TX Castle Doctrine Redefined

http://www.nbc5i.com/politics/11406804/detail.html?dl=headlineclick

Starting Sept 1st Texans can now legally defend ourselves without having to make an effort to flee.

A story was told to us during our CHL classes about a man abducted at gun point. The two assailants made him get in the back seat of his own car and forced him to navigate to his bank where upon they helped him empty his account. They then forced the man to navigate to his own home where the intended on robbing his home. The man was armed. When they arrived at his home he shot both assailants to death in his drive way while still in his car. The man is now serving two life sentences for failure to flee.

This is a good revision that our governor has brought about.
 
I'll start this by saying that I am a fan of this law, and I'm glad it's been passed.

But a good point has been brought up here (and I've brought it up with others before) that it could theoretically be used to get away with murder, since it increases the burden of proof for a murder you commit in your home such that it seems (to me at least) that it'd be nearly impossible to effectively prosecute.

No, I don't think this is something that will be a common problem, and yes I think the benefits outweigh any theoretical drawbacks. But I've never seen a serious explanation, founded in either logic or understanding of the law (and I admit that my understanding is not the best), as to why this isn't an issue. It's either joked about or dismissed.
 
Frustrating

I'd aver that no sane human being is "anxious" to take the life of another frivolously. And I sincerely hope that none of us would ever have to take a life in defense of our loved ones, etc.

But REALITY makes a mockery of "pious hopes"! How many repeatedly saw the criminal who desecrated the lady who was over 100 years old and severly constrained? And he didn't stop there, neither are such crimes rare.

I think it is fatuous to ask, "Will you kill a person just for your purse?" Who's so sure of the criminal's full extent of depravity?

The more I look at the news and monitor crime surge, the more I'm convinced that there is a need to send an unmistakable message to actual and potential criminals that they would be dealt with swiftly, surely, and impressively - and that their "loved ones" would NOT be able to give grief to anyone who does society this great service.

It's frustrating to know that a governor - kudos to him for this - has to sign a document making such common sense action legal.
 
Self-defense is still an affirmative defense that provides justification for a homicide. The castle doctrine does not shift the burden of proof to the State to disprove self-defense.

What the law does do is create a presumption that someone who forcibly enters your home has the intent to inflict great bodily harm. It also eliminates the duty to retreat when not at home and faced with imminent bodily harm.

Therefore, if someone breaks into your home you don't have to discern his intent and don't have to prove that the perp intended to inflict great bodily harm.

If you are not at home and are threatened with bodily harm, you don't have to run away. You still have to prove that the perp intended to inflict great bodily harm.

This all presupposes that you're not engaged in illegal activity, which is like duh. :p

Additionally, when I say "prove" I am not necessarily implying in a court of law.
 
The best thing about this is that it keeps the scumbag or his family from turning around and suing.
kudos to him for this
Click to expand...
and about nothing else. He's trying to take my uncles ranch for the Trans Texas Corridor. Imminent domain makes me furious!
 
Texas has always been more lenient in its prosecution of people trying to protect themselves and their property. Case in point is repeated (over the years) failure to prosecute debtors whose vehicles were being repossessed (particularly at night) shooting the repossessor and never being prosecuted. In most states a person who stepped out their door and shot the driver of a tow truck as the tow truck was fleeing (with or without their vehicle) would be charged...there have been numerous cases in Texas where there were no charges filed. I don't know if any of these shootings resulted in civil judgments against the debtors or not. I am curious how these laws in various states will be applied in the case of repossessors as I repo in the neighborhood of 1000 vehicles per year.
 
The Florida version of this law, along with the knowledge that I'm armed, has plus a restraining order, has put an 8-month long hole in a stalking campaign I had endured for 3 years at that time.

Here's to ya, TX.
 
If it's not too personal and will not betray your anonymity, I am curious how it helped in your situation. I am always interested in how legislation actually affects those it was intended to help as well as any unintended consequences.

Likewise, does anyone else have any actual examples in which "castle doctrine" statutes have proven beneficial or conversely had unforeseen results?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top