Not so hypothetical question regarding right to defend...

[Solsand]

Scenario is this- LTC holder walks out of a local business (where carry is allowed) to find a man breaking into their vehicle. Holder legally allowed to pull their weapon to stop this crime in progress? Or to shoot if they refuse to comply?

What about same exact scenario in your home driveway?

[Pariah3j]

What time of day is this hypothetical happening ? It does make the difference for the use of deadly force as I understand it.

[locke_n_load]

You have the right to use force to keep someone from stealing your property, so you are covered to use the THREAT of deadly force, i.e. drawing your firearm. NOT the actual use of deadly force, unless certain conditions apply (items not covered by insurance/invaluable/your life or someone else's is in danger, nighttime, etc.). Read the penal code for those exceptions. I wouldn't risk going to jail over an unjustified use of deadly force for someone running off with my GPS/laptop/etc. after I told them to stop.
Now if they pull a weapon, charge you, etc., then have the right to use deadly force.
Home driveway, I believe the same rules apply.

[Middle Age Russ]

Whether you are acting within the law or not is just one of the issues. The bigger question in this scenario is should you introduce deadly force from a risk versus reward perspective. Reward = recovery of personal property (car and its contents). Risks include shooting a by-stander inadvertently, damaging someone else's property, possible arrest and trial before a jury of your peers who will assess the "reasonableness" of your actions based only on the facts presented and allowed at trial. To me, personal property isn't worth the potential risks involved, and I'll do what I can to be a good witness.

[casp625]

Scenario is this- LTC holder walks out of a local business (where carry is allowed) to find a man breaking into their vehicle. Holder legally allowed to pull their weapon to stop this crime in progress? Or to shoot if they refuse to comply?

What about same exact scenario in your home driveway?

Since you edited your post a bit, the answer depends. You can use force, but not deadly force to protect your property. Pulling your gun is a use of force (see below). Theft during the night time, however, allows for deadly force.

Sec. 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.

Sec. 9.41. PROTECTION OF ONE'S OWN PROPERTY. (a) A person in lawful possession of land or tangible, movable property is justified in using force against another when and to the degree the actor reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary to prevent or terminate the other's trespass on the land or unlawful interference with the property.
(b) A person unlawfully dispossessed of land or tangible, movable property by another is justified in using force against the other when and to the degree the actor reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary to reenter the land or recover the property if the actor uses the force immediately or in fresh pursuit after the dispossession and:
(1) the actor reasonably believes the other had no claim of right when he dispossessed the actor; or
(2) the other accomplished the dispossession by using force, threat, or fraud against the actor.

Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 883, ch. 399, Sec. 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974. Amended by Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 900, Sec. 1.01, eff. Sept. 1, 1994.


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.

[Solsand]

Whether you are acting within the law or not is just one of the issues. The bigger question in this scenario is should you introduce deadly force from a risk versus reward perspective. Reward = recovery of personal property (car and its contents). Risks include shooting a by-stander inadvertently, damaging someone else's property, possible arrest and trial before a jury of your peers who will assess the "reasonableness" of your actions based only on the facts presented and allowed at trial. To me, personal property isn't worth the potential risks involved, and I'll do what I can to be a good witness.

Yeah I mainly want to know if you are acting within the law. I get all the moral and legal dilemmas associated with this action but are you legally within your rights to do so?

Also... So castle doctrine does not cover in the home driveway version?

[casp625]

Whether you are acting within the law or not is just one of the issues. The bigger question in this scenario is should you introduce deadly force from a risk versus reward perspective. Reward = recovery of personal property (car and its contents). Risks include shooting a by-stander inadvertently, damaging someone else's property, possible arrest and trial before a jury of your peers who will assess the "reasonableness" of your actions based only on the facts presented and allowed at trial. To me, personal property isn't worth the potential risks involved, and I'll do what I can to be a good witness.

Also... So castle doctrine does not cover in the home driveway version?

Read section 9.41 & 9.42 from my post above. Generally, if it's not nighttime, then they are merely trespassing on your property to break into your vehicle so you can use force, not deadly force.

