Houston Area Shooting, Terrible Loss of Life

[txinvestigator]

His definition doesn't matter. YOURS should be 'a reasonable and immediate fear for your life or the life of a third person.'

Fear of your life is not a justification. It may well be a valid emotion or feeling if a person is using or attempting to use unlawful deadly force against you, but it is not a justification.

If you ever ride in a car with my sister, you WILL be in fear of your life, but that don't mean you can shoot her!

 

[smschulz]

Show me in the penal code where deadly force is justified if someone tries to "hurt" you.

If I punch you in the arm, it will "hurt" you. The penal code allows deadly force to prevent the other from using unlawful deadly force against you.

Never said it was justification.
Just trying to get what your understanding is.

Getting a bee stings 'hurts' .
Getting your legs & arms broken by being hit with a baseball bat "hurts".
Getting shot can even just 'hurt' too.

If someone is hitting me with a baseball bat / breaking my legs then you cannot use deadly force unless you think they are also trying to kill you.

Not trying to be silly, argumentitive or suggesting an unrealistic hypothetical ~ just trying to get a better understanding.

PS: Not looking for an excuse to shoot someone either. :1zhelp:

 

[40Arpent]

If someone is hitting me with a baseball bat / breaking my legs then you cannot use deadly force unless you think they are also trying to kill you.

Hitting someone with a baseball bat in that manner is unlawful deadly force, so it doesn't matter what you think.

 

[txinvestigator]

Never said it was justification.
Just trying to get what your understanding is.

The person I responded to did;

Or you reasonably think he's trying to hurt or kill you or others

If someone is hitting me with a baseball bat / breaking my legs then you cannot use deadly force unless you think they are also trying to kill you.

Nope. The penal code does not use the phrase, "killing you", it says you can protect yourself from the others use or attempted use of unlawful deadly force. Deadly Force is defined.

Texas Penal Code
Sec. 9.01. DEFINITIONS. In this chapter:

(3) "Deadly force" means force that is intended or known by the actor to cause, or in the manner of its use or intended use is capable of causing, death or serious bodily injury.

So what is serious bodily injury?

Texas Penal Code
Sec. 1.07 DEFINITIONS. (a) In this code:

(46) "Serious bodily injury" means 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.

If someone hits you with a baseball bat it is deadly force. If someone attempts to hit you with a baseball bat, that is deadly force.

If I slap your face, that is force, if I beat you in the face and head area, that is deadly force.

 

[smschulz]

Thank you txinvestigator.

I feel better informed.

Seriously, I appreciate it.

 

[Big country]

Fear of your life is not a justification. It may well be a valid emotion or feeling if a person is using or attempting to use unlawful deadly force against you, but it is not a justification.

If you ever ride in a car with my sister, you WILL be in fear of your life, but that don't mean you can shoot her!

Excellent explanation

 

[markfh]

My point, as TI has already stated, is that trespassing does not factor at all into the "use of deadly force" equation.

Really. If someone trespasses on my property, and I perceive they are intent on harming myself or my family then deadly force will be used. I think you need to take a closer look at your math.

Quite often trespass is the first criminal act that preceeds other and often more violent acts. So yes, trespass DOES factor into the use of deadly force.

Here's a good read for y'all.

[url]http://loneranger2008.wordpress.com/2008/05/13/texas-castle-doctrine-the-law-word-for-word/[/URL]

 

[txinvestigator]

Really. If someone trespasses on my property, and I perceive they are intent on harming myself or my family then deadly force will be used. I think you need to take a closer look at your math.

PLease refer to my posts here. Perceiving that someone is intent on "harming" you is nor a justification for the use of deadly force.

You could also look through the Texas law threads elsewhere in the forum to see what is justified.


Whether they are trespassing matters not.

 

[markfh]

PLease refer to my posts here. Perceiving that someone is intent on "harming" you is nor a justification for the use of deadly force.

You could also look through the Texas law threads elsewhere in the forum to see what is justified.


Whether they are trespassing matters not.

(a) Except as provided in Subsection (b), a person is justified in using force against another when and to the degree the actor [he] reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary to protect the actor [himself] against the other’s use or attempted use of unlawful force. The actor’s belief that the force was immediately necessary as described by this subsection is presumed to be reasonable if the actor:
(1) knew or had reason to believe that the person against whom the force was used:
(A) unlawfully and with force entered, or was attempting to enter unlawfully and with force, the actor’s occupied habitation, vehicle, or place of business or employment;

 

[40Arpent]

You are proving TI's (and my) point and don't even know it. I give up.

 

[Big country]

(a) Except as provided in Subsection (b), a person is justified in using force against another when and to the degree the actor [he] reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary to protect the actor [himself] against the other’s use or attempted use of unlawful force. The actor’s belief that the force was immediately necessary as described by this subsection is presumed to be reasonable if the actor:
(1) knew or had reason to believe that the person against whom the force was used:
(A) unlawfully and with force entered, or was attempting to enter unlawfully and with force, the actor’s occupied habitation, vehicle, or place of business or employment;

You just proved yourself wrong! I think it might be time to admit defeat. Look at the 7th word after subsection (B) starts, the word is FORCE. If I hit you with a closed fist in the stomach I have used force. If I hit you in the face with a bat I have used deadly force. You can only use deadly force to stop deadly force period. There are many things that come into play on using force vs deadly force, and trespassing is not one of them.

 

[markfh]

You just proved yourself wrong! I think it might be time to admit defeat. Look at the 7th word after subsection (B) starts, the word is FORCE.

Cherry picking a single word does not accurately express the intent of the law.

If I hit you with a closed fist in the stomach I have used force. If I hit you in the face with a bat I have used deadly force.

Force is legally defined as more than just hitting someone.

You can only use deadly force to stop deadly force period

According to my understanding of the law and consulting with a criminal court judge you are not correct in this statement. (see my example at the bottom)

There are many things that come into play on using force vs deadly force, and trespassing is not one of them.

Wrong. As I stated trespass is part of the equation as usually being the initial criminal act that precedes additional criminal acts that could result in deadly force being exercised against a criminal.

I don't know why you think that trespass doesn't play into this. Simple logic, if the person killed was was somewhere they had no permission to be then the initial criminal act was trespass. Had the person not trespassed they wouldn't have been in a position to be killed.

reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary to protect the actor [himself] against the other’s use or attempted use of unlawful force.

The legal concept of trespass is an intrusion. An intrusion is an entry by force or without welcome.

I assume if someone is willing to commit the criminal act of trespass on my property they are up to no good. At which point "the actor reasonably believes the conduct (deadly force) is immediately necessary to avoid imminent harm"

I will "reasonably believe" that the "other's use or attempted use of unlawful force" will justify my use of deadly force.

In such a scenario are you willing to "assume" no potential for imminent harm to you or your loved ones?

Shortly after the Joe Horn episode another home owner shot and killed a criminal that was allegedly attempting to break into his home through a window.

Because the body was outside the home owner’s window we know for sure that the criminal was trespassing. The home owner stated that the criminal was attempting to enter his home through a window. We have to take the home owners word.

Apparently the authorities took him at his word since he wasn't charged.

Without evidence to the contrary yoy could say the criminal was killed for committing criminal trespass only.

There is flexibility in the deadly force law.

 

[Big country]

That is not trespass it it it is breaking in entry. And because you have to trespass before you can break in it does play a small role. And for you you're first comment no shit. I tried, I failed, good luck to the next to try and reason with him.