One Feisty Grandma

[angellaw]

Grandma confronts news crew with a hoe:

http://www.wesh.com/cnn-news/20545083/detail.html

[warhorse46]

Now watch them try to charge her with destruction of property or assault.

[IcyLogic]

Now watch them try to charge her with destruction of property or assault.

And why not? Violence isn't the answer, and old age gives no freedom from the laws of the land.

[warhorse46]

And why not? Violence isn't the answer, and old age gives no freedom from the laws of the land.

If they were on her property without permission then they were the ones in violation of the law. In my state we have the right to defend our (or even another's property) property using force, even deadly force.

SUBCHAPTER D. PROTECTION OF PROPERTY

§9.41. Protection of one's own property.

(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.
http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/PE/htm/PE.9.htm#9.01

[bearwds]

Feisty old gal.

Clearly they were trespassing and intruding.

Glad they didn't meet up with my ol' granny from Texas. She would probably be chasing them with the Sunday supper chicken de-necker.


bear

[IcyLogic]

If they were on her property without permission then they were the ones in violation of the law. In my state we have the right to defend our (or even another's property) property using force, even deadly force.

SUBCHAPTER D. PROTECTION OF PROPERTY

§9.41. Protection of one's own property.

(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.
http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/PE/htm/PE.9.htm#9.01

Not sure that knocking on someones door is trespass, unless signposted.

If you ask someone to leave, I believe you have to give them a reasonable period to actually leave before attacking them.

Shutting the door and calling the police would have been the correct course of action.

And hitting an unarmed person with a hoe, when they are clearly not conducting criminal activity isn't usually acceptable behaviour. But I guess if you're old anything goes, right?

[warhorse46]

Feisty old gal.

Clearly they were trespassing and intruding.

Glad they didn't meet up with my ol' granny from Texas. She would probably be chasing them with the Sunday supper chicken de-necker.


bear



We don't have the motto of "Don't mess with Texas" for nothing, lol.

[warhorse46]

Not sure that knocking on someones door is trespass, unless signposted.

If you ask someone to leave, I believe you have to give them a reasonable period to actually leave before attacking them.

Shutting the door and calling the police would have been the correct course of action.

And hitting an unarmed person with a hoe, when they are clearly not conducting criminal activity isn't usually acceptable behaviour. But I guess if you're old anything goes, right?



You obviously do not live in Texas so I would not expect you to understand the law. In my state this lady would have acted within the law.

[TBIBeg]

Feisty old gal.

Clearly they were trespassing and intruding.

Glad they didn't meet up with my ol' granny from Texas. She would probably be chasing them with the Sunday supper chicken de-necker.


bear


LOL my nanny woulda been chasing them with a switch from her weeping willow tree. dang those things stung!!

[WillowInFlight]

Maybe granny needs to go after her granddaughter with the hoe.

[IcyLogic]

You obviously do not live in Texas so I would not expect you to understand the law. In my state this lady would have acted within the law.

I can't understand any law that allows unjustified violence.

Cheer on the feisty old lady, and next time when she or someone like her whips out a gun and blows a film crew away, you can cheer her on again.

[warhorse46]

Maybe granny needs to go after her granddaughter with the hoe.

Or the weeping willow switch, lol. Those things will get your attention in a hurry & get you to comply real fast.

[Mandysmom]

If they were on her property without permission then they were the ones in violation of the law. In my state we have the right to defend our (or even another's property) property using force, even deadly force.

SUBCHAPTER D. PROTECTION OF PROPERTY

§9.41. Protection of one's own property.

(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.
http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/PE/htm/PE.9.htm#9.01
Defending her property from what? A news camera? LOL

If this had been Cindy Anthony, she'd be crucified by most people. You have to act within reason of any law, and she clearly didn't.

[incidentally]

Did you guys hear the tires squealing at the end of the video?



:lol:

I think in their attempt to get away they left a couple of their crew behind.

[Jay]

Defending her property from what? A news camera? LOL

If this had been Cindy Anthony, she'd be crucified by most people. You have to act within reason of any law, and she clearly didn't.



