Newbie Question. Please be nice to me, lol.

[GlockenHammer]

I think you are getting several different questions answered, instead of just what you asked.

To get the strict answer on what is legal, study the Penal Code, both Chapter 9 on justifications, and the specific crimes referred to so you know the difference between a theft and a robbery. From what i swa earlier, TXInvestigator gave you some very good legal advice on what is legal. Note that in the new scenario, this is a robbery and deadly force may be used to stop a person fleeing from a robbery if no other force would recover the property.

On all of the legal questions, remember that, as a general rule, it is illegal to shoot people in Texas. All Chapter 9 does is a defense to prosecution. This means that you may be arrested and charged, and win at the trial but you would still go through the whole enchilada.

Many other people are answering if the shooting would be justified morally or ethically. This is always a personal question that only you can answer for you. Each person makes his own decision on when he feels comfortable shooting. Some will almost never shoot over property while others will defend a single miscellaneous piece of paper. My answer will not be the same as yours, in all likelihood. As you think of what you would really do in these cases, remember the answers you got here. These people are all more pro-gun than the average citizen who will be on your jury. It may make a difference in your answer for real life cases.

Well said!

[NguyenVanDon]

I think you are getting several different questions answered, instead of just what you asked.

To get the strict answer on what is legal, study the Penal Code, both Chapter 9 on justifications, and the specific crimes referred to so you know the difference between a theft and a robbery. From what i swa earlier, TXInvestigator gave you some very good legal advice on what is legal. Note that in the new scenario, this is a robbery and deadly force may be used to stop a person fleeing from a robbery if no other force would recover the property.

On all of the legal questions, remember that, as a general rule, it is illegal to shoot people in Texas. All Chapter 9 does is a defense to prosecution. This means that you may be arrested and charged, and win at the trial but you would still go through the whole enchilada.

Many other people are answering if the shooting would be justified morally or ethically. This is always a personal question that only you can answer for you. Each person makes his own decision on when he feels comfortable shooting. Some will almost never shoot over property while others will defend a single miscellaneous piece of paper. My answer will not be the same as yours, in all likelihood. As you think of what you would really do in these cases, remember the answers you got here. These people are all more pro-gun than the average citizen who will be on your jury. It may make a difference in your answer for real life cases.

[Spacedoggy]

It's 2pm. Outside the grocery store. The guy runs and Tackles me on the floor, takes my wallet, got up, and started running.

Am allowed to shoot him?

Once again are you really willing to take a human life over a few dollars? Not to keep repeating myself but at that point the fight is over and in my opinion there is no need to shoot. One of the few pieces of property I would be willing to kill to recover would be 1 of my guns not much else would be worth me shooting over.

+1

[kauboy]

Agreed!

But here's a good hypothetical to grind your gears on.

If this same situation takes place, but as in my instance on the first page, the thief takes your gun, would it be justifiable to shoot him?
Same time of day, same non-assaulting act. It is still only a theft committed during the day. But now, he has a deadly weapon... YOURS. And he is hot-footing it for all he is worth in the opposite direction. If 3(b) is now met, but not 2, is it justifiable to shoot him with your backup?

[txinvestigator]

Agreed!

But here's a good hypothetical to grind your gears on.

If this same situation takes place, but as in my instance on the first page, the thief takes your gun, would it be justifiable to shoot him?
Same time of day, same non-assaulting act. It is still only a theft committed during the day. But now, he has a deadly weapon... YOURS. And he is hot-footing it for all he is worth in the opposite direction. If 3(b) is now met, but not 2, is it justifiable to shoot him with your backup?

You are not justified to use deadly force to recover property taken from a theft during the day. Period. There is no provision for what type of property is taken.

And the justification for using deadly force to recover property is either 9.42 (A) OR (B). Both don't have to be met.

TPC
§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:

(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.

[kauboy]

I thought that might be the answer, and I'm curious to know something further.

If he used my gun to commit another crime, could I be held liable by any means?

[txinvestigator]

I thought that might be the answer, and I'm curious to know something further.

If he used my gun to commit another crime, could I be held liable by any means?

Criminally, no. Civilly, that is a matter of fact for a judge or jury to decide if you were sued.

[kauboy]

Thanks