TexasCHLforum.com

Charles L. Cotton wrote:

Venus Pax wrote:I wouldn't inform the intruder that I was armed.

No reason to advise someone you are armed so they can fire through the door or walls.

Chas.

I guess that is possible. But, are you going to be yelling at all? I think the flight mode is gonna kick in first if they know you are armed and intend to use it. They are usually looking for victims, not adversaries. If they think you are unarmed they are more likely to proceed. If they are gonna fire through the door, they will probably do that anyway if they can hear you yelling. It could probably go either way. Personally I want to let them know I am gonna fight and try to get the strong hand and call them if they are bluffing.

EDIT: BTW, meant to add welcome to the forum Broge5! Great question that stimulated great debate. It is discussions like these where we can challenge ourselves and get good input from all of the members. This is a great forum. I really appreciate Charles for putting it up and the moderators on here; they do an AWESOME job!

Regards,

ScubaSigGuy wrote: Well now I'm confused. Do I trust Clint or Massad?

Clint's advice applies more to the tactical aspect of the scenario.

Ayoob's is more oriented towards the legal aspects. (i.e. establishing evidence that it was a clean shoot)

I guess you take your pick as to which set of concerns is more important in a given situation - in the unlikely event that such a thing actually happens to you.

I don't think a homeowner anywhere in Texas is going to be hauled in for not warning the BG that he's armed.
Our lawyers & LEOs on the forum can correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't know of a single home-defense shooting where the homeowner was charged for shooting while in his/her own home.

frankie_the_yankee wrote:

ScubaSigGuy wrote: Well now I'm confused. Do I trust Clint or Massad?

Clint's advice applies more to the tactical aspect of the scenario.

Ayoob's is more oriented towards the legal aspects. (i.e. establishing evidence that it was a clean shoot)

I guess you take your pick as to which set of concerns is more important in a given situation - in the unlikely event that such a thing actually happens to you.

Agreed,


Loudly informing the intruder that you ARE armed and WILL use force if they advance....is bound to work "for you" rather than "against you" in the majority of situations.

Issue the warning only once, do not give your position away by continuing to talk. Don't make any unnecessary sounds from your guarded position that would serve as target indicators.

If at night, lights need to be off. Do not leave your flashlight continuously on (Provides BG a target indicator) use it only when needed. This goes for laser sighting devices as well.

Take the time to examine your dwelling and determine where the best place is to take up a defensive position (it might not be the bedroom).

Congratulations for having started the thought process, lots of folks never do.

And welcome to the forum.


Flint.

Keith B wrote:

Venus Pax wrote:I wouldn't inform the intruder that I was armed.

Venus,

Why wouldn't you tell them you were armed? I am gonna be yelling that so the 911 operator can hear. If you have to follow through with a shooting, you now have another impartial witness and a recording that you were giving THEM the chance to retreat before shooting and not laying an ambush for them.

I know, they were in your house illegally, at night, up to no good, etc., but the more evidence you have it was a righteous shooting, the better.

You don't need much evidence, a stranger in your house when most good folks are sleeping is pretty much solid enough evidence in Texas. Its a tough call, by warning him, you might inadvertently be advising him to shoot first.

Just a comment: Is it just me, or has the State of Texas not yet updated the online presentation of the Penal Code? (http://tlo2.tlc.state.tx.us/statutes/pe.toc.htm)

The very important changes brought about by SB 378 are not included yet...at least not that I can find. That's pertinent here because SB 378, "the Castle Doctrine," makes changes to Section 9 that are pertinent to this discussion. As of September 1, my understanding (and I am not even remotely a lawyer: IANERAL ) is that if someone has unlawfully and with force entered your home, you have absolutely no responsibility in Texas to warn the invader that you are armed.

So if there is no legal requirement to communicate with the invader, warn him you are armed and know he's there and have called the police, I'll agree with Clint's tactics here (and Venus's), not Mas's. Whether you stay in your designated safe room, or have to start the very dangerous process of clearing the structure to get to that upstairs bedroom where your children are, I would in no way want to give away my position, status, or condition to the bad guys until I had to...and then it hopefully would be on my terms, not theirs.

(Edited to add: my, "As of September 1..." sentence inadvertently implied that you had to warn a home invader before 9/1. Also, I neglected to mention that I assume your home alarm system is blaring away because it either detected the break-in, or because you hit the panic button. I think that's all the warning necessary...)

Skiprr wrote:Just a comment: Is it just me, or has the State of Texas not yet updated the online presentation of the Penal Code? (http://tlo2.tlc.state.tx.us/statutes/pe.toc.htm)

The very important changes brought about by SB 378 are not included yet...at least not that I can find. That's pertinent here because SB 378, "the Castle Doctrine," makes changes to Section 9 that are pertinent to this discussion. As of September 1, my understanding (and I am not even remotely a lawyer: IANERAL ) is that if someone has unlawfully and with force entered your home, you have absolutely no responsibility in Texas to warn the invader that you are armed.

That's correct. And it is also true that if you shoot someone who has unlawfully entered your home in TX, you're on pretty firm legal ground. Much more so than in most other states. So "loading" the 911 tape with your warning is not as important here as it might be elsewhere.