(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.


You see my bold, such force with a hoe is not an "immediate" action needed to protect property, as if a person were breaking in, so the law, in this fact scenario, is moot.

[Mandysmom]

(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.


You see my bold, such force with a hoe is not an "immediate" action needed to protect property, as if a person were breaking in, so the law, in this fact scenario, is moot.
I thought the same thing. If she took a notion to crack the mailman over the head, I guess that would be okay as long as she lived in Texas. lol

I've never researched it, but I might take a hoe to the head of the meter next time he enters the yard.

I hate those pesky power bills:laugh:

[Jay]

I thought the same thing. If she took a notion to crack the mailman over the head, I guess that would be okay as long as she lived in Texas. lol



If you have a mailbox up, the mailman is similar to an "invitee".


The section is NOT a blanket license to shoot a person who is tresspassing.

[Mandysmom]

If you have a mailbox up, the mailman is similar to an "invitee".


The section is NOT a blanket license to shoot a person who is tresspassing.

:scared:I guess I'd better hold off on any hoe cracking then. lol

[Jay]

:scared:I guess I'd better hold off on any hoe cracking then. lol


Under some states "Castle doctrine" laws/common law, deadly force may be justified if a person is "inside", then again some may have a "duty to retreat" if it is available as an escape.

[Jay]

Here is an interesting state list about such laws/retreat laws.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castle_Doctrine_in_the_United_States

[Mandysmom]

Here is an interesting state list about such laws/retreat laws.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castle_Doctrine_in_the_United_States

Thanks Jay!

[Jay]

Thanks Jay!


10 -4. :smile:

[desmom]

Grandma confronts news crew with a hoe:

http://www.wesh.com/cnn-news/20545083/detail.html

That is scary. What if she had made contact with the camerman/woman's skull, hand or arm? IMO, it would have caused some serious damage.

Obviously she has never heard of closing the door in someone's face.

jmo

[Shells2]

You obviously do not live in Texas so I would not expect you to understand the law. In my state this lady would have acted within the law.

See ... why do you have to talk like that? Why do you have to make a not very nice comment like " I wouldn't expect you to understand". When in actuality, as Jay has so kindly pointed out, your interpretation of the law is incorrect. If she had indeed made contact with the person, with the hoe, she could be charged with assault.

In your state this lady did not act within the law. I don't need to live there to know that.

http://www.self-defender.net/law3.htm

[Jay]

See ... why do you have to talk like that? Why do you have to make a not very nice comment like " I wouldn't expect you to understand".



Deja Vu!! :smile:

[Ahlou]

She asked them to leave after that they should have left. They were not talking with the granddaughter, mother or father.

I'll bet if someone had done something good in that family you would NEVER see it on the new, imo.

[Jay]

She asked them to leave after that they should have left.


I did not see that in the link, where did you read that?


Even if true, the cops should have been called, agree or not?

[ExArkie]

....................snip...............

But I guess if you're old anything goes, right?

Pretty much!!!:tonguewag:

[warhorse46]

(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.


You see my bold, such force with a hoe is not an "immediate" action needed to protect property, as if a person were breaking in, so the law, in this fact scenario, is moot.


Not true since you left out part of the law in your bolding. And meeting someone you do not want on your property with a hoe IS immediate action.

[warhorse46]

I thought the same thing. If she took a notion to crack the mailman over the head, I guess that would be okay as long as she lived in Texas. lol

I've never researched it, but I might take a hoe to the head of the meter next time he enters the yard.

I hate those pesky power bills:laugh:


Read the entire statute. Meter readers, law enforcement, mail people, etc are exempt.

[warhorse46]

See ... why do you have to talk like that? Why do you have to make a not very nice comment like " I wouldn't expect you to understand". When in actuality, as Jay has so kindly pointed out, your interpretation of the law is incorrect. If she had indeed made contact with the person, with the hoe, she could be charged with assault.

In your state this lady did not act within the law. I don't need to live there to know that.

http://www.self-defender.net/law3.htm



You are talking about a completely different law so your statement is irrelevant.

