Let's talk about when to shoot someone in the back...
This is a discussion on Let's talk about when to shoot someone in the back... within the Carry & Defensive Scenarios forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; I would say the legal arrest aspect would be pretty shaky...and the use of deadly force only applies to the guard or peace officer...the use ...
December 27th, 2007 02:01 PM
I would say the legal arrest aspect would be pretty shaky...and the use of deadly force only applies to the guard or peace officer...the use of reasonable force laws still applies to citizens, and no citizen has the authority to use deadly force to prevent somebody from escaping unless they have your property...
§ 9.52. PREVENTION OF ESCAPE FROM CUSTODY. The use of
force to prevent the escape of an arrested person from custody is
justifiable when the force could have been employed to effect the
arrest under which the person is in custody, except that a guard
employed by a correctional facility or a peace officer is justified
in using any force, including deadly force, that he reasonably
believes to be immediately necessary to prevent the escape of a
person from the correctional facility.
December 27th, 2007 02:01 PM
December 27th, 2007 02:02 PM
I am sorry, it's 9.51.
here it is.
§ 9.51. ARREST AND SEARCH. (a) A peace officer, or a
person acting in a peace officer's presence and at his direction, is
justified in using force against another when and to the degree the
actor reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary to
make or assist in making an arrest or search, or to prevent or
assist in preventing escape after arrest, if:
(1) the actor reasonably believes the arrest or search
is lawful or, if the arrest or search is made under a warrant, he
reasonably believes the warrant is valid; and
(2) before using force, the actor manifests his
purpose to arrest or search and identifies himself as a peace
officer or as one acting at a peace officer's direction, unless he
reasonably believes his purpose and identity are already known by
or cannot reasonably be made known to the person to be arrested.
(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 immediately
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
Infowars- Proving David Hannum right on a daily basis
December 27th, 2007 02:12 PM
Here is the simple, 100% applicable throughout the USA rule:
Use of lethal force is justified only if required to stop a kidnapping, rape or the use of lethal/maiming force against an innocent (which you better be certain is an innocent).
Some jurisdictions may differ but for anyone not a LEO the above is the only catch all rule that will cover your use of lethal force in all 50 states. Stray from it if you like but your chances of needing a lawyer will increase dramatically.
With regards to shooting someone in the back I would say the above rule works in any rampage shooting scenario, home invasions (especially if armed), or situation where the criminal is moving towards cover and not simply beating feet directly away from you.
December 27th, 2007 02:18 PM
MCP, you are technically correct, you just have to remember that the statute does not mention deadly force...
And just to be complete...definition of lawful arrest per Tx Criminal Procedures
CCP 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.
December 27th, 2007 02:48 PM
BerneyG, I am with you there. It might be shaky ground, but it seems to me there is a whole lot of law here in Texas that depends on what the person in question "believes". In some cases it almost seems that being too familiar with the law can work against you! It is almost like ignorance of the law actually is an excuse! I may oversimplify at times but pretty much the way I see it is "deadly force" is the ultimate "degree of force" and other than the property crimes listed in 9.42 etc anything we would be authorized deadly force to prevent would be a felony. As far as the "lawful arrest" goes, I can't imagine any other reason I would be giving in front of a grand jury, or a trial jury. Even here in Fort Bend county I don't think giving "revenge" or "pool cleaning" as a motive would play very well.
Infowars- Proving David Hannum right on a daily basis
December 27th, 2007 03:03 PM
Well, if I was on your jury and you told me 'pool cleaning', I would call it a good shoot...Some days I kind of wish they issued tags for cleaning out the genetic pool...you know, like deer hunting...
But seriously, I think you are probably right about the being too familiar with the law...and if I ever did have to draw my cw, I am definitely not going to start spouting off Texas Penal code to the investigating officer. I am going to let him know I am a CHL, I am going to say I was scared for my life, and I going to say I am pretty shaken up and I would feel better continuing the interview after I have spoken with an attorney.
As far as the shaky ground of the lawful arrest...I just don't want to have CNN and Fox news talking about a lot of vigilante CHL's running around trying to be LEO's...not saying you are, but the words "I am a CHL, this is a citizens arrest" could be made to look pretty bad with the left-wing media spin.
December 27th, 2007 04:34 PM
Les Baer 45
N.R.A. Patron Life Member
December 27th, 2007 04:52 PM
if he is a threat, he is a threat.
December 27th, 2007 08:01 PM
Just yell hey you dropped your wallet, then when they turn around blammo, nobody said bad guys were smart!
December 27th, 2007 09:30 PM
In my opinion when the BG has his back to you, are you in fear of your life? If not then to me its not a justifible shooting. In my opinion to use your weapon on another you must be in fear of your life or another person in your surronding area life in danger. I feel shooting a fleeing BG and the courts will mince meat out of you. Just my opinion.
December 27th, 2007 09:45 PM
Indeed folks, if he is fleeing then shooting is a no go, pretty much everywhere but Texas:). The original point of my question, is how do you know if he is fleeing or just going for cover and a better shot at you? I know so many things have to be played as it is seen, I just wanted to have discussion anyway. Perhaps hear some tips or "tells" that indicate when the BG is still in the fight. I know of a couple Border Agents that can tell what a slippery slope the decision can be.
Sgt Mac has wise words, and mitchell CTs' links are good reading. Thanks all for the many contributions so far...
December 27th, 2007 11:11 PM
If he is running away...let him go.
If he is simply turning away, but has a visible weapon he has just tried to use on me...Boom, Boom, Boom...front, side, back, head, jewels, eye, ear...I really don't care!
Hopefully, if he has just tried to rob me or take my car, he won't be doing much running or turning...ever again!
Stay armed...stay safe!
"That I cannot do."
"Give this to, uh, Clemenza. I want reliable people, people who aren't going to be carried away. After all we're not murderers in spite of what this undertaker thinks."
Certified Glock Armorer
NRA Life Member
December 28th, 2007 12:35 AM
Originally Posted by Sergeant Mac
ALWAYS carry! - NEVER tell!
"A superior Operator is best defined as someone who uses his superior
judgement to keep himself out of situations that would require a display of his
December 28th, 2007 09:34 AM
Unfortunately the BG always comes back if they get away. That was a comfort when I was working for Cub Foods and I would miss a catch on a shoplifter, "They'll be back" Eventually I would catch them.
In this kind of scenario, I would be on edge for quite a while if prior to his tactical advance to the rear I was justified in passing out a Darwin Award, especially if the BG had enough info to find me again (my home, my car, anything that places me in a trap).
These are the methods that the combatants in Iraq and other places have been using for a long time, and eventually the violent criminals are going to learn that if their plan starts falling apart, all they have to do is turn tail and run and they will be safe to try again later. Practice makes perfect.
Hit my limit for speculation, the sky is falling, and gun owners fighting amongst themselves.
UNITED WE STAND, DIVIDED WE FALL!
December 28th, 2007 10:53 PM
"The price of freedom is eternal vigilance." -Thomas Jefferson
"Liberalism is a Mental Disorder." -Michael Savage
GOOD Gun Control is being able to hit your target! -Myself
By GunnyBunny in forum Off Topic & Humor Discussion
Last Post: March 3rd, 2011, 03:45 PM
By Maverick68 in forum Carry & Defensive Scenarios
Last Post: November 22nd, 2009, 09:35 PM
By CT-Mike in forum In the News: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
Last Post: February 17th, 2008, 05:34 PM
By jarhead79 in forum Carry & Defensive Scenarios
Last Post: September 19th, 2006, 01:37 PM
Search tags for this page
ron white you can't shoot someone in the back
Click on a term to search for related topics.