People in maryland should be allowed to carry, reason #436

[iobidder]

Wrong thread, Self Portrait thread is in the Watercooler.

Actually you are the only poster in that thread that's where I got this from..

I hate cop humor. iobidder tried telling me a knock-knock joke once...before I could say, "who's there", he shot my dog and cuffed me at gunpoint.

 

[moojersey]

Texas Penal Code - Section 9.42. Deadly Force To Protect Property

Texas law allows for the use of deadly force to protect your property as well as to protect your NEIGHBOR'S PROPERTY, as well as to prevent persons whom just robbed you from fleeing. i.e Yes you can shoot them in the back!!!

* I am not a lawyer, this is not legal advice.

§ 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.

 

[Nokas]

Open carry in practice is stupid, not saying it should be banned but it is tactically not an intelligent thing to do.

 

[amoebicmagician]

Wow, who'd have thunk that situational awareness might be a good thing?

While I don't believe you can stop a determined thief, you can certainly make his life more difficult (and thus lower your chance of being victimized.)

You can stop a determined thief.

As long as you're MORE determined not to be victimized. It takes a lot of energy, but it's possible.

 

[amoebicmagician]

The OP can argue all day long, but the reason for CC or to have a personal weapon at all, is for self-defense. Most states offer no protection in law to use deadly force to defend property. Would any of us, serving as a juror, expect to side with a defendant who used deadly force to protect property such as a purse or cell phone because they left their car unlocked and unguarded for their OWN convenience?

There's a reason why most states don't allow deadly force to protect property. Think about it.....

I would vote not guilty in a second on that jury, assuming the guy was a regular, well meaning and law abiding citizen

 

[amoebicmagician]

Where legal, it is a pretty good way to keep your mower around. The state, presumably Texas places the right of a citizen to defend property over the life of a criminal, somehow I'm fine with this.



I would think Repo men would follow a very specific legal procedure as they do in Texas, instead of busting into a place to repo a car without the legal right to do so. If someone shoots that repo guy without cause, then that's murder, Texas has a law about that too. Suprisingly enough, their deathrow fastlane, lethal force in defense of property, shall issue and self defense laws work pretty well for everyone, of course except for the criminals.

Every time I read one of your posts I like you a little more

 

[Blaster229]

I'm fine with it for the weak deterrent it is. People who say they would shoot and kill someone over a piece of property being stolen from their curtilage where there's no deadly threat, have never been around the legal process of committing such an act. There sure are lots O' tough guys out there.

 

[Gryphon]

I think the answer lies somewhere in between - exactly where I admittedly am not certain.

I am not up on current Texas law, but they use to have the Sunset Rule. That meant you couldn't use deadly force to protect your property during the day, but could after the sun set. So if you came out of your house at 11:00 at night and saw someone breaking into your car you could shoot - a formidable deterrent to post-sunset crime. In contrast, other states virtually require you to hide in your home, dial 911, and fill out a report when and if the police show up after the car is gone - not much of a deterrent.

I suggest if you weren't required to cower in your home, and could confront the criminal if so inclined, reserving the right to use deadly force if necessary, it would be an effective deterrent. So no, I don't think you should be allowed to exit the front door with your 1911 or 12 gauge persuader blazing away, but you should have the right to investigate and protect, and have the benefit of the doubt if you wind up having to use deadly force. Otherwise we are simply inviting unabated crime.

 

[Gbh]

I hate cop humor. iobidder tried telling me a knock-knock joke once...before I could say, "who's there", he shot my dog and cuffed me at gunpoint.

I call BS.

I doubt he knocked at all, let alone twice.

 

[haoleboy]

I'm fine with it for the weak deterrent it is. People who say they would shoot and kill someone over a piece of property being stolen from their curtilage where there's no deadly threat, have never been around the legal process of committing such an act. There sure are lots O' tough guys out there.

When an LEO draws their weapon, they are "ready" to use deadly force correct?
So when the cops arrive on the scene for a burglary call and see the suspect in the act, are guns drawn??

I think the answer lies somewhere in between - exactly where I admittedly am not certain.

