TexasCHLforum.com

Welcome to the forum skankpile. We all are here to learn and interact. Please understand there have been some new members lately that come trolling and looking for a fight, and your questions just seemed a little over the top, so that drove some skepticism.

The members here are a great bunch of folks and there is a vast knowledge base to draw from. While we may not all agree on methods and the level of force required for some instances, the information flow is extremely valuable stuff to digest and use in your own circumstances.

We hope you enjoy the forum and actively participate in the discussions and threads!

I would be very interested to learn the origin of your handle?

Alright, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. But if you reread your original post it does seem to be chomping at the bit.

Once the mugger starts running away, he no longer poses a threat to you.

Verbal provocation alone does not justify the use of deadly force.

If you are really worried about "...a group of skinz [coming] in and starts harassing me and mine spewing threats..." I would suggest patronizing an establishment that provides a higher class of fine dining.

Excellent advice from an old hand. Young & old should heed it.

I'm not really an old hand, I just run my mouth a lot.

I always thought trolls asked 3 questions before you could cross the bridge?????

"KEEPER: Heh heh. Stop! What is your name?
ARTHUR: It is Arthur, King of the Britons.
KEEPER: What is your quest?
ARTHUR: To seek the Holy Grail.
KEEPER: What is the air-speed velocity of an unladen swallow?
ARTHUR: What do you mean? An African or European swallow?
KEEPER: What? I don't know that! Auuuuuuuugh!
BEDEMIR: How do know so much about swallows?
ARTHUR: Well, you have to know these things when you're a king you know."

I am skankpile because that name is NEVER taken.. for some reason I'm always the only skankpile. Back when it was cool to have a yahoo mail account I tried all my sirnames to no end and did not want to add 1234 at the end of my name or some other stupid convention so I typed in something random which happend to be 'skankpile' and all the sudden yahoo said welcome skankpile so it took...and since then it has never been a reserved or taken name wherever I went. I was user skankpile on ebay for a while, but my wife said nobody would buy from a user named skankpile... so I changed it there

glocktalk = skankpile
tdiclub = skankpile
6mmbr = skankpile
rcgroups = skankpile
cnczone = skankpile
... if you see a skankpile its likely me.

LOL. Now we know who to blame on all those websites and who NOT to buy cars from on E-Bay.

[/joke]

skankpile wrote:I know that sounds harsh, but I've had my cars, and house broken into (it turned out to be my thug neighbor and his friends).. and I'm tired of buying the same things over again. My family has even been subject to a peeping-tom... I live in a better place now, but a lot of it stopped when I started mowing the lawn with my .45 on my side.

Statistics show that victims shooting criminals is the best way to reduce crime.

K. I realize that simply spewing verbal threats is not considered a reason for drawing according to the law. However, if several thugs had my family and I surrounded at a local business, I would have to assume that they weren't there to talk about the church bake sale.
But that's just my take on it.

Keith B wrote:Welcome to the forum skankpile. We all are here to learn and interact. Please understand there have been some new members lately that come trolling and looking for a fight, and your questions just seemed a little over the top, so that drove some skepticism.

The members here are a great bunch of folks and there is a vast knowledge base to draw from. While we may not all agree on methods and the level of force required for some instances, the information flow is extremely valuable stuff to digest and use in your own circumstances.

We hope you enjoy the forum and actively participate in the discussions and threads!

And join the NRA. Failure to do so could make the Forum a moot point.

Welcome to the forum.

To answer your question, apart from the legal and moral considerations, you should keep in mind that
if you pull the trigger, it'll cost you a minimum of $10,000,

no matter whether you are in the right or not. Makes Chris Rocks $5000 government surcharge for a bullet sound like a two for one bargain.

pt145ss wrote:I think you might be able to use reasonable force up to and including Deadly Force while in fresh pursuit of the BG…if the circumstances prove that you are in imminent danger of serious bodily injury AND there are no other means of getting the items back that were stolen.

I might be reading this wrong, but it seems like I could shoot a BG in the back while he's running with my wallet without any fear for my life. My trail of thought underlined:

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.

Now I'm NOT talking about the moral aspect of is my wallet worth his life. I'm simply saying that it seems to me, as far as the law is concerned, deadly force can be used to shoot someone in the back while they are running away from me with my property even if I'm in no immediate danger.

Venus Pax wrote:K. I realize that simply spewing verbal threats is not considered a reason for drawing according to the law. However, if several thugs had my family and I surrounded at a local business, I would have to assume that they weren't there to talk about the church bake sale.
But that's just my take on it.

If they can arrest a Lamar University student for email threats then I think we can draw for verbal threats.

Fangs wrote:Now I'm NOT talking about the moral aspect of is my wallet worth his life.

I like to think my wallet is far superior to a robber's life.

Fangs wrote:

pt145ss wrote:I think you might be able to use reasonable force up to and including Deadly Force while in fresh pursuit of the BG…if the circumstances prove that you are in imminent danger of serious bodily injury AND there are no other means of getting the items back that were stolen.

I might be reading this wrong, but it seems like I could shoot a BG in the back while he's running with my wallet without any fear for my life. My trail of thought underlined:

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.

Now I'm NOT talking about the moral aspect of is my wallet worth his life. I'm simply saying that it seems to me, as far as the law is concerned, deadly force can be used to shoot someone in the back while they are running away from me with my property even if I'm in no immediate danger.

IMHO...I think you may have the emphases on the wrong part.

(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.

Given the scenario that a BG just stole your wallet, in order to be justified in using deadly force to stop the BG from escaping with your wallet...you would have to believe that the items in your wallet could not be replaced/recovered. We know that the first part is met by the robbery itself because...well...the BG just robbed you. The second part is not so clear in that most items in a wallet to a reasonable person could be replaced with a few phone calls and some paperwork.

(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;

Now lets talk about where you put your emphases…on the OR which states: (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.

If the BG guy is fleeing…what risk is he posing to you? None…therefore deadly force is not immediately necessary. That being said, one could give fresh pursuit. I also, believe that while giving fresh pursuit, if the BG turns and does pose a threat of serious bodily harm or death, then one would be justified.

Just my opinion.

you would have to believe that the items in your wallet could not be replaced/recovered

The statute does not use the word recovered, nor does is equate replacement with recovery. The two are not the same. I believe shankpile is right. In Texas, you have a license to use deadly force under certain circumstances already made plain.