TexasCHLforum.com

So if you are at a loudparty, is it possible to have peace to breach? Hrmmm....

BrassMonkey wrote:So if you are at a loudparty, is it possible to have peace to breach? Hrmmm....

I think if a party is so loud it disturbs the neighbors, it would be a breach of the peace. There must be case law on this.

- Jim

It is my understanding that a "Preach of the peace", is a generic common law term that refers to a situation being such that the general citizenry would be considered endangered.

If I'm understanding what you folks mean by case law, read the reasoning section of this link

http://sol.lp.findlaw.com/2000/atwater.html

I've read the Atwater decision and also Texas v. Johnson. Unfortunately, they are written as if everyone understood that "breach of the peace" mean, without explaining it.

- Jim

Atwater contended that, at the time of the Constitution’s framing, the common law prohibited officers from making warrantless misdemeanor arrests, except in cases of breach of the peace, “a category she claims was then understood narrowly as covering only those non-felony offenses involving or tending toward violence.�

Sounds reasonable to me, if it involves violence.

Definitely calling 311, 911, or whatever while you're following is the way to do it.

Maybe I'm missing something, but I think that blocking in the drunk guy's car in and calling the cops is way better than pulling a gun on him. I'd get out of my car and stand back maybe 20 yards in condition red. It seems like a more effective, safe, and appropriate way to prevent him from harming others. He might bash into my car to get out, in which case my insurance should cover it. He might assault me; then I would be clearly justified in using force.

What do y'all think?

-Brent

doublepush wrote:Maybe I'm missing something, but I think that blocking in the drunk guy's car in and calling the cops is way better than pulling a gun on him. I'd get out of my car and stand back maybe 20 yards in condition red.

You don't know for a fact that he's drunk until you confront him at close range, smelling alcohol and so forth. He might have just been fooling with his cell phone.

- Jim

seamusTX wrote:

doublepush wrote:Maybe I'm missing something, but I think that blocking in the drunk guy's car in and calling the cops is way better than pulling a gun on him. I'd get out of my car and stand back maybe 20 yards in condition red.

You don't know for a fact that he's drunk until you confront him at close range, smelling alcohol and so forth. He might have just been fooling with his cell phone.

- Jim

He might have even been fumbling around trying to get his gun ready, because he's being chased by some stranger.

KBCraig wrote:He might have even been fumbling around trying to get his gun ready, because he's being chased by some stranger.

Heh.

Then he needs it cocked and locked in a holster, not floating under the seat.

- Jim

New to the forum, but I would have to ask if the CHL holder would have behaved differently had he not been carrying. When carrying a gun makes you more courageous or aggressive than you would normally be without it, your head is in the wrong place. That handgun is your defensive weapon of last resort.

I strongly suspect this individual was playing cop and it bit him. That's something we just don't do. It hurts the reputation of every other Concealed License Holder!

DoubleActionCHL wrote:New to the forum, but I would have to ask if the CHL holder would have behaved differently had he not been carrying. When carrying a gun makes you more courageous or aggressive than you would normally be without it, your head is in the wrong place. That weapon is your defensive weapon of last resort.

I strongly suspect this individual was playing cop and it bit him in the rear. That's something we just don't do. It hurts the reputation of every other Concealed License Holder!

Very well said.