TexasCHLforum.com

Great post CWOOD!

Interesting interview. I like the guy's new carry gun too.

ScubaSigGuy wrote:

txinvestigator wrote:

ScubaSigGuy wrote:What's with the choppy editing?

I agree completely with his decision to act, and I think that he did the right thing.

I am curious to know if he legally had the right to act as he did. It sounds like the BG was moving away from him with his back to him. He personally was not in any danger, right? Once again I fully agree with his actions. I'm just curious of the legalities of such a situation.

Don't know about Oklahoma, but Texas law offers justification to use deadly force to protect an innocent third person.

TXI

Where did I miss that? Do you know off hand what statute?

lol, You know I do.....


Texas Penal Code
§9.33. Defense of third person.

A person is justified in using force or deadly force against
another to protect a third person if:

(1) under the circumstances as the actor reasonably believes
them to be, the actor would be justified under Section 9.31 or 9.32
in using force or deadly force to protect himself against the unlawful
force or unlawful deadly force he reasonably believes to be
threatening the third person he seeks to protect; and

(2) the actor reasonably believes that his intervention is
immediately necessary to protect the third person.

ScubaSigGuy wrote:What's with the choppy editing?

I do agree that's about the worst editing job I've seen on 7 minutes of video... Having said that, the guy did represent CHL's well, with the exception of the "shoot to kill" comment at the end - as has already been stated, you should always "shoot to stop the threat".

txinvestigator wrote:

ScubaSigGuy wrote:

txinvestigator wrote:

ScubaSigGuy wrote:What's with the choppy editing?

I agree completely with his decision to act, and I think that he did the right thing.

I am curious to know if he legally had the right to act as he did. It sounds like the BG was moving away from him with his back to him. He personally was not in any danger, right? Once again I fully agree with his actions. I'm just curious of the legalities of such a situation.

Don't know about Oklahoma, but Texas law offers justification to use deadly force to protect an innocent third person.

TXI

Where did I miss that? Do you know off hand what statute?

lol, You know I do.....


Texas Penal Code
§9.33. Defense of third person.

A person is justified in using force or deadly force against
another to protect a third person if:

(1) under the circumstances as the actor reasonably believes
them to be, the actor would be justified under Section 9.31 or 9.32
in using force or deadly force to protect himself against the unlawful
force or unlawful deadly force he reasonably believes to be
threatening the third person he seeks to protect; and

(2) the actor reasonably believes that his intervention is
immediately necessary to protect the third person.

Thanks TXI! I must have missed that.

That wording makes me nervous in the hands of the wrong DA. I only hope that if I am ever unfortunate enough to be in that situation that I could act as definitively as he did. I'm sure he didn't have time to think, just react.

naw, basically it's saying if you would be justified in use of DeadlyForce, if the crime were happening to you, than, you can use it to defend someone else.

the thing is, though, that the forum has discussed at some length how one should proceed rather cautiously when attempting to defend someone else.
such oddball cases are those sticky domestics where the abusee may, or may not want help. you know, those unfortunates that get the cops there, and then don't press charges and what-not.

now, in the case, as discussed, the scenario was rather black and white.
THIS is a BG, and THIS is a GG kind of thing.

Venus Pax wrote:ONe of the robbers shot had served EIGHT years of a FORTY year probation for rape, robbery, torture, and scalding.

He should have remained locked up.

Yea that made me sick when I heard that.