"Loot Houston 2017 " Sounds like a facebook event.
You just posted about the violence antifa is using right now. Just for clarity, and not directed towards you, but antifa have been destroying property, people, and opinion for at least the past 18 plus months here in the media. Looting by inner city folk has been going on for much longer. I am absolutely against both actions, and all ILLEGAL actions that take place. There is no reason that this should be allowed in a civil society. The actions that are allowed by such a small percentage of Americans is disgusting.
It has been 24 hours and Trump hasn't specifically denounced looters. It is obvious that Trump supports the looters. He must be a looter, himself. If you deny this, you are also a looter.
Slow that tail down Willie, give it time and Im sure there will be a response. Unlike the response Obama had in Ferguson when he told the national guard to stand down and I got to witness my home town get burnt to the ground. (Twice)
A reporter is being tormented for calling Police on looters. Most of the feed back is, "****ing snitch!" Police were actually there, but the twatter storm is deafening the truth.
A little reminder if recent natural disaster relief efforts. So much gratitude. Hard to imagine why anyone would want to keep helping over, and over, and over again. I hope those that are not involved in this BS crime spree get the deserved help. **** those that do not deserve it.
its why i cant seem to donate. I want to help and am looking to help the animals more. Been looking at how to help the animals and i mean four legged freinds not these people.
(a) A person in lawful possession of land or tangible, movable property is justified in using force against another when and to the degree the actor reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary to prevent or terminate the other's trespass on the land or unlawful interference with the property.
(b) A person unlawfully dispossessed of land or tangible, movable property by another is justified in using force against the other when and to the degree the actor reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary to reenter the land or recover the property if the actor uses the force immediately or in fresh pursuit after the dispossession and:
(1) the actor reasonably believes the other had no claim of right when he dispossessed the actor; or
(2) the other accomplished the dispossession by using force, threat, or fraud against the actor.
Texas Penal Code - PENAL § 9.42. Deadly Force to Protect Property A person is justified in using deadly force against another to protect land or tangible, movable property:
(1) if he would be justified in using force against the other under Section 9.41; and
(2) when and to the degree he reasonably believes the deadly force is immediately necessary:
(A) to prevent the other's imminent commission of arson, burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, theft during the nighttime, or criminal mischief during the nighttime; or
(B) to prevent the other who is fleeing immediately after committing burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, or theft during the nighttime from escaping with the property; and
(3) he reasonably believes that:
(A) the land or property cannot be protected or recovered by any other means; or
(B) the use of force other than deadly force to protect or recover the land or property would expose the actor or another to a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury.
Texas Penal Code - PENAL § 9.43. Protection of Third Person's Property A person is justified in using force or deadly force against another to protect land or tangible, movable property of a third person if, under the circumstances as he reasonably believes them to be, the actor would be justified under Section 9.41 or 9.42 in using force or deadly force to protect his own land or property and:
(1) the actor reasonably believes the unlawful interference constitutes attempted or consummated theft of or criminal mischief to the tangible, movable property; or
(2) the actor reasonably believes that:
(A) the third person has requested his protection of the land or property;
(B) he has a legal duty to protect the third person's land or property; or
(C) the third person whose land or property he uses force or deadly force to protect is the actor's spouse, parent, or child, resides with the actor, or is under the actor's care.
[This message has been edited by texasfiero (edited 08-30-2017).]