casingpoint wrote:I stand corrected. But I am having some trouble with this shooting in the back thing. Cowards shoot people in the back. Persons apprised of the law know when to pull the trigger on a frontal shot. Like cops. When the perps are running away, it time to pursue, not shoot. Certainly human life has some value left in Texas. I can understand the property owner shooting in the back to protect his property rights. But a third party has no vested interest in the property, and suffers no personal loss if the property is stolen. That is hardly a mandate for shooting people in the back. The law in Texas on this matter is a bit of a stretch. I wouldn't count on going to the bank on it. Except maybe to borrow money to pay a lawyer to settle a civil claim from the survivors of the deceased.
Well, there could be extra circumstances, such as: Was he reaching for what possibly could be a gun? Was he attacking somebody else? Was he going into a place where another 3rd party is, such as a kid's bedroom, or toward a sensitive area? Was he getting behind cover to better engage you? Are there multiple assailants? Etc.
It's not cut and dry, if someone is just running down the middle of the street after you caught them robbing you, it's probably best not to shoot, but if they're running into your garage where there's a door that leads into the house, it's probably best to shoot.