[IcyLogic]

Please clarify, in Texas, if someone knocks on your door, clearly posing no threat, and asks a question, you are legally allowed to attack them?

That seems to be what you're saying.

Thats truly scary.

[warhorse46]

Please clarify, in Texas, if someone knocks on your door, clearly posing no threat, and asks a question, you are legally allowed to attack them?

That seems to be what you're saying.

Thats truly scary.


Read the statute, it is posted directly from the Texas laws. It has been tested several times & stood up. Two times in Houston that I know of.

[Cornblossom]

Texas Penal Code - Section 30.05. Criminal Trespass


§ 30.05. CRIMINAL TRESPASS. (a) A person commits an
offense if he enters or remains on or in property, including an
aircraft or other vehicle, of another without effective consent or
he enters or remains in a building of another without effective
consent and he:
(1) had notice that the entry was forbidden; or
(2) received notice to depart but failed to do so.


http://law.onecle.com/texas/penal/30.05.00.html




IMO....she should have asked them to leave her property before hoeing them.

[warhorse46]

Texas Penal Code - Section 30.05. Criminal Trespass


§ 30.05. CRIMINAL TRESPASS. (a) A person commits an
offense if he enters or remains on or in property, including an
aircraft or other vehicle, of another without effective consent or
he enters or remains in a building of another without effective
consent and he:
(1) had notice that the entry was forbidden; or
(2) received notice to depart but failed to do so.


http://law.onecle.com/texas/penal/30.05.00.html




IMO....she should have asked them to leave her property before hoeing them.


The article I read didn't say if she had told them to leave or not. I think I would have told them to leave first then if they did not, take more forceful actions. And the article did not say if that camera crew was the first to show up there, maybe they were one of many knocking on her door. There is a sign available in stores around here that says----trespassers will be shot, survivors will be shot again.

[doctor_J]

This video is being trafficked because it's funny.

To me it's just sad. The woman clearly has poor judgement, and is the apparent guardian of 2 children who strip.

[warhorse46]

This video is being trafficked because it's funny.

To me it's just sad. The woman clearly has poor judgement, and is the apparent guardian of 2 children who strip.


Kinda makes you question her guardianship abilities when two of them are into illegal activities.

[ExArkie]

Pretty much!!!:tonguewag:

I hasten to add, I have neither chased, hoed, nor shot anyone in days!!!:rolleyes:

[Katt2]

Please clarify, in Texas, if someone knocks on your door, clearly posing no threat, and asks a question, you are legally allowed to attack them?

That seems to be what you're saying.

Thats truly scary.

There was no threat to either this woman or her property so what was she protecting?

That antiquated law needs to be changed if indeed it gave her the right to attack with a hoe for no reason other than she didn't want the illegal activities of her minor grandchildren questioned!

[angellaw]

I hasten to add, I have neither chased, hoed, nor shot anyone in days!!!:rolleyes:

In Days..man u r on a roll ExArkie...congrats!!!:thumbsup:

[Jay]

Not true since you left out part of the law in your bolding. And meeting someone you do not want on your property with a hoe IS immediate action.



(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.


The 2 words are conjunctive, not seperate. It is not "necessary" to confront a person with a hoe if they are there as the media, as they mean no harm/destruction to person or property as another may be.

PLUS: It the person "reasonably believes" as the law also states, that they are justified in attacking a member of the media with a hoe in this fact specific case, let them try that defense in court.

[TBIBeg]

immediately necessary to prevent or terminate the other's trespass


I guess I don't understand where it says that you have to let them continue to trespass under certain circumstances?

If she had asked them to leave, then what is 'immediate' as her next option?

[msgatorslayer]

I seen that video and pictured it to be Cindy Anthony.:laugh:

[Lavinia]

Please clarify, in Texas, if someone knocks on your door, clearly posing no threat, and asks a question, you are legally allowed to attack them?

That seems to be what you're saying.

Thats truly scary.

You wouldn't believe how many Avon Ladies I've gone through. :laugh:

[Mandysmom]

Read the entire statute. Meter readers, law enforcement, mail people, etc are exempt.

