A fatal San Marcos shooting may fall under the castle doctrine. Two Luling teens are dead, one is in the hospital and another is in jail.
"Three of the suspects were armed, one with a handgun, two with what we were later to find out were pellet guns, but very realistic looking,” San Marcos Police Chief Howard Williams said.
San Marcos Police Chief Howard Williams says the teens burst inside the home. There were three people inside; a college student, and two men, one of which was armed.
"He opened his bedroom door. When he did, one of the suspects in his living room pointed a weapon at him. He fired on the suspects in his house,” Williams said.
Two 16-year-olds died, another is now at Brackenridge Hospital with serious injuries. Williams says 17-year-old Frank Castro escaped uninjured, but is now in jail charged with aggravated robbery.
I have to admit, this type of crime seems to justify some of the tough talk the pro-gun folks often use about criminals, "it's an occupational hazard" and "they asked for it." When people barge into some else's home with guns in hand and get killed for their trouble, I see absolutely no fault with the shooter.
What's your opinion? Does this "occupational hazard" extend to all criminals, even fleeing ones, as discussed here and here, and unarmed ones?
What about that castle doctrine law, which the article said was new? What did Texas have before?
Why do these crimes seem to happen more in Phoenix and Houston than in similar cities in New York and New Jersey? Is that why they adopted the castle doctrine law in Texas, because they need it more?
What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.