TexasCHLforum.com

According to a story in this morning's paper, a family returning home from vacation Tuesday night was followed from Houston by three men driving a pickup truck.

When the father of the family reached Texas City and realized he was still being followed, he stopped in the 300 block of 21st Avenue North rather than going home. The would-be carjackers confronted the family with "an assault rifle."

The father took the keys to his vehicle, ran to a nearby house, and knocked on the door. The mother and teenage son remained in their vehicle, "screamed and honked the horn."

A neighbor came out armed and fired four shots.

The robbers fled in the pickup truck that they had been driving. The police chased them through Galveston County and north on I-45 until the fleeing vehicle ran into a spike strip on I-45 at Fuqua. The robbers took off on foot and were caught.

The pickup truck that they had been driving was stolen. Police also recovered the "assault rifle."

http://www.galvnews.com/story.lasso?ewc ... f8a6c9b7d4" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The 300 block of 21st Avenue North is a residential neighborhood.

The story in the print newspaper has more details than the online version. The intended robbery victims were hauling two "four-wheelers." I assume they mean all-terrain vehicles. These things seem to be irresistible to thieves. Two unrelated theft rings have been busted up here in the past few months.

I hope someone will be getting a cell phone and a weapon and working on self-defense tactics soon.

- Jim

No kidding! That's scary. Thank goodness the homeowner had the necessary tools to scare the carjackers off.

That situation could have gone very bad, very quickly.

seamusTX wrote:A neighbor came out armed and fired four shots.

What are the odds that the neighbor gets arrested, his guns confiscated, and has to spend thousands of dollars defending his freedom, and possibly never sees his firearm again?

I certainly do not say this to demean the neighbor. I firmly believe he did the right thing. It just seem that the good guys always get punished.

I've been reading lots of "aftermath" stories lately in which the CHL holder defends himself/herself or defends others and still goes to jail, and to court, and gets punished financially, even if they are no-billed by the grand jury, and then have enormous hassles getting their firearm back.

Maybe its just that the stories in which the good guy does not get punished are lackluster and don't get published...I hope so, anyway.

Vic wrote:

seamusTX wrote:A neighbor came out armed and fired four shots.

What are the odds that the neighbor gets arrested, his guns confiscated, and has to spend thousands of dollars defending his freedom, and possibly never sees his firearm again? I certainly do not say this to demean the neighbor. I firmly believe he did the right thing. It just seem that the good guys always get punished.

I've been reading lots of "aftermath" stories lately in which the CHL holder defends himself/herself or defends others and still goes to jail, and to court, and gets punished financially, even if they are no-billed by the grand jury, and then have enormous hassles getting their firearm back. Maybe its just that the stories in which the good guy does not get punished are lackluster and don't get published...I hope so, anyway.

As it is clear to me, the neighbor was perfectly justified under PC 9.35. That neighbor probably saved someone from getting hurt, or even killed, as a firearm was displayed and was going to be used against the intended victims.

IANAL

I see that as well, but in some cases, even a justified shooting still gets the good guy arrested and charged. Even if the good guy gets no-billed, it still costs him thousands of dollars, months or years of hassle, and gets his property confiscated.

I'm not saying this happens in all cases, I just wonder what will happen in this case, given what happens sometimes in other cases.

For example, I'm currently reading "The Concealed Handgun Manual (5th Edition)" by Chris Bird. In it he relates a story that goes like this:

1. Good guy is sitting in his car.
2. Bad guy goes up to good guy's car and starts beating the hell out of good guy.
3. Good guy has no idea why this is happening, but is armed in order to defend himself.
4. Good guy shoots bad guy.
5. Bad guy stops the attack.
6. Police arrive and arrest both.
7. Bad guy goes to hospital where he eventually recovers.
8. Good guy stays in jail until eventually bonded out.
9. Good guy spends thousands of dollars defending himself in court.
10. Good guy eventually gets no-billed and his actions are deemed justified.
11. Good guy then gets sued in civil court.
12. Good guy spends thousands more defending himself in civil court.
13. good guy is eventually cleared of any wrongdoing in civil court.

So, he properly and justifiably defended himself, but he still got arrested, went to court twice, and is out thousands and thousands of dollars.

The alternative is to not defend yourself, and possibly be killed, so that's not an answer, and I'm not suggesting so. My point is that, from reading these stories, even a justified defense is probably going to be met with arrest, trial, and crushing expense for the good guy. I hope that doesn't happen in this case. I hope the cops pat him on the back and go about their day, and the District Attorney does the same.

Vic wrote:What are the odds that the neighbor gets arrested, his guns confiscated, and has to spend thousands of dollars defending his freedom, and possibly never sees his firearm again?

Low. They are pretty sensible about this kind of thing in Texas City, and Galveston County generally.

I certainly do not approve of "warning shots," but the principle of no harm no foul seems to apply here. If the shots caused the robbers to flee instead of shooting the victims, they worked in this case.

Prosecution of defenders is rare in Texas. It seems to occur when there's a combination of an unarmed attacker and a hostile DA. I've been able to identify only about five cases: http://www.texaschlforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=13128" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

BTW, it sounds like you are paraphrasing the case of Gordon Hale, the first CHL holder in Texas to defend himself by shooting his attacker. Mr. Hale was charged but no-billed. The attacker died.

- Jim

That's good to know, I really appreciate the information.

I do not remember the good guy's name, and I don't have the book with me at the moment (I was reading it at home last night).

There was a Porsche involved, if that helps identify the story.

Vic wrote:There was a Porsche involved, if that helps identify the story.

That is in The Concealed Handgun Manual by Chris Bird.

