At what point could you use deadly force in this video in TX if at all

[TexasRedneck]

The other thing to consider is "backdrop" - what's behind the perp that you're ALSO willing to shoot.......

 

[Moss_Berg5150]

Im not trying to start an argument...

we don't want to argue with you friend, we try our best to educate... where you potentially saw an opportunity to use deadly force, several of us shared with you why we did not see the same oppurtunity. I can tell you are starting to get it though by your follow up questions... One thing to remeber is, what I consider life threatening and what you consider life threatening are totally different... which stands my point of why I am just not a big fan of these types of discussions. Just please know that you are in no way under attack for your opinions what so ever. As was stated before... you will be the one to have to deal with the consequences of your actions. I just wanted to let you know that you should always try not to shoot first, in your response you mentioned that he kept attacking the car, and yes while that would definitely make me angry or scare me and my family I did not see a reason to pull out and start dumping bullets. You say tomato... it all goes back to the individual. As I said before some people are scared of an ass whooping and will shoot before they are even touched because they believe the "guy was bigger than me" so I shot him, and if you, not you personally just folks in general, think that blanket statement will work all the time, then go for it. I just don’t have the time or money for that kind of defense.

 

[txinvestigator]

One big thing to remember is Texas law does not allow the use of deadly force if you "feel scared", or if you "are in fear of your life" or if you "feel your life is threatened". Those are broad, vauge and subjective. In Texas to defend your person using deadly force you must be immediately preventing the others use or attempted use of unlawful deadly force against you and your belief must be reasonable (the castle doctrine makes presumptions for that belief to be reasonable, but they do not apply in this scenario). (or immediately preventing one of the listed crimes). Being in fear of your life does not justify deadly force, or you could shoot my sister if you ever rode in the car with her (insert rimshot)

Deadly force is defined in the penal code as force that by its use or intended use is capable of causing death or serious bodily injury. Serious Bodily Injury is also defined as bodily injury that creates a substantial risk of death or that causes death, serious permanent disfigurement, or protracted loss or impairment of the function of any bodily member or organ. PC 1.07

You may actually be in fear of your life, but that is not the justification. A guy telling you to back off or he will "beat you up" does not meet the justification for deadly force. In fact, him simply telling you that does not justify force.

 

[chiefglocker]

In Texas to defend your person using deadly force you must be immediately preventing the others use or attempted use of unlawful deadly force against you and your belief must be reasonable (the castle doctrine makes presumptions for that belief to be reasonable, but they do not apply in this scenario). (or immediately preventing one of the listed crimes)

Could you please explain the above in simple english ? I found it a little text bookish

 

[Texas1911]

Could you please explain the above in simple english ? I found it a little text bookish

Basically in short, they need to be in the process of killing you, or obviously making effort to do so. A fist fight is not someone trying to cause significant bodily harm, it's a fight. Someone trying to cave your skull in with a crowbar is significant bodily harm, and in my opinion, would be justified as deadly force. Basically someone has to be using deadly force against you in order for you to use deadly force against them in defense.

 

[TexasRedneck]

Actually - and this is where some of the variables come into play - there's a pretty wide lattitude that can be given to define "deadly force against you". The bottom line, though, is that you REALLY need to have thought things through before pulling a trigger. In my experience, being an armed reasonable person usually tends to make folks LESS inclined to take a given situation to the "next level", simply because he KNOWS he can do something ultimately final. If you walk around wondering if something justifies the use of deadly force, you need to leave the gun at home - because you should already have given scenarios in mind - and possible ways to de-escalate those scenarios if at all possible.
Believe me, my friends - when you hold a 16 year-old kids' head in your hands as you watch the last vestige of life leave his eyes, it won't matter how "justifiable" the shooting was. Period. I can guarantee you YEARS of recurring nightmares, and decades of second-guessing your actions.

 

[Wolfwood]

Actually - and this is where some of the variables come into play - there's a pretty wide lattitude that can be given to define "deadly force against you". The bottom line, though, is that you REALLY need to have thought things through before pulling a trigger. In my experience, being an armed reasonable person usually tends to make folks LESS inclined to take a given situation to the "next level", simply because he KNOWS he can do something ultimately final. If you walk around wondering if something justifies the use of deadly force, you need to leave the gun at home - because you should already have given scenarios in mind - and possible ways to de-escalate those scenarios if at all possible.
Believe me, my friends - when you hold a 16 year-old kids' head in your hands as you watch the last vestige of life leave his eyes, it won't matter how "justifiable" the shooting was. Period. I can guarantee you YEARS of recurring nightmares, and decades of second-guessing your actions.

