TexasCHLforum.com

http://www.kvue.com/story/news/local/20 ... /21278223/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Little too close to home for me. I'm glad the man was able to protect his family.

That is very close to home for me, didn't know there was a group home in the area. A good friend of mine lives in the neighborhood behind this one, even closer to him.

Too bad it had to end this way, but I'm glad nobody in the home was hurt.

So far I read a couple slightly different versions. One says the guy forced his way into the home and another says he was shot as he tried to enter. Could be a very important difference as one article is noted as a "suspicious death investigation.

Doesn't sound really suspicious to me. Try to break into a home, you may get shot.

So the homeowner is a firearms instructor, certified in "home firearm safety, pistol, rifle, personal protection in the home, personal protection outside the home and range safety".

So why would he open the front door at 6:00 AM to a stranger? He certainly should have known better.

Once the guy forced his way in the front door, I understand that use of deadly force was legally justified. But certainly we would all prefer to take a course of action that avoids creating the need to shoot someone.

Where are you seeing that he or his wife opened the door? The article says:

Police said the man forced his way onto the threshold of one of the homes, alerting the homeowners.

...whatever that means.

Pawpaw wrote:Where are you seeing that he or his wife opened the door? The article says:

Police said the man forced his way onto the threshold of one of the homes, alerting the homeowners.

...whatever that means.

The news video said the dead guy was banging on the door, the homeowner opened the door, the dead guy forced himself across the threshold, and was shot.

I see now. The video and the printed article barely even seem like the stories about the same incident.

Jumping Frog wrote:So the homeowner is a firearms instructor, certified in "home firearm safety, pistol, rifle, personal protection in the home, personal protection outside the home and range safety".

So why would he open the front door at 6:00 AM to a stranger? He certainly should have known better.

Once the guy forced his way in the front door, I understand that use of deadly force was legally justified. But certainly we would all prefer to take a course of action that avoids creating the need to shoot someone.

Early news articles like this are notoriously inaccurate and incomplete, so I wouldn't draw any conclusions other than that someone who did not live at the home was shot at that location. There is no mention of any conversation that may have taken place. One of the many possibilities is that the deceased may have stated he needed help to get the homeowner to open the door, and then charged into the home.

Another thing to keep in mind is that deadly force incidents are almost never pristine in all aspects. Investigation almost always shows that some mistakes are made by both adversaries and defenders. If a defender makes a tactical error, it is an opportunity for the rest of us to learn something, but doesn't automatically cancel the reasonableness of his overall actions.

I certainly wouldn't jump to fault the apparent victim of what is being reported as a forcible home invasion on the basis of
this really sparse early information which is really fuzzy about what happened at the threshold.

Let's wait and see what the fact pattern looks like after more information is released.

While I understand your caution regarding news stories, I also view discussions of these events as a way to look at what went right and what went wrong, in the same spirit that you mention that rarely does a DGU not include mistakes by the person defending him/herself.

I also agree that news stories can change. However, there has been no report of the dead guy breaking down the front door and such an action would have a very high probability of being reported. It is hard for me to view anyone opening a door in the dark to a stranger as anything but a judgment error. Certainly, I would not do so.

Also, given he instructs personal protection in the home, I believe it is reasonable to expect him to understand the issues and make more informed decisions than an untrained person.

Tragic:
http://kxan.com/2015/01/06/family-of-me ... tle-giant/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Apparently this was an autistic individual who was housed at a near-by group home.

cb1000rider wrote:Tragic:

Indeed.

cb1000rider wrote:Tragic:
http://kxan.com/2015/01/06/family-of-me ... tle-giant/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Apparently this was an autistic individual who was housed at a near-by group home.

The first sentence really clears up the confusion.

The family of a man was shot and killed after he tried to get into a South Austin home on Monday morning says they are shocked and are still trying to figure out how the situation unfolded.

There was also a comment about him being a gentle giant, but a nice person. The gentle giant from "Of Mice and Men" was nice also, but he still committed murder. No one knows what would have happened if the homeowner had not acted.

Tragic indeed, but the homeowner can't be faulted for defending his family and home. When someone bangs on your door and forces their way into your house, you don't have time to determine if they have mental issues.

Also, let's not forget that autistic people can be violent too.

Pawpaw wrote:I see now. The video and the printed article barely even seem like the stories about the same incident.

As someone with a professional journalism background, I can assure you that the writers at KVUE are embarrassingly illiterate, not to mention disinclined to fact-check before publishing. Not surprising that they can't manage to be internally consistent, either.

"The family of a man was shot and killed..."

Huh?

Perhaps, my reading comprehension is slipping, but that entire sentence is gobbledygook.

If you open the provided link in an earlier post, (kxan.com link) some of the comments are outlandish.

How so?

Many are defending the intruder.

While I didn't take the time to count, I'd say those supporting the defending homeowner and those supporting the intruder are roughly about 50/50.

But then, it happened in Austin where liberals flock and lefties don't believe in self defense.