Defensive Carry banner

1 - 17 of 17 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
122 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Hello all CC ers and OCers,
I have a question regarding Texas Gun Law along with a Scenerio. If a BG comes up to you while u are in your car and tries to steal your car, are you able to use deadly force to protect your property. When answering this question, please note the castle law. In Texas, your car is considered an extension of your home. With this in mind, is one allowed to use deadly force to stop the BG. If so, at what point in this scenerio would it become unlawaful. A sheriff in the valley told me that if a BG is trying to steal your car while you are in it, then deadly force is lawful, however; if the BG has already forced you out of your car and he is driving off, you cannot use deadly force (fire at him) when he is already on the road. Is this accurate information? Any feedback would be greatly appreciated.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
737 Posts
It would depend if it was day or night!

When you're in the car and he is trying to steal it, then you have a threat to your life as in Texas even just the hands are considered weapons. This is the case day or night.

If the BG is already in the car and it is day time then you are not legaly allowed to use deadly force. It is different at night time.

That being said, I would be hesitent to just open fire at my car as it was being driven away by a BG as my biggest concern is I may be firing into a crowed street and could injure or kill an unintended target. Besides if I did get my car back I wouldn't want it filled with bullet holes.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,178 Posts
Yeah 2ndsupporter I am with you on this. I would hate trying to explain to insurance company why my recovered vehicle was riddled with bullet holes. I am not sure I would want the car back covered in BG blood, urine and stomach contents.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
308 Posts
2ndsupporter is basically right as is the sheriff you talked to. Your right to carry in your car is not really an extension of the castle doctrine, nor does it give you the right to use deadly force to "protect property". It does give you the right to protect yourself from deadly force.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
369 Posts
As the law reads......

Here is a short version. I have put the link to the "castle law" at the bottom....

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


Look at (B) above..."was attempting to remove unlawfully and with force". But hey, if all he wants is my vehicle, and not me, he can have it. Not worth the headache of spending the rest of my life in court for trying to be a hero....IMHO.

http://www.rc123.com/texas_castle_doctrine.html
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
147 Posts
Straight out of the Texas penal code

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.

First bolded code could cover if it was clear they were going to take your car and crash into a crowd or something like that. Second bolded code flatly states you can pursue with deadly force. What it really boils down to is the facts of the case and how the DA interprets the statutes, however its pretty clear that if it is nightime and you get ripped out of your car at a stoplight, you can gun the guy down as he peels away in Texas. Is that a smart thing to do? absolutly not
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,765 Posts
Actually, if you look at the statutes...you have the right to use deadly force to protect your property...You also have the right to use deadly force to stop the BG from immediately fleeing with your property, it does not matter whether it's day or night... Now, if you mean shooting at your car when the bad guy is a 1/2 mile down the road, probably not... but for other liability issues...If you are talking about the BG pulling you out of the car and you firing on him as he's immediately driving off, by all means you are covered...

Don't take legal advice from street cops....You'll get 10 different answers if you ask 10 different LEO's and 8 of them will be wrong...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
148 Posts
I believe that if you are no longer being threatened and person driving away yoou would be breaking the law if you fired on person driving away. But if during the scuffle of you being pulled out the car, you would be justified in defending yourself furing the theft of your property & possibly your life.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
148 Posts
if you mean shooting at your car when the bad guy is a 1/2 mile down the road, probably not... but for other liability issues...If you are talking about the BG pulling you out of the car and you firing on him as he's immediately driving off, by all means you are covered...

Don't take legal advice from street cops....You'll get 10 different answers if you ask 10 different LEO's and 8 of them will be wrong...
I agree completely with this!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21 Posts
Unlike my family, my car is not worth dying for... unless I feel directly and personally that my life is in danger.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,765 Posts
Unlike my family, my car is not worth dying for... unless I feel directly and personally that my life is in danger.
I agree...Just because it's legal to use deadly force, doesn't mean you should...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
122 Posts
Discussion Starter #12
Thank you all for taking the time to answer my question. I indeed had an eye opener with some of your answers. I have to agree that a car is not worth using deadly force, however; when one is in this situation, you really do not know what is going to happen. If I were by myself, I would definitely draw my firearm toward the badguy during the scuffle, if it is assessed that all he wants is my car, then I would not go as far as using deadly force. I would, however; use deadly force if i have someone else in the car such as a family member and the BG is driving off. At that point, there is not question in my mind....someone is going to be hurting....and it will not be my passenger.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,226 Posts
Well since chances are my son will be in my backseat, i will not be exiting the vehicle unless it's to count the bullet holes in the BG.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7 Posts
I am pretty much in agreement with some of these. A person in the vehicle changes the parameters of the engagement and they are the priority, not the vehicle. They can have the vehicle as insurance covers it. I've already had one stolen, fortunately I wasn't in it at the time, and it bites to go through it, but it is not unbearable.

With that being said, my driveway is considerably longer than the 20 some odd feet to park a vehicle in a neighborhood and it is completely fenced in. I would keep them from leaving the property if at all possible. Of course when you live in the sticks there does not tend to be as much of that occurring since it is assumed a dog (and there is) and a firearm are present. :wink:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
369 Posts
I believe that if you are no longer being threatened and person driving away yoou would be breaking the law if you fired on person driving away. But if during the scuffle of you being pulled out the car, you would be justified in defending yourself furing the theft of your property & possibly your life.
I agree with Devildog above, for my family...in a heart beat, for a piece of metal, they can have it.

As for your comments, I guess it depends on how good your lawyer is....just ask OJ....:hand5::rofl:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,839 Posts
......... if the BG has already forced you out of your car .....
My spin on this scenario........:image035:
The key here is that he forced you out of your car!
The use of force makes this a robbery. The nighttime requirement no longer applies. Penal Code 9.42 #2 A&B and #3 A&B are the rules of the day.
 
1 - 17 of 17 Posts
Top