+10

 

[Mic]

Although others don't seem to want to avoid these discussions, I will give my two cents. TexasRedneck mentioned that you need to have thought things out before pulling the trigger. Of course, you don't have time to think it through when the crackhead in the video is beating on your car. That's why I think these kind of questions can be valuable tools for us. Get us thinking about these situations before they happen and not just rely on "Am I scared for my life", as others have mentioned that doesn't necessarily mean you are justified.

First, I agree with most of the responses to attempt to get out of dodge at all costs and avoid shooting. I think it says a lot about the responsibility of the members of this thread that most of the responses seem to shy away from using your firearm except as a last resort. As has been mentioned, even if acquitted, there are other tolls taken on your life (cost and time to defend yourself as well as emotional impact of having killed somebody - even if they turn out to be the lowest form of life).

The other reason I think these are valuable scenarios is because this if more of a view that a jury would have in determining whether or not deadly force is justified. If the video of either of these were shown to a jury, I am guessing it would be the main evidence they would use to determine their verdict (justified or not). So, in thinking of it from that light.......

In the first video, like everybody else has implied - at no point would I believe deadly force was justified.
In the second video, I personally would without any hesitation find somebody not guilty of homicide/manslaughter/etc at right about 55 sec (when the crackhead took the crowbar to the window of the driver). Remember to convict somebody, the beyond a reasonable doubt mentality would come into play. At that point, I would tell the rest of a jury that not guilty would be a verdict or we can wait around for a hung-jury. Now, that's just me. But I would have serious doubt that just about any reasonable jury would find the driver guilty at about 1:08, when they have driven back and forth and the crackhead takes the crowbar to the window where a child appears to be (assuming that is the circumstance). And legally, if I recall from my CHL class, there is not a requirement to attempt to flee (of course, legally and what a jury will decide are two different things).

Just my two cents. I think these are valuable discussion scenarios. I think deadly force is justiifed (second care only). But I agree heavily with others, get out of there. Drive it up on the curve, through the parking lot, hit the guy with the car if you have to, but get out of there (deadly force with car because you are attempting to flee far less politically charged than using a firearm).

 

[West Texas]

Actually - and this is where some of the variables come into play - there's a pretty wide lattitude that can be given to define "deadly force against you". The bottom line, though, is that you REALLY need to have thought things through before pulling a trigger. In my experience, being an armed reasonable person usually tends to make folks LESS inclined to take a given situation to the "next level", simply because he KNOWS he can do something ultimately final. If you walk around wondering if something justifies the use of deadly force, you need to leave the gun at home - because you should already have given scenarios in mind - and possible ways to de-escalate those scenarios if at all possible.
Believe me, my friends - when you hold a 16 year-old kids' head in your hands as you watch the last vestige of life leave his eyes, it won't matter how "justifiable" the shooting was. Period. I can guarantee you YEARS of recurring nightmares, and decades of second-guessing your actions.

+10

 

[chiefglocker]

Basically in short, they need to be in the process of killing you, or obviously making effort to do so. A fist fight is not someone trying to cause significant bodily harm, it's a fight. Someone trying to cave your skull in with a crowbar is significant bodily harm, and in my opinion, would be justified as deadly force. Basically someone has to be using deadly force against you in order for you to use deadly force against them in defense.

Thanks chief, it is crystal clear now.

 

[gringogigante]

There is nothing in that video worth killing a man over.

He was absolutely unprepared to defend himself. He spent the entire time bitching at other people for not calling the police for him.... I mean, really?

Why would they do that? I understand that it would be helpful and I'd be on the phone with 911 as an observer, but it is no one else's job to protect you. That is YOUR job. If you want the cops to show up, then call'em yourself.

Those security guards were worthless, but is that some big shocker? They aren't paid or prepared to jump into a violent encounter. They are basically a visual deterent and more highly qualified observer.

That fella should have kept his cam corder rolling (which he did) while he got the hell out of there. Then take the video to the police.

 

[gringogigante]

Can you say a "wasted thread"?

Can you say "wasted post"?

Thanks for contributing.