Good news in Texas

Good news in Texas

This is a discussion on Good news in Texas within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; TEXAS Texas Pro-Gun Legislation on the Move! By an overwhelming 133-13 vote, the Texas State House gave final approval this week to the NRA-backed "Castle ...

Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: Good news in Texas

  1. #1
    Member Array Richard C.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Houston, Tx
    Posts
    18

    Thumbs up Good news in Texas

    TEXAS

    Texas Pro-Gun Legislation on the Move! By an overwhelming 133-13 vote, the Texas State House gave final approval this week to the NRA-backed "Castle Doctrine" self-defense bill sponsored by State Senator Jeff Wentworth (R-San Antonio) and carried by State Representative Joe Driver (R-Garland) in the House. Also, NRA-backed legislation allowing employees who are Concealed Handgun Licensees to transport and store handguns in their private vehicles while parked on their employer's property, advanced out of both House and Senate committees this week.
    Now is the time for all young men to come to the aid of their Country!


  2. #2
    Distinguished Member Array Colin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Vancouver, Canada
    Posts
    1,863
    Congrats, hopefully the slow ooze of common sense will flow Northward!!!

  3. #3
    VIP Member Array ccw9mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    27,479
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard C. View Post
    By an overwhelming 133-13 vote, the Texas State House gave final approval this week to the NRA-backed "Castle Doctrine" self-defense bill ...
    Wow. This makes it a baker's dozen. We're on a roll. Keep up the pressure, via letters, phone calls, emails and contributions to NRA, JPFO, etc.
    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, SAF, GOA, OFF, ACLDN.

  4. #4
    Senior Member Array Geezer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    somewhere
    Posts
    534
    That's wonderful news - now if the Gov'nr will only sign it. Question - with a "castle doctrine", does that protect a homeowner from all civil liabilities from the skum's family ?

  5. #5
    Moderator
    Array RETSUPT99's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Central Florida
    Posts
    45,133

    Sounds Good...

    Hope it passes...certainly sounds like the TX politicians have 'common sense'...there is so little of it now-a-days...

    Stay armed...stay safe!

    ret
    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]

  6. #6
    Moderator
    Array Rock and Glock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Colorado at 11,650'
    Posts
    12,770
    IIRC Civil Immunity is part of the package. I'll look tomorrow night.

  7. #7
    VIP Member Array ccw9mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    27,479
    Quote Originally Posted by retsupt99 View Post
    Hope it passes...certainly sounds like the TX politicians have 'common sense'...there is so little of it now-a-days...
    The blood on the Texas legislators' hands from the 1991 Luby's incident is still stuck under the nails. Glad to see they are still mindful of what's right, no matter how it occurs.
    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, SAF, GOA, OFF, ACLDN.

  8. #8
    Moderator
    Array Rock and Glock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Colorado at 11,650'
    Posts
    12,770

    Post Texas SB 378 In Full

    Here it is in full, the Immunity Clause is in bold:

