The focal point for Texas firearms information and discussions
http://mail.texaschlforum.com/
handguns and shotguns” that had been left in plain view on the back seat and the floor of the pickup
I think chumming is allowed for sharks, thieves and other predators.flb_78 wrote:Is it legal to bait thieves?
Let's hope they don't get charged for using deadly force in protection of property since it was apparently not "theft during the nighttime".rev210 wrote:. . . Saturday afternoon . . .
Stealing property out of someone's vehicle is not "theft" - it's burglary.Jumping Frog wrote:Let's hope they don't get charged for using deadly force in protection of property since it was apparently not "theft during the nighttime".rev210 wrote:. . . Saturday afternoon . . .
Question is whether "burglary of vehicle" is same as "burglary" for purposes of PC 9.42 justification. And seems the police believe it is.Sec. 30.04. BURGLARY OF VEHICLES. (a) A person commits an offense if, without the effective consent of the owner, he breaks into or enters a vehicle or any part of a vehicle with intent to commit any felony or theft.
(b) For purposes of this section, "enter" means to intrude:
(1) any part of the body; or
(2) any physical object connected with the body.
(c) For purposes of this section, a container or trailer carried on a rail car is a part of the rail car.
(d) An offense under this section is a Class A misdemeanor, except that:
(1) the offense is a Class A misdemeanor with a minimum term of confinement of six months if it is shown on the trial of the offense that the defendant has been previously convicted of an offense under this section; and
(2) the offense is a state jail felony if:
(A) it is shown on the trial of the offense that the defendant has been previously convicted two or more times of an offense under this section; or
(B) the vehicle or part of the vehicle broken into or entered is a rail car.
Sec. 9.42. DEADLY FORCE TO PROTECT PROPERTY. A person is justified in using deadly force against another to protect land or tangible, movable property:
(1) if he would be justified in using force against the other under Section 9.41; and
(2) when and to the degree he reasonably believes the deadly force is immediately necessary:
(A) to prevent the other's imminent commission of arson, burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, theft during the nighttime, or criminal mischief during the nighttime; or
(B) to prevent the other who is fleeing immediately after committing burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, or theft during the nighttime from escaping with the property; and
(3) he reasonably believes that:
(A) the land or property cannot be protected or recovered by any other means; or
(B) the use of force other than deadly force to protect or recover the land or property would expose the actor or another to a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury.
Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 883, ch. 399, Sec. 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974. Amended by Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 900, Sec. 1.01, eff. Sept. 1, 1994.
Actually, no it's not. Burglary is the act of entering 'with the intent to commit theft' or a felony. The theft is actually separate.A-R wrote:Stealing property out of someone's vehicle is not "theft" - it's burglary.Jumping Frog wrote:Let's hope they don't get charged for using deadly force in protection of property since it was apparently not "theft during the nighttime".rev210 wrote:. . . Saturday afternoon . . .
Question is whether "burglary of vehicle" is same as "burglary" for purposes of PC 9.42 justification. And seems the police believe it is.Sec. 30.04. BURGLARY OF VEHICLES. (a) A person commits an offense if, without the effective consent of the owner, he breaks into or enters a vehicle or any part of a vehicle with intent to commit any felony or theft.
(b) For purposes of this section, "enter" means to intrude:
(1) any part of the body; or
(2) any physical object connected with the body.
(c) For purposes of this section, a container or trailer carried on a rail car is a part of the rail car.
(d) An offense under this section is a Class A misdemeanor, except that:
(1) the offense is a Class A misdemeanor with a minimum term of confinement of six months if it is shown on the trial of the offense that the defendant has been previously convicted of an offense under this section; and
(2) the offense is a state jail felony if:
(A) it is shown on the trial of the offense that the defendant has been previously convicted two or more times of an offense under this section; or
(B) the vehicle or part of the vehicle broken into or entered is a rail car.
