Whats the answer........

[CaptDave]

"Forget double-tap, I'm going to slide-lock"

Seriously, as he was in commission of a felony - against me - I would suggest that he not move very much until the boys in blue got there. I would be looking for -and expecting compliance. Just because I have his gun doesn't mean - to me anyway- that the threat is gone.

And FWIW: I'm legally justified to threaten with deadly force as follows:

PC §9.04. THREATS AS JUSTIFIABLE FORCE. The threat of force
is justified when the use of force is justified by this chapter. For purposes
of this section, a threat to cause death or serious bodily injury by
the production of a weapon or otherwise, as long as the actor's purpose
is limited to creating an apprehension that he will use deadly
force if necessary, does not constitute the use of deadly force.

You quoted the right section, but let me ask; what does he being in commission of a felony relate to?

I'm just taking a wild guess here, but I'm thinking these are probably felonies:

PC §9.32. DEADLY FORCE IN DEFENSE OF PERSON. (a) A person
is justified in using deadly force against another:...
......
(B) to prevent the other's imminent commission of aggravated
kidnapping, murder, sexual assault, aggravated sexual assault,
robbery, or aggravated robbery.

[gigag04]

"Forget double-tap, I'm going to slide-lock"

Seriously, as he was in commission of a felony - against me - I would suggest that he not move very much until the boys in blue got there. I would be looking for -and expecting compliance. Just because I have his gun doesn't mean - to me anyway- that the threat is gone.

And FWIW: I'm legally justified to threaten with deadly force as follows:

PC §9.04. THREATS AS JUSTIFIABLE FORCE. The threat of force
is justified when the use of force is justified by this chapter. For purposes
of this section, a threat to cause death or serious bodily injury by
the production of a weapon or otherwise, as long as the actor's purpose
is limited to creating an apprehension that he will use deadly
force if necessary, does not constitute the use of deadly force.

You quoted the right section, but let me ask; what does he being in commission of a felony relate to?

I'm just taking a wild guess here, but I'm thinking these are probably felonies:

PC §9.32. DEADLY FORCE IN DEFENSE OF PERSON. (a) A person
is justified in using deadly force against another:...
......
(B) to prevent the other's imminent commission of aggravated
kidnapping, murder, sexual assault, aggravated sexual assault,
robbery, or aggravated robbery.

But there are felonies that do not have a defense for use of deadly force. I think this was the point being made possibly?

-nick

[UNBLVR]

How about this...

PC §9.51 ARREST AND SEARCH
(b) A person other than a peace officer (or one acting at his direction) is justified in using force against another when and to the degree the actor reasonably believes the force is necessary to make or assist in making a lawful arrest, or to prevent or assist in preventing escape after lawful arrest if, before using force, the actor manifests his purpose to and the reason for the arrest or reasonably believes his purpose and the reason are already known by or cannot reasonably be made known to the person to be arrested.

Joe

[Geopagus]

I wholeheartedly agree with many of the great posts on this thread. Law can always be interpreted in different ways, as we have seen in the past. Exactly why we cringe when legislators come up with laws, that are ambiguous and vague (i.e. conceal carry while traveling). Based on my interpretation of Texas law in this scenario, the perp. has threatned my life and possibly others with a deadly weapon and I'll be da#$!@ if I'm not going to hold him at gunpoint until two things have occurred. 1) I put enought distance between myself and him. 2) Im positive that he has ended his assault.

[txinvestigator]

"Forget double-tap, I'm going to slide-lock"

Seriously, as he was in commission of a felony - against me - I would suggest that he not move very much until the boys in blue got there. I would be looking for -and expecting compliance. Just because I have his gun doesn't mean - to me anyway- that the threat is gone.

And FWIW: I'm legally justified to threaten with deadly force as follows:

PC §9.04. THREATS AS JUSTIFIABLE FORCE. The threat of force
is justified when the use of force is justified by this chapter. For purposes
of this section, a threat to cause death or serious bodily injury by
the production of a weapon or otherwise, as long as the actor's purpose
is limited to creating an apprehension that he will use deadly
force if necessary, does not constitute the use of deadly force.

