Deadly force is never justified to prevent harm from coming to yourself or bystanders.
I think you may be reading more into the wording than the message I'm trying to convey.
Deadly force is never justified to prevent harm from coming to yourself or bystanders.
I think you may be reading more into the wording than the message I'm trying to convey.
I think you may be reading more into the wording than the message I'm trying to convey.
I am responding to what you WROTE. Words have meaning. Feel free to clarify if you wish, but MANY people read these threads and have no idea when deadly force is justified. We have a responsibility to NOT mislead them.
Deadly force is justified to prevent an AGGRAVATED robbery, whe you resonably believe it was immediately necessary to prevent its imminent commission.very good point.
mincing words if f'ing annoying, though i hadnt thought of it fromt hat perspective.
but TXI, riddle me this, as soon as the bg drew his water pistol and declared the robbery, what position would the shooter be in if he loosed a few rounds before the BG turned around, that is while he still had his 'weapon' trained on the clerk. deadly force is authorized in order to stop an armed robbery as i understand it so far.
but then again (and this may very well be jsut to many westerns floating around in ym head) isnt there a law in texas against shooting a man in the back that doesnt specify any special circumstances? again, saying it outloud (well typing it quietly) make sit sound kindof silly, but what the heck never hurts to ask...