question regarding the use of deadly force to protect property (Texas)

P

Pecos21

New member
I got a debate going on with a friend.
In Texas, can you use deadly (lethal) force to protect your property? That is, can you shoot to kill if someone is breaking into your vehicle in your drive way, or walking out of your house with a TV? If you have any links that can reference actual laws or case laws, it would be needed.

I seem to remember in law class, that lethal force could only be used to protect your own life when there is reasonable concern of danger. I didnt think there was a "castle doctrine" in Texas similar to Florida???

Thanks for the help
 
IIRC in Texas you can shoot anybody stealing from your property after dark. No threat is required, and the value is irrelevant. We just moved from there. I am not a lawyer, but I did sleep at a Holiday Inn.
 
You could use deadly force against an arsonist if he is in the process of trying to start the fire.

If he pulls a weapon out to carjack you I would feel that I could shoot. If it was just carjacking I might pull the pistol because I felt my life was threatened. If the jacker decides to run I am going to let him go.

Also if a guy is running out the door with a TV I am probably going to let him go because my TV has a replacement warranty. I dont think a TV is worth shooting somebody over.

Night time creates some special circumstances under Texas law. However, you might want to count family heads before you pull that trigger.

For my own purposes if I pull a firearm because I feel that my life or anothers life is threatened and the criminal stops and surrenders or chooses to flee he has pretty much ceased and desisted. So I would not use deadly force. Hopefully I got a good look to give the police a good description.
 
This is what I found when I googled it .You gotta love Texas :D


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.
 
(A) the land or property cannot be protected or recovered by any other means;
Click to expand...

Alice Davison of Tac Pro Shooting Center covered this in my CHL class. Think about it...if it is insured, then you had better let it go. Meaning that in Texas most homeowners insurance covers items stolen from the home, or from one of the homeowner's vehicles. If you have homeowners insurance, then you may be in an indefensible position. On the other hand, this happens from time to time, and the end result is that you will come before the Grand Jury, but it is rare that anyone gets true billed.

(A) to prevent the other's imminent commission of arson, burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, theft during the nighttime, or criminal mischief during the nighttime
Click to expand...

It would probably be wise to know just exactly what constitutes criminal mischief.
 
Last edited:
I didn't write it,I just copied it.If it were me I would and I were that confused or concerned about the meaning I would do two things.
1 Consult a lawyer
2 Consult your local prosecutor
 
Or dont take a human life with your weapon unless positively absolutely neccessary. Like I said If I pull my firearm on the perp and he ceases and desists and surrenders game over. I dont have to shoot him. As far as shooting somebody over a cheap TV if he doesnt stop.... no way.

The objective is to use the minimum amount of force to make the perp cease and desist. If his actions threatens my life or the life of another and he doesn't stop then deadly force is called for.
 
thank god some one said it, eghad is right, why do you want to know if you can kill him? most car robbers would stop when you have a car aimed at them and if u need to shoot him in the arm, the way you're asking its as if you want the all clear.

just an observation.
 
I did pull a gun on someone I thought was breaking in my effeciency apartment one night when I was single. It was not in the best part of town. As soon as I snatched the door open with my right hand and pointed the revolver at his face with my left hand. He turned and ran away. It was a wino looking for a place to crawl into. I did ruin his drunk as he instantly sobered and said he was in the wrong place. I didnt have to shoot him. Thank goodness for that.

I will cross that bridge as a situation arises.
 
This isn't a thread about the morality of shooting a thieving parasite; it's a thread about whether it's legal in Texas to shoot a thieving parasite, and, if so, under what conditions. I wouldn't need Alice Davison or anybody else to read and comprehend a law that's written so clearly.
 
most car robbers would stop when you have a car aimed at them and if u need to shoot him in the arm
Click to expand...


Shoot someone in the arm? If you have to use deadly force, I hope you don't try to shoot for the arm. Someone has been watching too many movies.
 
Any shot fired is lethal force, practically and legally.

Also, despite the reading of the law - some DAs in TX have a track record of trying to prosecute any defensive shooting for property as that is their bias. You are presumend innocent but still have to shell out big bucks to clear yourself.

One problem of the gun world is that folks think things are absolute. The law is clear so you will have no problem. Welcome to reality. Sometimes I think it is a cognitive flaw that leads folks to ignore the practical as they think the world works in the absolute fashion that they think it should.

Or they just posture as a tough guy, shoot 'em up Texan or wherever.
 
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.
Click to expand...

Without knowing section 9.41, you can't know what this section permits.
 
Yes you can.

Years ago, I was indicted in FT. Bend County for 'Deadly Conduct', the DA requested dismissal as the incident happened at night.

I had shot a burglars car, with him in it, in the wheel. Shooting a car is deadly conduct during the day, but at night it is ok.

Got the papers that prove it. :)
 
Glenn E. Meyer

Glenn E. Meyer,
I don't mean to hurt your feelings but really get a grip.This whole thread is just pure speculation. You sound like a anti- gunner.The guy just asked a question and while you are entitled to your opinion we have ours and I for one don't think I am some sort of tough guy.I am just one of many who have worked hard all my life to get what I have and it will be a cold day in ---- before I let someone who could care less about me or anyone else and let them take what I have or hurt me or a loved one without a fight if at all possible.Now if you have a problem with that then its just that your problem.If you don't like the law then I would suggest that you don't live in Texas

Too bad we don't have the tongue sticking out smilie from the THR. Consider it put here
Click to expand...

Right back at ya pal :D This just in. I'm voting for Ron Paul :eek: and I suppose you have a problem with that also.
 
Last edited:
+1 RERICK,

Texas has the right idea and is in the right direction. I think Texas law on this needs adjustment. Personally, I don't think shooting during the daylight should be necessarily illegal. If the property can be prevented from being stolen without having to kill the thief, then obviously shooting is unnecessary and is excessive force, BUT property is not unimportant. Like you said,
I am just one of many who have worked hard all my life to get what I have and it will be a cold day in ---- before I let someone who could care less about me or anyone else and let them take what I have or hurt me or a loved one without a fight if at all possible.
Click to expand...
Property represents the fruit of your labor and it is a part of your life. For someone to steal that means they are stealing a portion of your life for their own because they are too lazy and worthless to work for it. I don't think holding that position means you are a posturing "tough guy" just a hard working honest guy who refuses to be violated as any man should.

I wish all states still allowed deadly force to protect property....actually, in a sense, some do. The Koreans in the LA riots were using deadly force to protect their property from looters and thugs and are viewed as heroes today (Not "tough guys")
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top