Father Fatally Shoots Man After Home Is Sprayed With Paintballs

Bob Irwin highlights the latest self-defense and other shootings of the week. Read them and see what went wrong, what went right and what we can learn from self-defense with a gun.

Paintbal Splatter
Father Fatally Shoots Man After Home Is Sprayed With Paintballs

USA –-(Ammoland.com)- KHOU TV 11 reported 05-22-19 in Houston Texas, a home was apparently targeted by group with paintball guns.

The shooting happened at about 11:30 p.m. in the 13300 block of Force. Police initially reported the incident as an attempted car burglary turned deadly, but the investigation is still underway at this time.

Police now believe a group of people firing paintball guns at the family's home was the catalyst for the shooting.

Sgt. Joshua Horn with the Houston Police Department told media (paraphrased for clarity) ‘They (the residents) were alerted to some sort of disturbance and believed that their house was being shot at.

The homeowner, the father, came outside and approached a suspect with a gun who was standing there. The father believed that the individual was a threat and fearing for his own safety, fired a round at him.

The homeowner also fired a couple rounds at the suspect's vehicle in the street. Several cartridge casings were found outside the home along with splatter from a paintball gun.

Police later received information that an individual who may have been involved in the targeting of this house ended up in a nearby hospital and was pronounced dead.

Investigators believe there were more than a dozen people outside the home when the incident occurred. As of this report it is unknown if any of them were armed with real guns or only with paintball guns.

Comments:

So, the resident is supposed to differentiate paintball guns from real firearms in the midst of incoming fire? I wonder if the paint spatter was red?

In most jurisdictions going outside to confront the attackers would be a serious error. Advice would be to call 911 and let the police respond with their tools and tactics to stop the threat

If the attackers force their way in before help arrives, do what is necessary to protect yourself.

Bob Irwin, Las Vegas


About Bob Irwin

Bob is retired after 30 years of ownership of The Gun Store & Indoor Range in Las Vegas. He continues his 2A issues show “Fired Up with Bob Irwin” on YouTube and on KLEY 1230 AM, The Nevada Talk Network on Saturdays.

As a firearm instructor of Concealed Firearm Applicants, Armed Security Officer and Law Enforcement Academies over his career, Bob appears frequently as an expert witness for firearm & use of force cases in Federal, State, and local courts.

  • 31 thoughts on “Father Fatally Shoots Man After Home Is Sprayed With Paintballs

    1. What motivated “more than a dozen people” to gather at the target home during the paint ball assault? Is there a history of bad blood? Were the paint ballers neighborhood kids?Obviously there’s much more to this story.

      Certainly it was just plain wrong to vandalize the home. But, if the homeowner knew it was a property crime and not a deadly threat, his overreaction could result in official entanglements.

    2. The lack of value life has to so many commenters here is tragic. If you’re too stupid to tell the difference between paintball fire and gun fire, you’re too stupid to own a gun! The shooter didn’t fear for his life, he was pissed someone shot water soluble paint at his house and wanted revenge. I’m all about an IQ test for gun rights, but that’ll eleminate most Republicans.

      1. I always love it when someone who is clueless attempts to attribute motive to someone they don’t know, have almost zero information about the circumstances and knows even less about firearms and self defense. You have accomplished the trifecta.
        As to the difference between a paint gun and a firearm, it is patently clear that you know nothing about the very lethal spectrum of air rifles readily available. Educate yourself and then get back with us.

      2. Some who see this as a ” lack of value life ” most likely have never experienced a threat to their or loved one’s life, and don’t know the law, especially Texas law. Someone shooting projectiles at your home at 11:30pm is a very real threat. The projectiles may be paint balls, but how do you tell at 11:30pm what kind of gun the perp is holding? Do you wait until someone or yourself is struck and injured or do you respond with projectiles of your own.? ( a paintball in the eye will destroy the eye and could be fatal ) Police will shoot and kill a suspect holding a BB gun in broad daylight because they don’t know if it’s a BB gun or a firearm. They have no greater moral high ground to do so than a homeowner being subject to assault in the middle of the night. In fact, the homeowner has the higher moral ground,

      3. Ahh an all knowing Democrat commented… First of all the police have been known to shoot and kill holders of such guns, BB guns and plastic toys, so get off of you Democrat “know it all” high horse. YOU have ZERO idea what was going through this fathers mind at that moment. A paintball can penetrate the skin so imagine the sound (CRACKS) as they hit the side of the house, they WILL break windows too, you would NOT know immediately if it was paint balls or gunfire smart ass. It is dark and you hear things hitting the house with a BANG/CRACK (especially if siding), you have children in the home, you react. You go out to people holding objects that you KNOW just fired on your home, you see that are some type of guns, they move, you react… Split second decision, do you want to become a victim ??? NO ! It’s the same EXACT thing that goes through a police officers mind in that millisecond.
        Take your Dem/lib I.Q test and shove it up your self proclaimed “perfect” ass, dickbag !
        The PERPS are where the blame lies here, NOT on the homeowner.