It was a joke. lol

I believe there has to be a danger of someone coming onto your property to do damage or hurt you before you can react with violence.

No matter what state you live in.

[Mandysmom]

immediately necessary to prevent or terminate the other's trespass


I guess I don't understand where it says that you have to let them continue to trespass under certain circumstances?

If she had asked them to leave, then what is 'immediate' as her next option?

Pump the shotgun? :laugh:

[Jay]

immediately necessary to prevent or terminate the other's trespass


I guess I don't understand where it says that you have to let them continue to trespass under certain circumstances?

If she had asked them to leave, then what is 'immediate' as her next option?


The statute deals with the use of FORCE, NOT a verbal or otherwise "menacing" confrontation.

It is NOT "necessary" to use "force", either "immediately" or even after the person remains on the land, to eject a member of the media from your property. IF your intention is to protect your property, then by attacking the person with a hoe, you invite a counter attack and possibly serious injury to yourself. Seems contrary to the "legislative intent" of the statute?


Courts often look at the "legislative intent" when a case is presented to them.

[warhorse46]

It was a joke. lol

I believe there has to be a danger of someone coming onto your property to do damage or hurt you before you can react with violence.

No matter what state you live in.

No so in Texas. Not the way our law reads. There was a man in Houston who saw someone on his front porch, he was not expecting anyone. He picked up his gun & shot the person, killing them. He was never charged with any crime because the DA said he acted within Texas property protection laws. Sad part of it all is the person he killed was his own son. There are other examples as well.

[Mandysmom]

No so in Texas. Not the way our law reads. There was a man in Houston who saw someone on his front porch, he was not expecting anyone. He picked up his gun & shot the person, killing them. He was never charged with any crime because the DA said he acted within Texas property protection laws. Sad part of it all is the person he killed was his own son. There are other examples as well.

Well that is really sad, and really stupid that people feel that they can just shoot to kill and not even try to see what is going on.

Life means more in some states I guess. :smile:

[IcyLogic]

No so in Texas. Not the way our law reads. There was a man in Houston who saw someone on his front porch, he was not expecting anyone. He picked up his gun & shot the person, killing them. He was never charged with any crime because the DA said he acted within Texas property protection laws. Sad part of it all is the person he killed was his own son. There are other examples as well.

If this is indeed the case, Texans should be thoroughly ashamed that there are third world countries out there that offer more protection to its citizens.

Were I a Texan, and thank goodness I'm not, I wouldn't be here boasting about laws like this, and applauding a "feisty Granny" I'd be doing my best to change them or change where I lived.

[Mandysmom]

If this is indeed the case, Texans should be thoroughly ashamed that there are third world countries out there that offer more protection to its citizens.

Were I a Texan, and thank goodness I'm not, I wouldn't be here boasting about laws like this, and applauding a "feisty Granny" I'd be doing my best to change them or change where I lived.

Lord it must be snowing in Hades, because I agree with you. :laugh:

[Jay]

If this is indeed the case, Texans should be thoroughly ashamed that there are third world countries out there that offer more protection to its citizens.

Were I a Texan, and thank goodness I'm not, I wouldn't be here boasting about laws like this, and applauding a "feisty Granny" I'd be doing my best to change them or change where I lived.


IF this was the case, and we don't have ALL the facts as, anyone can post a story they heard, we can only assume, from the facts not presented to us, as presented to the Prosecutor, it was a matter of "Prosecutorial discretion" NOT to file charges. He may have very well been Indicted in another TX county.

PD has a wide latitude behind it. A Prosecutor may believe a crime was committed, but IF s/he believes obtaining a conviction "beyond a reasonable doubt" is not a high probability, charges may not be filed.

[IcyLogic]

Lord it must be snowing in Hades, because I agree with you. :laugh:

LOL Well, Texas is a polarizing subject :)

[warhorse46]

Make my day! :w00t: :lol:

Seriously, I don't know what the law is here (TX) about such a thing, but I *hope* we aren't able to just start whaling on someone because they ring our doorbell. I'm quite capable of either not answering the door, or answering and asking them to leave and then calling LE if they refuse to leave. I would attempt to hurt someone only if they were trying to break-in (and feel my life is in danger) and even then, I'm more likely to run out of another part of the house.


