TexasCHLforum.com

I've never been completely comfortable with the language in this section. From what it says, you are justified in using deadly force to stop theft in the nighttime if:

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.

The first one refers to protecting "land or property": "the land or property cannot be protected ...."

So you're justified in using deadly force to stop theft in the nighttime if the land can't be "protected"? I'm having trouble even coming up with a hypothetical example for that one. Anybody have an example of using deadly force to stop theft in the nighttime when "the land cannot be protected"?

And how do you "recover" land, anyway?

As far as property: so if I see a kid grabbing a lawn sprinkler, and he starts to run off with it, I'm legally justified in blowing his head off, since that's the only way I could recover it. Of course, I would never do this over a sprinkler, but that seems to be what the code is saying. Is there a cite somewhere that clarifies?

It's also vague when "protection" is applied to "property." What's a viable example of using deadly force to "protect" property (as opposed to "recover")?

Would anybody care to discuss?