Texas holdup

This is a discussion on Texas holdup within the In the News: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly forums, part of the The Back Porch category; Recently, our tiny town had an armed robbery at a fast food joint, closing time on a weekend. Guy pulls a gun and orders everyone ...

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 20

Thread: Texas holdup

  1. #1
    Member Array DaveInTexas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    199

    Texas holdup

    Recently, our tiny town had an armed robbery at a fast food joint, closing time on a weekend. Guy pulls a gun and orders everyone to the floor, cleans out the cash,...and is in jail within a few hours. So those who warn us that it can happen in your town, to you you're right. I was in the place a few hours before.
    Anyway, what is the law on how a ccp holder can respond?
    The guy had an airsoft pistol. Not that you could tell from looking. I think in Texas if you believe someone's life to be in danger you are justified in protecting them ie you could shoot. Am I right? Would this have been a good shoot? Such a thing does not interest me, I would rather be a thousand miles away...but I do wonder how the law reads.

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #2
    Member Array cliffyp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    90
    If you reasonable believe your life is in danger you can defend youself. Recently in my town here in Texas two teens tried to rob an arcade with what turned out to be a pellet gun. One of the robbers was shot twice by a .40. No charges were filed against the shooter. Pull a pellet gun on a cop and they'll shoot you too. In that moment no one expects you to inquire about the authenticity of a gun.

  4. #3
    VIP Member Array dukalmighty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    texas
    Posts
    15,176
    In Tx not only can you protect yourself but you can come to the aid of a 3rd party IE the cashier who was being robbed,if you felt that unless you acted she would be subjected to great bodily harm or death ,then yes you can intervene,is it a good idea,depends on each situation,if BG just wants money and haul tail,be a good witness,if he acts like he ain't gonna leave any witnesses,make your shots count
    "Outside of the killings, Washington has one of the lowest crime rates in the country,"
    --Mayor Marion Barry, Washington , DC .

  5. #4
    VIP Member Array searcher 45's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    TEXAS
    Posts
    4,151
    I am very grateful to be a native born Texacan and live in Texas with the Castle Doctrine in place. I do wish we would make it faster for the processing of CHL paper work. I would like to change some of the knife laws, for instance the law about no two edged knifes, and the 51/2 in blade length limit, and above all the guff law about no Bowie Knifes. This is Texas and the home of the Bowie Knife.

    REMEMBER THE ALAMO!!!!!!

  6. #5
    VIP Member Array JoJoGunn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    West Virginia
    Posts
    2,886
    Several "cases" have been posted here.

    Guy who has a Concealed Carry Permit in FL Burger King shot and killed a robber who had a Byco .380, pretty much an "almost pellet gun". He was also wounded in the gunfire exchange, but survived. He wasn't charged, and was labeled a hero for thwarting a potential shoot by the perp.

    Other story was about a LEO who shot and killed a female teenager who pointed a firearm at him and refused to put it down. Turned out, the firearm was only an Air Soft or Pellet gun. No charges were filed against the LEO, but he has to live with the fact that this girl committed suicide by police.

    Needless to say, when confronted by a firearm weilding criminal or looney, you don't have much time to determine if said firearm is real or not. I'd say 99% are justified and most do not have charges against them either.
    "A Smith & Wesson always beats 4 aces!"

    The Man Prayer. "Im a man, I can change, if I have to.....I guess!" ~ Red Green

  7. #6
    Member Array DaveInTexas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    199
    OK how bout this, he has the loot and is beating feet to the door. If you don't stop him, he poses an imminent threat to the next cashier so you are saving that cashier when you pop hiim one in the back!

  8. #7
    VIP Member Array Paco's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    McKinney, TX
    Posts
    3,499
    Quote Originally Posted by DaveInTexas View Post
    OK how bout this, he has the loot and is beating feet to the door. If you don't stop him, he poses an imminent threat to the next cashier so you are saving that cashier when you pop hiim one in the back!
    In this situation you are most likely gonna get in some serious hot water. He is leaving and is no longer a threat, at least how the DA would see it.
    "Don't hit a man if you can possibly avoid it; but if you do hit him, put him to sleep." - Theodore Roosevelt

    -Paco
    http://www.shieldsd.net

  9. #8
    VIP Member Array ccw9mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    25,992
    If you reasonable believe your life is in danger you can defend youself.
    Basically, yes.

