So here's a CHL holder saving the day

[texas1234]

He is not in trouble, he was rendering aide protecting someone from a madman who was posing a life threatening situation and his gun "ACCIDENTALLY DISCHARGED"

It accidentally discharged, as it was accidentally pointed at the crazy madman, while the trigger got accidently pulled.

[blackdog8200]

This also demonstrates the "survivability" of a single GSW to the abdomen/chest. I think the single shot rate is upwards of 80%.

The CHL holder is a hero in my eyes....gutsy move in this PC legal world! I gave thanks and a "right on" when I heard the report.

Funny how up until 2005, a metro bus was a "gun free zone" but a CHL holder saves the day. Irony is a wonderful thing.


Maybe one day the bed wetters will learn to fear criminals and not CHL holders.

[Charles L. Cotton]

The shooter is also a security guard. Guess which description the Houston Chronicle used (security guard or CHL) ...

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/met ... 67778.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

That's the same thing KTRH new radio did in Houston this morning. So much for intellectual honesty.

Chas.

[Fangs]

“He got up and went and sat in his own car which, by the way, was on fire, and waited there, shot, and he was still there when the police and paramedics got here,” Torres said.

That. Is. Awesome.

Sorry, made me laugh after the whole crazy Grand Theft Auto-style series of events leading up to this nonchalant conclusion.

[sjfcontrol]

“He got up and went and sat in his own car which, by the way, was on fire, and waited there, shot, and he was still there when the police and paramedics got here,” Torres said.

That. Is. Awesome.

Sorry, made me laugh after the whole crazy Grand Theft Auto-style series of events leading up to this nonchalant conclusion.

Nothing like getting shot to really harsh your buzz! Bummer!

[Doug.38PR]

well....if we use the logic of some of our other internet experts and wisealec's, this CHLer was "just some Dirty Harry wannabe looking to play hero. He should have looked out for himself and his family and nevermind anybody else" so say these "experts"


As for myself, I take my hat off the the man. He did the right thing to help neighbor.

[philip964]

This guy is a hero. The CHL was only listed in the newspaper article. TV only said security guard. 3 people besides this guy went to the hospital. The TV coverage looks like this guy was at war, until our hero stopped it.

Pretty gutsy move. He is following in his car when he sees it happen and boards the bus to get the guy off the bus driver. He then becomes the object of the CBG's attention. Apparently only then he pulls his gun and only shoots "because he was in fear of his life" nice when the police detective is saying things like that on the TV news.

So the only question is whether a civil suit will be filed against our hero, for negligent bodily injury of a crazy bad guy by the crazy bad guys attorney. If the security guard was in any way covered by his companies insurance, I betcha it will happen.

Also I wonder if his security company will fire him, especially if they have a policy of no guns.

Mayor and Metro should give this guy a medal. Imagine if he had beaten the driver to death and taken control of the bus.

[srothstein]

Whether the accidental discharge is just his story to avoid legal issues or not I don’t know (but would be interested).

Careful reading is required here. The news article did not report that the discharge of the weapon was accidental, although it may have been crafted to leave that impression as it clearly did in some cases. It said that the weapon discharged and the suspect was struck in the abdomen. This is a neutral statement of easily verifiable objective facts and does not give any indication of intent either way.

The Chronicle story says that police stated the CHL shot the suspect when he tried to grab the gun. That makes it sound like a deliberate intentional shoot to me. It also still sounds like a good shoot.

And, under the Castle Doctrine, if the use of force was justified under the Penal Code, the CHL is immune to liability. He is not going to face lawsuits, as far as I can see.

Even without the law, I don't see too many Texas juries giving the suspect, high on PCP, any cash for being shot by someone stopping the attempted robbery (theft of the bus by using force is robbery).


And to be fair to the Chronicle, while they did focus on the job, they did at least mention he has a CHL. Which brings up the question of if he was in uniform at the time. I really can't see a CHL drawing the gun and then getting into a fistfight with the suspect, as was described. But a security guard in uniform would try the physical stuff first, just like most cops would. And be open to a gun grab, just like most cops would. If he was in uniform, the Security guard position might be more important than the CHL to the story.

Either way, Metro and HPD owe the CHL a hero's rewards. They should at least give him the civilian honors that they can for helping and putting his life in danger to do so.

[DoubleActionCHL]

And, under the Castle Doctrine, if the use of force was justified under the Penal Code, the CHL is immune to liability. He is not going to face lawsuits, as far as I can see.

