[ChicagoTroy]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
They made the choice to go into someones house. They made the choice to steal from someones house. They made the choice to run away despite someone yelling to stop running while holding a gun. What did they expect? The civilian didn't create the threat, the robbers did when they decided to break into someones home.

[/ QUOTE ]
You listened to the call right? This guy is guilty as hell. On what grounds should he be acquitted?

[/ QUOTE ]
He called the police who did not arrive. He went out to detain the thieves, and they ran at him. Frightened for his safety, he shot them. In Texas? I'm pretty sure he walks. I think he walks in San Francisco.
[ QUOTE ]
This was a case of vigilante justice gone wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]
What would have been gone right? IMO, going out there and holding them at gunpoint would have been ideal, but the knucklhead robbers have something to say about that, however briefly.
[ QUOTE ]
Of course they had the choice to not break into a house and take a VCR, but luckily that has no bearing on the decision. The ultimate decision rested upon the man, and it was his decision that resulted in two men getting murdered.

[/ QUOTE ]
I can't believe someone would actually write this. People breaking into the house had EVERYTHING to do with the decision. This guy wasn't holding up randoms on the street, he went out to stop two criminals victimizing his community.
[ QUOTE ]
Individual citizens do not have the right to use deadly force against someone fleeing from a burglary (from another's home). No matter how you slice it, they just don't unless THEY force a threat upon the person or their family.

[/ QUOTE ]
Whether somebody is being threatened or not can be extremely subjective when he is frightened. The thief does not say, "I am not threatening you with violence" as he runs towards him. The guy gets back on the phone in a very agitated state saying they ran at him. Sounded believable to me.