IANAL, but if the device is designed to ward off squirrels, then I think the first requirement would be met (not designed to cause death / serious bodily injury). As far as reasonableness, considering that it would be legal in Texas to kill the criminal the moment he has your flag in his hands and has started to flee, I think a slight shock is reasonable. But then again, IANAL. It probably depends on how many liberals you get on your jury (Katy is a bit of a crapshoot in that regard).oljames3 wrote: ↑Wed Aug 26, 2020 3:11 pmWhile potentially emotionally satisfying, this is probably not be legal under Texas law. https://statutes.capitol.texas.gov/SOTW ... m/PE.9.htmSec. 9.44. USE OF DEVICE TO PROTECT PROPERTY. The justification afforded by Sections 9.41 and 9.43 applies to the use of a device to protect land or tangible, movable property if:
(1) the device is not designed to cause, or known by the actor to create a substantial risk of causing, death or serious bodily injury; and
(2) use of the device is reasonable under all the circumstances as the actor reasonably believes them to be when he installs the device.
This is a good example of how Texas laws are a bit backwards w/r/t self defense, IMHO. It is legal to use deadly force to prevent a criminal from escaping with stolen property at night (assuming you can't chase him down, etc), but it might not be legal to give the same criminal a small shock to prevent him from stealing the property in the first place?