Shooting at Car Thieves

[KLB]

This is a dicey proposition. Texas law is different from Tennessee law, but risk is high, as one Tennessee concealed carrier has found out.

Do NOT use your gun to defend least defensible property (unless you’re in Texas, and even then I strongly discourage the practice—it’s easy to meet one of the many loopholes that even the Texas exception requires you jump through in order for deadly force in defense of property to be lawful in the Lone Star state).

https://legalinsurrection.com/2018/10/l ... -just-dont

[Grumpy1993]

Texas law is different from Tennessee law

QFT

[mrvmax]

Everyone needs to be as familiar with Texas law as much as possible if you have an LTC/CHL. I cringe when people tell me they used a Groupon deal or somehow found the cheapest LTC instructor they could find. I always refer people to Charles and I tell them to really pay attention when he talks about the legal aspects since I consider that the most crucial part.
Knowing the law is the first step, after that you need to decide what you are and are not willing to defend. I’ve decided that some things are not worth the possible legal battle (whether I am legally justified or not) and emotional drama, especially if I have them insured. But that’s just me and everyone makes their own choices.

[Maxwell]

Everyone needs to be as familiar with Texas law as much as possible if you have an LTC/CHL. I cringe when people tell me they used a Groupon deal or somehow found the cheapest LTC instructor they could find. I always refer people to Charles and I tell them to really pay attention when he talks about the legal aspects since I consider that the most crucial part.
Knowing the law is the first step, after that you need to decide what you are and are not willing to defend. I’ve decided that some things are not worth the possible legal battle (whether I am legally justified or not) and emotional drama, especially if I have them insured. But that’s just me and everyone makes their own choices.

When I first got my CHL we had a longer class, and I remember signing something that said I had read and understood the laws, so I do! I reread the laws at least once a year if not more often so I know what they say and where there might still be grey areas in my understanding.

[imkopaka]

Everyone needs to be as familiar with Texas law as much as possible if you have an LTC/CHL. I cringe when people tell me they used a Groupon deal or somehow found the cheapest LTC instructor they could find. I always refer people to Charles and I tell them to really pay attention when he talks about the legal aspects since I consider that the most crucial part.
Knowing the law is the first step, after that you need to decide what you are and are not willing to defend. I’ve decided that some things are not worth the possible legal battle (whether I am legally justified or not) and emotional drama, especially if I have them insured. But that’s just me and everyone makes their own choices.

When I first got my CHL we had a longer class, and I remember signing something that said I had read and understood the laws, so I do! I reread the laws at least once a year if not more often so I know what they say and where there might still be grey areas in my understanding.

I do too! I found the best way to understand and remember the law is to paraphrase it, so I'm constantly telling my wife and mother-in-law (who lives with us) paraphrased versions of the law to keep my overall understanding sharp. And if there's something I don't understand or can't find on Google, the forum members are more than happy to help!

[srothstein]

Also, I rememeber that when I originally took my CHL class, the instructor mentioned some law that allows one to use deadly force to stop a thief from stealing property but only unrecoverable/untraceable property. If the stolen item could be traced back to you if found by the police, you may not use deadly force to stop the theft. He literally said "I can't shoot a thief for stealing my truck but I can shoot him for taking my hubcaps". I cannot quote the exact law, sorry. Hopefully someone has a handy link.

The law is Penal Code Section 9.42 and it does not say quite that, though I can see the interpretation of that. Here is exactly what it says:
[quote:]Sec. 9.42. DEADLY FORCE TO PROTECT PROPERTY. A person is justified in using deadly force against another to protect land or tangible, movable property:
(1) if he would be justified in using force against the other under Section 9.41; and
(2) when and to the degree he reasonably believes the deadly force is immediately necessary:
(A) to prevent the other's imminent commission of arson, burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, theft during the nighttime, or criminal mischief during the nighttime; or
(B) to prevent the other who is fleeing immediately after committing burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, or theft during the nighttime from escaping with the property; and
(3) he reasonably believes that:
(A) the land or property cannot be protected or recovered by any other means; or
(B) the use of force other than deadly force to protect or recover the land or property would expose the actor or another to a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury.[/quote]

I am guessing that your instructor was referring to subparagraph (3)(A). I have also heard this clause taken to mean that if you have insurance that will replace the item, then deadly force is not justified. I disagree with both of these interpretations but I am not a lawyer to provide advise. Your instructor may be aware of some case law I am not familiar with. I do strongly agree that you need to know when you can shoot. A big part of this is to also know when YOU will should. That is, think in advance what is justifiable to you for defense. What would it take for you to shoot? Is your car that important to you that you are willing to kill for it? Are your hubcaps? Then you need to get with a good attorney and find out if your feelings are within the law in Texas.

I agree with the other posters that going to one of Charles' seminars would be very helpful in getting factual information about the law. You can also read the Penal Code (and all state laws) on the official state web site at https://statutes.capitol.texas.gov/.

Always remember that if you are out of state traveling, their laws may be very different.