You quoted the right section, but let me ask; what does he being in commission of a felony relate to?

I'm just taking a wild guess here, but I'm thinking these are probably felonies:

PC §9.32. DEADLY FORCE IN DEFENSE OF PERSON. (a) A person
is justified in using deadly force against another:...
......
(B) to prevent the other's imminent commission of aggravated
kidnapping, murder, sexual assault, aggravated sexual assault,
robbery, or aggravated robbery.

I was not disagreeing CaptDave. There are several things you might have meant by that.

Under the section you just quoted, you forgot to include this section ...when and to the degree you reasonably believe the deadly force is immediately necessary.... and I am not saying that the section in bold eliminates your justification...quite the contrary in the case we are discussing, but I think we always need to remember those sections.

As gigag04 pointed out, there is no blanket justifications for the use of deadly force for felonies. It is just for those listed.

I thought you might have mentioned felonies because in Texas any person can arrest for a felony committed in that persons presence or view.

Add that to the section quoted by UNBLVR, and you have justification to hold our bad guy at gun point for the police. (at that point you have arrested him)

In the Scenario given, at the point where I have actually disarmed the attackeer (all that training paid off?) and am holding him at gunpoint, I would rely on PC 9.04 and 9.51, as well as Texas Code of Criminal Procedure 14.01, to arrest him by holding him at gunpoint.

I would issue commands to get on the ground and stay down, and I would tell him that he is under arrest. The ball is then in his court.


Texas Code of Criminal Procedure
Art. 14.01. Offense within view.†

(a) A peace officer or any other person, may, without a
warrant, arrest an offender when the offense is committed in his
presence or within his view, if the offense is one classed as a felony
or as an offense against the public peace.

[stevie_d_64]

Ok, y'all were waiting for me huh???

I would say Deadly force is not justified, if you have successfully disarmed them with the weapon they are threatening you with...

And if they are submitting, to your "request", that they remain submissive till Law Enforcement arrives...Then you should be ok...

But...

If they run away, deadly force, in my opinion is not justified either, and you should just be a good witness, and give good information to help L.E. catch the suspect...

But...

If they get up and produce another weapon and continue the attack...Well...Thats your call...

But...(last one)...

If they get up, and they have another partner, and they are armed as well...You have a quick decision to make...If they both attack...

I bet you wish you hadn't left your trusted carry piece at home at that point...

There's just a lot of what-if's in this one...

And its difficult, if not impossible, to assume anyone (criminals) will do anything you expect in situations like this...

So Charles, txinvestigator...Get in here and comment...Y'all are not off the hook on this one...yet...

[stevie_d_64]

Not that its a big deal to me, because I do not really worry about it too much...

What really is the difference between "arrest" and "detainment"???

I have my own conclusions about the concept, but I see these situations come up in discussions quite a bit, and know that if you manage to "detain" someone, they are actually in your charge, and their well being is your responsibility...So that kinda puts the burn on you to make sure they remain "well", till you "officially" relinquish custody to the proper authority...

Now with that said, I believe it is should not be a priority or consideration with people with carry licenses to act as Law Enforcement in this capacity...

So since I do think you do have some liberty to "detain" a suspect (if given that opportunity, due to the situation), you may not in "some" jurisdictions have authority to "arrest"...Which incurs some sort of official capacity on your part which you may not be commissioned to perform...So learning what you can, and cannot do in your area is another step in feeding that mindset and applying it to your life...

So to put it simply, if they get up and run...Let 'em go...

If they get up and threaten you more so...Thats a call you have to make based upon what they do at that time...

I am not Law Enforcement, so I choose to not act, or imply in any capacity to anyone else that I am...

And there is another aspect to this senario, that needs to be addressed, that after proper authority arrives, there are certain things you should do not to allow the situation to go out of control...And thats another, separate discussion...

[nemesis]

Subch. C. PROTECTION OF PERSONS

PC §9.31. SELF-DEFENSE. (a) Except as provided in Subsection (b),
a person is justified in using force against another when and to the
degree he reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary to
protect himself against the other's use or attempted use of unlawful
force.

