Homeowner charged with attempted murder. - Page 10
Page 10 of 13 FirstFirst ... 89101112 ... LastLast
Results 91 to 100 of 130

Thread: Homeowner charged with attempted murder.

  1. #91
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Pasco, Washington, United States
    Posts
    6,271
    Quote Originally Posted by fcmatt View Post
    Then you sir don't live in Texas. With just about any forcible Felony action it is legal to use deadly force to protect your property. This applies especially to the house and vehicle. If you see someone stealing your $400 worth of tires or radio out of your car, you can shoot their butt, even if you aren't IN the vehicle.
    Same in Washington, deadly force can be used to stop a felony.
    “One of the illusions of life is that the present hour is not the critical, decisive one.” – Ralph Waldo Emerson

  2.   
  3. #92
    This is New Orleans we are talking about, a little island of New York and Kalifornia liberal mentality in the south.
    “Religion is an insult to human dignity. Without it you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things.
    But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.” ― Steven Weinberg

  4. Quote Originally Posted by fcmatt View Post
    Then you sir don't live in Texas. With just about any forcible Felony action it is legal to use deadly force to protect your property. This applies especially to the house and vehicle. If you see someone stealing your $400 worth of tires or radio out of your car, you can shoot their butt, even if you aren't IN the vehicle.
    No, I do not live in Texas, but I do have a Texas CCW permit. The instructor of my class (taken earlier this year) would not agree with your statement. Texas Penal Code states:

    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.

    Note that it does not say DEADLY force, and it says "to the degree the actor reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary." Is it necessary to shoot someone stealing $400 tires?

    At the following blog http://che,aperthandirt.com/blog/?p=23805 you will find the statement: "as a general rule, robbery, burglary, and any other felony that would be punishable with the death sentence is justified reason to use deadly force against another human being." I really doubt that even in Texas a thief would be sentenced to death for stealing a $400 tire.

    Deadly force is different from force. Taking a life for a $400 tire is not reasonable in civilized society. Even Sharia law only mandates removing the hand of a thief, not the death penalty.

  5. Quote Originally Posted by Firefighterchen View Post
    Same in Washington, deadly force can be used to stop a felony.
    Stealing $400 worth of tires is a felony in Washington??? Can you point me to that section of the Washington Penal Code?

  6. #95
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Republic of Dead Cell Holler, Occupied Territories of AL, former USA
    Posts
    7,418
    Quote Originally Posted by gmforsythe View Post
    Deadly force may not be used in ANY state to protect property (except in the case of arson), only lives and to prevent SERIOUS bodily injury. I know of no state that permits deadly force (even by LE) to protect property.
    Then before tonight, you have never actually looked for various states' code sections on the use of deadly force. I don't know the exact number right now, I want to say it's like 26 states that have a Castle Doctrine law, which in most, if not all instances, gives the green light to a property owner/occupant to use deadly force to prevent forcible burglary or robbery in any degree, and my state, Alabama, is one such state. Alabama Code Section 13A-3-23 states unambiguously in part:

    A person may use deadly physical force, and is legally presumed to be justified in using deadly physical force in self-defense or the defense of another person pursuant to subdivision (4), if the person reasonably believes that another person is:

    (1) Using or about to use unlawful deadly physical force.


    (2) Using or about to use physical force against an occupant of a dwelling while committing or attempting to commit a burglary of such dwelling.


    (3) Committing or about to commit a kidnapping in any degree, assault in the first or second degree, burglary in any degree, robbery in any degree, forcible rape, or forcible sodomy.

    Try again. Oh, wait, you already did, and you completely misconstrued and selectively quoted Texas' Castle Doctrine verbiage as well:

    Quote Originally Posted by gmforsythe View Post
    Texas Penal Code states:

    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.

    <snip>

    Note that it does not say DEADLY force, and it says "to the degree the actor reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary." Is it necessary to shoot someone stealing $400 tires?
    Why did you leave out the part that I put in bold above? The legal standard is not how much the property is worth or what the property actually is, the standard is the reasonable belief by the property owner/occupant that there is no other way for them to stop the property crime. Simple trespass is all the justification for the use of deadly force that is needed by the property owner/occupant in the section you quoted. They don't have to be stealing, vandalizing or otherwise harming property at all according to that code!

    BTW, selective quoting is very bad form.

    Quote Originally Posted by gmforsythe View Post
    At the following blog http://cheaperthandirt.com/blog/?p=23805 you will find the statement: "as a general rule, robbery, burglary, AND any other felony that would be punishable with the death sentence is justified reason to use deadly force against another human being." I really doubt that even in Texas a thief would be sentenced to death for stealing a $400 tire.
    I'm sorry, I really should take it easier on you, because it's obvious that you're not understanding what you're reading at umm....the Cheaper Than Dirt website! LOL Do you get all of your legal advice from Cheaper Than Dirt? Anyway, the "general rule" is that any burglary or robbery, and any other felony punishable by the death penalty justifies the use of deadly force. It's not either/or, all three types of crimes qualify as justifying deadly force.

