Then have it loaded and not chambered, it'll be much harder to load those mags then slide a shell in a regular shotgun, cause you know I also own one.

Why would you think it's only foreign agents who would use ICE as cover to disappear politicians they don't like?

Transparency: noun. The quality of being done in an open way without secrets.

Example: "the DHHS office was being operated without any transparency. That is until we walked in on the Secretary in the conference room fully nude, savagely defiling the corpses of various large mammals as he quaffed a goblet of raw sewage water."

The homeowner told police the two men said they were police and claimed they were at the home to serve a warrant.

[The homeowner] became suspicious, because, you know, they have a ring camera too, and the suspects were saying they had a warrant, but it was just two people and they're masked up and no police cars, no lights or anything like that," said Lt. Khan with HPD.

At some point, police said the men shot at the homeowner through the door, prompting the homeowner to return fire.

The homeowner was not hurt in the gunfire, but the two men were both hit and pronounced dead at the scene.

Stringer noted that real officers do not wear ski masks.

Someone tell the fascist brownshirts that work for ICE that.

I feel the headline should have noted that he shot in response to them shooting through his goddamn door first.

I have a prediction: the more professional and organized members of ICE would actually be foreign agents, causing problems at key points. Say, for example, "vanishing" unfriendly politicians. ICE is the perfect cover: Low recruitment standards, no regulation, bounties for those times you need to get money, and no one able to ask questions.

It would be the chaotic and unprofessional members of ICE that are native to the USA. Those would be just into ICE for the money and racism, not patriotism to their nation. This will become a "Lions Led by Donkeys" episode in a decade or two.

It's texas. He'll probably get a medal or something from his local law enforcement and a round of talk shows on fox if the colors line up with what fox likes/doesn't like.

as they fled a neighbor’s house

Were they leaving a neighbors house or were they in fact fleeing from robbing the neighbors house.

It appears that it wouldn't speak to cases that were never brought it would only immunize them if the grand jury is sought and declines to indict OR the case is dismissed rather than requiring a conviction to bring the suit.

This means they can't opt out of liability by ignoring the case. This doesn't appear on its face to be bad law. If Texan's decline to indict when they ought to then that not the law is the issue.

Likewise if its even possible to stack the jury that again is the problem not the law.

So I looked up the case for anyone's edification what happened is 2 pieces of human garbage were robbing his neighbor and running away with bags of their valuables. Aside from being robbers they had criminal convictions in Columbia for drug trafficking.

When confronted by the shotgun wielding neighbor the dangerous drug trafficking robbers refused his order for them to stop and one ran onto the neighbor's yard TOWARDS the shotgun wielding neighbor and the other ran away. He shot both.

Quoth the shooter

Horn, to dispatcher: "I had no choice. They came in the front yard with me, man. I had no choice."

Because of this the rest of the neighborhood wasn't victimized by drug dealing robbers breaking into their houses. Nobody ultimately had a run in with scumbags because someone was home when the robbers thought the place was empty. Nobodies family members got murdered to avoid leaving witnesses. Nobodies sanctity got violated.

But don't worry the New Black Panthers protested the scumbags deaths and threatened the fellow making their entire side look deranged and unreasonable when there are plenty of bad shoots by trigger happy cops perpetrated against actually innocent victims they could have been focusing on.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Horn_shooting_controversy

The homeowner told police the two men said they were police and claimed they were at the home to serve a warrant.

[The homeowner] became suspicious, because, you know, they have a ring camera too, and the suspects were saying they had a warrant, but it was just two people and they're masked up and no police cars, no lights or anything like that," said Lt. Khan with HPD.

At some point, police said the men shot at the homeowner through the door, prompting the homeowner to return fire.

The homeowner was not hurt in the gunfire, but the two men were both hit and pronounced dead at the scene.

This definitely shows a lot of perspective, thank you!

I really wish people looked at these cases more objectively, considering the humans involved and not simply:

"How can I paint this to forward my narrative obsession of the moment?"

It's like our entire society is based around social media clout farming. I know weaponized reporting is nothing new, but sheesh.

I wouldn't feel I had much choice either, if someone who just robbed a neighbor was charging at me in the dark. Suddenly after the fact, the internet is chock full of experts in ballistics and self defense law.

But you're right, it definitely defeated a future threat to the neighborhood residents. I haaaaate suburban Rambo Nextdoor toughguys as much as the next reasonable person, but this doesn't sound like that.

There's plenty of systemic issues to tackle around crime, but breaking into peoples' homes to loot and potentially harm them is always a choice carrying a significant weight of FAFO.

The homeowner told police the two men said they were police and claimed they were at the home to serve a warrant.

[The homeowner] became suspicious, because, you know, they have a ring camera too, and the suspects were saying they had a warrant, but it was just two people and they're masked up and no police cars, no lights or anything like that," said Lt. Khan with HPD.

At some point, police said the men shot at the homeowner through the door, prompting the homeowner to return fire.

The homeowner was not hurt in the gunfire, but the two men were both hit and pronounced dead at the scene.

Journalistic reflex; cops are always innocent.

I'm from the area. It all depends on how white and Republican you are. They stack the Grand Juries with "respectable members" of the community (white, male business owners typically) who no-bill white folk for killing minorities.

In a very public case, a white small business owner/homeowner shot 2 unarmed minorities in the back, killing both as they fled a neighbor's house. They never stepped on the killer's property and never threatened anyone. The homeowner called 911 and said he was going to kill them and get away with it. The operator said not to shoot and to go inside because police were just seconds away, and he killed them anyway.

The grand jury refused to let the prosecutor take the case to trial because killing black people is a public benefit in their eyes.

So the families of the victims sued the killer, and the state responded by outlawwing civil suits over any case involving a firearm that didn't first include a felony conviction.

The shooter told 911 they were coming at him, after basically saying he wanted to go kill them. The police officer who witnessed the killing said they were fleeing and that he shot them in the back.

I'm not some anti-gun dude. I own over 50 guns and used to work in the industry.

But that motherfucker should be in jail. Non-violent criminals don't deserve the death penalty - least of all from some psycho neighbor who has a hard-on for violence and essentially announces his intent to kill before going outside and killing.

Saying non-violent burglars and drug users deserve to die because Joe really wanted an excuse to kill isn't exactly objective.

The only witness to the killing was a plainclothes officer who said he shot people in the back while fleeing.

Stealing shit isn't a capital offense. As a society, we decided long ago that even a judge and jury can't kill someone for burglary. Why is it okay when the psycho neighbor who isn't even a victim does it?

No. It applies to all civil suits regarding gun crime.

It effectively raises the standards of civil suits when guns are involved, which are not supposed to be the same as criminal.

In reality, if the masked intruder you shoot happens to be a cop, then Castle Doctrine is irrelevant. You're now a cop murderer. They'll figure out some legal or extra-legal way to see you behind bars or dead.