TexasCHLforum.com

Purplehood wrote:What exactly are you allowed to do if you catch some lowlife breaking into your vehicle?

go read your book, but in general you're allowed to use force to defend property. Then the next section states that if you can use force then you can use deadly force. Some people will say you can only shoot at nigh but they're wrong. Pretty much if I'd caught him in the act I couldve shot him, which I wouldve.

UofHdevildog wrote:

Purplehood wrote:What exactly are you allowed to do if you catch some lowlife breaking into your vehicle?

go read your book, but in general you're allowed to use force to defend property. Then the next section states that if you can use force then you can use deadly force. Some people will say you can only shoot at nigh but they're wrong. Pretty much if I'd caught him in the act I couldve shot him, which I wouldve.

Normally I would never read a book...that is why I lurk on this board. But your answer seems so contrary to my understanding of the law that I better just go ahead and do it.

UofHdevildog wrote:

Purplehood wrote:What exactly are you allowed to do if you catch some lowlife breaking into your vehicle?

go read your book, but in general you're allowed to use force to defend property. Then the next section states that if you can use force then you can use deadly force. Some people will say you can only shoot at nigh but they're wrong. Pretty much if I'd caught him in the act I couldve shot him, which I wouldve.

Please re-read your book. TPC §9.42 defines the allowable use of deadly force to protect property and does NOT say if you can use force, you can use deadly force anytime. Here is the statute and I have highlighted some important points:

PC §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.

jbirds1210 wrote:This is not a flame! I just didn't know if you had ever read what the law in Texas says about having a round in the chamber. Good luck!

Texas Penal Code:

46.13. MAKING A FIREARM ACCESSIBLE TO A CHILD. (a) In
this section:
(1) "Child" means a person younger than 17 years of
age.
(2) "Readily dischargeable firearm" means a firearm
that is loaded with ammunition, whether or not a round is in the
chamber. (3) "Secure" means to take steps that a reasonable
person would take to prevent the access to a readily dischargeable
firearm by a child, including but not limited to placing a firearm
in a locked container or temporarily rendering the firearm
inoperable by a trigger lock or other means. <SNIP>

Thanks jbirds - good reminder. Personally, I don't feel a firearm is readily dischargeable if there is no round in the chamber, and the child holding the gun is physically unable to chamber a round. I know that's not taken into consideration in the law, but I think I'm probably in pretty good company on this board when I say I choose to keep a firearm unlocked next to my bed - but I'd like to think there are plenty out there that also keep the chamber empty if there are kids in the house. When my children are older, I will certainly rethink the how/where I keep my home protection weapon. I'm an amputee, so getting up in the middle of the night to defend my family takes a bit more effort (have to first put my leg on... I doubt the bad guy will wait until I make it a "fair fight"...

Keith B wrote:

UofHdevildog wrote:

Purplehood wrote:What exactly are you allowed to do if you catch some lowlife breaking into your vehicle?

go read your book, but in general you're allowed to use force to defend property. Then the next section states that if you can use force then you can use deadly force. Some people will say you can only shoot at nigh but they're wrong. Pretty much if I'd caught him in the act I couldve shot him, which I wouldve.

Please re-read your book. TPC §9.42 defines the allowable use of deadly force to protect property and does NOT say if you can use force, you can use deadly force anytime. Here is the statute and I have highlighted some important points:

PC §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.

That is what I thought...if someone is breaking into my vehicle I would probably be in deep kimchee if I shot at them (nothwithstanding other extenuating circumstances).

Don't scrimp if you can afford a strong bolt down safe. I don't know if the money you saved will take the sting out of whatever you might lose.

It still wouldve been hard not to. Why is that law like that? Sounds stupid to me.

UofHdevildog wrote:It still wouldve been hard not to. Why is that law like that? Sounds stupid to me.

The law has been that way for a long time, even before CHL. I think I heard (don't quote me) that this law may even be a holdover from the cattle rustling / horse theft days. However, as a CHL holder, you really need to understand when you can and can't use deadly force. If you shoot someone during the day who is breaking into your vehicle and you are not in personal danger, you will be very likely facing homicide charges.

Keith B wrote:

UofHdevildog wrote:It still wouldve been hard not to. Why is that law like that? Sounds stupid to me.

The law has been that way for a long time, even before CHL. I think I heard (don't quote me) that this law may even be a holdover from the cattle rustling / horse theft days. However, as a CHL holder, you really need to understand when you can and can't use deadly force. If you shoot someone during the day who is breaking into your vehicle and you are not in personal danger, you will be very likely facing homicide charges.

...and monumental legal fees.

TLynnHughes wrote:Someone else here on the forum recommended the Center of Mass (http://www.center-of-mass.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;) website as a place for safes specifically for the car. I put one from there on my list to Santa.

T.

Thanks for this link; we've had a Blazer in the past with both a locking console and glovebox; we gave it to my in-laws when we bought a 2004 Tahoe (new to us) but there's no locking *anything* in it. I found their exact-fit console safe and the wife immediately said "GET IT!" $250 well spent, IMO. She carries a nice stainless Para that I certainly don't want stolen, and I carry .. well.. whatever I feel like carrying that day.

Ken73 wrote:

TLynnHughes wrote:Someone else here on the forum recommended the Center of Mass (http://www.center-of-mass.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;) website as a place for safes specifically for the car. I put one from there on my list to Santa.

T.

Thanks for this link; we've had a Blazer in the past with both a locking console and glovebox; we gave it to my in-laws when we bought a 2004 Tahoe (new to us) but there's no locking *anything* in it. I found their exact-fit console safe and the wife immediately said "GET IT!" $250 well spent, IMO. She carries a nice stainless Para that I certainly don't want stolen, and I carry .. well.. whatever I feel like carrying that day.

Yep. My brother and I just put Console Vaults in our trucks. The great thing about them is that you can't tell they are there from the window and they allow nearly your entire console for the safe area. He recently had a firearm stolen from his vehicle and I've had one vehicle stolen and another broken into. We are getting to be of the opinion that if you are not allowed to carry into a building that is 30.06 posted or even like Reliant during a sporting event. Security like the airport should be provided and you are provided with a secured, guarded locker that they are responsible for any losses. If they want to force us not to carry they should be liable for protecting us. I'm so mean.

You can use or threaten non-deadly force anytime of the day to stop a burglary in progress.

There are too many variables to say conclusively, but assuming I scan the area and only see 1-2 actors (my back to the store, restaurant, or house with no way to get ambushed from behind):

I'd call 911 and let them know it as soon as we're connected and I start giving their descriptions. I plan to hover my hand near my firearm but keep it concealed.

If their aggression turns towards me, we have a new threat to analyze as it is now a crime against a person instead of against property.

TxDrifter wrote: If they want to force us not to carry they should be liable for protecting us. I'm so mean.

No, you're not mean - this is exacly how I think as well. If you are going to take away my right to protect myself, then you had well better provide me with protection! Airports have metal detectors and x-ray machines; if you can't prove to me that no one else is carrying - how do I know no one is, and for that matter - how will you know I'M not carrying?