Every man has the right to kill to defend his property

Things to note, the burglar did still have his wallet when he had left the house, while that may not be murder it can lead to something disasterous (ie ID theft) so he had to be stopped, and if he caused any damage in the house he'd have to pay for it. And the only chance of that happening if he hadn't stopped him is to ID him and hope he's found, and how good are many civilians at identifying criminals under duress. That ****head chief didn't have a clue what he was saying, "stay in and dial 911".

Even if someone just breaks in, at the end of the day hes breaking my windows and doors that i *beep* paid for. Like he thinks he can. Im gona punish him doing it.

The US has really good laws regarding self defense and home protection.

In Canada, it's very hard to justify self-defense. All you are supposed to do if your home is invaded is call the police and/or leave the house. If you can't do that, you have give the criminal whatever they are asking for.

Merely showing a gun to someone who has broken into your house will turn him into a victim and you a criminal. It's insane.

Dumb redneck. The problem is you inbreds fire at anything that moves, especially when you creeps are drunk. Your judgment is not sound and if you kill someone just for trespassing, you deserve to be put away!

Miss The Old USA Network?
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/oldusanetwork

Having worked in the legal system in Texas, a person has the right to defend him/herself and/or family and/or property, if being threatened or harmed, including using excessive force, if excessive force is being used by threat. For example, if the burglar has a knife and you have a bat, that is considered equal defense. But if the burglar has a knife and you have a shotgun and blow his head off, then that's excessive force.

However, if the threat or harm goes away (e.g., burglar leaves the home, thief runs off, etc.), the threat no longer exists and thus self-defense no longer pertains. So, the fact that Porter ran after the burglar after he exited his home, could be construed as an attack and no longer self-defense.

Porter should just have let the thief run off and cancel his credit cards, bank accts, etc. Although, if he had done that, the movie would have been over in 15mins...LOL.

But, to make the movie worth watching, they had to exaggerate his conviction and sentencing.




"Apparently, he had a VERY good time!"~Warden Gad Hassan from The Mummy

[deleted]

I agree chiselpoint.

I think the writers made an error in having the officer charge him with murder. Possibly a deliberate error for dramatic effect.

In reality it would be manslaughter at the most and probably involuntary manslaughter.

Wow, a lot of liberal hate going on in here, but I understand. However, not all of us are like this. As a liberal, I feel we should go far to help those who turn to crime, I believe rehabilitation is possible but not aimed for enough. That being said, I own about 14 guns (most older historical models) I keep a 9mm beside my bed and if I heard my front door open at night I'd reach for it. Even though I feel for people in that position it's the right of any free man to defend himself and his property. I also want to be clear that I believe one warning without compliance=the right to use lethal force. I live in KY and I love our laws on firearms.

I also carry a .32 when I go somewhere projected to be a rougher neighbor hood. Other than then, I carry a pocket knife. I'm very serious about self defense I weigh about 120 and aside from a few maneuvers a bigger person would easily have the edge on me, I don't see defending myself as this great endeavor and normally I could probably run and get away or comply and not get hurt but I feel it's my responsibility as a man to take care of those I love.

To him mercy is passion With me it is good manners.You may judge which motive is more reliable