TexasCHLforum.com

one eyed fatman

The law is basically wrote up to be debated and/or argued about. I think everyone here had done a good job of debating and arguing their points. Unfortunately there has been no judge or jury assigned to this thread so I guess everyone will have to walk away with their own ruling on the outcome of this thread.

one eyed fatman

Now, had the guy made his way back to the truck and actually began attacking me he probably would've seen the business end of the Glock 30 and I'm pretty sure it would've ended there.

That's pretty much what I said about the face slapping and somebody here said I would go to prison for that. Of course I realize the one who said that knows not anymore about the law than I do.

I especially enjoyed the comment made earlier by someone about the law being not that hard to understand. That was funny. I ain't that the law is hard to understand it's just the laws are so vague.

one eyed fatman

Show Killer wrote:
JohnKSa wrote: The legal use of force and deadly force are to allow you to PREVENT and PROTECT. Both of those are about stopping something from happening--NOT about retaliating for something that has ALREADY happened.
So, let's go back to my original post that started this thread.

The guy was walking back to my truck, I prepared to draw by gripping my pistol. Had the guy made it to my vehicle and started pounding on the glass I could've drawn down on him, right? I mean, at this point I don't know what his intentions are. Maybe he wants to do me bodily harm, maybe not. By drawing down on him I would be PREVENTING a possible attack. Would I have been in the wrong? Up till now all he would've done was assault my truck, not me.

If I gotta take a face slapping you gotta take someone beating on your window. With that said I also gotta say BULLTORK! If you can't at least pull your weapon to stop a possible attack against you then the law is not on our side. The reason we have trouble understanding the law is because the law is on the side of the lawyers. They want money, they create vague laws, they get to take you to court. That's what it's really about.

one eyed fatman

I don't know.... sometimes I get the feeling from these post that it would be better for me to get killed thereby staying within the limits of the law instead of protecting myself and staying alive.

one eyed fatman

From 9.31 "when and to the degree he reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary to protect himself"

Why wouldn't this cover the face slapping? You have been attacked, and you have no idea if that person may have a weapon. If I drew my weapon after being attacked (face slapped) I wouldn't be doing anymore than stopping an assault. If he then draws a weapon you have a much better chance of staying alive because you didn't let him draw first.

one eyed fatman

txinvestigator wrote:
one eyed fatman wrote:
txinvestigator wrote:
one eyed fatman wrote:
am with Flintknapper here.........a person threatening you with non-deadly force does not justify you to use deadly force, and in most cases would not justify threatening to use deadly force as per TPC 9.04.
And what is non-deadly force? Do I dig out and start reading my book of rules while being threatened or hit in the face? If someone gets out of their car and says I'm going to kill you is that non-deadly force? Face it, if you get into a situation your going to have to figure out on your own if it's non-deadly force or not. Good luck to everyone of us on that one.
The penal code STATES that Force is not justified in response to verbal provication alone. Non deadly force os force that is not capable of causing serious bodily injury or death.

Hit in the face? If I slap you across the face are you going to shoot me?[/quote]

Pretty good chance. You would see a gun in your face.
And you would go to prison. Seems like a bad decision to me.

[/quote]

You go ahead and quote the law here all you want txinvestigator. It's safe to do that here and the stuff you quote is true and correct. But you better know all that law you talk about won't do a thing to save your life. And all that law is useless if your dead.

one eyed fatman

txinvestigator wrote:
one eyed fatman wrote:
am with Flintknapper here.........a person threatening you with non-deadly force does not justify you to use deadly force, and in most cases would not justify threatening to use deadly force as per TPC 9.04.
And what is non-deadly force? Do I dig out and start reading my book of rules while being threatened or hit in the face? If someone gets out of their car and says I'm going to kill you is that non-deadly force? Face it, if you get into a situation your going to have to figure out on your own if it's non-deadly force or not. Good luck to everyone of us on that one.

The penal code STATES that Force is not justified in response to verbal provication alone. Non deadly force os force that is not capable of causing serious bodily injury or death.

Hit in the face? If I slap you across the face are you going to shoot me?[/quote]

Pretty damn good chance. You would see a gun in your face.

one eyed fatman

am with Flintknapper here.........a person threatening you with non-deadly force does not justify you to use deadly force, and in most cases would not justify threatening to use deadly force as per TPC 9.04.

And what is non-deadly force? Do I dig out and start reading my book of rules while being threatened or hit in the face? If someone gets out of their car and says I'm going to kill you is that non-deadly force? Face it, if you get into a situation your going to have to figure out on your own if it's non-deadly force or not. Good luck to everyone of us on that one.

Search found 8 matches