Welcome Guest Search | Active Topics | Members | Log In | Register

It’s OK in Texas to shoot a woman for refusing to have sex! You're within the law. Options · View
keoloke
Posted: Tuesday, June 11, 2013 8:44:29 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 8/12/2010
Posts: 599
Location: United States
A law in Texas allows people to use "deadly force to recover property during a nighttime theft." But that law is presumably in place to protect people during potentially violent break-ins and muggings. Gilbert met his victim on Craigslist, handed her the money voluntarily, and then shot her when things didn't go as planned.

He was acquitted!

Read it here and you can also sign a petiton. 25000 people signed, 25000 more needed.




Choose n Practice Happiness

Life is simple; we are what we eat and what we read. Talk is superfluous.
Buz
Posted: Tuesday, June 11, 2013 8:47:18 PM

Rank: The Linebacker

Joined: 3/2/2011
Posts: 5,838
Location: Atlanta, United States
hmmmmm.... If you can shoot people for theft of services then cable and satellite TV reps would be fair target.

Metilda
Posted: Tuesday, June 11, 2013 8:58:58 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 3/10/2013
Posts: 988
Location: United States
Well - being a technical bitch - he was acquitted because she took money from him (and regardless of the nature of the 'service' that was expected to be exchanged) took it and tried to leave after he demanded she return the amount.

It could have been over anything - money for watches, money for interior decorating . . . anything.

The law should be clarified to exclude such situation - as it's just poorly written and entirely vague as to when 'coercive tactics' or 'assault and battery' come into play, etc.

But that's Texas for you - permitting a murder over the theft of anything even if your life isn't in danger . . . and they're proud of it.

Available as an ebook through All Romance, Amazon, Barnes and Noble, iBooks, and others.
VanGogh
Posted: Tuesday, June 11, 2013 9:04:32 PM

Rank: Sarcastic Coffee Aficionado

Joined: 2/10/2012
Posts: 3,047
Location: Vancouver, Canada
I am forever surprised at some of the American laws and those surrounding guns (owners and their rights).

I believe laws are there to be tested and evaluated and amended as society changes. Outdated laws (like old-fashioned ideals/words) need to change with the times.

(or maybe this Canadian is speaking out of turn? Embarassed )

thanks for enlightening me!

A Milf series combined with Office Sex *fans face* .... The Secretary and The Student
starting with The Secretary and The Student - first part

Enjoy!!

For the Anal Lovers .... come enjoy my RR honoured An Alluring Ass

Another Sex in the Office Poem (I know you love those!!) In Your Office

Dani
Posted: Tuesday, June 11, 2013 9:21:06 PM

Rank: Big-Haired Bitch

Joined: 12/25/2010
Posts: 4,727
Location: Under Your Bed, United States
Don't turn this into a gun control issue. That's just grasping at straws. Would it have been better if he had bludgeoned or stabbed her to death?

Guns annoy me as much as the next person who wants to see some gun control. But that's really not the issue here. That poorly written 'deadly force to recover property' law is the issue here. It just so happens that his deadly force of choice was a gun.



Baby put your arms around me, tell me I'm a problem...

Buz
Posted: Tuesday, June 11, 2013 9:22:55 PM

Rank: The Linebacker

Joined: 3/2/2011
Posts: 5,838
Location: Atlanta, United States
Such laws vary by state. With 50 states that's a lot of variations. I don't think many states would allow for that. Texas is usually the most extreme. (Maybe because Texas was once an independent sovereign nation that joined the USA.) That would be excessive force where I live, but here, if anyone calls me by a highly offensive curse word or phrase, I can punch them in the nose and get away with it because they used 'fighting words', which makes it excusable. I kind of like that one.

CrossOfStAndrew
Posted: Tuesday, June 11, 2013 10:57:50 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 10/23/2011
Posts: 130
Location: United States
I'm sure there may be a few facts that were left out of this story, but I don't know if that would materially change the picture. The overall picture is that Texas is a state off the right side deep end.
Rembacher
Posted: Wednesday, June 12, 2013 2:11:52 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 10/16/2008
Posts: 1,106
slipperywhenwet2012 wrote:
Don't turn this into a gun control issue. That's just grasping at straws. Would it have been better if he had bludgeoned or stabbed her to death?

