"Brandishing" law or prior cases?

The "What Works, What Doesn't," "Recommendations & Experiences"

Moderators: carlson1, Crossfire


RottenApple
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 2
Posts: 1662
Joined: Sun Jan 09, 2011 3:19 pm

Re: "Brandishing" law or prior cases?

#16

Post by RottenApple » Mon Apr 22, 2019 7:23 pm

Jason Todd wrote:
Mon Apr 22, 2019 12:01 pm
I never understood why some people need to bump an old thread to add false information.
Well. Now I feel a right ID10T for responding. I saw his new response and assumed (my bad) that it was a new thread. :???:

User avatar

mojo84
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 5
Posts: 8947
Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2011 4:07 pm
Location: Boerne, TX (Kendall County)

Re: "Brandishing" law or prior cases?

#17

Post by mojo84 » Mon Apr 22, 2019 7:31 pm

RottenApple wrote:
Mon Apr 22, 2019 7:23 pm
Jason Todd wrote:
Mon Apr 22, 2019 12:01 pm
I never understood why some people need to bump an old thread to add false information.
Well. Now I feel a right ID10T for responding. I saw his new response and assumed (my bad) that it was a new thread. :???:
It wasn't that old of a thread. Nonetheless, it was resurrected with bad info.


WildRose
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 3
Posts: 542
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2018 1:30 am

Re: "Brandishing" law or prior cases?

#18

Post by WildRose » Mon Apr 22, 2019 9:12 pm

RottenApple wrote:
Mon Apr 22, 2019 10:11 am
WildRose wrote:
Mon Apr 22, 2019 2:17 am
It's really pretty simple. If you have a lawful use of force but not deadly force drawing your weapon would be a crime.
As noted by rob777 above, this is not entirely correct.

PC §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 (which is what drawing your firearm would be), 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.

So if you are in a situation where you are legally authorized to use force, but not necessarily deadly force, then drawing your firearm is only use of force if your intent in doing so is to create apprehension in your assailant that you will use deadly force if necessary.
While they are not always up to date and perfectly correct on matters of law what the DPS instructors taught us on this subject is that the line is crossed when you actually draw the firearm and point it in the direction of another.

IF you feel significantly threatened and put your hand on your gun or just reveal it to the actor in a situation where force but not deadly force would be lawful in order to deescalate or prevent escalation you would be justified in taking that action but if it would not be lawful under the circumstances and you draw the weapon and point it, then you are crossing into the realm of aggravated assault and certainly risk escalating the situation with your display.

As always it boils down to the "reasonable person" defense. First you're going to have to articulate to the police (if they are called or observe the interaction) what justified your actions, then likely to the DA who decides if it goes to the GJ.

If the GJ doesn't feel you were justified then you will go to trial and have to try to convince 12 people not very happy about being on jury duty that your actions were justified.

Personally I don't want to take that risk nor will I advise my students to do so.

If the mere display is not enough to diffuse the situation and get the actor to back off you have a real problem. If you though introduce the gun into the situation by drawing it when you do not have a lawful use of deadly force and things go bad you've just signed your own pass to to the TDC.
NRA Life Member NRA Certified Instructor RSO, CRSO,
USCCA Certified Instructor
TX LTC licensed Instructor Personal/Family Protection and Self Defense Instructor.
Without The First and Second Amendments the rest are meaningless.

User avatar

bblhd672
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 4799
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2016 10:43 am
Location: TX

Re: "Brandishing" law or prior cases?

#19

Post by bblhd672 » Mon Apr 22, 2019 9:35 pm

WildRose wrote:
Mon Apr 22, 2019 9:12 pm
RottenApple wrote:
Mon Apr 22, 2019 10:11 am
WildRose wrote:
Mon Apr 22, 2019 2:17 am
It's really pretty simple. If you have a lawful use of force but not deadly force drawing your weapon would be a crime.
As noted by rob777 above, this is not entirely correct.

PC §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 (which is what drawing your firearm would be), 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.

So if you are in a situation where you are legally authorized to use force, but not necessarily deadly force, then drawing your firearm is only use of force if your intent in doing so is to create apprehension in your assailant that you will use deadly force if necessary.
While they are not always up to date and perfectly correct on matters of law what the DPS instructors taught us on this subject is that the line is crossed when you actually draw the firearm and point it in the direction of another.

IF you feel significantly threatened and put your hand on your gun or just reveal it to the actor in a situation where force but not deadly force would be lawful in order to deescalate or prevent escalation you would be justified in taking that action but if it would not be lawful under the circumstances and you draw the weapon and point it, then you are crossing into the realm of aggravated assault and certainly risk escalating the situation with your display.

