TexasCHLforum.com

My Son recently became engaged and my future Daughter-In-Law is GREAT, they complement each other very well.

My scenario is as follows, I am carrying with the complete family, but one family member is a convicted felon. I get over taken by a BG, gun becomes available for convicted family member, they take action using the gun to defend the family, will the convicted family member be in further trouble? Just assume that the use of deadly force is justified, they are the closest and in proper position to act.

There is a legal argument called Competing Harms, I believe. As long as the convicted felon was NOT in possesion of the gun before the attack and was justified in the use of Deadly force, they have a defense against the charge of Felon in Possesion or Unlawful Carry of Weapon because they were defending themself or a third party.

I am not a lawyer and did not stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night.

soccerguy59 wrote:My Son recently became engaged and my future Daughter-In-Law is GREAT, they complement each other very well.

My scenario is as follows, I am carrying with the complete family, but one family member is a convicted felon. I get over taken by a BG, gun becomes available for convicted family member, they take action using the gun to defend the family, will the convicted family member be in further trouble? Just assume that the use of deadly force is justified, they are the closest and in proper position to act.

That is definatly a conundrum you have opend there. I think the out come would depend on too many variable to give a deciding factor one way or the other.

It depends upon the prosecutor. Some of them would nail a felon even if he had saved a busload of school kids and nuns from a crazed killer.

You may have noticed that citizens (non-CHL-holders) who defend themselves are sometimes guilty of UCW but not prosecuted.

- Jim

soccerguy59 wrote:My Son recently became engaged and my future Daughter-In-Law is GREAT, they complement each other very well.

My scenario is as follows, I am carrying with the complete family, but one family member is a convicted felon. I get over taken by a BG, gun becomes available for convicted family member, they take action using the gun to defend the family, will the convicted family member be in further trouble? Just assume that the use of deadly force is justified, they are the closest and in proper position to act.

The obvious solution to this situation is for one or more other family members to get their CHL and carry a weapon as well. This way the one with the previous conviction will not be placed in this sticky situation...

Jeremae has a valid point about the doctrine of competing harms.

Basically it says that it is ok to break a law if the harm caused by NOT breaking the law would be worse.

Unfortunately, it is my understanding that this is far from ironclad and the results of using this type of defense will vary significantly even in similar cases.

Personally, I think that in a situation such as you have described, there would probably not be an issue arising from a felon using a weapon of opportunity in a legal defense situation. If there were 12 of me on the jury, he'd be fine. On the other hand, there are probably many others who feel differently... and they might be part of that jury as well.

Sangiovese wrote:
Personally, I think that in a situation such as you have described, there would probably not be an issue arising from a felon using a weapon of opportunity in a legal defense situation. If there were 12 of me on the jury, he'd be fine. On the other hand, there are probably many others who feel differently... and they might be part of that jury as well.

I know if there were one of me or most people on this forum he would be OK ... At least until they retry the case.