PC §9.32. DEADLY FORCE IN DEFENSE OF PERSON. (a) A person
is justified in using deadly force against another:
(1) if he would be justified in using force against the other under
Section 9.31;
(2) if a reasonable person in the actor's situation would not have
retreated; and
(3) when and to the degree he reasonably believes the deadly
force is immediately necessary:
(A) to protect himself against the other's use or attempted use
of unlawful deadly force;

[txinvestigator]

Subch. C. PROTECTION OF PERSONS

PC §9.31. SELF-DEFENSE. (a) Except as provided in Subsection (b),
a person is justified in using force against another when and to the
degree he reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary to
protect himself against the other's use or attempted use of unlawful
force.

PC §9.32. DEADLY FORCE IN DEFENSE OF PERSON. (a) A person
is justified in using deadly force against another:
(1) if he would be justified in using force against the other under
Section 9.31;
(2) if a reasonable person in the actor's situation would not have
retreated; and
(3) when and to the degree he reasonably believes the deadly
force is immediately necessary:
(A) to protect himself against the other's use or attempted use
of unlawful deadly force;

Yes we know. That does not tell us what you would do.


Steve, as a private citizen, if you restrain a person, that is, if you cause that person not to be able to leave, you have arrested them. That is regardless of your intent.

If you did so lawfully, as per the CCP, then you are OK. However, if you did not actually have a felony or breach of the public peace, or if the offense did not occur in your presence or view, then you may have committed the crime of "false restraint". Do it with a firearm and move the person, and you could have a kidnapping or aggravated kidnapping charge.

Perhaps a new thread specifically on this subject??

[GrillKing]

Assuming the events occurred as described (you didn't provoke the attack) and if you do manage to separate the weapon from the attacker, and you do not fire the weapon, whether the assailant is compliant or runs away, I cannot imagine any charges being filed against you and almost no jury in Texas would ever convict you of anything. Nuances of the law aside, it ain't gonna happen in my opinion.

If it were me, as long as the assailant was standing in striking distance, he looks at the weapon pointed at him. If he sits or lays down as commanded, the weapon points safely at the ground, while I back away to a relatively safe distance until LEO arrives.

If he lunges, you can assume he is going for the weapon, therefore I fear for my life (assuming he isn't 4' and 75lbs), and I would use the force required to stop the threat.

Just one opinion....

[txinvestigator]

Assuming the events occurred as described (you didn't provoke the attack) and if you do manage to separate the weapon from the attacker, and you do not fire the weapon, whether the assailant is compliant or runs away, I cannot imagine any charges being filed against you and almost no jury in Texas would ever convict you of anything. Nuances of the law aside, it ain't gonna happen in my opinion.

If it were me, as long as the assailant was standing in striking distance, he looks at the weapon pointed at him. If he sits or lays down as commanded, the weapon points safely at the ground, while I back away to a relatively safe distance until LEO arrives.

If he lunges, you can assume he is going for the weapon, therefore I fear for my life (assuming he isn't 4' and 75lbs), and I would use the force required to stop the threat.

Just one opinion....

Texas does not allow deadly force if you are "in fear of your life". AS this is a seperate issue, I am going to start a new thread. I will link to it here after I post it.

http://www.texasshooting.com/TexasCHL_F ... php?t=1595

[gigag04]

If he lunges, you can assume he is going for the weapon, therefore I fear for my life (assuming he isn't 4' and 75lbs), and I would use the force required to stop the threat.

Can you not run away? That would avoid 1.) having to use deadly force and 2.) firing a weapon, the condition of which you are unsure

I still think the run away is the best option if you forgot to carry. If he hawks you down...then use the mystery gun.

-nick

[nitrogen]

With my luck, it'd be an undercover LEO mistaking me for someone he was after. If I got his firearm away from him, i'd probably already be shot by his partner at this point.

Have I mentioned my bad luck at all lately?

[GrillKing]

Agree, to run away is the best option. And is what is required if possible.

[nitrogen]

Oh, to answer:

I'd run, while hopefully figuring out how to operate the disassembly lever, throwing the slide to the north, the barrel to the east, and the mag to the west, while I run south