As always it boils down to the "reasonable person" defense. First you're going to have to articulate to the police (if they are called or observe the interaction) what justified your actions, then likely to the DA who decides if it goes to the GJ.

If the GJ doesn't feel you were justified then you will go to trial and have to try to convince 12 people not very happy about being on jury duty that your actions were justified.

Personally I don't want to take that risk nor will I advise my students to do so.

If the mere display is not enough to diffuse the situation and get the actor to back off you have a real problem. If you though introduce the gun into the situation by drawing it when you do not have a lawful use of deadly force and things go bad you've just signed your own pass to to the TDC.
You are entitled to your opinion, I will stick with what Texas law says.
The left lies about everything. Truth is a liberal value, and truth is a conservative value, but it has never been a left-wing value. People on the left say whatever advances their immediate agenda. Power is their moral lodestar; therefore, truth is always subservient to it. - Dennis Prager


WildRose
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 3
Posts: 542
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2018 1:30 am

Re: "Brandishing" law or prior cases?

#20

Post by WildRose » Mon Apr 22, 2019 9:42 pm

bblhd672 wrote:
Mon Apr 22, 2019 9:35 pm
WildRose wrote:
Mon Apr 22, 2019 9:12 pm
RottenApple wrote:
Mon Apr 22, 2019 10:11 am
WildRose wrote:
Mon Apr 22, 2019 2:17 am
It's really pretty simple. If you have a lawful use of force but not deadly force drawing your weapon would be a crime.
As noted by rob777 above, this is not entirely correct.

PC §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 (which is what drawing your firearm would be), 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.

So if you are in a situation where you are legally authorized to use force, but not necessarily deadly force, then drawing your firearm is only use of force if your intent in doing so is to create apprehension in your assailant that you will use deadly force if necessary.
While they are not always up to date and perfectly correct on matters of law what the DPS instructors taught us on this subject is that the line is crossed when you actually draw the firearm and point it in the direction of another.

IF you feel significantly threatened and put your hand on your gun or just reveal it to the actor in a situation where force but not deadly force would be lawful in order to deescalate or prevent escalation you would be justified in taking that action but if it would not be lawful under the circumstances and you draw the weapon and point it, then you are crossing into the realm of aggravated assault and certainly risk escalating the situation with your display.

As always it boils down to the "reasonable person" defense. First you're going to have to articulate to the police (if they are called or observe the interaction) what justified your actions, then likely to the DA who decides if it goes to the GJ.

If the GJ doesn't feel you were justified then you will go to trial and have to try to convince 12 people not very happy about being on jury duty that your actions were justified.

Personally I don't want to take that risk nor will I advise my students to do so.

If the mere display is not enough to diffuse the situation and get the actor to back off you have a real problem. If you though introduce the gun into the situation by drawing it when you do not have a lawful use of deadly force and things go bad you've just signed your own pass to to the TDC.
You are entitled to your opinion, I will stick with what Texas law says.
Run with that at your own risk. I'd rather keep people out of handcuffs and out of prison.
NRA Life Member NRA Certified Instructor RSO, CRSO,
USCCA Certified Instructor
TX LTC licensed Instructor Personal/Family Protection and Self Defense Instructor.
Without The First and Second Amendments the rest are meaningless.


K.Mooneyham
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 1896
Joined: Sat Jan 12, 2013 4:27 pm
Location: Vernon, Texas

Re: "Brandishing" law or prior cases?

#21

Post by K.Mooneyham » Mon Apr 22, 2019 10:30 pm

It would certainly seem that the entirety of the argument rests upon the exact definition of "the production of a weapon" (and we all know that doesn't have anything to do with manufacturing in this instance). Is there any place in TPC that defines that phrase?

User avatar

oljames3
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 2628
Joined: Sat Jun 14, 2014 1:21 pm
Location: Elgin, Texas
Contact:

Re: "Brandishing" law or prior cases?