Guns annoy me as much as the next person who wants to see some gun control. But that's really not the issue here. That poorly written 'deadly force to recover property' law is the issue here. It just so happens that his deadly force of choice was a gun.


As another Canadian outsider I will jump in on this. I don't think PA was referring to gun control per se, merely using it as the most obvious example of a law that was written over 200 years ago, which (to the outsider) the American public as a whole is unwilling to change to reflect the times.

When you live in a society where nobody really has handguns in their home, it seems really outdated (and possibly barbaric) to have a law that allows you to kill someone when simply scaring them off and calling the cops is all that is really needed.
LadyX
Posted: Wednesday, June 12, 2013 3:32:54 PM

Rank: Artistic Tart

Joined: 9/25/2009
Posts: 4,827
I believe this is what's known here in the Texas legislature as the "Bitch Had it Comin'" Law.
Dani
Posted: Wednesday, June 12, 2013 5:17:29 PM

Rank: Big-Haired Bitch

Joined: 12/25/2010
Posts: 4,727
Location: Under Your Bed, United States
PersonalAssistant wrote:
I am forever surprised at some of the American laws and those surrounding guns (owners and their rights).


Rembacher wrote:

I don't think PA was referring to gun control per se, merely using it as the most obvious example of a law that was written over 200 years ago, which (to the outsider) the American public as a whole is unwilling to change to reflect the times.


I see what you're trying to say. But I don't think that was the original intent. As I said, this issue doesn't pertain to gun control. Just that particular law.

I think seeing the title "It's OK in Texas to shoot a woman for refusing to have sex! You're within the law." kind of gives a knee-jerk reaction, especially for those who are gun sensitive. Saying, "It's OK in Texas to kill a woman for refusing to have sex! You're within the law." is probably more applicable in this situation.



Baby put your arms around me, tell me I'm a problem...

Magical_felix
Posted: Wednesday, June 12, 2013 5:58:34 PM

Rank: Wild at Heart

Joined: 4/3/2010
Posts: 4,913
Location: California
All my exes rest in peace in Texas.



HBmale
Posted: Wednesday, June 12, 2013 6:03:01 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 8/29/2012
Posts: 117
Location: So Cal, United States
And gays can't marry....dumbasses.
Buz
Posted: Wednesday, June 12, 2013 6:04:18 PM

Rank: The Linebacker

Joined: 3/2/2011
Posts: 5,838
Location: Atlanta, United States
Bad things might happen when you steal and commit a crime but that would generally be manslaughter any where else. Oh well, don't steal from anyone in Texas.

Magical_felix
Posted: Wednesday, June 12, 2013 6:06:35 PM

Rank: Wild at Heart

Joined: 4/3/2010
Posts: 4,913
Location: California
Buz wrote:
Bad things might happen when you steal and commit a crime but that would generally be manslaughter any where else. Oh well, don't steal from anyone in Texas.


I wonder if it extends to catching a motherfucker tryin'a steal your girlfriend?



Buz
Posted: Wednesday, June 12, 2013 6:18:41 PM

Rank: The Linebacker

Joined: 3/2/2011
Posts: 5,838
Location: Atlanta, United States
Magical_felix wrote:


I wonder if it extends to catching a motherfucker tryin'a steal your girlfriend?


It's Texas! You get an honorary deputy's badge and a marksmanship commendation if you shoot his nuts off.

RumpleForeskin
Posted: Wednesday, June 12, 2013 7:08:34 PM

Rank: The Right Rev of Lush

Joined: 7/3/2009
Posts: 2,906
Location: Lost in the ozone somewhere east of Luckenbach Tx,
Lady X wrote:
I believe this is what's known here in the Texas legislature as the "Bitch Had it Comin'" Law.

