Another Use Of Force Question

[Liberty]

So here's the next question...under 9.04 can you threaten him with your gun since you are authorized to use force which is a requirement for 9.04?

But what would you be threatening? He knows you are prohibited from using deadly force to stop a trespass unless he threatens you in the process. As long as he just sits there and smiles your threat with a gun seems empty.

Tex

Holding someone at gunpoint is using force.
Pulling the trigger is using deadly force. Even warning shots can be considered deadly force

Folks who are literally under the gun, aren't typically considering the legal ramifications. They are most likely wondering if the gun is loaded and if the guy holding the gun is crazy enough to unload said gun into them.

[locke_n_load]

Yeah, there must be a reasonably perceived threat of force or deadly force to justify a necessary response.

If the guy just sits down on your sofa, asks you for some refreshment and smiles, you won't be able to justify anything other than calling the police. But, as was stated, I would have the tool ready.

Texas Penal Code provides justification in using force to remove a trespasser if you believe the force is immediately necessary to prevent or terminate the trespass. You are justified in using deadly force if: (1) you reasonably believe that it is necessary to use force to prevent or terminate the trespass; and (2) you reasonably believe deadly force is necessary to prevent the trespasser from committing certain crimes, such as arson, burglary, or robbery.

I read it again (9.41a) and I agree. Force is available to prevent or terminate a trespass. Deadly force is not if the offense is simply trespass.

So when the guy decides to have a seat on your sofa and start a conversation despite you telling him to leave because he no longer has your consent to be there, when and to the degree necessary you may use force to remove him. That process may escalate to a scenario where you reasonably perceive a serious harm or deadly threat at which time deadly force is now available. But the deadly force is in response to the new threat of harm not the trespass.

So here's the next question...under 9.04 can you threaten him with your gun since you are authorized to use force which is a requirement for 9.04?

But what would you be threatening? He knows you are prohibited from using deadly force to stop a trespass unless he threatens you in the process. As long as he just sits there and smiles your threat with a gun seems empty.

Tex

You can threaten, but could not use, deadly force. I agree with Liberty below. Most people probably don't know what's legal, nor would they be thinking about what's legal in that situation.

Holding someone at gunpoint is using force.
Pulling the trigger is using deadly force. Even warning shots can be considered deadly force

Folks who are literally under the gun, aren't typically considering the legal ramifications. They are most likely wondering if the gun is loaded and if the guy holding the gun is crazy enough to unload said gun into them.

[thetexan]

I'm discussing a passive trespasser here...just to exercise our minds with the analysis......

Yes you can "hold" the trespasser at gunpoint.

Yes it is a technical use of force.

But what are you threatening by pointing your gun at him ( in this specific scenario)? I'll answer that.... Nothing. It is a bluff that you the gun wielder had better thoroughly understand the ramifications of...and that you hope the trespasser doesn't understand.

And are you really "holding" him? He might decide to peacefully get up and leave...the very thing your authorized force was given in 9.41a to terminate or prevent!

9.03 does authorize confinement if the situation authorizes force. But even then the force is to the degree necessary. It will never rise to the necessity of using deadly force unless a new ingredient is added. And that is a threat of serious bodily injury or death. THEN! that gun you have been pointing at him in your up-till-then bluff can be used, but not before.

I agree that most criminals won't be thinking that deeply when they are staring at a .45 pointing at them. Just be sure you, as the clear thinking defender, know what your legal limits are before you set yourself up for a possible murder charge.

In fact it makes you wonder what 9.04 is good for! Deadly force provided by the pointed gun can never be ACTUALLY used unless to meet a deadly threat in which case I don't need 9.04's permission to point the weapon. Anything less than that DOES NOT authorize the use of deadly force and 9.04 ends up being a bluff.

I think 9.04 is there simply as a relief for persons exposing their otherwise required holstered or concealed weapon as a tool to begin the self defending process he may find himself in.

Tex