TexasCHLforum.com

Scott Farkus wrote:the instructor said that fists alone were never justification to use deadly force.

I empathize with his motivation. . . trying to stop vigilantism and/or prevent hot heads from thinking they have the ultimate bar brawl trump card, but it's just not accurate.

"Almost never" would have been more responsible to say, followed by an explanation of disparity of force.

My instructor had me (I'm 6'5" and was in my mid-20s for my first class) stand up next to a WWII vet and used that to respectfully demonstrate the concept.

JustMe wrote:

Purplehood wrote:You were never a new poster? I know that I was...

Yes, I was--and am still new. but my first question wasn't--"Can I shoot someone"

My guess is that most of them think of the question, do some Google searching, and stumble upon our little community. The question and search for clarity in the law leads them here, so naturally, it's the first thing they ask.

I was obsessed with the "what-ifs" when I first got my CHL because my instructor did a poor job explaining a threat continuum and how to set a threshold of "Do I fear for my life or serious bodily injury?"

----
To OP:
As with most questions here, it depends. We can't answer every scenario definitively, but we can try to communicate a framework to use for your decision making.

You need to establish a threat continuum. . . and determine the threshold for different actions. What level of fear would make you draw? What level of fear would make you shoot? What is a clear line of demarcation to draw between the two?

For example, "If they block the door, I'm going to verbally demand they move. If they demand my money or respond with a threat, I'm going to draw. If they begins to attack, I'm going to shoot."

In the back of your mind (or preferably, before you're in the situation), consider the questions, "What do I have to do to survive" and then temper that against, "How will that look being explained to a jury?"

If you're 78 and there's one attacker using his fists in his early 30's, it's easier to explain your actions.

If you're 30 and there's one attacker using his fists in his late 70's, it's going to be very hard to explain your actions. Change it slightly so that he has a knife or gun, and it's easy to explain your actions.

If you're 24 and there's one attacker using fists about your same size. . . it gets a little murky to explain. Change it by adding a second attacker, and it gets a little easier.

Read the law and understand the requirements for:
- Threatening the use of force
- Using force
- Threatening the use of deadly force
- Using deadly force

Welcome to the forum!