Apparently you cant brandish a weapon in your own yard

[RiverRat1]

So every single TBHer that claims they held a trespasser at gunpoint could technically be arrested?

And ok... Good to know... I won't aim until I'm ready to shoot

I'd like to see more video of this event also BTW

Awesome.

Let me know when you shoot the trespassers…...

That was two different thoughts LOL

Serious question was first. Is it against the law to hold someone at gunpoint if trespassing or you catch them poaching or whatever?

[RiverRat1]

How would Texas’ open carry laws effect the “brandishing” claim?
If it is legal to open carry a rifle on your property, does it now become illegal because 300 people are trespassing on said property?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

And what is the exact definition of brandishing? Aiming directly at a person? Just letting them see the gun?

[muzzlebrake]

How would Texas’ open carry laws effect the “brandishing” claim?
If it is legal to open carry a rifle on your property, does it now become illegal because 300 people are trespassing on said property?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Then it becomes a question on whether or not you have a liberal DA or other far lefty in charge of LE.

[tvc184]

The issue here is it does not appear both sides are being provided equal protection under the law. If there is an investigation of the tresspassers I haven't heard of it. It may be in process but I'm not holding my breath. I have no problem with the investigation, but if the circuit prosecuter has told the police she will not prosecute any protest crimes she is just helping in the couple's defense. Based on recent history of mob violence, I believe the couple had a reasonable expectation to fear for their life or property. But that only comes into play after the investigation. The big issue is the circuit prosecutor, before any investigation, has gotten out ahead of her skis and may be in for some personal legal issues.

Selective prosecution.

[tvc184]

That was two different thoughts LOL

Serious question was first. Is it against the law to hold someone at gunpoint if trespassing or you catch them poaching or whatever?

I believe that it is illegal. A threat with a firearm is aggravated assault in Texas. It is a defense to prosecution under chapter 9 if that threat was justified. Texas law on trespassing says that you can use force but not deadly force which is a different term.

Trespassing is a class B misdemeanor or one step above a traffic citation. If using a firearm as a threat for that is lawful, being a person working, you could pull a gun on someone if you suspected that he was trying to steal a TV.

Your mileage may vary.

[tvc184]

And what is the exact definition of brandishing? Aiming directly at a person? Just letting them see the gun?

Brandishing it’s not a legal term in Texas.

What probably would fit what people are talking about would be disorderly conduct which some states might call disturbing the peace. This is that law....” displays a firearm or other deadly weapon in a public place in a manner calculated to alarm”.

So waving a gun around and trying to get attention likely fit that crime… Depending on the prosecutors opinion.

There is also Deadly Conduct which can be specifically pointing a firearm at a person whether or not it is loaded.

[tvc184]

Then it becomes a question on whether or not you have a liberal DA or other far lefty in charge of LE.

This brings up an interesting point. At least it does in Texas.

The DA has no control over police departments except their own. District attorney‘s have investigators attached to their office which has the same authority as any of the police officer. Sheriff departments and police departments however operate independently. For example a DA cannot order of police chief to conduct an investigation. The DA has his own investigators if he wishes to conduct some kind of investigation.

The problem with the authority of the DA is that in the code of criminal procedure it says the duty of the DA is not to prosecute but to seek justice. Justice is in the eye of the DA.

I can guarantee you that any police officer in this forum who has ever filed a case with the DA knows that the DA is in total control of what cases are accepted for prosecution. Police departments have no say so on what is brought to trial. They are just investigative agencies that are independent of the DA but have to turn the investigation over to the DA if they want something prosecuted.

I could also guarantee you that the officers who have turned over cases to the DA believe that they should have been prosecuted and the case was easily proven get the DA refuse the case “in the interest of justice”.

The police interview, take photographs, take fingerprints and so on and turn the case file over to the DA and they have complete autonomy to do what they wish with it.

[muzzlebrake]

This brings up an interesting point. At least it does in Texas.

The DA has no control over police departments except their own. District attorney‘s have investigators attached to their office which has the same authority as any of the police officer. Sheriff departments and police departments however operate independently. For example a DA cannot order of police chief to conduct an investigation. The DA has his own investigators if he wishes to conduct some kind of investigation.

The problem with the authority of the DA is that in the code of criminal procedure it says the duty of the DA is not to prosecute but to seek justice. Justice is in the eye of the DA.

I can guarantee you that any police officer in this forum who has ever filed a case with the DA knows that the DA is in total control of what cases are accepted for prosecution. Police departments have no say so on what is brought to trial. They are just investigative agencies that are independent of the DA but have to turn the investigation over to the DA if they want something prosecuted.

I could also guarantee you that the officers who have turned over cases to the DA believe that they should have been prosecuted and the case was easily proven get the DA refuse the case “in the interest of justice”.

The police interview, take photographs, take fingerprints and so on and turn the case file over to the DA and they have complete autonomy to do what they wish with it.

And therein lies the problem

[bowaddict40]

I do t k is Missouri laws but they didn’t use deadly force, they used force to protect their property.

Can’t say I wouldn’t have done the same thing. Now neither of them have very good muzzle discipline and the wife has horrible trigger discipline but I can see where they did anything wrong legally.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

The wife looked like it was the first time holding a gun. She was holding it like she would a purse. LOL

[sotx]

They were just out there because they were mad. When you get mad and drop down to the level of the rioters, you just become one of them

Exactly. Emotions got in the way, which as lawyers you'd think they would have known better, but on the other hand they prolly feel a little above the law. Who knows.

[flywise]

Exactly. Emotions got in the way, which as lawyers you'd think they would have known better, but on the other hand they prolly feel a little above the law. Who knows.

If 50 people break your gate and enter your yard talking about burning your house down you would not get emotional? Grab your weapons?

[RF76]

This won't end well for the mayor

And also for the judge that sign off on the search warrant. I hope they both get removed form their position.

[GarGuy]

And also for the judge that sign off on the search warrant. I hope they both get removed form their position.

Barr don't play

[RiverRat1]

If 50 people break your gate and enter your yard talking about burning your house down you would not get emotional? Grab your weapons?

Guys on TBH have 20/20 hindsight vision. Didn't you know?

If this were a hypothetical on TBH then what that couple did would be the least everyone here would swear they would have done LOL

[iamntxhunter]

Guys on TBH have 20/20 hindsight vision. Didn't you know?



If this were a hypothetical on TBH then what that couple did would be the least everyone here would swear they would have done LOL

Yes sir. I still say that I may have done the same thing. I guess it depends on how serious I felt like some of them were committed enough to risk being shot over their convictions.
.
Mark my words if this behavior continues something really bad is going to happen. The agitators are walking a fine line.