- Jim

Vic wrote:I see that as well, but in some cases, even a justified shooting still gets the good guy arrested and charged. Even if the good guy gets no-billed, it still costs him thousands of dollars, months or years of hassle, and gets his property confiscated.

I'm not saying this happens in all cases, I just wonder what will happen in this case, given what happens sometimes in other cases.

For example, I'm currently reading "The Concealed Handgun Manual (5th Edition)" by Chris Bird. In it he relates a story that goes like this:

1. Good guy is sitting in his car.
2. Bad guy goes up to good guy's car and starts beating the heck out of good guy.
3. Good guy has no idea why this is happening, but is armed in order to defend himself.
4. Good guy shoots bad guy.
5. Bad guy stops the attack.
6. Police arrive and arrest both.
7. Bad guy goes to hospital where he eventually recovers.
8. Good guy stays in jail until eventually bonded out.
9. Good guy spends thousands of dollars defending himself in court.
10. Good guy eventually gets no-billed and his actions are deemed justified.
11. Good guy then gets sued in civil court.
12. Good guy spends thousands more defending himself in civil court.
13. good guy is eventually cleared of any wrongdoing in civil court.

So, he properly and justifiably defended himself, but he still got arrested, went to court twice, and is out thousands and thousands of dollars.

The alternative is to not defend yourself, and possibly be killed, so that's not an answer, and I'm not suggesting so. My point is that, from reading these stories, even a justified defense is probably going to be met with arrest, trial, and crushing expense for the good guy. I hope that doesn't happen in this case. I hope the cops pat him on the back and go about their day, and the District Attorney does the same.

In TX, if you are no billed you are immune of civil prosecution.

I am not sure I would leave my wife and son behind, but I guess the guy did the right thing as everything worked out ok. Fortunately a neighbor got involved or it would likely have been very different. I carry a winchester 1300 defender in my truck so if I ever find myself in similar situation, the guys trying to get my truck are going to get some 000 buck instead. My other defensive strategy is to drive a truck nobody would want to steal.

JJVP wrote:

Vic wrote:I see that as well, but in some cases, even a justified shooting still gets the good guy arrested and charged. Even if the good guy gets no-billed, it still costs him thousands of dollars, months or years of hassle, and gets his property confiscated.

I'm not saying this happens in all cases, I just wonder what will happen in this case, given what happens sometimes in other cases.

For example, I'm currently reading "The Concealed Handgun Manual (5th Edition)" by Chris Bird. In it he relates a story that goes like this:

1. Good guy is sitting in his car.
2. Bad guy goes up to good guy's car and starts beating the heck out of good guy.
3. Good guy has no idea why this is happening, but is armed in order to defend himself.
4. Good guy shoots bad guy.
5. Bad guy stops the attack.
6. Police arrive and arrest both.
7. Bad guy goes to hospital where he eventually recovers.
8. Good guy stays in jail until eventually bonded out.
9. Good guy spends thousands of dollars defending himself in court.
10. Good guy eventually gets no-billed and his actions are deemed justified.
11. Good guy then gets sued in civil court.
12. Good guy spends thousands more defending himself in civil court.
13. good guy is eventually cleared of any wrongdoing in civil court.

So, he properly and justifiably defended himself, but he still got arrested, went to court twice, and is out thousands and thousands of dollars.

The alternative is to not defend yourself, and possibly be killed, so that's not an answer, and I'm not suggesting so. My point is that, from reading these stories, even a justified defense is probably going to be met with arrest, trial, and crushing expense for the good guy. I hope that doesn't happen in this case. I hope the cops pat him on the back and go about their day, and the District Attorney does the same.

In TX, if you are no billed you are immune of civil prosecution.

You are cannot be held civilly liable. They can still file suit....they just can't get any money (if the judge reads the law). There is a case right now in the courts. The inusrance company wanted to settle (the lawyer admitted the only reason they sued is to try and get the insurance company to settle), the home owner did not want court precedent to be set and declined to settle.

Now a question for the lawyers out there. Why not file a counter suit for legal costs against the lawyer and plantiff for bringing a lawsuit against a person when they can't be held civilly liable? Can a lawyer be disbarred for bringing such a suit?

My other defensive strategy is to drive a truck nobody would want to steal.

Ford man, huh?

Why did this guy a come to a stop ??? Put the pedal to the metal, or these days, the electricity to the throttle control, and give 'em a run for the money around town. Eventually, the cops are going to pull somebody over, and that sounds like a good thing. 'Course, if you're driving a Toyota, you might not be able to stop on demand.

Does anyone else find it ironic that the family:
1. Has enough money to go on vacation
2. They have enough money to own 2 ATV's
3. They presumably like the outdoors since they own ATV's

4. But they don't have a gun with which to defend themselves?

Maybe they are ineligible persons. If not, a trip to the nearest
gun store and a CHL class should be the next things on the
"to do" list.

I'm just sayin....

SIA

casingpoint wrote:Why did this guy a come to a stop ???

Only he can answer that question.

IIRC, there are two fire stations within a mile of where he stopped. Most criminals do not want to carry out their crimes in front of witnesses, especially firemen.

surprise_i'm_armed wrote:Does anyone else find it ironic that the family:
...
4. But they don't have a gun with which to defend themselves?

The problem probably boils down to "why do you need that thing?"

Now they know.

They don't even have to get a CHL (though I can recommend an excellent CHL instructor in Texas City ). As everyone knows, they can legally carry weapons in their vehicle or motor home.

- Jim

Family should have kept driving and called the police. Lucky it all turned out well for the intended victims.