TexasCHLforum.com

Jumping Frog wrote:

WildBill wrote:I think that people are getting too wrapped up about whether it is right or legal to shoot at the escaping robber.

I agree that it is important to maintain the distinction between whether his conduct was legal versus whether his conduct acceptable.

WildBill wrote:The CHLer was charged with Deadly Conduct.

Sec. 22.05. DEADLY CONDUCT. (a) A person commits an offense if he recklessly engages in conduct that places another in imminent danger of serious bodily injury.
. . .

IANAL, but it seems to me that the only issue is whether his conduct was reckless when he fired his gun.

There is definitely more than one issue. In addition to whether his acts were legally reckless (which has a higher standard of culpability than negligence), if he has competent defense they will also raise the issue of whether his alleged deadly conduct was justified under PC §9.22. NECESSITY.

spiga35 wrote:

jmra wrote:

03Lightningrocks wrote:

jmra wrote:

Superman wrote:

03Lightningrocks wrote:If a guy punches you and runs, he is no longer a threat..

You are assuming a lot when you state "he is no longer a threat." How does one come to that conclusion? Is it how far away he runs after hitting me or the time elapsed since he hit me? Is it if he runs around a corner...or three corners? Or is it if he says "uncle"? If I'm a victim of the "knockout game," are you suggesting I can't do anything because it's just one punch and then they run?

"It" is what a jury says it is. Good luck with that.

Sounds to me like somebody did not pay attention in class. You cannot shoot a person to extract your revenge or get even. If they are running away, it is done, over... Finished.

once they turn tail you are on shaky ground to say the least. As for the phone, I have stated many times on this forum that I would not shoot solely to retrieve property. It simply isn't worth it.

can u publish your home address and what type of car u drive. i want criminals to find your home and steal everyting u own bc they will have no fear that u will attempt to retrieve your property!

stroo wrote:Nope. Charging an accomplice is one kind of felony murder. But it is broader than that. If you commit a felony and someone dies as a result, you become guilty of felony murder regardless of who actually killed the person.

WildBill wrote:In this case, is reckless behavior the same as negligence?

Keith B wrote:

Superman wrote:...any time you discharge you gun in self defense there is likelihood of the bullet striking something unintended, even if you hit your target.

Here is the whole enchilada. The guy selling the phone was within the legal right to do what he did in trying to retrieve his stolen property. However, when he used deadly force he 'apparently' was very negligent in how he was shooting at the guy in a crowded parking lot. I believe had he been inside Walmart and the guy been attacking him or close enough that the shots were hitting or hitting close to the target the police might not have had grounds to arrest him. However, the police must have felt that when he was shooting outside the Walmart and the location of the bullets that didn't hit their target constituted negligence in the act of trying to retrieve his property, so they arrested him for that. You can't just go slinging lead everywhere. I was involved in an incident as a LEO where I had to not shoot because of a quick stop and glass windows with people behind the BG as he was running toward the building after shooting at us. I had already picked out my safe shot lane and was starting to pull the trigger of my handgun as he entered the zone when another officer had the clear angle and shot the BG. It was all very quick, but that is the type of decision you must be able to make on the fly in these situations. In this case the CHL didn't use good judgement in the method he used to try to recover his phone.

jmra wrote:

spiga35 wrote:

jmra wrote:

03Lightningrocks wrote:

jmra wrote:

Superman wrote:

03Lightningrocks wrote:If a guy punches you and runs, he is no longer a threat..

You are assuming a lot when you state "he is no longer a threat." How does one come to that conclusion? Is it how far away he runs after hitting me or the time elapsed since he hit me? Is it if he runs around a corner...or three corners? Or is it if he says "uncle"? If I'm a victim of the "knockout game," are you suggesting I can't do anything because it's just one punch and then they run?

"It" is what a jury says it is. Good luck with that.

Sounds to me like somebody did not pay attention in class. You cannot shoot a person to extract your revenge or get even. If they are running away, it is done, over... Finished.

once they turn tail you are on shaky ground to say the least. As for the phone, I have stated many times on this forum that I would not shoot solely to retrieve property. It simply isn't worth it.

can u publish your home address and what type of car u drive. i want criminals to find your home and steal everyting u own bc they will have no fear that u will attempt to retrieve your property!

Really nice first post. You may want to read some more of my posts before you start making assumptions about me. Defending my home and shooting someone over a $200 phone are very different circumstances. Hopefully, for your sake, you will take the time to learn the difference.

03Lightningrocks wrote:
NGWAA!

puma guy wrote:

03Lightningrocks wrote:
NGWAA!

Took me a while to figure that one out! I need to find an internet acronym dictionary and buzz word theraurus
spiga35- you might want to read the rules regarding being respectful.. just saying. Welcome to the forum