I guess my post is about the civil lawsuits, and if it would be better to wound someone, or kill them. Or, if it made any difference at all...
CZMatt ~
Legally, shooting a gun at someone
is using deadly force against them, even if they are not killed.
Deadly force, legally, is that degree of force a reasonable and prudent person would consider capable of causing death or
grave bodily harm. Grave bodily harm is a little bit of a slippery term, but it's basically a crippling injury, or an injury that will cause problems more than a year later.
Getting shot in the hand, arm, or leg could cause the person shot to die, or to be crippled for life. Any reasonable person knows this. Therefore,
any shot fired in the direction of another human being is using deadly force, no matter where on the person's body you aim.
So if you fire a shot, it needs to be as legally defensible if you kill them as it would be if you didn't kill them. You said you already know when the laws in Texas allow you to kill someone.
The exact same laws apply to you whether you 'shoot to kill' or 'shoot to wound.' There is no legal difference at all; by the standards used in criminal court, firing a gun at another person
is deadly force. *
If you are worried about civil court or being sued, keep in mind that anyone in America can sue anyone else for anything at all. Whether such suits are successful is a different story.
If your shot was justified and the criminal court finds you not guilty, you've got a better chance of surviving the civil action unscathed.
If your shot was not justified, if you plea bargain or lose the criminal trial, you've got a worse chance of getting through the civil action.
The size of the award in civil court really doesn't matter at that point. I think as a rule of thumb, a lost suit for a maimed person will be higher than a suit for a dead person. But a lost suit is going to break the bank in any case.
Better make sure you
really needed to fire that gun before you pull the trigger.
pax
* Of course, if they're dead and you shouldn't have fired, you get charged with homicide, whereas if they're not dead and you shouldn't have fired you get charged with attempted homicide. But the legal standards used to judge whether you are guilty or not guilty of the charges will be exactly the same.