TexasCHLforum.com

srothstein wrote: But the very same section says it is ANYTHING that in its manner of use can cause seriouJs bodily injury. And Section 9.01 confuses this just a little by redefining deadly force to be the use of anything capable of causing death or serious bodily injury. . .

And all of this shows why the answer really is "it depends" and most cases are very gray areas.

Like sidewalks applied vigorously to the back of a person's head . . .

clarionite wrote:And "It Depends" changes every day in every situation. And boils down to which Investigator you draw, if they're getting along with their spouse and kids that day, which DA you draw and all the little things like what their personal beliefs are about CHL. Then it depends on which lawyer you can afford, and who shows up for jury duty and what kind of mentality they have.

The question that is asked is "When can I shoot?" or "Can I shoot if x happens?" What they really mean is, "Will I have to deal with legal ramifications if I shoot?" The answer to that is a most resounding Yes! You'll have to deal with the police, you more than likely will have to deal with a lawyer. You might have to deal with a DA, a Grand Jury, and later a Judge and Jury. This is a very scary position that most sane people don't want to have to be in. So, while the law may say this or that when it comes to when you should shoot, my personal rule of thumb is only shoot if I feel that myself or some other innocent person may not walk away from the situation if I don't shoot. That way, no matter what I have to deal with on the legal side, I have less to deal with on the conscious side of the matter.

It also depends upon how well you can articulate the facts that led you to believe you were in immediate danger from deadly force, even if the BG turns out to be unarmed.

Contrast how these two descriptions paint a different picture:

Description 1: A guy approached me in a parking lot so I shot him. I don't know if he was armed.

Description 2: I was in a isolated parking lot with no other cars nearby. I saw the man start walking towards me. I altered course and noted he also altered his course to intercept me. I held my weak hand out in a "Stop" gesture and told him to stay away from me, but he kept approaching. I noticeably placed my strong hand on the grip of my handgun while repeating the "Stop" gesture with my other hand and now telling him, "STOP RIGHT THERE, DO NOT APPROACH ME" in a command voice. He continued coming, now at a brisker pace. I drew my handgun at low ready, and told him "I AM WARNING YOU TO STOP APPROACHING ME OR I WILL SHOOT". He started running towards me. I could not see his hands. I concluded if he was still willing to continue what appears to be an attack in that manner even though he knew I was armed, he must have the means to be deadly himself and had bad intentions. I believed the entire approach to be an imminent robbery. Means, motive, opportunity. I stopped the threat.

Same basic facts but two entirely different articulations.

Sounds like a robbery. Guy says, "Give me your money", and he gets perforated.

They should have covered the crimes that give the presumption of justified self defense in your class.