TexasCHLforum.com

I've been thinking a lot about this case. Would it the outcome be any different now that we have HB823? I would think that it could be argued the CHL was protected under HB823 because the requirement for concealment there is "The person is not carrying a handgun in plain view", implying the physical sight of a handgun, not just the "presense" of it. The CHL satisfied every other requirement for "traveling" so could it be possible he would have a good defense post 9/1/2005 (I'm assuming this event happened before HB823).

Also, gigag04's verbal warning saying he is armed shouldn't get him in the same trouble as this CHL. gigag04 never (would have) said what he is armed with. It could be a legal knife, pepper spray, or a stun gun.

ThunderDownUnder wrote:"Nope, this is a fight you can't win. " I know you can kick my butt but I not going to let it get that far. You'll have a bullet hole in you before that happens." The other driver asked if he had a gun. The CHL nodded affirmative.

First this was a great lesson and thanks for sharing. I'm a little surprised he was charged with failure to conceal, but I guess I can see their point.

What if the CHL, when asked if he had a gun, took a polite as possible "you tell me" attitude? He wouldn't have admitted to anything, so what could they charge him with?

I've wondered myself what I would say in a situation when asked if I have a gun and I figured not clearly answering their question would be the best bet, like saying "you tell me" (not in a threatening manner though, almost jokingly). On one hand I wouldn't want them to think "ok this guy isn't armed, let's jump him," but I also couldn't afford the $11,000 legal bill and possible jail time for saying "yes."

Let's say the CHL's reponse stopped with, "this is one fight you can't win," not including the bullet hole threat. The driver of the other car makes the connection and asks if he has a gun. What would you guys say?

nitrogen wrote: My fiancee thinks I should invest in one of those handheld zapper things. After seeing news reports about people being killed by tasers, it makes me think seriously about this before getting one.

While I won't disagree that people probably have died from "stun guns" under certain circumstances, don't forget that the media has a bad reputation for blowing things terribly out of proportion. I would consider it a viable option for non-lethal self-defense.

gigag04 wrote: You have yet to comment on what you would do. Apparently you disagree with my prognosis so how about posting your own thoughts??? I'm curious on what the "right" course of action is.

Sorry, forgot that was the original question here. I don't really disagree with what you said. The thing about having to retreat is something I don't like but don't want that to be the thing that convicts me if I have to use force. I'm hoping that'll change in 2007. Florida's recent changes are maybe the most important things we need next session (no civil suit if not guilty/no billed, and extension of castle doctrine). So again, I didn't mean to criticize negatively what you said, because retreat wouldn't really be the first thing I'd want to do (unless the attacker was out of shape, I'm not a particulary fast runner... just average I'd say). Just trying to make you aware of the potential legal problem, no moral objections there.

I don't think there is one "right" answer to this situation. I'd have to reflect more on this to give a full answer, but I'd probably try to retreat and quickly assess whether or not I would be successful in doing so. If not, I'd turn around, draw, and hope the threat stops (either by their own decision or with use of force). If you can make it to your property in time and still felt you were being threatened, you could make it known you are armed. Being on your property, you can carry however you want, open or concealed. Just be careful not to waive it around in a threatening manner. I would consider doing this (making it known that I was armed) if it was an option. If the streets were crowded and in the day time, I wouldn't do it, but if it was night time and just me and the BG, I'd keep it as an option. Although now that I think about, you've just shown the BG where you live, which as discussed earlier, is really not a good thing.

I think simply put, I'd retreat while it was still a possibility as the law requires me, but then use force from there. Use your best judgement to determine where to draw that line.

gigag04 wrote:Figure I'll take first stab at it.

Once the suspect starts running towards us, my girlfriend (imaginary) would run to the house and call the cops. I would turn, put my hand on my kimber, but with my shirt covering it (it is usually at like 4 o clock behind me and thus hidden) and yell "STOP - I am feeling threatened by you, I am armed and willing to defend myself"

(my reasoning here is that regardless of what you say, words are merely words, and actions are what matter in court).

If remains running towards me, now at 20 ft or so, I would draw down, click safety off (finger off triger duh...) and yell "STOP GET ON THE GROUND NOW" at this point I'm fearing a knife or gun attack or worse.

If the assault continues, I would strongly considering stopping it with deadly force but I'm not totally sold on the legal ramifications. This may be a great time of OC (I should get some).

Maybe I'm jumping the gun so to speak but this is probably what my first reaction would be.

Critiques?

Unless you are on your property your number one duty in Texas is to retreat whether you like it or not. If this guy was much faster of a runner than you retreat may not be an option, as you could only buy yourself some extra time before he caught up.

This also brings up the subject of having full knowledge of the situation. Maybe some guy is following you and starts running faster towards you as you are about to leave his sight. This would be unusual behavior, but what if they guy was trying to return your wallet you accidentally dropped and wanted to hand it over before losing sight of you. A verbal warning should clear that up pretty quick as you would have done. Just worth considering though.

Does yelling, "STOP - I am feeling threatened by you, I am armed and willing to defend myself" constitute a threat of deadly force? Instead of saying you are armed, would it be better to say you will "stop" them if they continue?