TexasCHLforum.com

Stupid wrote:Read Ayoob's book "In the gravest extreme"

I am supprised to see that fist is NOT deadly weapon. For those who think you would only get a black eye, that is deadly wrong. Hands and fingers are really powerful tool. In on swoop, one can break your windpine and pull your eye out.

I agree, however a fist doesnt always have to be "deadly"

I know a person very close to me who was "beat up"

He didnt die, but had brain damage due to the beating.

dihappy wrote:

Stupid wrote:Read Ayoob's book "In the gravest extreme"

I am supprised to see that fist is NOT deadly weapon. For those who think you would only get a black eye, that is deadly wrong. Hands and fingers are really powerful tool. In on swoop, one can break your windpine and pull your eye out.

I agree, however a fist doesnt always have to be "deadly"

I know a person very close to me who was "beat up"

He didnt die, but had brain damage due to the beating.

I know people who were shot and stabbed and didn't die. It really does not matter whether it is a knife, fist, firearm, car or what, What matters is whether you are comitted to defend yourself. If you fret about whether you will be able to defend your position in court at the time, you may lose your life.

I watched a show on cable last night measuring the force of martial artists blows against dummies. Hardest punch to the head was not a karate/kung fu type. It was a boxer. His punch to the head was measured at almost 1000 pounds of force. Who says fists are not deadly.

Mind set before the event is important. You must know you will win. Don't let doubt creep into the equation. I believe we, more than most, will likely recognize deadly force and react accordingly.

Stay safe, my brothers.

Anygun

Anygun

Natl Geographic Channel, Fight Science.
saw it as well, great show.
the force generated by the guy's knee strike blew me away!!!

I thought of referencing that show as well, it clearly shows that in the right "hands," the human body is a very lethal weapon.

Boma wrote:

txinvestigator wrote:

Stupid wrote:Read Ayoob's book "In the gravest extreme"

I am supprised to see that fist is NOT deadly weapon. For those who think you would only get a black eye, that is deadly wrong. Hands and fingers are really powerful tool. In on swoop, one can break your windpine and pull your eye out.

Does he list deadly weapons in his book, and he does not lists fists?

Texas does not list deadly weapons. All we have to worry about is if the force being used against use, in the manner of its use, is capable of causing serious bodily or death.

The fact that fists can has been well established in Texas law.

We had an officer who ended up with a BG sitting on her chest pounding her head into the pavement and smashing her face with his fists. She warned him that she was going to shoot him, he ignored her and she fired one .357 round thru him. No only was she no-billed, but the family of BG sued, and the jury awarded the officer a judgement against the family.

Wow now that is justice! But you know the family is going to say the jurors were racists!!! Did that scumbag die?

It would be difficult to claim racism as both the officer and BG were of the same race.

Yes he died. When the first unit arrived she was performing first aid on him.

dihappy wrote:

Stupid wrote:Read Ayoob's book "In the gravest extreme"

I am supprised to see that fist is NOT deadly weapon. For those who think you would only get a black eye, that is deadly wrong. Hands and fingers are really powerful tool. In on swoop, one can break your windpine and pull your eye out.

I agree, however a fist doesnt always have to be "deadly"

I know a person very close to me who was "beat up"

He didnt die, but had brain damage due to the beating.

That IS serious bodily injury; therfore, it is deadly force.

Never underestimate the power of fists. I have no peripheral vision in my right eye due to getting punched in the face during a fight in High School.

If a bunch of football players handt' pulled the 4 kids off of me, i could have been brain damaged or worse. (though some here might argue that I WAS! )

John wrote:

stevie_d_64 wrote: I remember one of the first documented defensive uses of a firearm of a Texas CHL'er...

The CHL'er was in his vehicle, no way to de-escalate, or drive away, the suspect got out of their vehicle and proceeded to give the CHL'er a whoopin' through the drivers side window at a traffic signal...IIRC...

What was the outcome of that case? I think I remember, but not sure.

Also, wasn't there a case this year, or last, in Houston where a man (CHL'r) shot and killed a person that put his fist through his drivers side window? I think the deceased was upset that the shooter had cut him off in traffic or something to that effect. If I recall correctly, the deceased had his 16 year old daughter in his car too. She witnessed the entire event. It was a bad deal for her to see her father die because of his temper. I do not think the driver (shooter) was procecuted.

In that older case back in 1996 I believe...

I do not assume, but as much as the prosecutors wanted "and" dragged the CHL'er throught the muck, he was eventually cleared of any wrongdoing...This I really think was the first case of a defensive shooting involving a CHL person in Texas...

