TexasCHLforum.com

This event is tragic for both the homeowner and a man who apparently was a nice guy, until he mixed alcohol and medication.

I want to thank everyone for this discussion. Although our opinions vary, I think this is a valuable thread that could be beneficial to all of us.

Chas.

Renegade wrote:

Will938 wrote:

frankie_the_yankee wrote:I take it back. The guy will be no billed. Here's why.

PC §9.31. SELF-DEFENSE. (a) Except as provided in Subsection
(b), a person is justified in using force against another when and to the
degree the actor reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary
to protect the actor against the other's use or attempted use of
unlawful force. The actor's belief that the force was immediately
necessary as described by this subsection is presumed to be reasonable
if the actor:
(1) knew or had reason to believe that the person against whom
the force was used:
(A) unlawfully and with force entered, or was attempting to
enter unlawfully and with force, the actor's occupied habitation, vehicle,
or place of business or employment;

The guy banging on the door could be easily construed as "attempting to enter unlawfully and with force". This should meet the requirements for the presumption of reasonableness under the law.

I still wouldn't shoot through a door myself.

Isn't there a distinction between force and deadly force?

Yes, that is what I was referring to when I wrote:

I do not think it was "immediately necessary", as required by PC9.32 (3).

above. Deadly force has the additional qualifier of being "immediately necessary".

The new "Castle Doctrine" in Texas presumes you reasonably believed deadly force was immediately necessary, if you know or have reason to believe that someone is attempting to enter your home, business or car unlawfully and with force. It's clear that the homeowner knew or had reason to believe that someone was attempting to enter unlawfully and with force, so he is entitled to the presumption. As noted in one of the articles quoted, there are other justifications for using deadly force under these circumstances.

By no means am I saying I would have shot through a closed door in this situation, nor am I saying I wouldn't. I just don't know enough of the facts to make a determination. There certainly are circumstances where I would not wait for entry to fire in self-defense, but they would be the exception rather than the rule. This is my standard, not Texas law and not something I would try to force on others.

I am very sorry the man is dead and I’m sorry that the homeowner had to take someone’s life. However, we need to be guarded in blanket criticism of someone trying to prevent an unlawful and forceful entry into one’s home. Texas law now recognizes this as legitimate use of deadly force. Also, we could easily replace the healthy man in this scenario with a frail, elderly woman with limited physical abilities. Would we expect her to wait until the BG or multiple BG’s are already inside her home before firing in self-defense?

Again, I’m not taking a position on this particular shooting; I’m am saying we should never say we’d never fire through a door, regardless of the circumstances.

Chas.