Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Use of deadly force

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #46
    Originally posted by westtexducks View Post
    You can light em up in the dark, but you can't during the day.

    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.
    This is what the Texas penal code says... But strong warning of advice. If you do drop the hammer expect to be arrested and taken before grand jury.... That's just how the game is played. Make sure your aware of the consequences.

    I personally wouldn't drop the hammer on someone for a burglary of vehicle (depending on circumstances). Things can be replaced, lives can not.

    My 2 cents worth.

    Comment


      #47
      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.
      I think people need to pay more attention to this part... The way it has been explained to me by the people at Texas Law Shield, it is very hard to defend deadly force in defense of property, ESPECIALLY in Civil Court, because of this single sentence.

      It is very hard to prove that you reasonably believed that the ONLY way to protect or recover your property would be to kill someone.

      Again, realistically, this is Texas. You're probably not going to go to jail over something like this. However, you most likely will lose a civil suit. Now you have tens of thousands of dollars invested in defending you from the criminal charges (if any), and you could potentially lose all of your assets in a civil suit to the "victims" family.

      So really, is a small amount of your stuff, like a truck or radio, or whatever, a good trade-off for ALL of your stuff like your house, savings, family livelihood???

      Again, I'm not saying it's right or wrong either way. Every single situation is different and there really is no right or wrong answer.

      But killing someone over something that doesn't place you or your loved ones in danger not only can ruin your future financially, it also makes those who would take our guns away salivate at the idea of media stories all over the nation depicting gun owners as a bunch of "nutjobs" just pulling the trigger over $200 car stereos...

      Comment


        #48
        We can cuss and discuss this forever.

        I've never had to shoot anyone.

        I hope I never do.

        I hope, if the time comes, that I can successfully defend my own life and those dear to me. I certainly intend to.

        I don't believe I want to shoot anybody for breaking into my car, or stealing my lawn mower though.

        If they've broken into my home, it's a slightly different story.

        This is what I think RIGHT NOW, with no threat or stress on me at all.

        It all comes down to personal choices.

        Comment


          #49
          Originally posted by outlaw38 View Post
          A new car will be cheaper than the court cost.
          Yes indeed..

          Comment


            #50
            Once again- some really good answers. Awesome thread...

            Comment


              #51
              Well you can tapem up and drive to the deepest desert and drop them off with no clothes on just saying.

              Comment


                #52
                Get a shotgun and load that sucker up with some rock salt pop them at a distance where they think there dying and they will learn a lesson and you want have a death on your hands lol

                Comment


                  #53
                  I've been carrying a concealed handgun for a long time and have run different shoot dont shoot scenarios thru my head a thousand times...the one constant is I would never try to take someones life to protect property. I might put a beat down on them and call the Po-Po but not shoot them!
                  I feel the only time I am morally justified in killing someone is if I, or someone else is about to be harmed by a person or animal (I capped a big dog one time that was running at me and kids with bad intentions)...If they are about to harm me or some else, I will protect with lethal force. The only for sure in any of this is if someone breaks in my house or is attempting to break in my house, there is no doubt what my response will be...Swift, violent and very LOUD. I pray it never happens.

                  Comment


                    #54
                    ^^^^^ what he said

                    Comment


                      #55
                      Not that long ago a electrician heard someone at his truck ran out side killed one and shot all kinds of holes in the back of he get away car. No charges where brought up. I would hope that I never have to shoot someone, but I am ready to defiend what is mine.

                      Comment


                        #56
                        Only you can make the choice if you need to use deadly force. However, if you do use deadly force DO NOT aim for the knee, arm, etc. You fire center mass until the person is no longer a threat. If your justified in using deadly force and purposefully shoot someone in an area with the intent not to kill them, then you didn't really need to use deadly force, and the court will s we it this way. Never answer with I was trying to wound, maim, or scare said person when I shot him/her. Best answer is always " you were in fear of your life or another persons life". Very little (if any) property kept in a car or outside is irreplaceable, and that prosecutor or civil attorney will hammer this home to the jury.

                        Comment


                          #57
                          Originally posted by westtexducks View Post
                          You can light em up in the dark, but you can't during the day.

                          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.
                          Originally posted by bpa556 View Post
                          If you shoot for property crime alone, the case will almost certainly be presented to the Grand Jury for indictment. If GJ returns "no bill" you are good to go legally (civil suit may still bankrupt you). If you are indicted you will spend several fortunes defending your actions no matter the outcome. Cheaper to file insurance claim for stolen property. It sucks, but shooting someone out of "principal" because the law indicates that you can will cost you dearly in both money and quality of life.
                          With both of these responses, I believe we've answered the question.

                          Comment


                            #58
                            Would anyone really shoot someone over stuff left in a car or truck? Somehow this makes no sense to me. I like my stuff as much as anyone but to kill someone over stuff just seems unreal. It is only stuff.

                            I have seen it cost over $50k in attorney fees to defend a vehicle accident in civil court. I believe in standing on my principles as much as the next guy but it is not worth the risk to me over stuff.

                            Comment


                              #59
                              Yet in Texas its legal to hang a horse thief ,the car or truck is our horse.

                              Comment


                                #60
                                Some things I gather from this thread:

                                1). Most people have no clue of the law.
                                2). There is some insanely stupid advice in this thread (warning shots, firing into the ground, rock salt )
                                3). Some people have a level head and agree that property may not be worth taking a life. As much as it sucks and we have to take a stand somewhere, the truth is that is reality.

                                Comment

                                Working...