...and that justification has to be proven in court by the defendant AND his mouthpiece.anygunanywhere wrote:From the code for your reference:
CIVIL PRACTICE AND REMEDIES CODE
TITLE 4. LIABILITY IN TORT
CHAPTER 83. USE OF FORCE OR DEADLY FORCE
Sec. 83.001. CIVIL IMMUNITY. A defendant who uses force or deadly force that is justified under Chapter 9, Penal Code, is immune from civil liability for personal injury or death that results from the defendant's use of force or deadly force, as applicable.
Added by Acts 1995, 74th Leg., ch. 235, Sec. 2, eff. Sept. 1, 1995.
Amended by:
Acts 2007, 80th Leg., R.S., Ch. 1 (S.B. 378), Sec. 4, eff. September 1, 2007.
Search found 3 matches
- Sun Sep 03, 2017 8:56 am
- Forum: Gun and/or Self-Defense Related Political Issues
- Topic: Shooting looters
- Replies: 29
- Views: 8733
Re: Shooting looters
- Sat Sep 02, 2017 11:09 pm
- Forum: Gun and/or Self-Defense Related Political Issues
- Topic: Shooting looters
- Replies: 29
- Views: 8733
Re: Shooting looters
......unless he/she could get a nice retainer up front? It's all about the money, not what's right or wrong.jmorris wrote:The law still allows them to file, but it'd have to be a pretty stupid lawyer to take a civil case where a shooting was justified.anygunanywhere wrote:Ummm no. You are protected from civil suit in a justified self defense shooting under Texas law.bayou wrote:It wouldn't be the criminal courts but the civil courts one would have to worry about...
- Fri Sep 01, 2017 9:37 pm
- Forum: Gun and/or Self-Defense Related Political Issues
- Topic: Shooting looters
- Replies: 29
- Views: 8733
Re: Shooting looters
If you shoot someone for any reason anywhere, you are subject to legal action so, be prepared to defend your action/s with your time and your money. IANAL.
BTW, I think looters, especially in an instance such as this, should be shot on sight regardless of race, sex or age.
BTW, I think looters, especially in an instance such as this, should be shot on sight regardless of race, sex or age.