    3. Texas Law allow defense of property with force. 11:30PM, dark, somebody shooting at your house, can’t tell if it’s a real gun or something else. Homeowner returns incoming fire. I think any charges against him will be dropped, but it’s up to the DA.

      Texas Penal Code (2017)
      Chapter 9. Justifications Excluding Criminal Responsibility
      SUBCHAPTER D. PROTECTION OF PROPERTY
      Sec. 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.

    4. Jerry’s Kids bring fake guns to real gun fights trying out for Antifa.

      Perhaps they’re just doing what they’re taught to do?
      https://gunsinthenews.com/cops-shoot-teachers-execution-style-with-pellet-guns-in-insane-school-shooting-drill/

      There’s a 99% decrease in crime in my neighborhood since the last midterms when we elected a new Sheriff who doesn’t create crime like the previous Sheriff. Switching from a socialist Sheriff who did not obey the law to a Republican Sheriff has it’s benefits.

      1. The lack of value life has to so many commenters here is tragic. If you’re too stupid to tell the difference between paintball fire and gun fire, you’re too stupid to own a gun! The shooter didn’t fear for his life, he was pissed someone shot water soluble paint at his house and wanted revenge. I’m all about an IQ test for gun rights, but that’ll eleminate most Republicans.

        1. “The lack of value life has to so many commenters here is tragic. If you’re too stupid to tell the difference between paintball fire and gun fire, you’re too stupid to own a gun! The shooter didn’t fear for his life, he was pissed someone shot water soluble paint at his house and wanted revenge. I’m all about an IQ test for gun rights, but that’ll eliminate most Democrats.
          There, I fixed it for you.

        2. @BP, I don’t know how you could make those conclusory pronouncement about what the self defender felt because you were not there.
          In the facts given, it appears that there was insufficient time available to gather data and make the evaluation that you suggest.
          “The lack of value life has to so many commenters here is tragic.” Are you saying that there should be fewer commenters?

    5. I don’t think this is going to turn out very well for the homeowner. First impression from the headline is that this one is a bad shoot. Reading the article, there’s a slim chance it’ll be adjudicated clean but I’m still going with 80/20 odds that it turns out the homeowner is charged.

      Seems to me that Mistake #1 is coming outside the house to confront the paintball people. Mistake #1A is not locking all the doors and calling the police or sheriff’s office first. Mistake #2 is firing.

      Two things in this world you can’t ever get back – wasted time and fired rounds. I understand the guy’s feelings at his house being shot at and I even understand the impulse to go confront them about it. Doesn’t mean it’s the right or smart thing to do. The worst part of this is that there is one person not going home to their family ever again, regardless of the reason he was out there shooting paintballs at a house. In this case, it appears that stupid (paintballs shot at a house at night) plus bad choices (homeowner going outside with real gun and firing it) equals a homeowner going to jail most likely and one kid or young adult dead.

        1. I was just going to note that as well. Texas is a different matter than most other States. Even here in Montana, the homeowner would likely be charged. And I have to agree with the reasoning. The thinking is: Since the homeowner voluntarily went outside ‘into the lions den’, as it were, he likely did NOT fear for his life AT THAT TIME. If he had truly been in fear for his life, he would have either hidden, or taken up a defensive position.
          The fact that he went outside to confront what appears to be an entire gang, suggests a motive of revenge, anger, or retaliation instead. This is the problem with laws. They must attempt to figure out who was really at fault, and who did what to who when, and all after the fact when it is the most difficult. Luckily, there are usually some eyewitnesses to help sort the facts out. Unfortunately, eyewitness accounts are usually in error, in one way or many. If one has three eyewitness accounts, they’re usually three different stories. Everyone perceives things differently, depending upon their position, focus, personal biases, etc. So an investigator needs a number of different eyewitness perspectives, and then he can take the things that are common to all of the stories and expect some degree of truth to emerge.
          In Montana, I think he might still get away with it, because a Jury here would likely take into account the disparity of force in this incident.
          Here, he has the right to go out and confront people shooting pellet guns or throwing rocks, or whatever, at his house, because that’s what everyone does. He has no need to be in fear for his life, it’s enough to be protecting his property. And it is expected that he will NOT go into a potentially dangerous situation unarmed. In Montana, I think his case would be helped by the other shots fired into the car. Citidiots would tend to take that to mean he was just shooting at everything, whereas here, it would tend to be taken as a sign that he saw yet another threat from the enemies surrounding him.
          A jury here would tend to start from the obvious fact that these people had no right to be there damaging his property in the first place, thus anything nasty that happens will tend to be blamed upon the ones starting it in the first place.
          It takes like the guy in Missoula, MT. a couple of years back, who shot and killed a man in his garage, to be convicted here. At first glance this one could have been a good shoot, as the man was inside of his garage. Upon further investigation though, after having his garage burgled before, the homeowner turned out all his lights, pretended to not be home, left the roll up garage door open with valuables in plain sight as bait, and then hid in the shadows with a shotgun and then killed the first man to set foot on his garage floor.
          Obviously, he could have had no idea if the man he killed was the one who robbed him before, or just an innocent bystander wondering why this guy left his garage door open. He’s in State prison for murder now, which is as it should be. I can understand the frustration of having one’s property stolen, and wanting to lash out, but a man happy to kill anyone passing by to make himself feel better needs to be removed from society. Such a one is not stable enough to coexist with others without constant supervision.
          Its also worth noting that the homeowner (neutral tense. One could also call him the “murderer” and be somewhat neutral, since his has been convicted) was NOT a native Montanan, but an out-of-state transplant.