I think most people would react the same way as you but our law does give us the right to use force to protect our or another's property. The Texas statute on property protection is posted in this thread.

[Mandysmom]

Make my day! :w00t: :lol:

Seriously, I don't know what the law is here (TX) about such a thing, but I *hope* we aren't able to just start whaling on someone because they ring our doorbell. I'm quite capable of either not answering the door, or answering and asking them to leave and then calling LE if they refuse to leave. I would attempt to hurt someone only if they were trying to break-in (and feel my life is in danger) and even then, I'm more likely to run out of another part of the house.

:laugh:Thank goodness, you had me worried there for a minute. Believe me, if me or my family were in danger, I could do some damage myself.

[Lavinia]

I think most people would react the same way as you but our law does give us the right to use force to protect our or another's property. The Texas statute on property protection is posted in this thread.

But in what way was the lady's property being threatened? I don't think I could go up to anyone's house in Texas and ring the doorbell and expect to have some maniac buck out of the chute and chase me down with a garden implement, or worse.

ETA: Lawfully, anyway.

[Mandysmom]

I think most people would react the same way as you but our law does give us the right to use force to protect our or another's property. The Texas statute on property protection is posted in this thread.

Honestly though, wouldn't you worry about your children or grandchildren if they were out trick or treating for example, picked up a lawn decoration and some nutty person comes out of the house next door and shoots them?

I know that may sound extreme, but if they reasonably thought the kids were going to destroy property, would they be just allowed to do that and walk away?

I would have to move out of state. lol

[Lavinia]

Honestly though, wouldn't you worry about your children or grandchildren if they were out trick or treating for example, picked up a lawn decoration and some nutty person comes out of the house next door and shoots them?

I know that may sound extreme, but if they reasonably thought the kids were going to destroy property, would they be just allowed to do that and walk away?

I would have to move out of state. lol

That's why every Texas child is discharged from the hospital after birth with a functioning car seat and a shotgun. (Tongue barely in cheek.)

[Shells2]

You are talking about a completely different law so your statement is irrelevant.


Unfortunately in your eagerness to be right, you neglected once again to read the link.

You are wrong Warhorse, and I know how much you hate that, but tis true...

[Shells2]

But in what way was the lady's property being threatened? I don't think I could go up to anyone's house in Texas and ring the doorbell and expect to have some maniac buck out of the chute and chase me down with a garden implement, or worse.

ETA: Lawfully, anyway.


Exactly!! If the property or person wasn't threatened, she is not acting within the law.

That point has been made over and over on this thread...

[Shells2]

No so in Texas. Not the way our law reads. There was a man in Houston who saw someone on his front porch, he was not expecting anyone. He picked up his gun & shot the person, killing them. He was never charged with any crime because the DA said he acted within Texas property protection laws. Sad part of it all is the person he killed was his own son. There are other examples as well.


Do you have a link to that case... Because according to Texas Law he should have been charged, so I think you possibly left out a few details. Unless the man had reasonable belief that the man standing on his porch was going to commit a crime against him or his property he was not justified in using deadly force..

9.42 DEADLY FORCE TO PROTECT PROPERTY.

(a) 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.

I'm sure that the DA didn't charge him because he was probably suffering enough knowing that he killed his own on...

I'm not sure if a "hoe" can be classified as a deadly weapon, but if a BB gun can, (Adame v. State) I'm guessing it can, so this woman could have been in A LOT of trouble had that hoe made contact with any person.

[GMTminus6]

If they were on her property without permission then they were the ones in violation of the law. In my state we have the right to defend our (or even another's property) property using force, even deadly force.

SUBCHAPTER D. PROTECTION OF PROPERTY

§9.41. Protection of one's own property.

(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.
http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/PE/htm/PE.9.htm#9.01
Where I come from, a hoe is considered a deadly weapon and if cops had been there, she might have been shot.