Sec. 9.42. DEADLY FORCE TO PROTECT PROPERTY. A person is justified in using deadly force against another to protect land or tangible, movable property:
(1) if he would be justified in using force against the other under Section 9.41; and
(2) when and to the degree he reasonably believes the deadly force is immediately necessary:
(A) to prevent the other's imminent commission of arson, burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, theft during the nighttime, or criminal mischief during the nighttime; or
(B) to prevent the other who is fleeing immediately after committing burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, or theft during the nighttime from escaping with the property; and
(3) he reasonably believes that:
(A) the land or property cannot be protected or recovered by any other means; or
(B) the use of force other than deadly force to protect or recover the land or property would expose the actor or another to a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury.
Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 883, ch. 399, Sec. 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974. Amended by Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 900, Sec. 1.01, eff. Sept. 1, 1994.
The pair broke a rear window on the driver's side and took “at least four, maybe five weapons — handguns and shotguns” that had been left in plain view on the back seat and the floor of the pickup, Priore said.
carlson1 wrote:The pair broke a rear window on the driver's side and took “at least four, maybe five weapons — handguns and shotguns” that had been left in plain view on the back seat and the floor of the pickup, Priore said.
I think this is the main thing they should focus on for their legal defense. It's not like the the thieves were stealing a radio, after all. They were stealing deadly weapons. How else are you going to get a thief to give back a deadly weapon?the use of force other than deadly force to protect or recover the land or property would expose the actor or another to a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury.
snatchel wrote:carlson1 wrote:The pair broke a rear window on the driver's side and took “at least four, maybe five weapons — handguns and shotguns” that had been left in plain view on the back seat and the floor of the pickup, Priore said.
Yeah, I had the same reaction. Taking a blanket to throw over your stash doesn't require a whole lot of forethought.
Burglary etc http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/D ... /PE.30.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/D ... m/PE.9.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Sec. 9.42. DEADLY FORCE TO PROTECT PROPERTY.
...
(3) he reasonably believes that:
(A) the guns cannot be protected or recovered by any other means; or
(B) the use of force other than deadly force to protect or recover the guns would expose the actor or another to a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury.
Sec. 30.02. BURGLARY. (a) A person commits an offense if, without the effective consent of the owner, the person:
(1) enters a habitation, or a building (or any portion of a building) not then open to the public, with intent to commit a felony, theft, or an assault; or
(2) remains concealed, with intent to commit a felony, theft, or an assault, in a building or habitation; or
(3) enters a building or habitation and commits or attempts to commit a felony, theft, or an assault.
interesting that intent to commit an assault isn't in Burglary of Vehicles as it is in BurglarySec. 30.04. BURGLARY OF VEHICLES. (a) A person commits an offense if, without the effective consent of the owner, he breaks into or enters a vehicle or any part of a vehicle with intent to commit any felony or theft.
(b) For purposes of this section, "enter" means to intrude:
(1) any part of the body; or
(2) any physical object connected with the body.
(c) For purposes of this section, a container or trailer carried on a rail car is a part of the rail car.
I would not like knowing that guns they took from me were used to end innocent peoples' lives later and I might do whatever is reasonably necessary to try to prevent the criminals who displayed propensities to commit crimes from using the guns for such purposes.Sec. 30.03. BURGLARY OF COIN-OPERATED OR COIN COLLECTION MACHINES. (a) A person commits an offense if, without the effective consent of the owner, he breaks or enters into any coin-operated machine, coin collection machine, or other coin-operated or coin collection receptacle, contrivance, apparatus, or equipment used for the purpose of providing lawful amusement, sales of goods, services, or other valuable things, or telecommunications with intent to obtain property or services.
(b) For purposes of this section, "entry" includes every kind of entry except one made with the effective consent of the owner.
IOW, a concealed handgun license allows you to carry a concealed weapon but does not change the laws on deadly force. You're not somehow more protected from charges by having a license.A concealed handgun license, he added, also does not affect when a person can or cannot use deadly force.
A pair of men who fled in a tan or gold SUV with bullet-hole damage on the driver's side door remained at large.
I've seen the discussions on this board on the topic of burglary versus burglary of vehicle. I personally conclude that burglary of vehicle is not an act covered under PC §9.42(2)(A)-(B) where "burglary" is referenced.A-R wrote:Stealing property out of someone's vehicle is not "theft" - it's burglary.
...
Question is whether "burglary of vehicle" is same as "burglary" for purposes of PC 9.42 justification. And seems the police believe it is.