    Ayoob phrases it this way:
    The justified use of lethal force requires that the innocent be in immediate and otherwise unavoidable danger of death or grave bodily harm.
    though, the statutes in your state will vary the details of that somewhat. As others have noted, not everyplace allows defense of others with lethal force. Texas does.

    My $0.02.

    There are many bright people who are thoroughly knowledgeable about the responsibilities and risks of taking actions that result in the damage or death of others. Many of them will have made a life of publishing their expertise, helping people to see what an extreme legal, financial and social risk it can be for anyone to be in such a situation.

    The law in Texas basically gives you the right to act reasonably in the defense of yourself and others, against violence, to preserve life. But it places the responsibility for judging the reasonableness of those actions in the hands of others, to judge your actions after you've committed them and have affirmatively claimed that you committed them.

    If a knife is put to your throat or a gun to your head, the immediacy and the danger cannot be questioned. It's patently clear, then, that you'd be best served by not moving a hair or being explosive and decisive in your defensive actions in order to stop being killed. Practically nobody will question anything you do, in a situation like that.

    However, the more "remote" the danger or immediacy gets, the sticker it can be. What if the threat is 10ft away, or being applied to someone else directly (right now, but perhaps you in 0.5sec later), or several other factors are combined to make it clear the situation is exactly as you describe ... and, you're able to do something about it?

    Well, partly, it's going to depend on who's left standing, whether anyone gets harmed via your actions, the recent political sensibilities in your state/community. Seriously. Factors other than basic reasonableness and the basic facts you see are going to twist people's sense of reasonableness. The law gives them that responsibility, to judge you from their perspective, in spite of you having had to judge from yours.

    If you're in a crowded mall and you start blasting from 25ft away in order to stop someone else from being harmed by a knife-wielding robber, it's a pretty good bet you're going to be hauled into court in chains to explain what the hell you were doing putting so many people at risk. Obviously so, yes? You're putting many others at immediate risk that goes way beyond what a single, skinny guy with a knife is doing to everyone.

    Point is, there's a soft, fuzzy dividing line, there, somewhere. It can be hard to see. At the absolute moment there's no other option, you'll know it, sure as sunshine. It's just important to keep in mind that your legal future will depend on others seeing it as well. So, be certain that death is imminent, your actions are necessary, your actions are unavoidable, and that nobody else is unreasonably put at risk by your actions.

    Be careful. It's bloody important that others see you as having acted reasonably, decisively, because there was no other option, to save lives, without unduly putting others at risk. Be seen as the good guy, particularly if you're going to be pulling out a deadly weapon and (potentially) taking a life.

    Quote Originally Posted by DaveInTexas View Post
    OK how bout this, he has the loot and is beating feet to the door. If you don't stop him, he poses an imminent threat to the next cashier so you are saving that cashier when you pop hiim one in the back!
    If he's heading for the door, then he absolutely isn't posing an immediate threat to any other cashiers, now, is he? No, he's not. So, how would you explain that "shot in the back" as he was fleeing? Would the people tasked with determining if that was reasonable decide it that way, in Texas, or would they have flexibility in determining it somewhat differently than you, given the speed, direction, distance, timing and other factors they see clearly (minus the stress of the moment that you had)? Careful, 'cause your family's financial existence and your freedom for the remainder of your natural life depends upon your answer.

    I'm all for defending against crime. Absolutely. But, at some point the line gets crossed to where it's simply no longer in anyone's interest to take that next step. That's the tough part: deciding when one needs to stop and tend to the survivors, even though it might mean the lunatic criminal gets away (for the time being).
    Your best weapon is your brain. Don't leave home without it.
    Thoughts: Justifiable self defense (A.O.J.).
    Explain: How does disarming victims reduce the number of victims?
    Reason over Force: The Gun is Civilization (Marko Kloos).
    NRA, GOA, OFF, ACLDN.

  10. #9
    Member Array socal2310's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Camarillo, CA
    Posts
    467
    I'm curious, which states don't allow lethal force in defense of innocent third parties? Even California allows this. Remember the convicted felon in Los Angeles who retrieved a gun and shot the knife-wielding man who was attacking two women?

    I'll see if I can find the story.