I will be quite interested to see how Civil Practices and Remedies Section 83.001 is applied, assuming anyone even attempts to sue civilly. As I understand it, this section doesn't mean he won't have to worry about a lawsuit, but it will be short-lived in the courts. We keep hearing arguments about civil immunity in these cases, so it will be great to see it in action and settle these arguments once and for all.

[hirundo82]

This guy is a hero. The CHL was only listed in the newspaper article. TV only said security guard. 3 people besides this guy went to the hospital. The TV coverage looks like this guy was at war, until our hero stopped it.

KTRK (ABC 13) said that he was a CHL holder.

[mctowalot]

According to Texas code, an armed (commisioned) security guard who is in uniform may not carry concealed (while in uniform) even if he has a CHL). - go figure.
You know, you just can't make this stuff up.

IMHO, the hero just isn't getting the recognition (support?) he really deserves here.

And as posted above, if Mr. PCP freakout had gained control of that bus there is no doubt that many more people would have been hurt or killed. Remember the 18 wheeler that was stolen and chased through much of Houston while the driver just plowed over anything (occupied vehicles included) in his path?
Or the bus driver that lead HPD on a several
hour chase when he freaked out on crack?
In both instances HPD was powerless to stop the chase. (Spike strips don't work to well on large commercial truck tires)
The 18 wheeler driver was finally stopped by two TX DPS Troopers, both armed with shotguns. As the truck was crossing a bridge, they waited on the other side of the center median. While the truck was passing one Trooper shot through the windshield and the other the drivers door. Thinking about it now it seems even at 15 feet the buckshot spread to about a dinner plate.
The 18 wheeler stealer/driver didn't make it - imagine that.
The rig just coasted across the remainder of the bridge and then onto the soft shoulder where it stalled.
I think the bus driver just ran 'till he ran out of fuel.
Funny thing about the 18 wheeler incident - which I recorded on our VCR while it was being broadcast live - a news helicopter was on top of everything. At the end of the chase they showed a closeup of the truck. I don't know what pellet count buckshot DPS uses but there were a lot more holes in the truck than you would think. And HPD was not allowed to fire on the truck.

[surprise_i'm_armed]

Steve Rothstein:

You mentioned the Castle Doctrine above as part of the GG's
defense.

How is the Castle Doctrine involved in this case? The security
guard/CHL was not in his home, and he had exited his vehicle,
which might be possibly considered part of his "Castle".

He was on the bus when the scuffle and subsequent shooting
took place.

I'm pleased he intervened and stopped the rampage, but how
is the Castle Doctrine helping him in this case?

Thanks in advance.

SIA

[Keith B]

Steve Rothstein:

You mentioned the Castle Doctrine above as part of the GG's
defense.

How is the Castle Doctrine involved in this case? The security
guard/CHL was not in his home, and he had exited his vehicle,
which might be possibly considered part of his "Castle".

He was on the bus when the scuffle and subsequent shooting
took place.

I'm pleased he intervened and stopped the rampage, but how
is the Castle Doctrine helping him in this case?

Thanks in advance.

SIA

This guy was used deadly force as defined in Sec 9.32 (1) (e) See http://www.rc123.com/texas_castle_doctrine.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Bottom line the castle doctrine (SECTION 4. Section 83.001, on civil immunity listed at the bottom of the link above) covers you any time you are in a place where you can legally be and justifiably use force or deadly force per Sec 9.31 or 9.32

[srothstein]

To expand on Keith's answer just a little bit, the civil immunity clause was passed in its current wording as part of the Castle Doctrine bill. This is 83.001 of the Civil Practices and Remedies Code. It just says that if you use deadly force (or force) and are justified under Chapter 9 of the Penal Code, you are immune from the liability. So, to me, even shooting to stop a robbery is covered by this part of the Castle Doctrine. Your castle is greatly expanded from just your home (where we almost always could shoot to protect ourselves in Texas).

Chapter 9 of the Penal Code justifies the use of force to defend yourself or others and specifies that it applies if you are in any place you have a right to legally be, and removes the duty to retreat. Protecting another just requires that the force would have been justified to protect yourself in that situation, so this was also clearly justified.

So, think of your castle now as anyplace you have a legal right to be. for justifying the use of force, this is what applies.

[DoubleActionCHL]

Nevermind. Had a cranial flatulence.

I'd still like to see it in action.