A Texas man opened fire on a pair of suspects who tried to break into his home over the weekend in a wild scene caught in doorbell footage.One of the suspect...
It’s a definite possibility and so is the resulting liability. However, unless that concrete is a facade or otherwise very thin it will probably stop handgun rounds up to even the .45 caliber size. If he’s using defensive rounds (hollow points), then penetration through concrete is reduced even further as they are made to expand and dump their kinetic energy within a very short distance after the expansion is triggered. The bullet damage to the wall is something he will certainly be liable for though, also his new screen door lol.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but it’s a reference to a subculture, not an ethnicity. Though most cholos are probably hispanic, being a ‘cholo’ isn’t down to your racial genetics, it’s a subculture.
Cabron! That wiki page clearly states (“gangster” in Mexico). It is a stereotype we use all the time and have no issues with. Same as you using “white men” to describe, I don’t know, caucasians? I don’t feel offended by it and so shouldn’t you on behalf of “mexican looking latino americanos who commit crimes”.
Not really the same thing, I think. Though one could certainly note with some interest how all common slurs equating white ethnicities with crime have fallen out of style. In the 1920’s I’m sure we’d have had all kinds of ways to call someone an Irish criminal or whatever.
The only one I can even think of is if you called some vaguely Italian crook a goombah or Guido, and the first one would probably just confuse people who didn’t watch a bunch of Mafia movies.
And I’m not offended by the usage, just the pretense that this racial term isn’t a racial term. Not a huge fan of either intellectual dishonesty or just casual ignorance in general.
Might depend on the area but neither I nor any other Hispanic or Latino I know see cholo as a racial insult or slur (granted I’m a tiny sample size). It’s more of a descriptor than anything in my experience.
At least as far as criminal law goes. However, I’ve heard of some pretty wacky situations where defending your home like this can result in some civil liability.
The shooting, or saying he wasn’t home? Seems like the shooting was pretty justified given they were actively trying to break down his door.
deleted by creator
For sure a concern, but still seems like a reasonable action given that those guys didn’t look like they wanted to sell Tupperware.
It’s a definite possibility and so is the resulting liability. However, unless that concrete is a facade or otherwise very thin it will probably stop handgun rounds up to even the .45 caliber size. If he’s using defensive rounds (hollow points), then penetration through concrete is reduced even further as they are made to expand and dump their kinetic energy within a very short distance after the expansion is triggered. The bullet damage to the wall is something he will certainly be liable for though, also his new screen door lol.
See the following for an example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qFwntHIWjaw
And one of them had a gun in their hand.
The one cop said there were shell casings outside, so they were shooting too
The gamble was shooting through the door and possibly hitting someone in the apartment across the way.
Hopefully that cholo got perforated and nobody else.
No need to use racial terms
You don’t even know what “cholo” means.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but it’s a reference to a subculture, not an ethnicity. Though most cholos are probably hispanic, being a ‘cholo’ isn’t down to your racial genetics, it’s a subculture.
It meant someone who has indigenous ancestry… ie, a racial term, since there are many American indigenous ethnicities.
You could argue it doesn’t mean that anymore, but do you often hear it being applied to non-Hispanic people?
What do you think it means?
Racializing was unnecessary
Always thought that this was how my fellow Mexicans called their gang members by but hey, thanks for caring about our gang member’s feelings.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cholo
It’s a racial term. You could certainly argue it has been successfully co-opted though.
Cabron! That wiki page clearly states (“gangster” in Mexico). It is a stereotype we use all the time and have no issues with. Same as you using “white men” to describe, I don’t know, caucasians? I don’t feel offended by it and so shouldn’t you on behalf of “mexican looking latino americanos who commit crimes”.
Not really the same thing, I think. Though one could certainly note with some interest how all common slurs equating white ethnicities with crime have fallen out of style. In the 1920’s I’m sure we’d have had all kinds of ways to call someone an Irish criminal or whatever.
The only one I can even think of is if you called some vaguely Italian crook a goombah or Guido, and the first one would probably just confuse people who didn’t watch a bunch of Mafia movies.
And I’m not offended by the usage, just the pretense that this racial term isn’t a racial term. Not a huge fan of either intellectual dishonesty or just casual ignorance in general.
Racializing was unnecessary
Might depend on the area but neither I nor any other Hispanic or Latino I know see cholo as a racial insult or slur (granted I’m a tiny sample size). It’s more of a descriptor than anything in my experience.
Source: am Mexican with native ancestry.
Especially in texas.
At least as far as criminal law goes. However, I’ve heard of some pretty wacky situations where defending your home like this can result in some civil liability.
Thats why you always shoot to kill. Its cheaper in the US.
Not in Texas.
There is a difference between criminal law and civil law. Yes, you can get sued for self-defense in civil court in Texas: https://www.walkertaylorlaw.com/sued-for-self-defense-in-texas/