    Ryan

    *Found it: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,481785,00.html
    Last edited by socal2310; November 13th, 2009 at 11:03 AM. Reason: Missing information
    Those who will not govern their own behavior are slaves waiting for a master; one will surely find them.

  11. #10
    Member
    Array Queensidecas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Arlington, TX
    Posts
    147
    You can pursue with deadly force in Texas, so yes, you can shoot the robber fleeing the convienience store. Texas is pretty unique in that regard. The problem comes in with the district DA and how he views that statute. If you chased him for a mile.. maybe not, if you drop him as he crosses the threshold, you will likely get a no-bill here. I think part of the idea behind that is that the robber fleeing might try to car-jack someone or continue on his spree of violence
    "How a politician stands on the Second Amendment tells you how he or she views you as an individual... as a trustworthy and productive citizen, or as part of an unruly crowd that needs to be lorded over, controlled, supervised, and taken care of." -Suzanna Gratia Hupp

  12. #11
    Member
    Array Queensidecas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Arlington, TX
    Posts
    147
    The part of the code I am refering to is:

    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.
    "How a politician stands on the Second Amendment tells you how he or she views you as an individual... as a trustworthy and productive citizen, or as part of an unruly crowd that needs to be lorded over, controlled, supervised, and taken care of." -Suzanna Gratia Hupp

  13. #12
    Moderator
    Array RETSUPT99's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Central Florida
    Posts
    44,504
    Remember the Boarding House Rules...

    Two dirtbags...each gets one 'helping' before anyone is getting 'seconds'..

    Which means...First BG, 1 CoM...Second BG, 1 CoM...then alternate as the need arises.
    I guess this means that if you have the opportunity to put out the lights on some dirtbag robbing a place...make the call as you see it, but don't be stupid in your choices.
    Sometimes it may be easier to let the $$$ go out the door.
    Last edited by RETSUPT99; November 13th, 2009 at 06:27 PM.
    The last Blood Moon Tetrad for this millennium starts in April 2014 and ends in September 2015...according to NASA.

    ***********************************
    Certified Glock Armorer
    NRA Life Member[/B]

  14. #13
    Distinguished Member Array P7fanatic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Texan in NWFlorida
    Posts
    1,588
    Quote Originally Posted by Queensidecas View Post
    The part of the code I am refering to is:

    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.
    Queensidecas,

    The way I read it, highlighting (2)(B) requires that you also highlight either (3)(A) or (3)(B). Which one is it?
    If the BG is leaving with something of great value or is hard to replace, I believe you stand on good ground.
    If the BG is leaving with a few dollars, you might want to think about it not just twice but thrice. Especially if you are in Travis County.

    That's the way I see it.


    "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

  15. #14
    VIP Member Array mcp1810's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    4,948
    P7fanatic you are correct. But lets be the court's "reasonable man" for a second here. Look at (3) (B). If we are talking about a fleeing armed robbery suspect, armed with what we believe to be a hand gun, what force other than deadly force would not "expose the actor or another to a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury."?

    Anyone commiting a crime with a deadly weapon is putting themselves in jeopardy. The deadlier the weapon, and the greater the effective range, the greater their exposure.
    Infowars- Proving David Hannum right on a daily basis

  16. #15
    Member Array carry ok's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    388

    OP.....

    I would assume you have read it, but no post mentioned it , so http://handgunlaw.us/states/texas.pdf. The document should be read and re-read in it's entirety.
    Extremism in the Defense of Liberty is No Vice--Moderation in the Pursuit of Justice is No Virtue. - Senator Barry Goldwater

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Links

Posting Permissions

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

Similar Threads

  1. Since it's snowing where I live :Snowman Holdup!
    By JoJoGunn in forum Off Topic & Humor Discussion
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: February 10th, 2010, 04:28 PM
  2. Found out the holdup on my CCW
    By pelletm in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: January 9th, 2010, 10:48 AM
  3. Holdup Victim Kills Gunman
    By TJMill in forum In the News: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: July 24th, 2008, 07:09 PM
  4. Driveway Holdup (An Armed Citizen Scenario)
    By HeadHunter in forum Carry & Defensive Scenarios
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: July 5th, 2008, 08:44 AM
  5. Indianapolis - Permit Holder Stops Grocery Store Holdup
    By lance22 in forum In the News: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: January 3rd, 2008, 11:38 PM