Its ok to kill a hooker if she does not provide for you in Texas

I seem to recall a thread I think in the Dallas forums about the subject of carrying guns to appointments and someone, real or wannabe lawyer felt it was illegal to carry a gun while committing another crime. Originally Posted by rcinokc

That is somewhat correct. Texas laws provide for the "lawful possession" of a weapon. Committing a crime of a certain level, makes the lawful possession become unlawful. I just took the coarse but I don't remember the threshold. Clearly running a stoplight doesn't but likely solicitation does.

If that is true, it seems that would have come in to play somewhere in here. Originally Posted by rcinokc

Again, we haven't read the transcript or arguments, but perhaps the customer had not yet committed any crimes...because his money was stolen before he could.

I can't today, but I will try to find the threshold where lawful possession becomes unlawful possession. IIRC, "intoxicated", open container, and Disorderly Conduct were two of interest.

This guy was robbed by her and her pimp its not all cheery like its been reported. How many times have we read in alerts where guys were threatened by some thug when his less than desirable asset is in collusion in a robbery venture. That is a very high risk endeavor to say the least. Every time that approach is taken buy robbing pimps and less than desirable assets it should be expected to have some lead flying in their direction. In this case the hobbyist did wing her. Seven months later she dies from complications. Was the approved insurance healthcare provider adequate ? I personally don't know many providers that do have health care plans.

I just wanted to add that he was not shooting at her. He was shooting at her tires. He had no intention to kill her. He was just trying to stop her. A metal piece from the tire covering went through her seat and into her spine. Again...he did not intend to kill her. It also comes down to whether or not it was really "theft". Knowing bp ads most providers post there that it's for time only and not services. Did he have proof that the money was for sex? Because she did stay for 20 minutes. If he didn't have proof and they pulled up an her old ad that possibly stated what men were paying for (time) he could've been charged with attempted rape (for trying to force her to have sex and stay) and second or third degree murder. More information is needed for me to make a judgement on this case. Although I'm currently sided with the courts.

Juries are our last defense against a tyrannical government. Just because a body of lawmakers passes a law, doesn't mean we have to put up with it. A jury has the right to find a person "not guilty" if they don't agree with that law. Maybe some on the jury thinks prostitution should be legal. Everyone knows that phrase about paying "for time" is poppycock. Some think that will keep them out of trouble, just like they think asking if you are a cop will protect them. Cops are permitted to lie! Maybe the jury realized he was not trying to kill her. Maybe some of them had been ripped off in the same manner.
I don't think the girls on eccie or other reputable sites need to worry about somebody shooting them. We are in a different situation than the streetwalker/thug mentality. By the way, do you realize that some of those low class women have slit men's throats. Some truck drivers have been found dead in their trucks by women who did that because they wanted money to buy Christmas presents. You probably won't see that in the news. We all have to be careful, but if we treat others right, our chances of not having trouble are quite high. Screen your clients well, then focus on the passion of love making.

I just wanted to add that he was not shooting at her. He was shooting at her tires. He had no intention to kill her. He was just trying to stop her. A metal piece from the tire covering went through her seat and into her spine. Originally Posted by Malaya

Let me debunk this by using an analogy. Imagine her spine is a vagina and the bullet is a penis. This is like saying that a guy who is aiming his penis in the air and blows a load onto the ceiling got a female pregnant from that cumshot while she was wearing 5000 pairs of panties and had her tubes tied.

So the premise is... he's wrong for shooting a gun at her for stealing his $150. So going on that... what amount of $$ in your mind would be acceptable? 1k? 10k? 100k?

So the premise is... he's wrong for shooting a gun at her for stealing his $150. So going on that... what amount of $$ in your mind would be acceptable? 1k? 10k? 100k? Originally Posted by Luxury Daphne

Daphne, I will answer your question but then I would like you to answer one in return.

I do not think robbery is a capitol offense, regardless of the amount. In my mind there would have to be some additional condition--some physical threat--to justify it. For example, if my banker embezzled $200,000 from me and I walked into the bank and shot him, would that be justified? Not in my mind.

So your turn now. You seem to believe $150 is enough of a reason to kill someone. What about $50? $5? What is the minimum amount that is adequate justification in your mind?

Let me debunk this by using an analogy. Imagine her spine is a vagina and the bullet is a penis. This is like saying that a guy who is aiming his penis in the air and blows a load onto the ceiling got a female pregnant from that cumshot while she was wearing 5000 pairs of panties and had her tubes tied. Originally Posted by jl11

Terrible analogy, please try again

So your turn now. You seem to believe $150 is enough of a reason to kill someone. What about $50? $5? What is the minimum amount that is adequate justification in your mind? Originally Posted by Old-T

I did not say that, and I would appreciate it if you did not put words in my mouth for me. My question was more of a leading one, not the point of my surmise. What I do know is that I know how it feels to be robbed, and yes depending on how hard you worked for it, the value you put on it, and the audacity of someone to come take it, you may want to shoot a fuckers tires out to stop them from leaving with it. There's a reason to do everything. Hell you could find a reason to kick an old lady down a flight of stairs, YOU JUST DON'T DO IT. At that point you have lost control, and that is exactly what happened with that guy. I don't agree, but I can understand, obviously 12 other people did. Sure, she's dead, and that a sad thing. She lost her life, for doing some fool-ass shit that. They both chose poorly. He chose the wrong hooker, and she chose the wrong john to rip off. I have seen people lose their lives for less. Some people don't give a damn what you steal from them, all they see is YOU STEALING FROM THEM, which is the main point.

My question is, does she take any responsibility in what happened to her? Or was she a poor hooker brutalized by some asshole with nothing to do but shoot at people? Or is that question an automatic no because she's 6 feet under and he's free? Do you think that she ever thought, "You know what, 150 bucks is not worth me getting hurt over. If I don't want to fuck him let me leave his money here." Obviously not. If fact I would bet 150 bucks that is was probably more like, "HA. another trick I just rolled over."


I've heard a saying, When you play pussy, you get fucked. I know that my opinion is not going to be a popular one, especially among the ladies, and I'm fine with that. That's a good thing. But everything is not always black and white, there is always a grey area depending on the circumstances. That, also is a good thing.

Please forgive me, but I did not answer your question; you asked it out of a surmise that was not only self serving, but was also terribly, terribly unsound. This should be a lesson for hookers everywhere, work for what you get and keep you hands off other people's shit, then you can lay blameless when someone harms you. Karma is a bitch on her period.

So you're telling me that we don't justify cutting someone's hand off for stealing, but shooting an unarmed woman for stealing is justified?

Also, this wasn't a robbery. His best defense would of been that he acted in self defense, and more than likely he'd of had to of shot the pimp.

She did not steal, you dopes. She was there 2/3 of her time before he got irate and she justifiably left, to which he pulled out an AK-47 and shot her.

Once the sun sets, you can legally shoot anyone you negotiate with, I guess. Pay a dude $60 to clean the pool, if he forgets the drains, shoot him before he leaves the property.

Pizza boy delivers two pies, give him $20, find out he left out the peppers. Shot that mother fucker!

This story's rediculous and he only got away because she sold want society doesn't want salable.

Its not ok, but had she not been trying to scam him, perhaps things would have gone differently. She cashed and dashed on the wrong one. Originally Posted by Luxury Daphne

If she had been a junkie or purses snatcher, or had robbed his house as a burglar for that same $150, we would not be having this conversation. Originally Posted by Luxury Daphne

I agree. I have no sympathy for her at all. You steal and end up getting killed, I'm not shocked at all. Hell if this guy came to Houston, I'd see him and I am sure I would live to tell about it.