Effective 1-September, the intentional display of a handgun has a new friend in the recently enacted SB-299.
On that date it it will be a defense to prosecution to display a handgun in situations where "use of force or deadly force" would have been justified.
Previously, the intentional display of a handgun was limited to "deadly force" situations only.
I am considering recalibrating my "when to draw" mindset in light of this change in law.
So as not to distract from the discussion of "Sliders", I've started a new thread here..... http://texaschlforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=68416" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Your input is appreciated.
Search found 6 matches
Return to “"Sliders" a growing problem”
- Fri Aug 16, 2013 11:54 am
- Forum: The Crime Blotter
- Topic: "Sliders" a growing problem
- Replies: 65
- Views: 8043
- Fri Aug 09, 2013 12:23 am
- Forum: The Crime Blotter
- Topic: "Sliders" a growing problem
- Replies: 65
- Views: 8043
Re: "Sliders" a growing problem
Its Bush's fault, of course.ddurkof wrote: Yea, the world is that screwed up.
- Thu Aug 08, 2013 5:02 pm
- Forum: The Crime Blotter
- Topic: "Sliders" a growing problem
- Replies: 65
- Views: 8043
Re: "Sliders" a growing problem
KeithB & AIT, thanks for the analysis... Looks like we all agree where the point of contention is, but without any clear case law it looks like there is sufficient ambiguity in the law that it could go either way... "Beyond edge of certainty" on this particular issue..
Caveat Actor
Caveat Actor
- Thu Aug 08, 2013 3:04 pm
- Forum: The Crime Blotter
- Topic: "Sliders" a growing problem
- Replies: 65
- Views: 8043
Re: "Sliders" a growing problem
I'm just curious where the hard stops are...gigag04 wrote:I think if we really want to be responsible in our use of DF, then the question is better framed "do I absolutely have to shoot this person doing XYZ"
(all my opinion)
Count me among those that would not shoot to stop a fleeing burglar (I'm fairly well insured for most things), but it's always good to know (with certainty) that if some extraordinary situation emerged, where the boundaries exactly are...
So... Are 30.01, 30.02 and 30.03 all and each included in the 9.42 definition of "Burglary"?
- Thu Aug 08, 2013 1:20 pm
- Forum: The Crime Blotter
- Topic: "Sliders" a growing problem
- Replies: 65
- Views: 8043
Re: "Sliders" a growing problem
Are you suggesting that "Burglary of a Vehicle" doesn't meet the definition of "Burglary" in PC 9.42.??MasterOfNone wrote:"Burglary of a vehicle" and "Burglary" are NOT the same crime. Nor is one a subset of the other. Burglary is a crime under section 30.02, which does not include 30.04 (Burglary of a vehicle). They are commonly confused because "Burglary of a vehicle" sounds like a specific kind of "Burglary."
I would certainly disagree.... "Burglary of a vehicle" is, IN MY OPINION, "Burglary"... But.. I am not a lawyer, just a guy that sleeps at HI Express occasionally.
Any TX legal eagles care to clarify
Is "Burglary of a vehicle" (PC 30.04) included in the definition of "Burglary" in PC 9.42?
Noting that "Burglary" as defined by PC 30.01 is that of a "habitation or building".
IMO, 9.42 refers to any kind of Burglary and Section 30 provides definitions of several kinds of Burglaries that would ALL provide sufficient justification under 9.42.
Just my opinion. IANAL.
- Thu Aug 08, 2013 12:40 pm
- Forum: The Crime Blotter
- Topic: "Sliders" a growing problem
- Replies: 65
- Views: 8043
Re: "Sliders" a growing problem
The OP describes a BURGLARY, possibly even ROBBERY. Not THEFT. Relevant portions in bold.TexasCajun wrote:Use of force? Yes per PC 9.41. But the use of deadly force would only be permitted if the theft were occurring at night. Much easier & simpler to lock the doors or stand where you can see all of your vehicle's doors.
Sec. 31.03. THEFT. (a) A person commits an offense if he unlawfully appropriates property with intent to deprive the owner of property.
Sec. 30.04. BURGLARY OF VEHICLES. (a) A person commits an offense if, without the effective consent of the owner, he breaks into or enters a vehicle or any part of a vehicle with intent to commit any felony or theft.
(b) For purposes of this section, "enter" means to intrude:
(1) any part of the body; or
(2) any physical object connected with the body.
Sec. 29.02. ROBBERY. (a) A person commits an offense if, in the course of committing theft as defined in Chapter 31 and with intent to obtain or maintain control of the property, he:
(1) intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly causes bodily injury to another; or
(2) intentionally or knowingly threatens or places another in fear of imminent bodily injury or death.
(b) An offense under this section is a felony of the second degree.
Sec. 9.42. DEADLY FORCE TO PROTECT PROPERTY. A person is justified in using deadly force against another to protect land or tangible, movable property:
(1) if he would be justified in using force against the other under Section 9.41; and
(2) when and to the degree he reasonably believes the deadly force is immediately necessary:
(A) to prevent the other's imminent commission of arson, burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, theft during the nighttime, or criminal mischief during the nighttime; or
(B) to prevent the other who is fleeing immediately after committing, burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, or theft during the nighttime from escaping with the property; and
(3) he reasonably believes that:
(A) the land or property cannot be protected or recovered by any other means; or
(B) the use of force other than deadly force to protect or recover the land or property would expose the actor or another to a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury.