[imkopaka]

Also, I rememeber that when I originally took my CHL class, the instructor mentioned some law that allows one to use deadly force to stop a thief from stealing property but only unrecoverable/untraceable property. If the stolen item could be traced back to you if found by the police, you may not use deadly force to stop the theft. He literally said "I can't shoot a thief for stealing my truck but I can shoot him for taking my hubcaps". I cannot quote the exact law, sorry. Hopefully someone has a handy link.

The law is Penal Code Section 9.42 and it does not say quite that, though I can see the interpretation of that. Here is exactly what it says:

Sec. 9.42. DEADLY FORCE TO PROTECT PROPERTY. A person is justified in using deadly force against another to protect land or tangible, movable property:
(1) if he would be justified in using force against the other under Section 9.41; and
(2) when and to the degree he reasonably believes the deadly force is immediately necessary:
(A) to prevent the other's imminent commission of arson, burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, theft during the nighttime, or criminal mischief during the nighttime; or
(B) to prevent the other who is fleeing immediately after committing burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, or theft during the nighttime from escaping with the property; and
(3) he reasonably believes that:
(A) the land or property cannot be protected or recovered by any other means; or
(B) the use of force other than deadly force to protect or recover the land or property would expose the actor or another to a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury.

I am guessing that your instructor was referring to subparagraph (3)(A). I have also heard this clause taken to mean that if you have insurance that will replace the item, then deadly force is not justified. I disagree with both of these interpretations but I am not a lawyer to provide advise. Your instructor may be aware of some case law I am not familiar with. I do strongly agree that you need to know when you can shoot. A big part of this is to also know when YOU will should. That is, think in advance what is justifiable to you for defense. What would it take for you to shoot? Is your car that important to you that you are willing to kill for it? Are your hubcaps? Then you need to get with a good attorney and find out if your feelings are within the law in Texas.

I agree with the other posters that going to one of Charles' seminars would be very helpful in getting factual information about the law. You can also read the Penal Code (and all state laws) on the official state web site at https://statutes.capitol.texas.gov/.

Always remember that if you are out of state traveling, their laws may be very different.

I hope I'm not putting words in his mouth, but I seem to remember Charles saying that replacing the item with insurance does not mean the same thing as recovering the actual physical item that was stolen and therefore does not constitute a requirement of this law (i.e. the ability to replace it with insurance does not mean the item can be "recovered by [another] means" as the law states). Can anyone verify this as correct?

ETA: I searched and searched and can't find Charles saying this, only other members. If anyone finds a more credible source saying this, please share.

[rotor]

I think that the average person that has not taken a LTC course and studied the material like we have would have a tendency to shoot as their $60k pickup was being driven off by a thief. They might be in trouble later but reflex would jump in. How many understand the difference between theft at night (most don't know what legal night is) and "recoverable" property? Even LTC holders don't fully understand these laws.

[TreyHouston]

Im willing to bet that the drugs in the car were HIS!!

[srothstein]

How many understand the difference between theft at night (most don't know what legal night is) and "recoverable" property? Even LTC holders don't fully understand these laws.

I think you are right. I sincerely doubt most people know what is meant by night, legally. And those who do, probably don't understand what is the legal time for sunset (though they may know where to look up the time for their area).

My understanding of legal night, for those who are curious, is 30 minutes after sunset until 30 minutes before sunrise. Sunset is defined as when the bottom edge of the sun touches the horizon and sun rise is defined as when the bottom edge clears the horizon. Now if I can find the citations for that, I will edit this to be sure.

EDIT: A quick search found that the definition of daytime and nighttime are in Transportation Code section 541.401. I can't find the definition of sunrise or sunset in the quick search.

[tomneal]

To me this is just a simple math problem that gun owners should do in the sober light of day.

I have car insurance with a $1000 deductible.
My estimate of legal fees for stopping a bad guy doing a bad thing is "the price of a car". (The 'better' the shoot, the cheaper the car.)

If I caught someone trying to steal my car, I would confront them in a loud and clear voice with "Stop, or I'll put a hole in you, you can't cover up." I don't plan to fire unless the situation escalates.

However, if they were also kidnapping one of my loved ones... It moves into a more complicated math problem that includes arc's, angles, and acceleration. And, does not include dollars.

I don't see using deadly force to defend property.
That being said, if theft(s) cross the line between shooting to defend my property -vs- shooting to defend my right to own property.

I've had my Texas CHL since the first year. I've had several good instructors and no bad ones. I sat through Charles class more than once and recommend it.

[Oldgringo]

I don't think I'd at a car thief unless said car thief was at me.

[mrvmax]

I don't think I'd at a car thief unless said car thief was at me.

Yep, most of tne time they’d be doing me a favor and like Tom Neal stated, legal fees are way more than I want to pay. I’ve never owned a vehicle I couldn’t do without or replace. I’d treat it like a stereotypical used car lot, once they drove off I’d be yelling “no returns once your off the lot”.......

[Grumpy1993]

(3) he reasonably believes that:
(A) the land or property cannot be protected or recovered by any other means; or

Does anybody on the forum work for HPD? What percentage of stolen cars and trucks do y'all recover?