Home Invasion: Did Homeowner Go Too Far?

[joab]

(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

From the same penal code

§ 9.01. DEFINITIONS. In this chapter:
(1) "Custody" has the meaning assigned by Section
38.01.
(2) "Escape" has the meaning assigned by Section
38.01.

From section 38.01
(2) "Escape" means unauthorized departure from
custody or failure to return to custody following temporary leave
for a specific purpose or limited period or leave that is part of an
intermittent sentence, but does not include a violation of
conditions of community supervision or parole other than conditions
that impose a period of confinement in a secure correctional
facility.

Not that that means anything

But again I ask you to provide the statute that allows a person to leave his property to pursue the thief, especially to get involved in a vehicular pursuit

I would also like to know what if anything any of this has to do with the comment of mine that you chose to address

 

[Thumper]

It's self explanatory there, joab. I quoted a question you asked, then answered it with the word 'no.' I understand you have an argumentative nature, but you're barking up the wrong tree.

Not sure why you also made note of portions of the code you admit are irrelevent.

The further question you pose:

But again I ask you to provide the statute that allows a person to leave his property to pursue the thief, especially to get involved in a vehicular pursuit

As far as I can read, the defense doesn't disallow you from leaving your property to attempt to recover your stolen goods.

In fact, in the case law cited in my CHL class, a Texas homeowner followed a thief several blocks with his deer rifle, then used a handy mailbox as an expedient rest to center punch the guy as he ran under a streetlight.

Wish I could cite you the case, but I don't have it. Perhaps someone else can.

 

[mountainclmbr]

I think the police would have done the same thing by persuing. This person, I am assuming is a tax payer, therefore the police are his civil servants. When a citizen can't do what their paid servants can do there is a serious problem.

 

[BigO01]

As far as I'm concerned they started a war with the homeowner and he finished it .

Just that simple .

Give the guy a medal and a free thousand rounds of ammo for his gun .

 

[joab]

I understand you have an argumentative nature, but you're barking up the wrong tree.

If I am the one with the argumentative natire why was it you that started this by quoting me and then making a totally irrelevant comment regarding the comment I made

I never said that the info I gave was irrelevant, you however present a set of statutes that may or may not support shooting a thief when there is absolutely no indication that the BGs stole anything or that they even managed to actually gain entrance to the home in the first place
I have asked several times why you picked me out to do that

The penal code you posted clearly states that for the purpose of the section you posted the definition for word "escape" would coincide with the definition given in section 38.01

§ 9.01. DEFINITIONS. In this chapter:
(1) "Custody" has the meaning assigned by Section
38.01.
(2) "Escape" has the meaning assigned by Section
38.01.

I then gave you that definition, which makes no mention of pursuing off property in a vehicle

Nowhere in that 901 does it give permission for an ordinary citizen to get into a vehicular pursuit to hunt down and kill people who may or may not have committed a burglary on their property
The statute you provided is not one of disallowance it is a specific set of allowances

As far as I'm concerned they started a war with the homeowner and he finished it .

I agree, but that doesn't mean that his actions are condoned by law