A True Texas Hero!

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
101

[quote]rainjack wrote:
I would not doubt for a second that the neighbor gave the old man instructions ot look after his place.

That’s just an exchange of common courtesy around here: you tell your neighbors you are leaving, the neighbor offers to keep an eye on the place, the one leaving accepts his offer.
[/quote]

This occurred blocks from where I grew up.

In that area they have a Neighborhood Crime Watch Program where everyone agrees to look after each other. They even have stickers on the windows of houses that state this. When I was a child, I used to see the white sticker with a blue eye on it on all the houses. This system was set up to stop crime.

What I am getting at is that it is understood, in these parts, that you can depend on your neighbor to have your back. Also, in this part of the world, most neighbors are close friends. Most people don’t even know what their neighbors look like in other parts of the world.

Now combine the two. Agreement to defend your neighbor’s property + the neighbor being your friend, the result is obvious.

To add to this, there a lot of parts of Pasadena where crime rates are very high. When someone’s house gets robbed, the whole block (we say street around here) knows about it.

What do we have left?
Agreed Crime Watch Program + Looking after a friend + high crime area + fear of one’s life. The man was defending himself as well as upholding his civic duty.

102

[quote]texasguy2 wrote:
Morality is extremely subjective as you must know. A man makes his own rules based on his own morality as you allude to with your own post. A man’s house is his castle. Come in to his house and play by his morally driven rules. In Texas, this moral sentiment is widespread enough to make it to the books. [/quote]

Yes. Man acts according to his moral virtue. The difference between how a man acts and how he is to be judged is called the law. Laws do not tell a man how he is to behave. They judge actions after the fact. The law is absolute. Morals are not.

I am not arguing against the legality of this man’s action – though there might be a case against his actions in light of all the evidence. I am arguing that his actions were immoral. I also argue that because I judge his actions to be immoral he cannot be considered a hero as per the HH’s assertion.

What is moral isn’t always legal, what is legal isn’t always moral.

103

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
texasguy2 wrote:
Morality is extremely subjective as you must know. A man makes his own rules based on his own morality as you allude to with your own post. A man’s house is his castle. Come in to his house and play by his morally driven rules. In Texas, this moral sentiment is widespread enough to make it to the books.

Yes. Man acts according to his moral virtue. The difference between how a man acts and how he is to be judged is called the law. Laws do not tell a man how he is to behave. They judge actions after the fact. The law is absolute. Morals are not.

I am not arguing against the legality of this man’s action – though there might be a case against his actions in light of all the evidence. I am arguing that his actions were immoral. I also argue that because I judge his actions to be immoral he cannot be considered a hero as per the HH’s assertion.

What is moral isn’t always legal, what is legal isn’t always moral.[/quote]

You are talking in circles. We’ve identified that morality is subjective and that laws are written to embody and enforce the morality of the majority.

I agree that laws can be disputed. This man apparently does too as the home he was protecting was not his own, but his neighbors, who placed the well being of their home in his hands while out of town.

Operating within not only his own moral compass, but a loose interpretation of the law as well, he morally protected his neighbors property as it was entrusted to him.

Your center of morality is no more objective than the law’s or the robbers’ who felt it moral to rob a house.

If you really want to be an anarchist about it, understand that in the absence of laws in favor of individual governance, all people will subject others in their spheres of contact and influence to certain treatment as said individual sees fit.

If this is the case, the man with the biggest gun or greatest accuracy wins.

In a legal scenario, protecting your home, life, property and other innocent lives in Texas by using deadly force is legal.

Morally, the man was entrusted to protect his neighbors home as he does his own while they were out of town and he did what he felt was right.

In any case, legal, moral or anarchial (sp?), the old man is the moral victor.

104

Thats how we roll in Texas…bitches. Props to any 70 year old dude who can use a shotgun

105

Maybe they should print certain parts of Texas law in Spanish or some language that illegal perps can understand. That way, they know, it they rob, they may die.

Either that, or have nice signs with a shotgun on it and fake brains and blood spattered all over, on the front lawn, so they know there are people in the neighborhood that protect one anothers property…and it’s LEGAL to do so. The signs can be state sponsered ! Pick em up at the town hall.

Other states have different laws, but apparently in Texas, they take property rights very seriously and allow neighbors to protect each other. Wow…what a concept. Maybe it should be NATIONAL law.

In other states, you probably have to listen to the break in, call the police and hope that they get there in time before the criminals come over to YOUR house. NOT GOOD !