    AN ACT
    relating to the use of force or deadly force in defense of a person.
    BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF TEXAS:
    SECTION 1. Section 9.01, Penal Code, is amended by adding
    Subdivisions (4) and (5) to read as follows:
    (4) "Habitation" has the meaning assigned by Section
    30.01.
    (5) "Vehicle" has the meaning assigned by Section
    30.01.
    SECTION 2. Section 9.31, Penal Code, is amended by amending
    Subsection (a) and adding Subsections (e) and (f) to read as
    follows:
    (a) Except as provided in Subsection (b), a person is
    justified in using force against another when and to the degree the
    actor [he] reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary
    to protect the actor [himself] against the other's use or attempted
    use of unlawful force. The actor's belief that the force was
    immediately necessary as described by this subsection is presumed
    to be reasonable if the actor:
    (1) knew or had reason to believe that the person
    against whom the 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
    aggravated kidnapping, murder, sexual assault, aggravated sexual
    assault, robbery, or aggravated robbery;
    (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.
    (e) A person who has a right to be present at the location
    where the force is used, who has not provoked the person against
    whom the force is used, and who is not engaged in criminal activity
    at the time the force is used is not required to retreat before
    using force as described by this section.
    (f) For purposes of Subsection (a), in determining whether
    an actor described by Subsection (e) reasonably believed that the
    use of force was necessary, a finder of fact may not consider
    whether the actor failed to retreat.
    SECTION 3. Section 9.32, Penal Code, is amended to read as
    follows:
    Sec. 9.32. DEADLY FORCE IN DEFENSE OF PERSON. (a) A person
    is justified in using deadly force against another:
    (1) if the actor [he] would be justified in using force
    against the other under Section 9.31; and
    (2) [if a reasonable person in the actor's situation
    would not have retreated; and
    [(3)] when and to the degree the actor [he] reasonably
    believes the deadly force is immediately necessary:
    (A) to protect the actor [himself] 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
    [requirement imposed by Subsection (a)(2) does not apply to an actor
    who uses force against a person who is at the time of the use of
    force committing an offense of unlawful entry in the habitation of
    the actor].
    (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.
    SECTION 4. Section 83.001, Civil Practice and Remedies
    Code, is amended to read as follows:
    Sec. 83.001. CIVIL IMMUNITY [AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE]. A [It
    is an affirmative defense to a civil action for damages for personal
    injury or death that the] defendant who uses force or[, at the time
    the cause of action arose, was justified in using] deadly force that
    is justified under Chapter 9 [Section 9.32], Penal Code, is immune
    from civil liability for personal injury or death that results from
    the defendant's [against a person who at the time of the] use of
    force or deadly force, as applicable [was committing an offense of
    unlawful entry in the habitation of the defendant].

    SECTION 5. (a) Sections 9.31 and 9.32, Penal Code, as
    amended by this Act, apply only to an offense committed on or after
    the effective date of this Act. An offense committed before the
    effective date of this Act is covered by the law in effect when the
    offense was committed, and the former law is continued in effect for
    this purpose. For the purposes of this subsection, an offense is
    committed before the effective date of this Act if any element of
    the offense occurs before the effective date.
    (b) Section 83.001, Civil Practice and Remedies Code, as
    amended by this Act, applies only to a cause of action that accrues
    on or after the effective date of this Act. An action that accrued
    before the effective date of this Act is governed by the law in
    effect at the time the action accrued, and that law is continued in
    effect for that purpose.
    SECTION 6. This Act takes effect September 1, 2007.



    __________________________________________________ __________
    President of the Senate Speaker of the House
    I hereby certify that S.B. No. 378 passed the Senate on
    March 13, 2007, by the following vote: Yeas 30, Nays 0.



    ______________________________
    Secretary of the Senate
    I hereby certify that S.B. No. 378 passed the House on
    March 20, 2007, by the following vote: Yeas 133, Nays 13, one
    present not voting.



    ______________________________
    Chief Clerk of the House


    Approved:

    ______________________________
    ______________________________
    Date


    ______________________________
    ______________________________
    Governor

  9. #9
    Senior Member Array Steve48's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    St. John, Kansas
    Posts
    777
    Good luck!! Steve48

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. Good News from Texas
    By JohnLeVick in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: April 14th, 2010, 07:41 PM
  2. No News is Good News (or A Real Cowboy)
    By Tom357 in forum Open Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: August 13th, 2009, 07:33 PM
  3. Good News / Bad News or Milking and Pushing...Help!
    By DizTbone in forum Defensive Carry & Tactical Training
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: June 16th, 2006, 11:08 PM
  4. Good News Link - 2 or 3 good stories
    By ArmyCop in forum In the News: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: March 7th, 2006, 12:18 PM
  5. Good news/bad news - need some input
    By LMarshall73 in forum Off Topic & Humor Discussion
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: August 5th, 2005, 02:47 AM

Search tags for this page

texas penal code sb no 378

Click on a term to search for related topics.