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

[salvadore94]

if your neighbors house was being robed would you grab your gun and wait for the robers to leave and cross your property? then shoot them because they are on your land against your will and threatening the community. My liberal college professor and played a youtube police tape with a guy in this sitation and the man shot the two robbers and it was completely legal.

Would you do the same? I think It depends on if they were armed and if i thought my neighbor was in trouble. If the hot girl next girl was screaming and their was obviously a robbery in progress I'd prob just go next door and take care of the problem. In texas many self defense cases arn't a big issue like the guy with the gun on his own property is ussually the good guy.

[matchitisiw]

It really just depends. I believe the video you are referencing is joe horn who shot 2 robbery suspects in the back.. I have no problem in helping a neighbor if they are being threatened violently. but if its property that is not even mine and there is no indication that the neighbor is home, I would just call the cops, thats what they get paid to do. However, if someone wanted to confront them and legally use deadly force, I have no problem whatsoever. Laws protect the abiding, not the scumbag stealing another's property that was rightfully earned through their life blood.

Back to the Joe horn video, I think what he did was kind of unneccessary considering the police were on their way, but that is really his judgment call and the grand jury acquitted him.

[dallen47]

Wow, talk about a loaded question, No pun intended.
Based upon you scenario, where there is no immediate threat to me, no I am not going to do anything except call the authorities and wait in inside. Basically I am not going to out and engage someone who is of none of my concern. In this case, since you are throwing so many variables around, your neighbour should have had his own weapon. No robbery, case closed.
I am not going out and engage someone who is not a threat to me.
Now if I were threatened, no problem, the subject would be DRT.

[melville]

yes but would not wait until they left neighbors house to act.....since for all i know they could be in there killing my neighbors....

** btw defense of others is legal in my state....called alter ego law.....says if the other person had gun and was able to use a it and would then u can....


** btw since i have a firearm on me 24/7 would not have to go to safe or some other nonsense....only time i'm not carrying is when i'm sleeping or in the shower or in a "criminal safe zone"(firearm free zone)

[sampson]

No I would not shoot somebody just because they stole my neighbors laptop.... Just because they ripped off your neighbor and are on your property does not give you the right to murder them.....

Get real.....

I would only shoot somebody if I felt they were going to imminently injure me, a family member or someone else.....

You just cant go shooting people just because they stole a tool box......

[pete]

yes. i would cause they might end up hurting you or someone else

[warton26]

Would I ambush the person who just robbed my neighbor's home? No, not even if legally justifiable. I'd still have to live with the fact that I killed someone over a stereo.

The first thing to do is call 911.

Would I intervene in a possible rape/murder? Yes. It would be hard to live with myself if I didn't. I do know that I wouldn't go rushing in like a superhero. No good is done if you rush around a corner and the perp shoots you in the head.

So, I must intervene but I'm not sure I can get the drop on the uninvited house guest? Simply banging loudly on the side of the house would probably be enough to get most criminals to flee... Hopefully that 911 call brings the police in hot on his trail.

[lazaro94]

If strangers burst into my home bearing arms and against my will and expressed orders, I'd shot 'em down and sleep like a baby that night. I'd have every expectation that they had entered prepared to take my life and I don't have a problem defending my life.

In the situation you described, I'd not shoot unless necessary. Even a scumbag's life is worth more than a TV. I'd attempt to hold them for the police to arrive. If they attempt to resist, that is when it would become an attack on me and they'd suffer the consequences.

I've been in a similar situation many years ago. My wife and I returned home late in the evening and heard a noise in our neighbor's house. We knew Lee and Del were away for the weekend. I grabbed my revolver and went to investigate while Nancy called the police. I kept a close watch on the house, gun in hand, until the police arrived and took over. The cops told the punk they caught that he'd better be glad he'd caught them rather than me, since I'd been waiting for him with a .44 in my hand.

Screams coming from the neighbor's house? You betyourass I'd be over there in a red hot New York Second! Everything would be over and we'd be drinking coffee before the slow responding cops in this county arrived.

I wish every state would adopt a Castle Doctrine. After all one of the basic tenets of our common law is that every man's home is his castle and he is entitled to defend it.

Doc Hudson

[gowan]

Jake,

The shooting you describe didn't have anything to do with the more recent "Castle Doctrine". The elderly gentleman took enforcement action that has been on the books for decades. Here is the penal code entry I refer to, and you'll see that 2a and 2 b apply. Remember that what is justified homicide in one state is murder in another. Texas has long been a state with a strong insurance lobby, so preservation of property is important. Decades ago this resulted in the introduction of making Theft or Criminal Mischief "at night" shooting offenses. During my career in law enforcement in Texas I saw citizens use these rights many times.

§ 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.

Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 883, ch. 399, § 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974.
Amended by Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 900, § 1.01, eff. Sept. 1,

[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.