Page 2 of 2
Posted: Tue Aug 21, 2007 7:32 am
by MoJo
Shooting at vehicles is risky at best, if you hit the driver then there is a 4,000 pound unguided missile hurtling around. Render aid to the injured, and be the best witness you can.
Posted: Tue Aug 21, 2007 7:39 am
by stevie_d_64
I agree with the whole no shoot analysis...I would not take a shot like that in the first place regardless...
The question I have is that if the CHL'er type person was in the parking lot of the Cowboy Palace...Could we assume for a moment that they might have been "in" the Cowboy Palace enjoying the venue???
Sounds to me like a place that might possibly be off-limits to be in, in the first place, and possibly another bad judgement call on that particular CHL'er...
Just thought I would float that out there for general consumption...
"Intensive" isn't it Txi???
I'm in for it now!
Posted: Tue Aug 21, 2007 9:01 am
by Longtooths
I think my first concern would be for the victim. Not for hurting the occupant of the truck.
A few things come to mind.
1) I hear with more and more about older people mistaking the peddles and barrelling through crowds of people.
2) Person in truck had a heart attack.
3) I hit the gas tank and cause injury to people in parking lot.
Posted: Tue Aug 21, 2007 9:30 am
by KBCraig
stevie_d_64 wrote:The question I have is that if the CHL'er type person was in the parking lot of the Cowboy Palace...Could we assume for a moment that they might have been "in" the Cowboy Palace enjoying the venue???
Sounds to me like a place that might possibly be off-limits to be in
"Assume", "Sounds to me", "might possibly be" are all speculation. You can theorize all day, but still not know the facts of the case, which are all that count.
Posted: Tue Aug 21, 2007 10:48 am
by Paladin
KBCraig wrote:This is a good lesson in how to read news articles.
If you read the report and immediately pictured somebody blasting away at a truck fleeing the scene, then you drew from the article exactly what the writer/editor intended.
If you read the report and wondered when the shots were fired, if the shooter was also in danger of being run over, how the parking lot was laid out and what were the positions of the particpants, etc., etc., then congratulations! You've learned how to read news articles with an objective eye!
You should never, ever, read a news article and feel you've got more answers than questions. Especially when it involves a political hot topic.
Kevin
+1 to that
Posted: Tue Aug 21, 2007 2:25 pm
by mikesrex
without knowing the specifics of the situation, I'm not sure what would be the right thing to do.
as a general guideline, though, I would say it's a bad idea to shoot at a vehicle of a person who is fleeing the scene after doing a bad thing.
Posted: Tue Aug 21, 2007 2:50 pm
by HankB
As many have pointed out, there are a LOT of missing details in the story - too many, in my opinion, for an informed judgement on this case.
Here's a general question for those legal-eagles amongst us: how does Texas case law treat a citizen who uses deadly force in an attempt to prevent the escape of a perp he just personally witnessed, moments ago, commit an act of violence that resulted in serious injury or death to a third party?
And would it make any difference if that third party is a family member?
(Note that this is a general question - don't assume I believe it's directly applicable to the post that begain this thread.)
Posted: Tue Aug 21, 2007 3:11 pm
by seamusTX
HankB wrote:Here's a general question for those legal-eagles amongst us: how does Texas case law treat a citizen who uses deadly force in an attempt to prevent the escape of a perp he just personally witnessed, moments ago, commit an act of violence that resulted in serious injury or death to a third party?
Illegal, generally.
A peace officer can use deadly force to affect an arrest or prevent escape under some circumstances, but not an ordinary citizen acting on his own:
PC §9.51. ARREST AND SEARCH. (a) A peace officer, or a person
acting in a peace officer's presence and at his direction, is justified in
using force against another when and to the degree the actor reasonably
believes the force is immediately necessary to make or assist in
making an arrest or search, or to prevent or assist in preventing
(1) the actor reasonably believes the arrest or search is lawful or,
if the arrest or search is made under a warrant, he reasonably believes
the warrant is valid; and
(2) before using force, the actor manifests his purpose to arrest or
search and identifies himself as a peace officer or as one acting at a
peace officer's direction, unless he reasonably believes his purpose
and identity are already known by or cannot reasonably be made
known to the person to be arrested.
(b) A person other than a peace officer (or one acting at his direction)
is justified in using force against another when and to the degree
the actor reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary to
make or assist in making a lawful arrest, or to prevent or assist in
preventing escape after lawful arrest if, before using force, the actor
manifests his purpose to and the reason for the arrest or reasonably
believes his purpose and the reason are already known by or cannot
reasonably be made known to the person to be arrested.
(c) A peace officer is justified in using deadly force against another
when and to the degree the peace officer reasonably believes the
deadly force is immediately necessary to make an arrest, or to prevent
escape after arrest, if the use of force would have been justified under
Subsection (a) and:...
You can read the rest of the details on the web site.
- Jim
Posted: Tue Aug 21, 2007 3:13 pm
by LedJedi
Insufficient data to process.
Please input additional parameters.
Posted: Tue Aug 21, 2007 3:48 pm
by ricor
Where did the CHLed person come from. If he came from Cowboy's I would think it was a bar with 51% of its sales coming from the consumption of alcohol on the premises. R
Posted: Tue Aug 21, 2007 5:20 pm
by KBCraig
ricor wrote:Where did the CHLed person come from. If he came from Cowboy's I would think it was a bar with 51% of its sales coming from the consumption of alcohol on the premises. R
And I would think that I don't know that, thus shouldn't assume that.
I would also think there are other possibilities, such as that he was dropping someone off or picking someone up.