TexasCHLforum.com

thetexan wrote:You are correct. The word is belief. My mistake. Fear is a belief however, but belief is the word.

So your point is?

So what if fear is a belief? That is not what the law states.
My point is that if you are going to try to explain the law you should use the correct words.
Putting the word "fear" in your statement gives the false impression that someone must be afraid in order to justify the use of deadly force.
This is simply not true.
Especially if you capitalize and underline the words, it gives the impression that you are quoting the law.

Ok. The context for what I was stating is the same. And, please, feel free to post you in depth analysis of the statute at your convenience.

thetexan wrote:Ok. The context for what I was stating is the same. And, please, feel free to post you in depth analysis of the statute at your convenience.

The purpose of my posts is to clarify facts and impart some knowledge to the forum members, not to belittle you.
You seem to take some of my comments as personal insults to you and respond with snide comments.
I can't help it if that is your reaction.
If you are aren't willing to take them as constructive, then my in depth analysis on any subject would be futile.
I will still continue to make my posts for those who are willing to read them.
Hopefully some of the forum members will gain some insight and knowledge about the subjects that are discussed.

WildBill wrote:

thetexan wrote:Ok. The context for what I was stating is the same. And, please, feel free to post you in depth analysis of the statute at your convenience.

The purpose of my posts is to clarify facts and impart some knowledge to the forum members, not to belittle you.
You seem to take some of my comments as personal insults to you and respond with snide comments.
I can't help it if that is your reaction.
If you are aren't willing to take them as constructive, then my in depth analysis on any subject would be futile.
I will still continue to make my posts for those who are willing to read them.
Hopefully some of the forum members will gain some insight and knowledge about the subjects that are discussed.

I'm willing to read them!

Javier730 wrote:

WildBill wrote:

thetexan wrote:