TexasCHLforum.com

wford

I would guess that for those times where you didnt feel the need to report the incident you probably didnt have cause to use deadly force.

For example a guy with murder in his eye approaches you with an impact weapon yelling he is going to kill you. There is enough distance and obstacles between you to allow you to draw without having to shoot. He runs away. Who wouldnt report that ?

OTOH, a "thug" approaches you late at night in an isolated area. You draw your weapon and yell stop and he runs away. Pretty grey area, IMHO.

wford

Just the fact that an LEO open carries should tell you that LEO's and non LEO's operate under different laws.

From your example I would say a DA could make a case for failure to conceal. If verbal threats alone are not sufficient for use of deadly force then I dont see how just being approached could be.

The penal code, as I read it, just doesnt seem to support your position. The only applicable defense I see for 46.035(a) is

It is a defense to prosecution under Subsection (a) that the
actor, at the time of the commission of the offense, displayed the
handgun under circumstances in which the actor would have been
justified in the use of deadly force under Chapter 9.

I was told in my last CHL instructor course that there was case law that upheld a failure to conceal conviction for a CHL holder telling someone he had a gun. I have never found proof of this however.

HotLeadSolutions wrote:
wford wrote:Hotlead said in part, "Also consider this: We do not operate under any different laws than LEOs. There are many times that a LEO unholsters a weapon in response to a unarmed threat. Remember there is a difference between unholstering a weapon, pointing a weapon, and using the weapon."

Oh my ! I hope you dont really believe this.
I fully believe this. I am not saying that we are the same as officers without badges...I am saying that LEO's and regular joe blow citizens must abide by the same laws in regards to weapons/force use. I know that if I unholster my weapon I better be ready (and justified) to use it. But there are times when you can (and legally) expose your weapon to bring the point home that you are in fear of great bodily injury, and not (at that moment) be justified in pointing it.

Case in point: I was in the parking garage of an upscale downtown building with my father. Three thuggish types (that had no business in this parking garage) came from a back corner and was making an intercept for me and my father. (we were the only car parked at this end of the garage, there were no pedistrian exits that they could have been walking to)
My father immediately produced his weapon (thugs about 75 feet away) and shouted "Stop where you are, do not come any closer" We made it to the car, and left the garage with the three guys stopped in their tracks wondering what had just happened. He immediately called 911 and told the dispatcher his name, location and that he was a CHL holder...that we had been approached in a parking garage by three thugs, and that he - in fear of what was about to happen - displayed his weapon and threatened force. They dispatched police to the location, and days later we were visited by a dectective and questioned about the event. (He was investigating some high end cars that were stolen from that garage)

After explaining what had happened to him, my father asked about the decision that he had made, and the dectective told him he was justified in pulling his weapon, and had the thugs continued on their path he would have been justified in pointing the weapon. (but that puts us on a slippery slope - In My Opinion)

Again I am not saying that a CHL is a Batman license or a license to arrest bad guys, but I do think the law gives us more choices that shoot/dont shoot.

wford

Hotlead said in part, "Also consider this: We do not operate under any different laws than LEOs. There are many times that a LEO unholsters a weapon in response to a unarmed threat. Remember there is a difference between unholstering a weapon, pointing a weapon, and using the weapon."

Oh my ! I hope you dont really believe this.

wford

I for one cant change a shoot decision to a noshoot decision. A draw decision is a very grey area to me and would have to be discussed within a very tight context.

bobcat50 wrote:I'm a bit confused from something my CHL instructor said in class. I understood him to say "never, never draw your weapon unless you have already made the decision to shoot because you believe your life is in immediate danger". So, what if I do feel my life is in immediate danger but because I have drawn my weapon, but not yet shot, the threat stops, runs away, falls down begging for his life? I drew my weapon and was ready to shoot but it turns out I didn't have to. Am I in violation of the law because I didn't actually shoot the person?

TexasCHLforum.com

Search found 4 matches

Re: Shoot... Don't Shoot?

Re: Shoot... Don't Shoot?

Re: Shoot... Don't Shoot?

Re: Shoot... Don't Shoot?