TexasCHLforum.com

Honestly, sometimes it's worth paying a lawyer for their perspective.

Having said that, can we all agree that "a threat to cause death or serious bodily injury by the production of a weapon or otherwise, as long as the actor's purpose is limited to creating an apprehension that he will use deadly force if necessary, does not constitute the use of deadly force" for this discussion?

Can we all also agree that the guy smashing your car with a baseball bat can't claim self defense because he was "engaged in criminal activity" more serious than a traffic violation, specifically criminal mischief?

You don't seem to want to believe what's posted here. Maybe you should spend a few dollars and get legal advice from a lawyer you trust.

mr.72 wrote:right, so is there a difference between the justification for the threat of deadly force, and deadly force itself?

Yes. See 9.04, 9.31 and 9.32.