TexasCHLforum.com

OneGun wrote: Thanks for the clarification! I was thinking about the Joe Horn shooting in Pasadena, TX a number of years ago where Joe Horn shot and killed two burglars who were burglarizing his neighbor's house in broad daylight. At that time, the grand jury declined to indict and the explanation was that a person can use deadly force to protect his property or a third person's property.

Thanks again for your the clarification.

Is that the actual law? My understanding was to be able to use that defense, you need to have some sort of agreement with the neighbor that you were "watching" or otherwise responsible for the property... Maybe I've got it wrong?

I like my neighbors, not sure I'd risk a grand jury for them though.

OneGun wrote:I would like a little clarification. If a person trespasses in my house with a weapon, It would be a defense from prosecution to shoot the trespasser. However, if an armed trespasser is on my land and shoots my horse, I can't shoot the armed trespasser?

My take: If your horse is already dead and he's not threatening otherwise, then no, you can't shoot him. Shooting your horse or dog is the same as shooting your lawn mower as far as Texas is concerned, all of the above are property. The person can be held liable for the damage to property.

If you were to use force to prevent what you believed to be immanent damage to your property which could not be avoided by any other means, then you *might* be justified. You might be more justified if it was dark and they were "in progress".

For the average cost of legal defense involved in a shooting (supposedly around $50k), I can get a lot of insurance. I can also replace a lot of lawn mowers. And as upset as I might be about someone shooting my dog - regardless of how I might feel about it - I know better than to make a deadly response.