[Middle Age Russ]

"Stand your ground" and "Castle Doctrine" laws codify that there is no requirement to retreat before acting in defense of your life or someone else's. Where a vehicle sits doesn't change the fact that it is a vehicle and therefore personal property. Casp625 has posted relevant sections of the law.

[Solsand]

"Stand your ground" and "Castle Doctrine" laws codify that there is no requirement to retreat before acting in defense of your life or someone else's. Where a vehicle sits doesn't change the fact that it is a vehicle and therefore personal property. Casp625 has posted relevant sections of the law.

Yes sorry. I didn't see his post until after I hit SUBMIT...

[casp625]

Keep in mind, it is completely different if you are actually inside the vehicle and they try to break in and/or force you out.

Sec. 9.32. DEADLY FORCE IN DEFENSE OF PERSON. (a) A person is justified in using deadly force against another:
(1) if the actor would be justified in using force against the other under Section 9.31; and
(2) when and to the degree the actor reasonably believes the deadly force is immediately necessary:
(A) to protect the actor against the other's use or attempted use of unlawful deadly force; or
(B) to prevent the other's imminent commission of aggravated kidnapping, murder, sexual assault, aggravated sexual assault, robbery, or aggravated robbery.
(b) The actor's belief under Subsection (a)(2) that the deadly force was immediately necessary as described by that subdivision is presumed to be reasonable if the actor:
(1) knew or had reason to believe that the person against whom the deadly force was used:
(A) unlawfully and with force entered, or was attempting to enter unlawfully and with force, the actor's occupied habitation, vehicle, or place of business or employment;
(B) unlawfully and with force removed, or was attempting to remove unlawfully and with force, the actor from the actor's habitation, vehicle, or place of business or employment; or
(C) was committing or attempting to commit an offense described by Subsection (a)(2)(B);
(2) did not provoke the person against whom the force was used; and
(3) was not otherwise engaged in criminal activity, other than a Class C misdemeanor that is a violation of a law or ordinance regulating traffic at the time the force was used.
(c) A person who has a right to be present at the location where the deadly force is used, who has not provoked the person against whom the deadly force is used, and who is not engaged in criminal activity at the time the deadly force is used is not required to retreat before using deadly force as described by this section.
(d) For purposes of Subsection (a)(2), in determining whether an actor described by Subsection (c) reasonably believed that the use of deadly force was necessary, a finder of fact may not consider whether the actor failed to retreat.

[WTR]

We had a case of an Attorney and his wife returning to their car after dinner (at night). A burglar was attempting to break into their car. The attorney is a CHL holder. He shot and and killed the burglar. He did not give the Police a statement. He HIRED an attorney. Case went away.......Hire an attorney and don't speak to the Police.

[GlockBrandGlock]

Now if they pull a weapon, charge you, etc., then have the right to use deadly force.
Home driveway, I believe the same rules apply.

What if you pull a weapon as a use of force to stop the burglary, then they charge at you? Would that constitute using deadly force? Or would they need a weapon in hand? I know you're not a lawyer, but I'd like another opinion, or know if there is already a precedent for this.

[mrvmax]

I would only draw my pistol if and when he attacks me while I am taking his picture and calling the police.

I agree, I made the decision to never involve myself for property related issues, I don't think it is worth the possible trouble, I have insurance to cover those issues. If I ever draw my weapon it will be for a life or death situation.

[locke_n_load]

Now if they pull a weapon, charge you, etc., then have the right to use deadly force.
Home driveway, I believe the same rules apply.

What if you pull a weapon as a use of force to stop the burglary, then they charge at you? Would that constitute using deadly force? Or would they need a weapon in hand? I know you're not a lawyer, but I'd like another opinion, or know if there is already a precedent for this.

If they charge you, and you have a firearm in hand (they have nothing in hand), you would still be justified in using deadly force. If they are fixing to use force against you, you can go a level above that to stop the threat, the level above being deadly force.

Also, think of it this way - guy is charging me and we get into a scuffle, he gets lucky and knocks me out, and could potentially kill me when I'm unconscious. When can you shoot? Before they get to you. You don't want to decide to shoot after the guy is already on you. That is too late.

This only applies however, if you did not initiate the encounter. What I mean by that is if you start a fight, and then drew/shoot, the shooting would not have been legal.