More Reason To Carry - Walmart Robbery

[rm9792]

That "minor property" has your address, maybe keys, kids pics and maybe school info, credit cards that can be ran up to tens of thousands of dollars, etc. Not IMO a minor crime.

[Excaliber]

Says something about the disadvantage of off body carry. If someone came up and demanded your bag or purse, would you be able to draw or he is going to get your wallet and your gun?

In a criminal confrontation, the first thing a female victim is separated from is her purse, and when someone's close enough to get that, there's little likelihood that it would be a good time to attempt a draw from inside of one. It's not likely to be a lightning move.

I am a vociferous nonsupporter of purse carry as a desirable way to go, but before the ladies here gang up to pillory me, I'll also concede that it is sometimes the least poor choice from a range of even worse options.

If a woman must sometimes dress in certain ways that do not support on body carry, particularly during hot weather, purse carry may be the only practical way to go armed. In that case, I would suggest that these folks kick the situational awareness radar up several notches and pay real close attention to anyone within 30 feet in a 360 degree circle so they don't get surprised inside touching distance. Fanny pack carry would be preferable to some degree, but my wife has informed me that doesn't make it fashion wise.

She's more than likely right.The fine points of fashion aren't the strong points on my resume.

[sjfcontrol]

That "minor property" has your address, maybe keys, kids pics and maybe school info, credit cards that can be ran up to tens of thousands of dollars, etc. Not IMO a minor crime.

"Ladies and Gentlemen of the jury, I shot the deceased to protect my keys, and pictures of my kids!" Yep, that'll go over well.
The credit cards are a maximum of $50 liability each, and usually that's waived (especially if notification is given in a reasonable time).

Look, I'm just saying you really want to weigh your options before "wasting" somebody over the contents of a purse.

[grumble]

IMHO this was not a "purse snatching." It was felony armed robbery. The suspect had a gun and threatened her life.

Yep, the end result was that she lost her purse and contents. In the process of such, she in mortal danger.

Not certain what I would have done in that situation, but had she been armed, she certainly would have been justified in using deadly force under Texas statute.

[Purplehood]

Isn't the fact that he produced a gun sufficient justification to get his noggin perforated? Purse or no purse, the gun seems like enough for me to justify a shoot.

[davidtx]

PC §9.42. DEADLY FORCE TO PROTECT PROPERTY.

(B) to prevent the other who is fleeing immediately after com-
mitting burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, or theft during the night-
time 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.

What are the chances of getting the contents of her purse back?

[sjfcontrol]

Yes, certainly while the gun was pointed at her, If she'd been armed, she would have been justified in shooting -- if she could have gotten it out without getting shot herself. And most likely would not have too much of a problem showing justification.

What I was considering was after the robbery was over, and the BG was walking away (2 seconds later?). This most likely would have been the first opportunity she would have to draw. Seems to me the threat was then over, and the only justification for shooting at that point would be to protect/recover the stolen property.

[Keith B]

PC §9.42. DEADLY FORCE TO PROTECT PROPERTY.

(B) to prevent the other who is fleeing immediately after com-
mitting burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, or theft during the night-
time 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.

What are the chances of getting the contents of her purse back?

That only relates to theft of property requiring it to be at night. In this case it was aggravated robbery so it didn't have the night-time restriction (burglary or robbery also apply).

[davidtx]

PC §9.42. DEADLY FORCE TO PROTECT PROPERTY.

(B) to prevent the other who is fleeing immediately after com-
mitting burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, or theft during the night-
time 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.

What are the chances of getting the contents of her purse back?

That only relates to theft of property requiring it to be at night. In this case it was aggravated robbery so it didn't have the night-time restriction (burglary or robbery also apply).

I'll never figure out how to parse legalese. I expected that the "during the night" applied to the entire list. I guess that's why I use bulleted or numbered lists when I'm writing technical documents.

[Keith B]

PC §9.42. DEADLY FORCE TO PROTECT PROPERTY.

(B) to prevent the other who is fleeing during the night-
time, immediately after com-
mitting burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, or theft from escaping with the property[/color]; 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.


I'll never figure out how to parse legalese. I expected that the "during the night" applied to the entire list. I guess that's why I use bulleted or numbered lists when I'm writing technical documents.

I think the wording would be something like above if it applied to the whole portion for night-time. I may be wrong on this phrasing. Guess that's why dem thar lawuers goes ta schoolin' fer a long tyme. Or maybe it's to take accounting courses to figure out how to stretch their billable hours. (Charles not included )

[seniorshooteress]

Says something about the disadvantage of off body carry. If someone came up and demanded your bag or purse, would you be able to draw or he is going to get your wallet and your gun?

This is EXACTLY why I don't purse carry. My firearm is always on my person in one way, shape or form. There are way too many other options out there for ladies besides purse carry.

[rm9792]

That "minor property" has your address, maybe keys, kids pics and maybe school info, credit cards that can be ran up to tens of thousands of dollars, etc. Not IMO a minor crime.

"Ladies and Gentlemen of the jury, I shot the deceased to protect my keys, and pictures of my kids!" Yep, that'll go over well.
The credit cards are a maximum of $50 liability each, and usually that's waived (especially if notification is given in a reasonable time).

Look, I'm just saying you really want to weigh your options before "wasting" somebody over the contents of a purse.

Way to take out of context. Let me know how you feel after your wife and kids are assaulted or killed when a "minor purse snatcher" comes to your house WITH your KEYS. You missed my point entirely. It is more than just stamped metal and pictures. They are ways into your life. Perv grabs the purse fromt he trash and has pics of your pretty daughter and your address. Still feel like its not worth shooting over? This isnt gentle or nice to hear but it does happen, not uncommon at all. I agree the CC has limits but most check cards dont and the id theft that might happen could take years and a small fortune to clear up. This isnt 1950, minor crimes then are major crimes now. Why do we not just let them steal our stuff from the house without stopping them? Because they will likely come back for the new stuff and criminals tend to escalate.

[sjfcontrol]

ok -- I'll let you know how I feel when my family is murdered -- You let me know how you feel when your wife is on death row. Well compare notes.

By the way, you CANNOT kill somebody for something they might or might not do some time in the future. To be specific, you CANNOT kill somebody because they just got your keys and address, and may or may not show up at your door. You CAN kill them once they're in your door and threatening you or your family.

[rm9792]

I wasn't wishing you ill will, it just a general statement, my apologies. I am not saying to kill for future transgressions but I am not taking the chance with my family.

"You CAN kill them once they're in your door and threatening you or your family." I am not taking that chance, you might not be home as criminals arent necessarily stupid. We had a rapist here that would rob purses so he could get the address to go attack the women later, in their bed, at his convenience. He said the purse gave him an address to check out for his safety, pictures to tell him if she was single or had kids/husband, keys to multiple cars also was a clue as to how many adults were living there, etc. You can guess/tell a lot from the contents of a purse or wallet. Wasnt an exact science but worked for him till he was seen exiting by a neighbor. A woman would never, never, never get Death Row for shooting an attacker. I think any paralegal could get that no higher than manslaughter or whatever Texas equivalent is in the penal code.

[G26ster]

BTW, when is it legally night-time? In aviation, for example, there is a definition, but what is the legal definition in the Texas statutes?