[AnniePie]

I don't live in Texas and I'm not a violent person, BUT... if someone was at my door shoving a camera in my face, I might react like this gramma did. The media may not have committed a crime, but they attempted to steal her privacy with that camera and I don't blame her for going berserk.

The only weapon I would have handy at my front door would probably be a flyswatter, so it might seem a little less violent at my house. :smile:

[Jay]

I'm not sure if a "hoe" can be classified as a deadly weapon, but if a BB gun can, (Adame v. State) I'm guessing it can, so this woman could have been in A LOT of trouble had that hoe made contact with any person.

I keyed in; Model Penal Code + deadly weapon: to try to get a generic defintion. This case came up from CA:

page 18:

The Model Penal Code defines "deadly weapon" as "any firearm or other weapon, device, instrument, material or substance, whether animate or inanimate, which in the manner it is used or is intended to be used is known to be capable of producing death or serious bodily injury." Model Penal Code § 210.0(4). And, the Supreme Court of California has held that, "as used in section 245, subdivision (a)(1), a `deadly weapon' is `any object, instrument, or weapon which is used in such a manner as to be capable of producing and likely to produce, death or great bodily injury.'" People v. Aguilar, 16 Cal.4th 1023, 68 Cal. Rptr.2d 655, 945 P.2d 1204, 1207 (1997) (citation omitted). Furthermore, that same court has generally treated the phrase "deadly weapon or instrument" as a whole, rejecting, for example, the contention that the clause be read disjunctively. Id. at 1209-10.


http://ftp.resource.org/courts.gov/c/F3/452/452.F3d.409.05-40804.html

A state may or may not follow in whole or in part any adaptation of the MPC.

However, here is TX's:

Sec. 1.07. DEFINITIONS. (a) In this code:

(17) "Deadly weapon" means:

(A) a firearm or anything manifestly designed, made, or adapted for the purpose of inflicting death or serious bodily injury; or

(B) anything that in the manner of its use or intended use is capable of causing death or serious bodily injury.

http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/PE/htm/PE.1.htm

I doubt if there is case law to the effect, may be, but a Hoe is certainly capable of infliciting death, depends on how hard and where the person was hit?

We also see an "intended" element in b after OR. So unless it was a gun/knife, etc., where no question can arise, the Hoe would have to be used in a vital area, such as the head /heart, and such may qualify as the "intended use". Any reasonable person would know if you hit a person in the head with a hoe, it can cause serious bodily injury or even death.

[Spyder88]

The only weapon I would have handy at my front door would probably be a flyswatter, so it might seem a little less violent at my house. *snipped gif*

:lol: It may seem a little less violent, but I'll bet it stings like fire. :chicken:

All I know is if Granny had killed someone, her behavior wouldn't seem so harmless. Granny needs to learn to calm herself and quit acting like a twit. She's way to old for such foolishness.

Lock the door, call the cops. Easy Peasy and no one gets hauled off to the looney bin or the local hoosegow (sp) pending further investigation. :rolleyes:

MHO

[Shells2]

Where I come from, a hoe is considered a deadly weapon and if cops had been there, she might have been shot.

haha
Well then she should consider herself doubly lucky!! One, that she didn't actually hurt anybody and get charged, and two, that the cops didn't show up and shoot her!

[Lavinia]

I don't live in Texas and I'm not a violent person, BUT... if someone was at my door shoving a camera in my face, I might react like this gramma did. The media may not have committed a crime, but they attempted to steal her privacy with that camera and I don't blame her for going berserk.

The only weapon I would have handy at my front door would probably be a flyswatter, so it might seem a little less violent at my house. :smile:

My mother used to carry a flyswatter in the car (although she denies this, lol) and when our father would start getting visibly upset over anything children are wont to do, she would turn around with that flyswatter and start whaling on you with it. It IS a deadly weapon. :scared:

[angellaw]

I don't live in Texas and I'm not a violent person, BUT... if someone was at my door shoving a camera in my face, I might react like this gramma did. The media may not have committed a crime, but they attempted to steal her privacy with that camera and I don't blame her for going berserk.

