TexasCHLforum.com

Not to get in the middle of you two, but if I were hypothetically carrying in a posted location and saw some crazy pull out a knife and start stabbing someone, I don't believe that I need to run away before shooting the knife wielding nut in defense of his victim. I don't see anything in the law that says that, and I don't think any jury in the world would convict me for saving the person.

If someone attacked me, I believe it would be in my best interest to retreat to cover or escape if possible. That's the case anywhere. If I can't, I think I would be justified in shooting. I understand that I lose the automatic presumption of not having to retreat, so whether I could have will be considered, but if I couldn't retreat and had to act immediately, I don't think I'm automatically going to be convicted because I didn't run three steps backwards first.

Is there specific case law to show that I'm wrong? I would genuinely like to know.

The other day, I went to a friend's child's birthday party at some pizza place. I can't remember the name. The place had very darkly tinted windows all across the front. I decided to conceal because I didn't know most of the people there. Checked for signs on my way in and didn't see any. On the way out, I saw that there was an otherwise compliant 30.07 posted with letter stickers on the inside of the window next to the door. Because of the tinting, it was invisible from the outside. I went out and pointed it out to my wife; she looked right at it and said "what sign?" Had it been a 30.06 and I had to use my gun, one of these "crusading DAs" I keep hearing about might have argued that the sign was valid. These types of situations are what make me interested in knowing exactly what the legal ramifications could be.

Ruark wrote:2. No prepaid legal service on the planet will assist you if you use your firearm while carrying illegally. You would be totally on your own.

I asked the President of the service I use this specific question. He said he cannot advocate carrying past a legally binding sign, but that I would most definitely be covered if I had to use my gun in that situation, as long as I was otherwise justified in doing so. He said they will absolutely not refuse to defend someone over a technicality, and they will always side with the member if there's a question about the legality of their actions. I have received this information both in person and in writing.

I'm sure there are some services for which your statement is true, so it would behoove anyone who has this type of coverage to ask about this scenario. I'm being purposefully vague because I'm not allowed to discuss specific services of this type on this forum, if I remember correctly. (Mods if I'm doing anything wrong by even saying this much, please just let me know.)

ETA: Just in case it's not clear, I am not advocating ignoring signs. The main reason I asked was because I have missed poorly posted (arguably non-compliant) signs a couple times.