    Quote Originally Posted by gmforsythe View Post
    Deadly force is different from force.
    Prove it with definitions cited from the Texas Code. Best of luck with that.

    Quote Originally Posted by gmforsythe View Post
    Taking a life for a $400 tire is not reasonable in civilized society.
    That is your opinion that is quite obviously not supported by the very code section you cited. I generally agree with you that tangible property is not worth taking a life over, but you're citing law, then selectively quoting it to make your point that what is, shouldn't be, and then you make up out of thin air that TX lawmakers intended the word "force" to only mean getting in a fist-fight (or whatever you fantasize it means) and that the word "deadly" must precede it for it to actually mean deadly force. It is impossible to decipher where the law begins, your opinion kicks in, and your fantasies end! Really man, it's not as hard as you're making it. Deadly force is presumed by the law to be justified in or on your own or rented property when someone is breaking or has broken in in most, if not all, of the states with a Castle Doctrine law, regardless of if they're there to steal something, hurt or kidnap you or assault or kill you, or just to use your commode and then be on their way! If they're uninvited and have already committed the crime of breaking and entering, the law allows you to presume their threatening and potentially deadly intentions in those jurisdictions.

    Quote Originally Posted by gmforsythe View Post
    Even Sharia law only mandates removing the hand of a thief, not the death penalty.
    Maybe you'd feel more "civilized" moving to a country that is Sharia-compliant then.

    Quote Originally Posted by gmforsythe View Post
    Stealing $400 worth of tires is a felony in Washington??? Can you point me to that section of the Washington Penal Code?
    If Washington's Castle Doctrine law is as plainly-worded and unambiguous as Alabama's, then any degree of burglary and/or robbery justifies the use of deadly force.

    Stick around man, you might actually learn something. However, people will get tired of doing your homework for you pretty quick. If you're going to make unequivocal statements of fact which are provably false, the best thing you can do for yourself to keep from being embarrassed in public is do your homework before making the statements to verify that your WAGs are correct. (BTW, "WAGs" = "Wild Ass Guesses" just in case you aren't familiar with that common shorthand.)

    Have a good'un....

    Blues
    No one has ever heard me say that I "hate" cops, because I don't. This is why I will never trust one again though: You just never know...

  7. #96
    ezkl2230 Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by gmforsythe View Post
    No, I do not live in Texas, but I do have a Texas CCW permit. The instructor of my class (taken earlier this year) would not agree with your statement. Texas Penal Code states:

    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....
    You need to re-read that section of the law. The level of force required to terminate trespass (that word, terminate, should have given you a clue) is determined by the owner of the property. It places no limit on level of force the property owner determines to be necessary. If the author of the law had wanted to stipulate a limitation on the kind of force that could reasonably be used, he/she would have limited the type of force to less than lethal. My great grandfather (this is in Michigan during the depression) had an employee who was stealing from him, but he could never catch him in the act. He rigged the wheels of his truck with an electrical wire. One morning he came out to find a dead employee - he was electrocuted as he tried to steal the wheels from the truck. The principle was simple: the theft of the tires equalled theft of my great-grandfather's ability to do business. Stealing those tires today equals the same thing - my ability to get to work, bring my kids to school, get to the hospital in case of an emergency. As it happens, Michigan law today doesn't allow the use of deadly force to prevent a property crime, but that doesn't mean that other states don't allow it.

  8. #97
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    1,097
    Quote Originally Posted by dad45acp View Post
    Truth.

    Sent from my NSA screened Smartphone
    You guys are cops aren't you? Is that why you have your heads stuck something?

  9. #98
    Quote Originally Posted by JimTh View Post
    You guys are cops aren't you? Is that why you have your heads stuck something?
    You're replying to a quote I made weeks ago? Way to catch up. I couldnt even remember what this thread is about. And no, I work in sanitation.

    Sent from my hand-held mind distractor

  10. #99
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    51
    Quote Originally Posted by Yarbow View Post
    I don't know what laws are for homeowners. But from story I see he still in a safe area. I have all ways been told " Do not go search for trouble. You've no no backup with you.
    Everybody in the house was in not in any inanimate threat.
    Should have stayed put in the safe area call and wait for PD to arrive then if perp did get in to house the threatening danger orlife then defensive. Shooting I mightbe justified.
    Sent from my LG-VM696 using USA Carry mobile app
    huh ?
    "A Sig is like a lightsaber - not as clumsy or random as a Glock."
    "Never fight an old man, if he can't fight you he'll just shoot you"

  11. #100
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Vermont
    Posts
    2,837
    Quote Originally Posted by gmforsythe View Post
    Deadly force may not be used in ANY state to protect property (except in the case of arson), only lives and to prevent SERIOUS bodily injury. I know of no state that permits deadly force (even by LE) to protect property.



    Sent from behind Enemy Lines.

Page 10 of 13 FirstFirst ... 89101112 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Quantcast