I think that it might be better to describe the two deceased burglars as ‘petty thieves’ rather than say that their crime is ‘petty theft’. I don’t know what was in the bag they were carrying, but I doubt that they made off with more than a few thousand dollars in property. I also think that the property was probably insured under the home owner’s insurance policy, so I don’t think the owner would have lost out on much regardless of what they took. The victims of the burglar would feel violated, as all victims of crime feel, but I don’t think that death of the burglars is going to make them feel better.

Grand theft is different than petty theft.

And, kidnapping is different than grand theft.

Grand theft is grand theft. Grand theft with breaking & entering is more serious than grand theft alone.

For the record, I do not think that death is a suitable consequence to be imposed by the State for grand theft w/ B&E. But, I’m still not sure, especially the way the law is written in the State of Texas, that the 61 y-o neighbor has violated Texas law.

My vote: Brother’s keeper – not criminal.

Texas SB 378 doesn’t appear to be applicable to this situation – it amended the Texas Penal Code sec. 9.32 which is about deadly force in defense of person. The relevant statute appears to be Texas Penal Code sec. 9.43, which allows deadly force in defense of a third person’s property under broad conditions.

I think that section is extreme, but it certainly appears to provide a sufficient legal justification for the shooter’s actions in this case. By comparision, Utah does not allow deadly force to be used in defense of property (cf. Utah Code 76-2-406). I don’t know about other states.

Someone else forcibly putting my person, my spouses person, or my son’s person in a box for 30 hours is completely different than robbing someone of something that cost 30 hours of work. For one thing, if someone were forcibly kidnapping a human being, almost every common law jurisdiction makes deadly force a justification to avoid imminent death or serious bodily harm, which could well be the situation if a kidnapping (forcibly taking someone and putting them into a box) were afoot.

I do view taking of my personal property as a serious infringment of my right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, but I do not think death is a suitable consequence.

And if someone were trying to forcibly take the person of me or anyone else, I would use whatever force was necessary to stop it, assuming I was able to do so.

If someone is burglarizing your house, you have a right to defend yourself and your family (not your house) but that’s the catch — when you are in there you cannot be presumed to know whether the burglar intends to harm you or not so you can blow him or her away. Seeing someone running away from burglarizing your neighbor’s house is a far cry from this historical understanding of the principle of using deadly force in self-defense.

In a society that has legitimate debate about the application of the death penalty when applied to those who have committed heinous crimes, it is difficult to imagine that you can just blow someone away who is not threatening your life in any way but rather running away from someone else’s house in an apparent burglary. No judge, no jury, just a suspicion, a gun, and a window facing your neighbor’s house. I have a feeling that this isn’t going to come under the purview of the statute.

Jordan F.: Why did you initially use the term “a petty theif” in your questioning? Why the downplaying, even and most likely if unintentional? Why this tendency among so many?

Why is respect for property diminished so much? Yes, I know that property can be restored, whereas life cannot. But, I feel that the safeguarding of property has been, and is being, marginalized by too many in society today. I see it in things from movies and cartoons (think explosions… even though I do enjoy the entertainment) to criminal, civil and tax law. Where my wife works there is a thief. Where I work there is a thief. Things go missing.

For me, property is a tangible representation and realization of both life and liberty. So, when one violates property, one also violates life and liberty. If I make $10 an hour and buy a $300 Mont Blanc Fountain then I have used my liberty to expend 30 hours of my life working to make a foolish purchase. But, it was my choice. If someone jacks my MB, then they have stolen 30 hours of my life and liberty. What kind of penalty would you impose upon someone who took you, your spouse, or 4-y-o daughter and just put ‘em in a box for 30 hours? Or, your neighbor’s? What would you do to stop them?

I guess I won’t be on the jury of this case.

B&E does not make it petty theft… it is burglary.