A 79-year-old homeowner shot and killed a man who broke into his Aldine-area home early Tuesday and refused to leave, Houston police said.
In my opinion it would be manslaughter. There is no indication that the man ever threatened the 79 year old man, he just refused to leave (more below). I would tend to think that the 79 year old had the crucial time to think and would have been presented with three options 1. Shoot to kill 2. Shoot to wound or 3. Hold the gun on the intruder and call the police.
entire story
http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/metropolitan/2959157
A 79-year-old homeowner shot and killed a man who broke into his Aldine-area home early Tuesday and refused to leave, Houston police said.
The intruder, Robert Hinojosa, 19, of the 200 block of Gulf Bank, was shot once in the abdomen about 1:30 a.m., investigators said. He died later at Ben Taub General Hospital.
Police said Hinojosa was burglarizing a residence in the 500 block of Turney when the homeowner woke up and repeatedly told him to leave before shooting him.
The case will be referred to a grand jury for review.
This points out one of my largest complaints against the gun lobby in general. They promote ownership without accountability. I think it is absurd that such a deadly weapon would be placed in someones hands without even a minimual requirement for training or licensing. To further the absurdity I have seen this man defended on the basis that he has the right to defend his property with deadly force, in the same manner he would be justified were there a threat of personal harm. Can someone explain the logic to me?