I would also find it hard to give my position away to an intruder, but on the ohter hand if it's some 17 yo kid stealing stuff to support his addiction it would be hard thing to live with if I gunned him down without a warning.
Even though I was justified.

As far as property crimes go I was still slightly confused when it's okay to use deadly force....

For instance, if someone was breaking into your car and you heard them from inside your house, you could use deadly force if it was at night but cannot if it's during the day.....is this correct?

take cover in bedroom behind bed,

First, do whatever you can to keep them out of your house. If you can't prevent entry then retreat to a safe room. Once they're in your house they pose a far greater threat than if they were outside trying to get in.

yobdab wrote:For instance, if someone was breaking into your car and you heard them from inside your house, you could use deadly force if it was at night but cannot if it's during the day.....is this correct?

They should have covered this in CHL class: PC §9.42. DEADLY FORCE TO PROTECT PROPERTY. Of course, there may be a difference between legally justified and morally justified, as in your 17 yo kid example.

Thanks all for the input.

Now I see that I did understand Mr. Cotton correctly, and I see his point. I have the tactical mindset as a martial arts instructor, but while many of the rules are the same, the finality of my actions are quite different here.

This definitely gives a lot to think about.

As Mr. Cotton said in the talk he gave, we all have to decide where we draw our line in the sand. Seems to me that making a plan that the family can practice and sticking to the plan is the way to go.

I look forward to joining future discussions.

Scuba, I thought that was you!!!

My first concern would be the safety of my family. I wouldn't announce my intentions until I was positioned between the threat and them. Although, I would be late to the scene, I'm sure my German Shepherd would make her presence known before I could react. She has this protective side, especially at night. I'm her backup

yobdab wrote: As far as property crimes go I was still slightly confused when it's okay to use deadly force....

For instance, if someone was breaking into your car and you heard them from inside your house, you could use deadly force if it was at night but cannot if it's during the day.....is this correct?

Exactly right.
There is case law that supports it in the affirmative. The same night time situation happened in Odessa in the last year, and the homeowner was no-billed. hth..

Keith B wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote:

Venus Pax wrote:I wouldn't inform the intruder that I was armed.

No reason to advise someone you are armed so they can fire through the door or walls.

Chas.

I guess that is possible. But, are you going to be yelling at all? I think the flight mode is gonna kick in first if they know you are armed and intend to use it. They are usually looking for victims, not adversaries. If they think you are unarmed they are more likely to proceed. If they are gonna fire through the door, they will probably do that anyway if they can hear you yelling. It could probably go either way. Personally I want to let them know I am gonna fight and try to get the strong hand and call them if they are bluffing.

EDIT: BTW, meant to add welcome to the forum Broge5! Great question that stimulated great debate. It is discussions like these where we can challenge ourselves and get good input from all of the members. This is a great forum. I really appreciate Charles for putting it up and the moderators on here; they do an AWESOME job!

Regards,

I agree in part. I would not be yelling and giving away my position within the room. If I were going to yell, then telling a BG you're armed adds only one more element to your danger -- the knowledge that you are armed and can resist. As you say, most attackers want victims, not gun fights, so there is a chance they will leave. However, I will not gamble my safety on percentages.

I have to be candid and acknowledge that the NRA Personal Protection in the Home Course advocates telling an attacker you have called the police and that you have a gun. Since it's in the Course, I am obliged to teach it, but I then note my respectful disagreement and explain why.

Chas.

Charles L. Cotton wrote:

Keith B wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote:

Venus Pax wrote:I wouldn't inform the intruder that I was armed.

No reason to advise someone you are armed so they can fire through the door or walls.

Chas.

I guess that is possible. But, are you going to be yelling at all? I think the flight mode is gonna kick in first if they know you are armed and intend to use it. They are usually looking for victims, not adversaries. If they think you are unarmed they are more likely to proceed. If they are gonna fire through the door, they will probably do that anyway if they can hear you yelling. It could probably go either way. Personally I want to let them know I am gonna fight and try to get the strong hand and call them if they are bluffing.

EDIT: BTW, meant to add welcome to the forum Broge5! Great question that stimulated great debate. It is discussions like these where we can challenge ourselves and get good input from all of the members. This is a great forum. I really appreciate Charles for putting it up and the moderators on here; they do an AWESOME job!

Regards,

I agree in part. I would not be yelling and giving away my position within the room. If I were going to yell, then telling a BG you're armed adds only one more element to your danger -- the knowledge that you are armed and can resist. As you say, most attackers want victims, not gun fights, so there is a chance they will leave. However, I will not gamble my safety on percentages.

I have to be candid and acknowledge that the NRA Personal Protection in the Home Course advocates telling an attacker you have called the police and that you have a gun. Since it's in the Course, I am obliged to teach it, but I then note my respectful disagreement and explain why.

Chas.

I definitely understand and respect your point of view on this Charles. I guess my rational came form my time as a LEO when I had 'yelled down' suspects by appearing 'larger than life' with a lot of bravado, but those were face-to-face confrontations. I do see where the yelling may give away your hiding spot. Maybe I need to learn ventriloquism and be able to throw my voice so it sounds like I am behind them!!

Seriously, I think it is all going to come down to the situation at the time. I am going to put some personal scenarios together so I can be prepared for whatever comes down the pike.

Thanks for the great discussion and different viewpoints to ingest!! Is this forum great or what??
Regards,