TexasCHLforum.com

Nano wrote:

Drjfiremedic wrote:

AEA wrote:Are you telling us that this WAS NOT covered in your CHL Class?

AEA, I could right a book about the pertinent information that was not covered along with a lot of other wrong info. Instructors are people too, and are very capable of making mistakes right along with the rest of us. That is a big reason for forums such as this one. A little group discussion goes a long way. I like to get on here and read the scenario based questions, (there usually is a lot of good input) but there are always the nay sayers that criticize. That aint what its about.

I completely agree with you.

It's interesting. On one hand you have people who can list many things that weren't covered in their class. On the other, lots of people say the class is too long. Maybe the solution is to teach useful and important stuff instead of telling war stories and playing videos to kill time.

You are absolutely right.

sumyungai wrote:It's interesting. On one hand you have people who can list many things that weren't covered in their class. On the other, lots of people say the class is too long. Maybe the solution is to teach useful and important stuff instead of telling war stories and playing videos to kill time.

Absolutely!!! No videos in the one I went to--just an instructor who went on a rant for hours without a break! And what he did say wasn't exactly accurate. It's a good thing I can read for myself and that I found this forum! another reason I am going to the instructor class--I KNOW I can do a better job! I may not have the LE experience he did--but that also means I won't have all the war stories to tell.

Yes, call the cops, give a description, so the cops will hopefully catch the guy and prevent further crimes.

If I believed the situation warrants my drawing my pistol, I am not going to wait around to see what happens next. I am shooting as soon as I clear the holster, and plenty of other people will be calling 911.

_________________
... holding His hand.

I agree George, waiting to see if he is going to drop it takes to long!

ElGato wrote:If I believed the situation warrants my drawing my pistol, I am not going to wait around to see what happens next. I am shooting as soon as I clear the holster, and plenty of other people will be calling 911.

_________________
... holding His hand.

I agree George, waiting to see if he is going to drop it takes to long!

sumyungai wrote:

The Texan Ninja wrote:You are walking to your car at night and some thug walks up with a knife and demands money. You draw your weapon and the BG drops the knife and takes off running.

Shooting him in the back might be tempting but it's usually not a good idea.

ElGato, I know you to be an experienced CHLer. So what if the BG sees the gun and stops the attack immediately? Still gonna shoot?

Actually, I can think of half a dozen scenarios where I might draw my gun before actually coming face to face with the BG..... You're in the back refrigerator aisle of a 7/11 when bad guy comes in to rob it at gunpoint. You're out of sight to him, but you don't know if he's going to canvass the place before exiting. Wouldn't you want to have your gun already out if at all possible? It would give you a tactical advantage that leaving it holstered doesn't provide. And if he exits without without coming to the rear, you can reholster without having upset anybody. That's just one.

george wrote:TAM

I defer to Gato, since he gave me the class, 2x. However, it is my understanding that when I draw my pistol, I have committed an assault.

To iterate, if I draw my pistol, I'm shooting.

This issue/question was discussed at length in 2005 in this thread: viewtopic.php?f=7&t=1262" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Somewhere on page 4 or 5 you will find Charles' conclusion in regard to
TPC 9.04 THREATS AS JUSTIFIABLE FORCE. The threat of
force is justified when the use of force is justified by this
chapter. For purposes of this section, a threat to cause death or
serious bodily injury by the production of a weapon or otherwise, as
long as the actor's purpose is limited to creating an apprehension
that he will use deadly force if necessary, does not constitute the
use of deadly force.

Kyle Brown wrote:

george wrote:TAM

I defer to Gato, since he gave me the class, 2x. However, it is my understanding that when I draw my pistol, I have committed an assault.

To iterate, if I draw my pistol, I'm shooting.

This issue/question was discussed at length in 2005 in this thread: viewtopic.php?f=7&t=1262" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Somewhere on page 4 or 5 you will find Charles' conclusion in regard to
TPC 9.04 THREATS AS JUSTIFIABLE FORCE. The threat of
force is justified when the use of force is justified by this
chapter. For purposes of this section, a threat to cause death or
serious bodily injury by the production of a weapon or otherwise, as
long as the actor's purpose is limited to creating an apprehension
that he will use deadly force if necessary, does not constitute the
use of deadly force.

He said assault, not aggravated assault, and showing the gun to cause apprehension is force as your quote shows.

I agree that using deadly force is not justified when the situation calls for force, but when the situation calls for deadly force, limiting yourself to force can get you or your family members killed.

gringo pistolero wrote:

Kyle Brown wrote:

george wrote:TAM

I defer to Gato, since he gave me the class, 2x. However, it is my understanding that when I draw my pistol, I have committed an assault.

To iterate, if I draw my pistol, I'm shooting.

