TexasCHLforum.com

txinvestigator wrote:Of course there is a legal ramification. Regarding your incident; was the victim IN the car,

How is that relevant to the defense for preventing criminal mischief?

Except for the remote possibility of driving away, which would assume your car has the performance of Automan's to get out of reach before the damage is done, there is nothing I could do from inside the car that would stop them by less force than would be necessary from outside.

KD5NRH wrote:

txinvestigator wrote:Of course there is a legal ramification. Regarding your incident; was the victim IN the car,

How is that relevant to the defense for preventing criminal mischief?

Except for the remote possibility of driving away, which would assume your car has the performance of Automan's to get out of reach before the damage is done, there is nothing I could do from inside the car that would stop them by less force than would be necessary from outside.

Notice I asked SEVERAL questions specifically in response to the post I quoted. I disagree with your assessment. What is remote about the possibility of driving away? Who is "automan"?

My point about being in the car is that it COULD add to your justification, not detract from.

JKDubb wrote:

To answer Question 1, I will say that I have been there, I can't discuss the situation because the investigation is ongoing but, no shots were fired. The guns were pulled out on us first and we retreated, we were pulled over and after speaking with the LEO's they told me that because of the location (Club) a shooting would be unjustified sober or not.

That is just inaccurate. In fact, having a firearm where prohibited has no effect on a use of force case. If I was in a school with my concealed handgun and some nut began shooting people and I shot and killed the shooter, I would not lose my justification for using deadly force simply because it was unlawful to carry in the school.

We can argue that I could be charged with carrying in places weapons prohibited, but if I was justified in using deadly force to protect myself or an innocent third person, then it matters not what type of DF I use.

LedJedi wrote:1) He mentioned that it was under any circumstance unjustified to use deadly force on the intoxicated as indicated by his CHL instructor. I find that a bit difficult to believe and can't seem to find anything in the penal code about it. It seems to me that if someone is drunk that doesn't negate your right to defend yourself and yours.

I think you missed something in the Penal Code that might have answered your question. The Penal Code does not recognize intoxication as a defense, so it clearly would not affect your need to defend yourself.

8.04. INTOXICATION. (a) Voluntary intoxication does
not constitute a defense to the commission of crime.
(b) Evidence of temporary insanity caused by intoxication
may be introduced by the actor in mitigation of the penalty attached
to the offense for which he is being tried.
(c) When temporary insanity is relied upon as a defense and
the evidence tends to show that such insanity was caused by
intoxication, the court shall charge the jury in accordance with
the provisions of this section.
(d) For purposes of this section "intoxication" means
disturbance of mental or physical capacity resulting from the
introduction of any substance into the body.

txinvestigator wrote:

JKDubb wrote:

To answer Question 1, I will say that I have been there, I can't discuss the situation because the investigation is ongoing but, no shots were fired. The guns were pulled out on us first and we retreated, we were pulled over and after speaking with the LEO's they told me that because of the location (Club) a shooting would be unjustified sober or not.

That is just inaccurate. In fact, having a firearm where prohibited has no effect on a use of force case. If I was in a school with my concealed handgun and some nut began shooting people and I shot and killed the shooter, I would not lose my justification for using deadly force simply because it was unlawful to carry in the school.

We can argue that I could be charged with carrying in places weapons prohibited, but if I was justified in using deadly force to protect myself or an innocent third person, then it matters not what type of DF I use.

I agree with you but like I said I was not going to argue on the side of the road. I was thinking that I may beat the rap but not the ride.