Right on, Mr. Walsingham. Speaking as a citizen who lost over a thousand dollars worth of camera equipment to thieves this past weekend, I would have put a round in any and all of them if I had been "Johnny on the spot". For those peole who cry bad form, just don't get caught in my belongings and you won't have to worry about getting shot!! The responsibility is on you not to violate others' personal space.

It is true that the pendulum of justice has recently swung toward the use of deadly force.

One must remember that the application of Texas state law depends a great deal on what was done, when, to whom, and where.

A grand jury may not indict you in Ward County, but would in Ector County.

I feel for your loss of property, but use caution with deadly force. Our prisons are full of those who felt that they acted within the law.

Thanks for your empathy, but I'd rather have the thief's hand.

Are you a thief?? Rapist?? Vandal?? Murderer? No? Then you have nothing to worry about. However, if you even hesitated in any of your answers, then my advice to you is don't get caught (especially in the act).

I learned in parenting classes that you lay out the boundries to your kids and then enforce them. If you explain the way it works and tell them the punishment in advance, then you are putting the resposibility on the kids to adhere to the rules or suffer the consequences.

I see no reason why adults should not operate in the same manner.

If the criminal element here in Texas gets used to seeing citizens no-billed for killing the criminals caught in the act, I'd think it would act as a bit more of a deterent than a grand jury may or may not indict you.

The saying goes "I'd rather be judged by twelve than carried by six." The criminals should not get the choice, the law abiding citizens should.

Having spent a lifetime in law and seen thousands of cases, I offer my advice carefully to you - just as I did when you made threats against medically impared drivers.

You don't learn law from the pages of the National Rifleman. Even if you do survive years in criminal courtrooms, one faces more years of civil suits for wrongful death.

Get a good description of the thief and call the police. Use them because you are paying for the service. Replacing uninsured camera equipment costs far less money than lawyers.

I have to agree with Anonymous as far as the camera equipment.

Even in the most threatening situation any bullet you fire will cause a lawyer to appear.

When the article refers to "Justifiable Homicide" I take it to mean that there is an imminent and lethal threat to the shooter and that in that case the whole concept of "shoot first" doesn't even have a place. It isn't "shooting first". It is self defense.

If the threat is not imminent and lethal, keep it holstered. If it is...."better to be judged by twelve than carried by six."

Anyone with a Concealed Carry Permit will tell you that.

Cool, lawyers make good targets!! Almost as good as pedophile priests.

For a website known for its cutting edge sarcasm (at least I hope it is intentional sarcasm), you guys should lighten up. No worries, you'll never find the evidence anyway. Wink, Wink.

NOTE: No lawyers were harmed in the posting of these comments, a few criminals may have been buried alive though. Kids do not try this at home, someone out there is a trained professional (but it isn't me).

And anon, I didn't threaten anybody, but you can keep deluding yourself if you would like. And I don't think they have a provision in our state laws for driving while medically impaired. I am pretty sure it just covers impaired. But I digress. That you think I will some how end up talking with Johnny Law about this is ridiculous; as ridiculous as the war on drugs, as ridiculous at the attempted war on alcohol, and as ridiculous as our attempts to force democracy and christianity on people around the world.

At last some rationality in our lttile debate.

MsW0WT dhroqwpjzodz