The only weapon I would have handy at my front door would probably be a flyswatter, so it might seem a little less violent at my house. :smile:



:beer: beer botttle works well I would think

[angellaw]

My mother used to carry a flyswatter in the car (although she denies this, lol) and when our father would start getting visibly upset over anything children are wont to do, she would turn around with that flyswatter and start whaling on you with it. It IS a deadly weapon. :scared:



LOVE IT!!! :laugh:

Note to self...put flyswatter in the car.... :smile:

[ExArkie]

LOVE IT!!! :laugh:

Note to self...put flyswatter in the car.... :smile:

My kids are a little old for flyswatters (not that it wouldn't do them some good); but, my Chihuahuas are terrified of my flyswatter, too! I only have to pick it up - never use it - they are just like two little angels!!:scared:

[Shells2]

Opened for posting

Thanks Coldwater :)

[Shells2]

I did some reading on this last night, and found that the TV crews were AT WORST, only in violation of civil tresspass, not crimminal. The woman was totally outside of her rights to use "reasonable force" to get them off of her land.

I believe, within her rights, the only option she had was to ask them to leave, and then go inside her home, shut the door and call the police.

I'm curious to see what will happen with this. The police may use these actions against her, to help with the investigation into the two teenagers that were allegedly working in a strip club.

[Citygirl]

:lol: It may seem a little less violent, but I'll bet it stings like fire. :chicken:

All I know is if Granny had killed someone, her behavior wouldn't seem so harmless. Granny needs to learn to calm herself and quit acting like a twit. She's way to old for such foolishness.

Lock the door, call the cops. Easy Peasy and no one gets hauled off to the looney bin or the local hoosegow (sp) pending further investigation. :rolleyes:

MHO

I agree this woman was goin way overboard here..she should have said.."no comment and please leave my property now", then closed her door.
If they did not leave, she then should have called LE..
you are not allowed to use any more force than necessary in a case of trespassing, when no bodily danger to the owner is evident or expected.
So, instead of it being a little worrisome for a few minutes..she just ensured she is on national television now and in all her local papers and on the Internet too.
She will now prolly have to pay for any damage to the camera since she chased the cameraman down..sheesh!

[Shells2]

I agree this woman was goin way overboard here..she should have said.."no comment and please leave my property now", then closed her door.
If they did not leave, she then should have called LE..
you are not allowed to use any more force than necessary in a case of trespassing, when no bodily danger to the owner is evident or expected.
So, instead of it being a little worrisome for a few minutes..she just ensured she is on national television now and in all her local papers and on the Internet too.
She will now prolly have to pay for any damage to the camera since she chased the cameraman down..sheesh!

I totally agree with this CG.. I don't know where this woman got off thinking she can shake a hoe at people and their property. I suppose if I was the type of person that let teenagers work in a strip club, I might pull out a hoe myself... I'm just going to count my blessings that I am not.

[WillowInFlight]

I totally agree with this CG.. I don't know where this woman got off thinking she can shake a hoe at people and their property. I suppose if I was the type of person that let teenagers work in a strip club, I might pull out a hoe myself... I'm just going to count my blessings that I am not.

Yep, and don't ask me why but I'm wondering who the heck keeps a hoe in their house, that has been bothering me for days.:sneaky: I know, I need a life. :laugh:

[Cornblossom]

Yep, and don't ask me why but I'm wondering who the heck keeps a hoe in their house, that has been bothering me for days.:sneaky: I know, I need a life. :laugh:if it's any consilation.....so have I. I can see maybe a ballbat,gun even,broom,umbrella, but a hoe????!!!!!

[WillowInFlight]

if it's any consilation.....so have I. I can see maybe a ballbat,gun even,broom,umbrella, but a hoe????!!!!!

LMAO add to that some golf clubs.

[Shells2]

Yep, and don't ask me why but I'm wondering who the heck keeps a hoe in their house, that has been bothering me for days.:sneaky: I know, I need a life. :laugh:


Hahah! True enough!

You know, even if you were the redneck type chasing folks of your property with garden tools, it's illegal. I hope she gets charged!! It's not gonna happen, but I can dream. It would be nice to put across a message of civility and order.