I am not up on current Texas law, but they use to have the Sunset Rule. That meant you couldn't use deadly force to protect your property during the day, but could after the sun set. So if you came out of your house at 11:00 at night and saw someone breaking into your car you could shoot - a formidable deterrent to post-sunset crime. In contrast, other states virtually require you to hide in your home, dial 911, and fill out a report when and if the police show up after the car is gone - not much of a deterrent.

I suggest if you weren't required to cower in your home, and could confront the criminal if so inclined, reserving the right to use deadly force if necessary, it would be an effective deterrent. So no, I don't think you should be allowed to exit the front door with your 1911 or 12 gauge persuader blazing away, but you should have the right to investigate and protect, and have the benefit of the doubt if you wind up having to use deadly force. Otherwise we are simply inviting unabated crime.

+1 I don't think you should shoot someone trying to steal your lawn mower.
That being said, if you see someone outside trying to steal your lawn mower, you should be able to go out and confront them armed. If they run away, then great. You don't need to go out and buy a new one.
If they escalate the situation, then Bang.

 

[Blaster229]

When an LEO draws their weapon, they are "ready" to use deadly force correct?
So when the cops arrive on the scene for a burglary call and see the suspect in the act, are guns drawn??

Not sure what you are getting at but I think we are agreeing with each other.
Drawing a gun and shooting it at someone are two different things. I'm not against drawing a weapon on someone stealing your property, while on your property.
But, sitting on your deck with your Remington 700 .308 w/ $5,000 Ninja night scope and plucking a guy off leaving your shed with a rusty garden tool is not appropriate.
Many tough guys would say otherwise because that's what the law says is ok.
This attitude falls in line with some of the people I see at gun shows. They just cannot wait to get their first human kill.

 

[haoleboy]

My bad, I took from your posts that we shouldn't even show an armed response for theft. I would want to be armed as a deterrent, just like the police are.
The police in England are not armed, do they get much respect?

 

[Blaster229]

My bad, I took from your posts that we shouldn't even show an armed response for theft. I would want to be armed as a deterrent, just like the police are.
The police in England are not armed, do they get much respect?

Actually they do. Now that's not to say that they don't get their share of disrespect. But you have to understand that when kids are growing up, they are still the police and most grow up treating them as such. Not having a pistol isn't a deal breaker. If you think about it, not having a gun(aside from the real obvious safety reason), they have to really rely on their training and "verbal judo" ( I HATE that term ) because they aren't packing that intimidation.

 

[moojersey]

I will say this. If I was a low life, dirt bag, welfare sipping, methodone clinic eating, haven't taken a shower or held a job ever, type member of society ... if I knew the law of the land was that anyone could fire at will and upon sight of my crack head ass trying to break into their shed, house, garage, lean - to, outhouse, pop up tent, etc...

.... I will surely think twice, three times, four times, before I attempt to take something that is not mine to fuel said habits.

*This is an opinion, I am not a lawyer, this is not legal advice.

 

[Brychan]

Which one of these thoughts would do the most to deter crime:

1) Is it worth a life and/or injury to shoot someone for stealing and Iphone (or any other property)?

2) Is it worth my life and/or injury to steal that Iphone (or whatever)?

 

[hylomar]

I think the answer lies somewhere in between - exactly where I admittedly am not certain.

I am not up on current Texas law, but they use to have the Sunset Rule. That meant you couldn't use deadly force to protect your property during the day, but could after the sun set. So if you came out of your house at 11:00 at night and saw someone breaking into your car you could shoot - a formidable deterrent to post-sunset crime. In contrast, other states virtually require you to hide in your home, dial 911, and fill out a report when and if the police show up after the car is gone - not much of a deterrent.

I suggest if you weren't required to cower in your home, and could confront the criminal if so inclined, reserving the right to use deadly force if necessary, it would be an effective deterrent. So no, I don't think you should be allowed to exit the front door with your 1911 or 12 gauge persuader blazing away, but you should have the right to investigate and protect, and have the benefit of the doubt if you wind up having to use deadly force. Otherwise we are simply inviting unabated crime.

http://www.kens5.com/news/Potted-plant-thief-shot-in-head-by-homeowner-SA-police-say-139363363.html
I'm not sure about the Sunset Law thing. Criminals are not vampires and will come out during the day.