Yea, verily, Sister X. There used to be a law in Texas that a man catching another man enjoying some carnal delights with the former's wife, could kill him with no fear of the law. This 'oldie but goodie' stayed on the books until a lawyer (wouldn't you know it) had his wife seduce his partner. He then caught 'em in the act and gunned down his betrayer/partner. After the fact, the 'aggrieved husband' got off scot-free, all the firm's assets and even kept his willing accomplice (aka: wife). When the details leaked out, even the Texas legislature was motivated to repeal the law. My hunch is this came about not out of some perceived breach of common sense, much less common law, but because letting the law stay on the books might be bad for business.

glasses8


Writing is not necessarily something to be ashamed of, but do it in private and wash your hands afterwords. - ROBERT HEINLEIN

Feels So Right, It Can't Be WrongMore steamy, seductive, straight step-sibling sex, 2-3

FROM:
Becky -- FOR: Matt -- With Love:
a Festive contest winner – honest

HOW HUMANS DO IT: a fish-eye view of sex an Editor's Pick - no kidding
kylie_kained
Posted: Wednesday, June 12, 2013 7:28:50 PM

Rank: Detention Seeker

Joined: 8/17/2010
Posts: 994
Location: Over your Knee Screaming and Kicking!, United King
It's time Texas and the U.S really started changing the laws.
















ByronLord
Posted: Thursday, June 13, 2013 6:16:01 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 11/14/2010
Posts: 754
Location: Massachusetts, United States
slipperywhenwet2012 wrote:
Don't turn this into a gun control issue. That's just grasping at straws. Would it have been better if he had bludgeoned or stabbed her to death?

Guns annoy me as much as the next person who wants to see some gun control. But that's really not the issue here. That poorly written 'deadly force to recover property' law is the issue here. It just so happens that his deadly force of choice was a gun.


No, the coward would never have bludgeoned her to death, it was the gun that made it easy for him to do.

It is because of places like Texas that we need federal gun control. Its the macho gun slinging culture that people find offensive.

LadyX
Posted: Thursday, June 13, 2013 7:00:51 AM

Rank: Artistic Tart

Joined: 9/25/2009
Posts: 4,827
ByronLord wrote:


No, the coward would never have bludgeoned her to death, it was the gun that made it easy for him to do.


You can steer any issue you'd like toward your beefs with gun ownership and other cultural traits you hate, but this isn't really a gun control issue. We have a few threads already for that flavor of bloviation. People kill others without guns on a regular basis, sometimes quite gruesomely. There's no basis for asserting what he would or would not have done in different circumstances.
ManInNewHampshire
Posted: Thursday, June 13, 2013 8:41:52 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 4/23/2013
Posts: 139
Location: Under the radar, United States
LadyX wrote:


You can steer any issue you'd like toward your beefs with gun ownership and other cultural traits you hate, but this isn't really a gun control issue. We have a few threads already for that flavor of bloviation. People kill others without guns on a regular basis, sometimes quite gruesomely. There's no basis for asserting what he would or would not have done in different circumstances.



I agree. I was involved with getting city kids out of gangs. Guns were the weapon of last choice. If people were actually involved with both gangs and living in states where gun ownership is fairly common they would see a completely different picture.

Crow bars, hammers, knives, tire irons, and pipe wrenches are only a few weapons used to kill people. Do we only allow professionals to own these things? Or maybe self defense courses should be outlawed because those same skills can be used to kill someone?

The argument should be about common sense laws.
Dani
Posted: Thursday, June 13, 2013 9:18:30 AM

Rank: Big-Haired Bitch

Joined: 12/25/2010
Posts: 4,727
Location: Under Your Bed, United States
LadyX wrote:


You can steer any issue you'd like toward your beefs with gun ownership and other cultural traits you hate, but this isn't really a gun control issue. We have a few threads already for that flavor of bloviation. People kill others without guns on a regular basis, sometimes quite gruesomely. There's no basis for asserting what he would or would not have done in different circumstances.


Aww damn. You beat me to it.



