TexasCHLforum.com

Just saw this on wfaa.com: Undercover Arlington officer shot in Dallas

http://www.wfaa.com/story/news/2015/11/ ... /76037572/

Undercover is a tough business.

I represented an undercover officer in a real estate dispute. He was infiltrating the local gangs, the scuzziest looking character you can imagine. The first time he came to the office, the receptionist came into mine with a very frightened look, and told me this rough character had entered the waiting room, what should she do?

Truth to tell, if I had seen him messing with my neighbor's car, I might have taken a shot at him too.

This fellow was the nicest guy. His wife was a wonderful woman, his kids were spotlessly normal. One morning, some gang types tried to kill them at the school bus stop.

Why would they wait until after 6am to put a tracking device on a vehicle? That would seem to be something best done at 3am (when most people are asleep), instead of when lots of people are waking up and getting ready for work.

There could be a valid reason, like the car just arrived, but it seems strange.

Sources say the undercover officer responded that he had dropped something. That's when the neighbor opened fire with an assault rifle.

Sure it was.

Former Prosecutor Toby Shook says if the neighbor reasonably believed that he was stopping a burglary, then Texas law may protect him.

"Texas law also allows for use to use deadly force to stop a burglary," Shook said. "Texas law is pretty liberal in this area."

As it should be.

A friend of a friend is an Arlington officer. He's got his concerns and his job to do, but he's also got a wonderful, protective attitude about all civil rights. He wants to defend civil order in all respects, including the right to keep and bear.

This is a TV news story, which means there is reason to verify from a second source. If the story is accurate and the shooter felt safe enough to ask the officer what he was doing, it sounds like the shooter could have gotten away. He wouldn't have been in fear of his life.

If the police officer was in the process of putting something external on the car, I don't see how that would rise to the level of deadly force. He was already stopped from stealing anything, if that's what it looked like.

The law should allow for deadly force to protect property, but I don't think a suspicious guy still on the outside of a parked car, particularly one engaged in dialog, justifies anything harsher than "Get the heck off my property."

That's my polite take on the matter. In truth, if the story is completely and factually presented, I think it's a story of attempted murder.

Yeah seems a little harsh to open up with a semi-auto rifle on the guy after he just said he dropped something...

I don't know the area, but it was an undercover drug operation. Maybe the guy with the rifle was the subject of their investigation.

Or its a bad part of town, and break-in are common, the guy knows the neighbors and didn't buy that he was in his neighbors yard, no where near the sidewalk messing with their car.

A friend from highschool now lives in Beaumont, and has had his car broke into 3+ times. He's at the point if he finds someone in or around his car at night that he doesn't know, he's likely to start shooting.

jed wrote:I don't know the area, but it was an undercover drug operation. Maybe the guy with the rifle was the subject of their investigation.

The story says it was a neighbor.

If it was, he might be covered by this:

PC §9.43. PROTECTION OF THIRD PERSON’S PROPERTY. A person is
justified in using force or deadly force against another to protect land or tangible,
movable property of a third person if, under the circumstances as he reasonably
believes them to be, the actor would be justified under Section 9.41 or 9.42 in
using force or deadly force to protect his own land or property and:
(1) the actor reasonably believes the unlawful interference constitutes
attempted or consummated theft of or criminal mischief to the tangible
movable property; or
(2) the actor reasonably believes that:
(A) the third person has requested his protection of the land or property;
(B) he has a legal duty to protect the third person’s land or property; or
(C) the third person whose land or property he uses force or deadly force
to protect is the actor’s spouse, parent, or child, resides with the actor, or is
under the actor’s care.

Or later it will come out that the "concerned neighbor" in this case was indeed the subject of the investigation, and the anti-firearm news media wants to paint citizens defending property in a bad light. My trust with mass news media, as I have stated before, occupies a rock-bottom position. They aren't merely inept at reporting stories involving firearms use, they are biased against us, the average gun-owner.

I would not have believed his lame excuse of dropping something. I would not have shot him, but I would have held him for uniformed Police Officers

WTR wrote:I would not have believed his lame excuse of dropping something. I would not have shot him, but I would have held him for uniformed Police Officers

I had a friend in college who got drunk and wrecked his car. Within minutes 3 guys showed up and said "We is unduhcovah agents, give us yo money!". They quickly disappeared when the real cops showed up and carted my buddy off to jail for DWI, and another friend for "Illegally congregating at the scene of an accident..."

Luckily no one was injured or shot.

ScottDLS wrote:

WTR wrote:I would not have believed his lame excuse of dropping something. I would not have shot him, but I would have held him for uniformed Police Officers

I had a friend in college who got drunk and wrecked his car. Within minutes 3 guys showed up and said "We is unduhcovah agents, give us yo money!". They quickly disappeared when the real cops showed up and carted my buddy off to jail for DWI, and another friend for "Illegally congregating at the scene of an accident..."

Luckily no one was injured or shot.

I have learned my lesson when it comes to folks claiming to be official LEOs. I better see some official ID.

No one likes burglers. But that does not mean it is open season on them.

Inside your house is one thing.

Outside on your neighbors property is another.

Sources say the undercover officer responded that he had dropped something. That's when the neighbor opened fire with an assault rifle.

Not knowing the details of what happened, I could see confronting someone with a rifle and them saying something while making a sudden move so that the rifleman feared for his life. Other than that, I have little information.

They did say the SWAT team surrounded the house and then hauled off the shooter. The article also states, the undercover officer was able to jump into a truck with 2 other undercover officers and the rifleman continued to fire at the truck as it drove off.

There just might be more to this story.