TexasCHLforum.com

Renegade wrote: We are talking about Castle Doctrine, Stand Your Ground. The reasonable person test for Stand Your Ground does not apply in the home. Look it up in 9.32 if you are a non-believer.

No. The paraphrased quote attributed to Davis was that, "...there was a reasonableness test before deadly force can be applied on an intruder in the home,..."

Note, not a reasonableness test for whether or not you should have stood your ground, which I agree is specifically removed from consideration in the law, but a reasonableness test before deadly force can be applied. The Castle Doctrine did not address or change this part of the statute nor the well established case law principle.

Renegade wrote: Obviously you cannot just shoot anybody in your home without cause.

However, under Castle Doctrine I think you really can just shoot any intruder. The fact they broke into your home is cause enough.

Both 9.31, 9.32, and 9.33 state that an actor's actions are presumed to be reasonable if the conditions listed below (in the statutes) were met. Note that just because an action is presumed to be reasonable doesn't mean that it automatically is reasonable. All it means is that the burden of proof (to prove that the action was not reasonable) lies with the state.

If state proves that your actions were not reasonable, you're gonna do time.

Renegade wrote: That is why the guy who shot the musician (who was outside the home and unarmed) got off with no charges. Merely attempting to break in is cause enough.

Nope. He was not charged because the police and DA believe that his actions were reasonable under the circumstances, at least to the point where thet DA felt there was no chance of proving that they were not reasonable.

Renegade wrote: I will have to see the final version of SB378 that gets enrolled to be sure though.

Check out this link.

http://www.txdps.state.tx.us/ftp/forms/ls-16.pdf

Scroll down to 9.31, 9.32, and 9.33. These sections show SB378 incorporated into the relevant deadly force statutes.

frankie_the_yankee wrote:
No. The paraphrased quote attributed to Davis was that, "...there was a reasonableness test before deadly force can be applied on an intruder in the home,..."

You are confusing what he said on FOX4 with what he said in radio show, which is based on how I remembered it from a few weeks ago. My comments were based on what he said on radio show, which is what bpet asked me about. On radio show, he claimed Stand Your Ground was something new, it is not in Texas home.

frankie_the_yankee wrote:
Nope. He was not charged because the police and DA believe that his actions were reasonable under the circumstances, at least to the point where thet DA felt there was no chance of proving that they were not reasonable.

Play on words since 9.32 now presumes reasonableness if someone is breaking into your home. Or as I would say say, reasonableness is no longer an issue.

frankie_the_yankee wrote:

Renegade wrote: I will have to see the final version of SB378 that gets enrolled to be sure though.

Check out this link.

http://www.txdps.state.tx.us/ftp/forms/ls-16.pdf

Thanks!

Renegade wrote: Play on words since 9.32 now presumes reasonableness if someone is breaking into your home. Or as I would say say, reasonableness is no longer an issue.

A presumption of reasonableness is not the same as it "not being an issue". A presumption can be rebutted if there is evidence.

Whack a 5 year old kid who entered your house "unlawfully" and see what happens.

Reasonableness is always an issue when deadly force is used. If your actions are not reasonable, you are going to be in trouble.

frankie_the_yankee wrote: Reasonableness is always an issue when deadly force is used. If your actions are not reasonable, you are going to be in trouble.

Glad to see you have finally come around on this one!

Renegade wrote:

frankie_the_yankee wrote: Reasonableness is always an issue when deadly force is used. If your actions are not reasonable, you are going to be in trouble.

Glad to see you have finally come around on this one!

When have I ever posted otherwise?