Baby put your arms around me, tell me I'm a problem...

Jack_42
Posted: Thursday, June 13, 2013 10:31:37 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 8/21/2009
Posts: 986
Location: Prague, Czech Republic
I believe that there is a law in the Isle of Man that is yet to be repealed that says Scotsmen wearing a kilt can be shot on sight. However I don't think you'd get away with it, (yes of course I mean wearing the kilt). There is also another law and I think it's still active and in use where criminals can receive corporal punishment for certain crimes.

n.b for those who are unsure of where the Isle of Man is it is a small island between Ireland and England more or less on a level with Liverpool. It has semi independence from the U.K. and is famous for motor bike racing, fairy tales and cats with no tails. It is a lovely place covered in fir trees with really nice beaches and a sort of attractive Edwardian lady gone to seed atmosphere.
overmykneenow
Posted: Thursday, June 13, 2013 10:35:01 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 6/8/2010
Posts: 1,024
Location: United Kingdom
LadyX wrote:

You can steer any issue you'd like toward your beefs with gun ownership and other cultural traits you hate, but this isn't really a gun control issue.


It's not really an issue about ownership, more a question of what this guy's first course of action was. It wasn't based on his knowledge of the law and the thought that he'd get away with it. It was more down to the culture of sorting out your problems with an assault rifle.

He went and got his AK47 and opened fire on a moving car in the dark for the sake of $150. Of course the worse thing is, the law has backed him up. Shop-lifters beware!

Warning: The opinions above are those of an anonymous individual on the internet. They are opinions, unless they're facts. They may be ill-informed, out of touch with reality or just plain stupid. They may contain traces of irony. If reading these opinions causes you to be become outraged or you start displaying the symptoms of outrage, stop reading them immediately. If symptoms persist, consult a psychiatrist.

Why not read some stories instead

NEW! Want a quick read for your coffee break? Why not try this... Flash Erotica: Scrubber
LadyX
Posted: Thursday, June 13, 2013 11:23:04 AM

Rank: Artistic Tart

Joined: 9/25/2009
Posts: 4,827
overmykneenow wrote:


It's not really an issue about ownership, more a question of what this guy's first course of action was. It wasn't based on his knowledge of the law and the thought that he'd get away with it. It was more down to the culture of sorting out your problems with an assault rifle.

He went and got his AK47 and opened fire on a moving car in the dark for the sake of $150. Of course the worse thing is, the law has backed him up. Shop-lifters beware!


That's true. And regardless of where it occurred, it should be a homicide of some sort. The fact that it's not is what makes it notable, not that a gun was used in the process.

As for using any US crime story involving the use of a gun as just another opportunity to 'tut-tut' about gun culture...the line for doing so forms to the left.

mercianknight
Posted: Thursday, June 13, 2013 12:26:14 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 8/11/2009
Posts: 2,029
Location: whispering conspiratorially in your ear, Bermuda
Perhaps this is why Texas has two of the fastest growing cities in the U.S. AND the highest rate of internal migration i.e. other yanks moving from the touchy-feely socialist north to the willd, wild west approach of Texas.

Not for me though. Just saying.

"Whoa, lady, I only speak two languages, English and bad English." - Korben Dallas, from The Fifth Element

"If history repeats itself, and the unexpected always happens, how incapable must man be of learning from experience?" - George Bernard Shaw
ByronLord
Posted: Friday, June 14, 2013 7:01:47 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 11/14/2010
Posts: 754
Location: Massachusetts, United States
LadyX wrote:


You can steer any issue you'd like toward your beefs with gun ownership and other cultural traits you hate, but this isn't really a gun control issue. We have a few threads already for that flavor of bloviation. People kill others without guns on a regular basis, sometimes quite gruesomely. There's no basis for asserting what he would or would not have done in different circumstances.


The statistics simply don't back that claim. Take out the deaths due to guns and the US per captia murder rate is the same as that of France, the UK and Germany. The gun deaths in the UK are practically zero because guns are banned completely.