That more recent case was a lawyer who was the CHL'er and was not able to de-escalate before the deceased came and broke in the drivers window with a tire iron...The lawyer was later aquitted...

The tragedy to the more recent incident was the deceased teenage daughter was in the vehicle and had to watch her dad do something stupid and lose his life over it...

All of this being to the best of my recollection...And all of the shots fired in self-defense were made from inside the CHL'ers vehicle...Just something else to keep in mind...

If someone brings up the fists, it's time to use the best defense - run.

My comment on the fists was aimed at prosecutors - they know nothing about what is deadly!!!!

that show is great. I hope one day some lawyer can bring it up to the jury to show them how deadly a bare-handed human can be.

'specially that Ninjitsu student's Hammer Fist!! more force than a crowbar!

Nice catch mod's.

txinvestigator wrote:The law says you can use deadly force when and to the degree you reasonably believe it is immediately necessary to protect yourself from another's use or attempted use of unlawful deadly force against you.

Don't forget aggravated kidnapping, sexual assault, aggravated sexual assault, robbery, aggravated robbery, arson, burglary, theft during the nighttime, or criminal mischief during the nighttime.

Simple robbery becomes an interesting deviation here, since, as has been discussed in another thread, it only requires the threat of bodilyinjury, not serious bodily injury. Bodily injury is defined pretty well as darn near anything that hurts. 1.07(a)(46) makes an attempt to define serious bodily injury as "bodily injury that creates a substantial risk of death or that causes death, serious permanent disfigurement, or protracted loss or impairment of the function of any bodily member or organ," but even still, one must question what is "serious permanent disfigurement or protracted loss or impairment." If I'll limp for a month, is that a protracted impairment? How big would a facial scar have to be to qualify as a serious disfigurement?

Aggravated kidnapping is pretty broad, and so would appear include pretty much all except certain parental custody issues.

One could also argue, rather callously, that the effects of sexual assault would not constitute serious bodily harm, though I doubt that would fly with any Texas jury.

The pure property crimes as justifications are apparently unique to Texas, but seem reasonable in the context of an escalation through other levels of force.

What it all boils down to, though, is that I don't think I should ever be required to take a substantial beating simply because I am unable to prevent it by any lesser application of force. Houdini died from a single punch in the gut, and a lot of other tough guys have died from even less, regardless of whether their attackers intended to kill them.

KD5NRH wrote:

txinvestigator wrote:The law says you can use deadly force when and to the degree you reasonably believe it is immediately necessary to protect yourself from another's use or attempted use of unlawful deadly force against you.

Don't forget aggravated kidnapping, sexual assault, aggravated sexual assault, robbery, aggravated robbery, arson, burglary, theft during the nighttime, or criminal mischief during the nighttime.

I didn't forget; the intial post was about a gang beatdown by more than 1 person.

One could also argue, rather callously, that the effects of sexual assault would not constitute serious bodily harm, though I doubt that would fly with any Texas jury.

As you pointed out, there is no need to show ANY injury to use DF to prevent the imminent commission of Sexual Assault.

What it all boils down to, though, is that I don't think I should ever be required to take a substantial beating simply because I am unable to prevent it by any lesser application of force.

Yep

The deadly potential can be elevated very quickly, in many ways.

An attack that begins with fists, can elevate to an armed attack (stick, rock, chair, hammer, knife, broken bottle, chainsaw, gun, etc.). The threat level has just risen.

An attack with fists, feet, etc. could render a person unable to move or unconscious. Incapacitation is very serious hazard to anyone. A person in such a state has no method of self-defense.

Incapacitation is even more hazardous to a person carrying a concealed handgun, as that person would be unable to prevent the attacker from taking their handgun. It this case, a formerly legally concealed firearm is now in the hands of an out-of-control person.

Popshot wrote:The deadly potential can be elevated very quickly, in many ways.

An attack that begins with fists, can elevate to an armed attack (stick, rock, chair, hammer, knife, broken bottle, chainsaw, gun, etc.). The threat level has just risen.

An attack with fists, feet, etc. could render a person unable to move or unconscious. Incapacitation is very serious hazard to anyone. A person in such a state has no method of self-defense.

Incapacitation is even more hazardous to a person carrying a concealed handgun, as that person would be unable to prevent the attacker from taking their handgun. It this case, a formerly legally concealed firearm is now in the hands of an out-of-control person.

Yep, yep and...............................yep.

So if I see someone kidnapping my girlfriend's niece (9 years old) and they're dragging her into a car, I can legally shoot the man right?