Subject:
|
Re: Go ahead, make my day!
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Thu, 26 Jul 2001 15:11:01 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
971 times
|
| |
|
|
> >
> > > Think otherwise? Go check your state law.
> >
> > Now THAT is what you should have said in the first place. And I suggest you >>check out
> > all 50 state laws - some are even more lenient than the CO law.
>
> Then quote me them instead of just shooting your mouth off. I'm sure some
> are more lenient then others (I noted all bets were off on Texas, for
> example - you are presuming my opinion again when I have already stated
> otherwise).
>
> Bruce
Well, since you keep bringing Texas up, I thought I would give you a little
reading material....
SUBCHAPTER C. PROTECTION OF PERSONS
§ 9.31. Self-Defense
(a) Except as provided in Subsection (b), a person is justified in
using force against another when and to the degree he reasonably believes
the force is immediately necessary to protect himself against the other's
use or attempted use of unlawful force.
(b) The use of force against another is not justified:
(1) in response to verbal provocation alone;
(2) to resist an arrest or search that the actor knows is being made by
a peace officer, or by a person acting in a peace officer's presence and at
his direction, even though the arrest or search is unlawful, unless the
resistance is justified under Subsection (c);
(3) if the actor consented to the exact force used or attempted by the
other;
(4) if the actor provoked the other's use or attempted use of unlawful
force, unless:
(A) the actor abandons the encounter, or clearly communicates to the
other his intent to do so reasonably believing he cannot safely abandon the
encounter; and
(B) the other nevertheless continues or attempts to use unlawful force
against the actor; or
(5) if the actor sought an explanation from or discussion with the
other person concerning the actor's differences with the other person while
the actor was:
(A) carrying a weapon in violation of Section 46.02; or
(B) possessing or transporting a weapon in violation of Section 46.05.
(c) The use of force to resist an arrest or search is justified:
(1) if, before the actor offers any resistance, the peace officer (or
person acting at his direction) uses or attempts to use greater force than
necessary to make the arrest or search; and
(2) when and to the degree the actor reasonably believes the force is
immediately necessary to protect himself against the peace officer's (or
other person's) use or attempted use of greater force than necessary.
(d) The use of deadly force is not justified under this subchapter
except as provided in Sections 9.32, 9.33, and 9.34.
Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 883, ch. 399, § 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974. Amended by
Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 900, § 1.01, eff. Sept. 1, 1994.
Amended by Acts 1995, 74th Leg., ch. 190, § 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1995.
§ 9.32. Deadly Force in Defense of Person
(a) A person is justified in using deadly force against another:
(1) if he would be justified in using force against the other under
Section 9.31;
(2) if a reasonable person in the actor's situation would not have
retreated; and
(3) when and to the degree he reasonably believes the deadly force is
immediately necessary:
(A) to protect himself against the other's use or attempted use of
unlawful deadly force; or
(B) to prevent the other's imminent commission of aggravated
kidnapping, murder, sexual assault, aggravated sexual assault, robbery, or
aggravated robbery.
(b) The requirement imposed by Subsection (a)(2) does not apply to an
actor who uses force against a person who is at the time of the use of force
committing an offense of unlawful entry in the habitation of the actor.
Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 883, ch. 399, § 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974. Amended by
Acts 1983, 68th Leg., p. 5316, ch. 977, § 5, eff. Sept. 1, 1983; Acts 1993,
73rd Leg., ch. 900, § 1.01, eff. Sept. 1, 1994.
Amended by Acts 1995, 74th Leg., ch. 235, § 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1995.
§ 9.33. Defense of Third Person
A person is justified in using force or deadly force against another to
protect a third person if:
(1) under the circumstances as the actor reasonably believes them to
be, the actor would be justified under Section 9.31 or 9.32 in using force
or deadly force to protect himself against the unlawful force or unlawful
deadly force he reasonably believes to be threatening the third person he
seeks to protect; and
(2) the actor reasonably believes that his intervention is immediately
necessary to protect the third person.
Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 883, ch. 399, § 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974. Amended by
Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 900, § 1.01, eff. Sept. 1, 1994.
§ 9.34. Protection of Life or Health
(a) A person is justified in using force, but not deadly force, against
another when and to the degree he reasonably believes the force is
immediately necessary to prevent the other from committing suicide or
inflicting serious bodily injury to himself.
(b) A person is justified in using both force and deadly force against
another when and to the degree he reasonably believes the force or deadly
force is immediately necessary to preserve the other's life in an emergency.
Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 883, ch. 399, § 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974. Amended by
Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 900, § 1.01, eff. Sept. 1, 1994.
SUBCHAPTER D. PROTECTION OF PROPERTY
§ 9.41. Protection of One's Own Property
(a) A person in lawful possession of land or tangible, movable property
is justified in using force against another when and to the degree the actor
reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary to prevent or
terminate the other's trespass on the land or unlawful interference with the
property.
(b) A person unlawfully dispossessed of land or tangible, movable
property by another is justified in using force against the other when and
to the degree the actor reasonably believes the force is immediately
necessary to reenter the land or recover the property if the actor uses the
force immediately or in fresh pursuit after the dispossession and:
(1) the actor reasonably believes the other had no claim of right when
he dispossessed the actor; or
(2) the other accomplished the dispossession by using force, threat, or
fraud against the actor.
Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 883, ch. 399, § 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974. Amended by
Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 900, § 1.01, eff. Sept. 1, 1994.
§ 9.42. Deadly Force to Protect Property
A person is justified in using deadly force against another to protect
land or tangible, movable property:
(1) if he would be justified in using force against the other under
Section 9.41; and
(2) when and to the degree he reasonably believes the deadly force is
immediately necessary:
(A) to prevent the other's imminent commission of arson, burglary,
robbery, aggravated robbery, theft during the nighttime, or criminal
mischief during the nighttime; or
(B) to prevent the other who is fleeing immediately after committing
burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, or theft during the nighttime from
escaping with the property; and
(3) he reasonably believes that:
(A) the land or property cannot be protected or recovered by any other
means; or
(B) the use of force other than deadly force to protect or recover the
land or property would expose the actor or another to a substantial risk of
death or serious bodily injury.
Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 883, ch. 399, § 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974. Amended by
Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 900, § 1.01, eff. Sept. 1, 1994.
§ 9.43. Protection of Third Person's Property
A person is justified in using force or deadly force against another to
protect land or tangible, movable property of a third person if, under the
circumstances as he reasonably believes them to be, the actor would be
justified under Section 9.41 or 9.42 in using force or deadly force to
protect his own land or property and:
(1) the actor reasonably believes the unlawful interference constitutes
attempted or consummated theft of or criminal mischief to the tangible,
movable property; or
(2) the actor reasonably believes that:
(A) the third person has requested his protection of the land or property;
(B) he has a legal duty to protect the third person's land or property; or
(C) the third person whose land or property he uses force or deadly
force to protect is the actor's spouse, parent, or child, resides with the
actor, or is under the actor's care.
Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 883, ch. 399, § 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974. Amended by
Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 900, § 1.01, eff. Sept. 1, 1994.
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Go ahead, make my day!
|
| (...) It's interesting reading. The defense of property part is what I suspected it might be - even though that is couched in "reasonable belief" terms and "can't get the property back" terms, tackling a guy running off with your stereo is fraught (...) (23 years ago, 26-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Go ahead, make my day!
|
| (...) Actually, the only law that was quoted here on the board was from Colorado. I've heard similiar claims from people in other states - I can't think of one that didn't mention the stuff about reasonable belief that you were in some sort of (...) (23 years ago, 25-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
110 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