Look at G&C Anthony - they had tons of media all over there front lawn hassling them for months on end, and I never saw George come running out the front door with a hoe like some wild banshee.

It just would be nice, if people were forced to behave and act like human beings. I wonder what happened with the teen girls?

[WillowInFlight]

Hahah! True enough!

You know, even if you were the redneck type chasing folks of your property with garden tools, it's illegal. I hope she gets charged!! It's not gonna happen, but I can dream. It would be nice to put across a message of civility and order.

Look at G&C Anthony - they had tons of media all over there front lawn hassling them for months on end, and I never saw George come running out the front door with a hoe like some wild banshee.

It just would be nice, if people were forced to behave and act like human beings. I wonder what happened with the teen girls?

No George just used a limp hose, and Cindy carried a hammer. LMAO. That woman should be charged I agree, but I think she has bigger problems heading her way with those two teens. Something tells me she will be in the news again.

[Lavinia]

Yep, and don't ask me why but I'm wondering who the heck keeps a hoe in their house, that has been bothering me for days.:sneaky: I know, I need a life. :laugh:

Someone running a hoe house? :shrug:

[Pashie]

Someone running a hoe house? :shrug:

OH! :lol: HAHA!

[WillowInFlight]

Someone running a hoe house? :shrug:

Considering the teens occupation there could be some truth to that.

[warhorse46]

Considering the teens occupation there could be some truth to that.




I wonder if it is proven the teens were working @ the strip club will the grandmother's guardianship be revoked?

[AnniePie]

Hahah! True enough!

You know, even if you were the redneck type chasing folks of your property with garden tools, it's illegal. I hope she gets charged!! It's not gonna happen, but I can dream. It would be nice to put across a message of civility and order.

Look at G&C Anthony - they had tons of media all over there front lawn hassling them for months on end, and I never saw George come running out the front door with a hoe like some wild banshee.
It just would be nice, if people were forced to behave and act like human beings. I wonder what happened with the teen girls?

Well! There actually is something positive to be said for ol' George. :bored:

[Mandysmom]

Yep, and don't ask me why but I'm wondering who the heck keeps a hoe in their house, that has been bothering me for days.:sneaky: I know, I need a life. :laugh:
No more than the rest of us. :laugh:

[Mandysmom]

OH! :lol: HAHA!

:w00t: She is bad. In a good way though. :laugh:

[Mandysmom]

Hahah! True enough!

You know, even if you were the redneck type chasing folks of your property with garden tools, it's illegal. I hope she gets charged!! It's not gonna happen, but I can dream. It would be nice to put across a message of civility and order.

Look at G&C Anthony - they had tons of media all over there front lawn hassling them for months on end, and I never saw George come running out the front door with a hoe like some wild banshee.

It just would be nice, if people were forced to behave and act like human beings. I wonder what happened with the teen girls?The funny thing is, if she'd just closed the door or said "no comment" there would be no story. lol

Now she has to be plastered all over tv and the innanet. :laugh:

I saw it this morning again on my local Fox affiliate. The news crew looked so shocked. LOL

[Cornblossom]

I wonder if it is proven the teens were working @ the strip club will the grandmother's guardianship be revoked?
IMO it should be,even if she says she didn't know they were(if proven)......most strip clubs I've heard of stay open late or til early morning hours and surely she knew they weren't home in bed.

[Cornblossom]

The funny thing is, if she'd just closed the door or said "no comment" there would be no story. lol

Now she has to be plastered all over tv and the innanet. :laugh:

I saw it this morning again on my local Fox affiliate. The news crew looked so shocked. LOL
Now she gets a book deal,"How I Hoed My Way to the Top". LMAO j/k

[Mandysmom]

Now she gets a book deal,"How I Hoed My Way to the Top". LMAO j/k

:laugh: Oh my word. lol

[warhorse46]

IMO it should be,even if she says she didn't know they were(if proven)......most strip clubs I've heard of stay open late or til early morning hours and surely she knew they weren't home in bed.




That is for sure.