          1. @Knute, The thinking that, “Since the homeowner voluntarily went outside ‘into the lions den’, as it were, he likely did NOT fear for his life AT THAT TIME. If he had truly been in fear for his life, he would have either hidden, or taken up a defensive position.” is quite wrong because it presumes clear headed thinking and weighing of the balance when we all know that is not the case when first waking up. Particularly waking up to an emergency.

            Second, it rejects maneuver and fire tactics which are far superior to hiding in one’s house awaiting the end of the attack.

            Texas law, in addition to what others have posted above, includes the presumption of right action if one is on their own property, and further, requires that the jury be instructed to weigh the facts presented exclusively from the self defender’s perspective.

            If you believe in justice, Texas is calling.

            1. Maybe he was indeed in fear for his life but being a father, choose to step out to protect his cornered family

            2. I think you might have missed the part where I said that this is the way lots of people in Montana think, but not necessarily the way I think. And, it does seem to work rather well here, in most cases, but laws are things of men, and are thus always imperfect.
              For example, in Texas, you can open carry rifles, but not pistols. How does that make any sense? All States, all laws, all courts, are messed up and completely illogical in various ways.
              In Montana, we can concealed carry with no permit, so long as the pistol is not “connected to” your body. This is a valuable feature, to me. I’d prefer Constitutional carry, but the States that have that, have other things messed up that come along with the deal. All up, for me, Montana is still the choice.
              I have thought many times of Alaska, but I’m too old and stove up now to build a cabin on a mountaintop by myself, which was my dream a decade ago.
              My dream now is a 30ish foot sailboat based in the Caymans. Either Little or Brac. Greater is too touristy. I’ll probably move back and forth, and hit Greater every once in a while, just to remember what it’s like to battle one’s way through endless hordes of brainless US tourists.

            3. @Knute, I think that you missed the part where you wrote, “… the homeowner would likely be charged. And I have to agree with the reasoning. The thinking is: Since the homeowner voluntarily went outside …”
              You also write, “… in Texas, you can open carry rifles, but not pistols. How does that make any sense?” We did not think that it made sense either, so we changed it in the last legislative session because we are getting back to the Constitution.
              If you believe in our Constitutionally enshrined Rights, then Texas is calling.
              A cabin in Texas might be nice, too.

            4. @Knute …often thought about sail boat . Prefer the south east Alaska archipelago . Japanese current moderates the temp and tourists no problem . No heat and humidity .

        2. Without the couple rounds fired at the vehicle I’d acquit but that’s where it goes from fear for his families life to teach them punks a lesson.

        1. Yep. that bit about “criminal action in the night” as one of the “justificationis” for the use of lethal force will carry a lot of water for homeowner.

          Further, he could have gone out to try and scare them orr, but things escalated once he was out there…. and at THAT point he was in a real fear for his life/safety, and that of his family. Further to assume the toy paintball guns are the ONLY ones they nmight have with them is not a rock solid assumption.

          seems in Texas one has a strong right to protect and defend his property from any intruders.. they were clearly in the commissioin of criminal mischief in the night,

          We none of us were there… and we none of us know all the details, or what was going through his mind at the time he squeezed that round off.

      1. @ Melody No one knows exactly what they would do unless they are right there at the time of the incident. I would have done the same thing, it is a right to be able to defend yourself and your property. Not necessarily a law by some politician but a natural law.

    Leave a Comment 31 Comments