An armed elderly man in Dallas shot and killed a suspected burglar after finding him trying to break into his Dallas home this week. However, he was also forced to defend his actions after the would-be robber’s family showed up at his home. The homeowner, a victim of repeat burglaries, found Deyfon Pipkins attempting to climb in the house through the window and fired at least one shot killing Pipkins.
Dallas police stated that the homeowner is covered by the so-called “Castle Doctrine,” which provides legal protection to gun owners in Texas and other states who are forced to use deadly force against a home intruder. It means they don’t actually have to retreat once someone comes in their home.
Once police officers notified Pipkin’s family, some of his family members showed up at the victim’s house and expressed their anger at the homeowner for not issuing a “warning.” What blows my mind is that the criminal had an extensive criminal record and had served time in prison. He was previously convicted of theft, possession of a controlled substance and criminal trespassing. How about his family should have warned the criminal to stop his ways and straighten out.
What would have happened if this elderly person was not armed? Would there be another victim here? Where were the police when the crime happened – not dissing the police here just stating the fact that this was ‘in the instant” and had the homeowner not acted something terrible may have happened to the wrong person. The fact that the homeowner was armed may very well have saved his life.
Police have not charged the homeowner with any crime, but Dallas police will now refer the case to the Grand Jury to determine whether he followed the law when he killed the home intruder.
Get involved and show your support – it’s our future – it is our safety – it is our right to self determination that is at stake here