Texas Castle doctrine gun law=would you shoot...?

[madison86]

In this situation, you would legally be in the WRONG. Now you've just shot someone, without justifiable means...




This being said, my neighbors are close friends of mine, and elderly. They've been there for my family, and I'll be there for them. If I heard anything... undue... coming from their house, or if I knew something bad was happening, I'd call for the State Police and head over to see if I could give them a hand. I highly doubt I would be crucified (even in CT) for shooting a scumbag that was violently praying on an elderly couple and their roly-poly beagle.



If they weren't great friends of mine, AND elderly... forget it. I'll just get the Staties to handle it. Some of those boys can really make a Crown Vic MOVE.

[barend31]

The Castle Law permits lethal force protection of you and yours. It does not require you to use such force. Nor, does it allow you to just take out perpetrators at will. Just because you can. Or want to. It is still an open question on use of force to protect others.

It is pretty much factual that using lethal force to protect another would be excused. Depending upon circumstances. It would not matter if it was the cutie. or, the fly infested fat slob next door. It's still up to the officers on seen. The DA and the Grand Jury.

Fear of others reaction and that "That's what insurance is for" garbage is exactly why ghettos stay ghettos. I am blessed to be in Texas. But, once lived in a ghetto in Michigan. It would not matter to me if it where here, or there. A crime in progress should be stopped. Often enough, bringing a firearm to bear on an offender is enough to halt the crime. You can be all too eager to fire. When one should not. That's the rub. If, the criminal obeys and stops? You have no need to fire. If, criminal proceeds and even threatens you with deadly force in turn? Then it is time to fire. The gentleman in question was very fortunate that the Grand Jury released him. That was a bad call on his part. There was also an incident near here. Where a man caught a burglary in progress upon his business property. He shot both men at close range. On this incident it was barely reported and he faced no charges. His circumstances were immediate and he himself was in danger of being over powered. Simply two, now dead, long term criminals who faced one man and did threaten his life/livelihood/property.

I use to have some compassion and the Lone Ranger ideal of not shooting to kill. However, life in the ghetto and here has taught me different than Newell in LA. Those who will not stand up for themselves asks for victim status. Empower the criminals. the You protect yourself, those you love and others. Your pets, your property, the property of others. In each case circumstances differ as to application of deadly force. But, you do not ever shot to just disarm/wound. You shot to kill. Period. So, yes, pulling the trigger is remarkably easy. Too easy. That's when sound judgment is needed. If, you pull out the firearm. Intend to use. If, you do pull the trigger? Aim to kill.

[hewlett]

Whoa! I think your fantasies are carrying you away and you need a quick reality check before riding off to save the fair hottie next door.

In Texas, you have the right to use lethal force to defend yourself or your property against an imminent threat of bodily harm or the commission of a felony. Texas also has a law that says you are not required to retreat. You also have the right to intervene in the commission of a crime of violence against another person.

What Joe Horn did was not "legal" under either the Castle Doctrine or the no requirement to retreat statutes. What was determined was that it was "justified" in this case. Horn was cleared only after charges were presented to a grand jury and they decided to not indict him. It took two weeks of testimony for them to arrive at that decision. Horn was warned repeatedly by 911 dispatcher not to use his gun as property wasn't worth shooting someone over.

You do not have the right to use lethal force in the case of simple trespass nor do you have the right to use lethal force to "protect the community." Protecting the community is the job of the police and they are the only ones with the legal power to use lethal force in that instance.

If the young lovely next door was screaming and there was a crime in progress, the first thing you should do is call the police and stay on the phone with them. If you have reason to believe that someone will suffer serious bodily injury or death unless there is immediate, armed intervention, you may be justified in rendering aid. Note that I said "may," not "will." Entering someone else's house with a firearm puts you on legally risky ground, at best, and is going to create confusion in the minds of the responding officers.

In addition, the first sentence of your final paragraph shows that you really need to study up on lethal force situations. I don't know where you think all this time is coming from; situations like the one you describe where you come in as the knight in shining armor are generally over in a few minutes at most and may be over by the time you could get from your house to the one next door. Second, unless you are a frequent visitor to the house and know the layout, you are going into a situation where you are at a tactical disadvantage. If the perpetrator hears you coming, he may ambush you, which would end your rescue both quickly and badly. And your contention that you have the time to "prepare a shot" at under 10 yards is pure fantasy. It takes just a couple of seconds for the bad guy to rush you from that distance and it is a fact that most shots, even at that short range, miss their targets. This includes shots fired by trained professionals like experienced police officers.

We all dream of being the white knight charging in to save the lady fair. But knights trained extensively under the tutelage of experienced masters. An "untutored" knight would be more of a danger than an asset.

Oh, and yes, I could use lethal force to protect the life of another from a criminal attack. I might regret the killing for years, but that regret would be balanced by the knowledge the bad guy had every chance to call off the attack and run away.

[jolie]

No, that's crazy. I own a house. I am not going to lose my house, shooting someone over a burglary. How much can you run out the door with? $500? $1000? $2000? That is not worth the hassle of killing someone. Best to let them run out the door with the loot. Material things can be replaced. You could miss, and a bullet could kill a grandma or toddler. Just not worth it. That's why you have homeowner's insurance.

Also, if you have a hostage situation, it's really easy to goof up and get killed, shoot the wrong person, or misinterpret the situation. Best to call the police and let them handle these things.