Now you can claim that this jerk could have murdered the girl just as easily with his bare hands or a knife, but he would have had to run pretty fast to catch up with the car, then ripped the door open and overpowered her while the driver looked on.

Now you can say that being able to kill people with the press of a button makes no difference to people's willingness to kill but that does not make it true.

And the people who oppose gun control laws are the same people who push for the type of gunslinger justice that led to this girl's murder and the murder of Treyvon Martin in Florida. Its the NRA that pushes for the stand your ground laws and for putting machine guns in the hands of loonies.


elitfromnorth
Posted: Friday, June 14, 2013 8:07:05 PM

Rank: Brawling Berserker

Joined: 2/12/2012
Posts: 1,620
Location: Burrowed, Norway
overmykneenow wrote:


It's not really an issue about ownership, more a question of what this guy's first course of action was. It wasn't based on his knowledge of the law and the thought that he'd get away with it. It was more down to the culture of sorting out your problems with an assault rifle.

He went and got his AK47 and opened fire on a moving car in the dark for the sake of $150. Of course the worse thing is, the law has backed him up. Shop-lifters beware!


That only counts if it's in the night time! So parents of Texas, if you're gonna teach your kids one valuable lesson it's this; If they're gonna be bullies and steal from the other kids make sure that they do it in the daytime, because if it's during a class sleepover the little victim can use deadly force to protect his snicker's bar.

"It's at that point you realise Lady Luck is actually a hooker, and you're fresh out of cash."
LadyX
Posted: Friday, June 14, 2013 8:12:10 PM

Rank: Artistic Tart

Joined: 9/25/2009
Posts: 4,827
ByronLord wrote:


The statistics simply don't back that claim. Take out the deaths due to guns and the US per captia murder rate is the same as that of France, the UK and Germany. The gun deaths in the UK are practically zero because guns are banned completely.


Yes, they actually do. I wasn't arguing that most deaths aren't gun deaths, nor is the murder rate in those countries zero. If you want to argue how to quantify "regular basis" or "plenty", then be my guest.

As for this particular and specific circumstance, yes, only with a gun could be let her leave and only then attack. Therefore, cue the gun lecture. I've seen this episode several times now.


Quote:

Now you can say that being able to kill people with the press of a button makes no difference to people's willingness to kill but that does not make it true.


I can, yes, but I won't. Of course it's easier, but that doesn't mean it would eliminate all homicides. Most, I'll give you. I actually agree with you on gun control, at least until you slip into "children's blood is on your hands" histrionics and the gunslinger/cowboy sociology speeches.

Poppet
Posted: Friday, June 14, 2013 8:53:33 PM

Rank: Sweetest Cricket

Joined: 10/5/2012
Posts: 5,259
Location: You Inspire Me, United States
Buz wrote:
hmmmmm.... If you can shoot people for theft of services then cable and satellite TV reps would be fair target.


For what I pay for my cable/net I can agree that it should be!

ArtMan
Posted: Friday, June 14, 2013 9:17:06 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 6/29/2011
Posts: 640
Location: South Florida, United States
kylie_kained wrote:
It's time Texas and the U.S really started changing the laws.


Maybe Texans think the UK should change their laws. That's comparing apples to oranges, two different cultures.

Laws in Texas may not reflect laws in other parts of the U.S. If you are going to talk about laws in the U.S. please understand that there are federal laws and then there are state laws. Most laws are up to each state to set the way they see fit. For instance Texas laws and Massachusetts laws vary greatly from one another. Laws covering murder and so forth are state laws, unless one murders a federal employee going about their duty.

You are invited to read Passionate Danger, Part II, a story collaboration by Kim and ArtMan.
http://www.lushstories.com/stories/straight-sex/passionate-danger-part-ii.aspx

Users browsing this topic
Guest 


Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Main Forum RSS : RSS

Powered by Yet Another Forum.net version 1.9.1.6 (NET v4.0) - 11/14/2007
Copyright © 2003-2006 Yet Another Forum.net. All rights reserved.