TexasCHLforum.com

Excaliber wrote:
My suggested approach starts with asking yourself a few questions (preferably well ahead of time - during an incident there will be too much going on to do a good job here):

1. Am I willing to risk being seriously injured or killed to protect my property?
2. What are my options for direct intervention while staying within the law?
3. Am I willing to act on the edge of justification where my actions could easily be interpreted as unlawful, at least initially, with the risk that I could be arrested on a felony, endanger my livelihood, and have my weapons seized and vindication, if it ever comes, may take years?
4. What is the law enforcement response time like where I live?
5. Is there a point where possible permanent loss of the property in question may be an acceptable option in order to achieve my objectives in the answers to questions 1 through 3?

My priority order for these incidents is:

1. Come through the incident alive.
2. Come through the incident without serious injuries to any innocent party (and ideally without serious injuries to anyone).
3. Stay solidly within the law so I don't incur $40,000 in legal bills in order to protect a $2500 trailer
4. Protect and retain the property that is rightfully mine.

Yes, I see now Excaliber you did/do tender serious thought on the question. My response was/is more superficial. I have reading glasses now and it is easier to follow a long discourse (my concentration is not what it used to be).

1. Am I willing to risk being seriously injured or killed to protect my property?
Property can be replaced. If that is a serious risk, no, if it is avoidable. But, how do we measure the risk level? Depends on the situation.
If the risk is low enough the answer is probably yes.
2. What are my options for direct intervention while staying within the law?
I don't care to brandish a weapon even on my own property. If a weapon is out it's because it is needed for protection and the possibilty of being used is real.
Before a firearm ever came out there would be a verbal admonishment - unless the perpetrators were in dangerous proximity.
3. Am I willing to act on the edge of justification where my actions could easily be interpreted as unlawful, at least initially, with the risk that I could be arrested on a felony, endanger my livelihood, and have my weapons seized and vindication, if it ever comes, may take years?
To this question the answer is no. However, if it is a clearly justified situation of self preservation it is a different matter.
4. What is the law enforcement response time like where I live?
The farm could take 15 minutes? Never had to try it. Sheriff's dept. There are parts of the farm where cell phones do not work so getting any response could be dicey. Have a house in town and everything would be different there because law enforcement is so accessible.
5. Is there a point where possible permanent loss of the property in question may be an acceptable option in order to achieve my objectives in the answers to questions 1 through 3?
Yes.
Seems like most of the answers above could change depending on the situation however.

Excaliber, I cannot do your questions justice because they are so couched in specificities that could vary so widely based on the situation. I think my "problem" with this whole topic is that in my mind I am rolling all of this property theft issue with criminals invading personal property into protection of the individual rather than the property.
I do think the OP should have interceded to protect his property.
He should have let the criminals flee when they chose that option. If the warning shots had been during the act to stop it and not after it would be different.
It looks like I am having a hard time seperating the "fear" of bodily harm by the same criminals that would steal property and/or trespass (with bad intent).
Excaliber, you appear to have the benefit of serious experience/analysis of these issues.
I do not know the answers; I don't plan on rolling over for any criminals however.
I just do not know. Actually kind of sorry I jumped in here. I am not sure you can analyze this situation in advance there are so many variables...

EDIT: one last point. It is difficult to seperate all of this into theory. Fact of the matter is that many petty crimes turn into assaults and even homicides when the perp is caught in the act. I guess this what-if analysis if good but when the situation presents itself there will be unique circumstances that will dictate actions. Everything is in a different light if the trespassers can potentially harm the victim.

Excaliber, I guess I could not read your posts at the depth at you would wish in the middle of the day. I had a sincere desire to understand the issues here.
I am dissapointed you would deride my efforts. I am not here for a debate or devil's advocacy; I am an old guy and was trying to understand. Sorry about that.

I don't want to go to far with "what if" but if you were carjacked and armed would you let a thief drive off with your car?
Would you let a thief take your car from your driveway?
What is the line? Is it a dollar amount?

Most of use are comfortable with "stopping the crime or criminal" if we are concerned for ours/our family's safety.

Where does trespass fit in? You would not fire a shot to scare an intruder from your house?
Nighttime is certainly elevated a level.

I am not certain the OP was wrong firing a shot on his property to alert criminal trespassers to leave his property and protect his family.
I am seeing here it is unlawful to fire a firearm on your own 5 acre+ property in Texas?
A good idea? Possibly not. How far do you let the criminals go before you act?

Why might you feel justified saving your car in a public area and not your trailer/horse/cow/goat on your own property?
I'm not trying to play Devil's Advocate; you guys have raised some good questions.

I know I will protect my family from harm. Property? Joe Horn did not get a lot of criticism from the law abiding on his decision to protect his neighbor's property - not his own. Of course, he says he fired when they came in his yard and he felt threatened. I can tell you I am not going to shoot someone for trespassing. If I am frightened/startled/in fear at night the circumstances with dictate but I am not letting anyone invade my immediate proximity that creates a risk - certainly on my own property where they are trespassing. Let's not forget the men at the Christian Recording Studio in Garland and the many others. In the OPs scenario the criminals were fleeing - let them flee; he helped them along. Other situations dictate other actions.

EDIT: I agree the point here is that at the point they were fleeing there was no reason to shoot. And, no reason to fire warning shots.
If they had persisted would you have rather fired warning shots or shot them or let them take the trailer?

I understand the flight part. As someone who has a farm I understand the law enforcement response time part.
I certainaly don't see shooting people for trespassing even when marked.
I also see horrific crime and criminals these days.

So, beyond criminal trespassers on the OPs property with his family present... what would all of the "let them leave" suggestors suggest if they had continued to hook up the trailer to try to tow it off?

I will tell you I do not have patience for criminal trespass. It's not worth shooting someone but how do you know their ultimate intentions on your property. There are kidnappings and killings every day. And, we've had a trailer stolen and it's obviously not fun. Shooting is a serious issue and a last resort to "stop" a serious level crime. Now what do you do if they continue? Yes, I know the thing to do is let them leave so they can come another day but what do you do it they do not desist? I am not trying to stir this up; I am asking a serious question about what you think you should do if the crime continues. I don't care to shoot anyone - certainly not over property. But, in the same vein of what is proper what would you do?