This issue/question was discussed at length in 2005 in this thread: viewtopic.php?f=7&t=1262" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Somewhere on page 4 or 5 you will find Charles' conclusion in regard to
TPC 9.04 THREATS AS JUSTIFIABLE FORCE. The threat of
force is justified when the use of force is justified by this
chapter. For purposes of this section, a threat to cause death or
serious bodily injury by the production of a weapon or otherwise, as
long as the actor's purpose is limited to creating an apprehension
that he will use deadly force if necessary, does not constitute the
use of deadly force.

He said assault, not aggravated assault, and showing the gun to cause apprehension is force as your quote shows.

I agree that using deadly force is not justified when the situation calls for force, but when the situation calls for deadly force, limiting yourself to force can get you or your family members killed.

The production of a weapon in accordance with TPC 9.04 is not assault as defined in TPC 22.01. The production of a weapon in accordance with 9.04 is a threat to do bodily harm and as such is considered Justifiable Force, not assault.

Kyle Brown wrote:

gringo pistolero wrote:

Kyle Brown wrote:

george wrote:TAM

I defer to Gato, since he gave me the class, 2x. However, it is my understanding that when I draw my pistol, I have committed an assault.

To iterate, if I draw my pistol, I'm shooting.

This issue/question was discussed at length in 2005 in this thread: viewtopic.php?f=7&t=1262" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Somewhere on page 4 or 5 you will find Charles' conclusion in regard to
TPC 9.04 THREATS AS JUSTIFIABLE FORCE. The threat of
force is justified when the use of force is justified by this
chapter. For purposes of this section, a threat to cause death or
serious bodily injury by the production of a weapon or otherwise, as
long as the actor's purpose is limited to creating an apprehension
that he will use deadly force if necessary, does not constitute the
use of deadly force.

He said assault, not aggravated assault, and showing the gun to cause apprehension is force as your quote shows.

I agree that using deadly force is not justified when the situation calls for force, but when the situation calls for deadly force, limiting yourself to force can get you or your family members killed.

The production of a weapon in accordance with TPC 9.04 is not assault as defined in TPC 22.01. The production of a weapon in accordance with 9.04 is a threat to do bodily harm and as such is considered Justifiable Force, not assault.

IF it's justified. That's usually a decision for a grand jury to make, or a petit jury if you're really unlucky.

gringo pistolero wrote:

Kyle Brown wrote:

gringo pistolero wrote:

Kyle Brown wrote:

george wrote:TAM

I defer to Gato, since he gave me the class, 2x. However, it is my understanding that when I draw my pistol, I have committed an assault.

To iterate, if I draw my pistol, I'm shooting.

This issue/question was discussed at length in 2005 in this thread: viewtopic.php?f=7&t=1262" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Somewhere on page 4 or 5 you will find Charles' conclusion in regard to
TPC 9.04 THREATS AS JUSTIFIABLE FORCE. The threat of
force is justified when the use of force is justified by this
chapter. For purposes of this section, a threat to cause death or
serious bodily injury by the production of a weapon or otherwise, as
long as the actor's purpose is limited to creating an apprehension
that he will use deadly force if necessary, does not constitute the
use of deadly force.

He said assault, not aggravated assault, and showing the gun to cause apprehension is force as your quote shows.

I agree that using deadly force is not justified when the situation calls for force, but when the situation calls for deadly force, limiting yourself to force can get you or your family members killed.

The production of a weapon in accordance with TPC 9.04 is not assault as defined in TPC 22.01. The production of a weapon in accordance with 9.04 is a threat to do bodily harm and as such is considered Justifiable Force, not assault.

IF it's justified. That's usually a decision for a grand jury to make, or a petit jury if you're really unlucky.

Well, I am not sure if Charles has followed this issue subsequent to our discussion in '05, but I have with a focus on Travis and Taylor counties where I know a few ADAs and numerous criminal defense attorneys. I have not found an instance in which a CHL holder was arrested for the production of a weapon in accordance with 9.04. Do you know of any such arrests?

You can shoot someone and not be arrested. That doesn't mean it won't go to the grand jury.

IANAL and YMMV

I think there are both legal and tactical considerations. The tactical issues are affected by training, formal and informal. Also by lack of training, generally or in certain areas. It's also affected by what other gear you carry, although that's also affected by training and experience, so it may be tough to separate the two. In any event, I don't think a one size fits all paradigm works.

I do think people who say they're shooting if they draw need to ask themselves what their plan in the intermediate situations where deadly force isn't justified and harsh words aren't getting the job done. The answer to that also isn't one size fits all. Some people carry OC. Some people have mad HTH skillz. Whatever the answer, I think it's a question we all should ask ourselves. There's a saying that everything looks like a nail if we only have a hammer.