.
xrocket is offline  
Old August 1, 2007, 04:55 PM   #25
Spenser
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 18, 2006
Location: Texas
Posts: 408
Sounds like this could be justified. Again, we'll have to wait and see what all the facts are.

However, given the Penal Code definitions, he might just have an argument that his actions were justified to prevent anything else from happening....

We shall see.
Spenser is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:39 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.13818 seconds with 7 queries