#22

Post by oljames3 » Tue Apr 23, 2019 10:49 am

WildRose's statements notwithstanding, Texas Penal Code section 9.04 states:
Sec. 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.
https://statutes.capitol.texas.gov/Docs/PE/htm/PE.9.htm

And a Texas lawyer says:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zINtaXThtpY

Obviously, the wisdom of such a tactic is subject to debate. Opinions differ. Texas law remains clear. TPC 9.04 sets the requirements under which you can use your firearm in a way that does not "constitute the use of deadly force."
O. Lee James, III Captain, US Army (Retired 2012), Honorable Order of St. Barbara
2/19FA, 1st Cavalry Division 73-78; 56FA BDE (Pershing) 78-81
NRA Distinguished Life Member (Disabled Vet), TSRA, NAR L1


Pedrowfwf123
Junior Member
Posts in topic: 2
Posts: 15
Joined: Tue Mar 19, 2019 10:11 am

firearm

#23

Post by Pedrowfwf123 » Tue Apr 23, 2019 11:05 am

Hi guy... i have a question im going back to the oilfield in odessa/midland tx... can i cary my gun in my moms/brothers car even though the car isn't under my name?

User avatar

Liberty
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 2
Posts: 6043
Joined: Mon Jul 03, 2006 8:49 pm
Location: Galveston
Contact:

Re: firearm

#24

Post by Liberty » Tue Apr 23, 2019 12:47 pm

Pedrowfwf123 wrote:
Tue Apr 23, 2019 11:05 am
Hi guy... i have a question im going back to the oilfield in odessa/midland tx... can i cary my gun in my moms/brothers car even though the car isn't under my name?
If you have an LTC or you are driving then, yas. Otherwise no.
Liberty''s Blog
"Today, we need a nation of Minutemen, citizens who are not only prepared to take arms, but citizens who regard the preservation of freedom as the basic purpose of their daily life and who are willing to consciously work and sacrifice for that freedom." John F. Kennedy

User avatar

mojo84
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 5
Posts: 8947
Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2011 4:07 pm
Location: Boerne, TX (Kendall County)

Re: firearm

#25

Post by mojo84 » Tue Apr 23, 2019 1:48 pm

Pedrowfwf123 wrote:
Tue Apr 23, 2019 11:05 am
Hi guy... i have a question im going back to the oilfield in odessa/midland tx... can i cary my gun in my moms/brothers car even though the car isn't under my name?
I am not aware of who the car is titled to being an issue. As long as you are the one in control of the vehicle and authorized to be in control of it, I do not believe the motorist protection act or LTC laws address who owns the vehicle. Don't take my word as the sole source though.

User avatar

Liberty
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 2
Posts: 6043
Joined: Mon Jul 03, 2006 8:49 pm
Location: Galveston
Contact:

Re: "Brandishing" law or prior cases?

#26

Post by Liberty » Tue Apr 23, 2019 4:03 pm

46.02. UNLAWFUL CARRYING WEAPONS. (a) A person commits an offense if the person:

(1) intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly carries on or about his or her person a handgun or club; and

(2) is not:

(A) on the person's own premises or premises under the person's control; or

(B) inside of or directly en route to a motor vehicle or watercraft that is owned by the person or under the person's control.

(a-1) A person commits an offense if the person intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly carries on or about his or her person a handgun in a motor vehicle or watercraft that is owned by the person or under the person's control at any time in which:
Liberty''s Blog
"Today, we need a nation of Minutemen, citizens who are not only prepared to take arms, but citizens who regard the preservation of freedom as the basic purpose of their daily life and who are willing to consciously work and sacrifice for that freedom." John F. Kennedy

User avatar

mojo84
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 5
Posts: 8947
Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2011 4:07 pm
Location: Boerne, TX (Kendall County)

Re: "Brandishing" law or prior cases?

#27

Post by mojo84 » Tue Apr 23, 2019 4:10 pm

Liberty wrote:
Tue Apr 23, 2019 4:03 pm
46.02. UNLAWFUL CARRYING WEAPONS. (a) A person commits an offense if the person:

(1) intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly carries on or about his or her person a handgun or club; and

(2) is not:

(A) on the person's own premises or premises under the person's control; or

(B) inside of or directly en route to a motor vehicle or watercraft that is owned by the person or under the person's control.

(a-1) A person commits an offense if the person intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly carries on or about his or her person a handgun in a motor vehicle or watercraft that is owned by the person or under the person's control at any time in which:
Thanks. I remembered the part I enlarged above. In the posters question, the fact he is in control of the vehicle, he should be ok.


Pedrowfwf123
Junior Member
Posts in topic: 2
Posts: 15
Joined: Tue Mar 19, 2019 10:11 am

Re: "Brandishing" law or prior cases?

#28

Post by Pedrowfwf123 » Tue Apr 23, 2019 8:27 pm

Thanks guys... just wanted to be safe incase i do get pulled over i dont want to get in trouble... my ltc should come in any time now... i hope... but thank you both

Post Reply

Return to “New to CHL?”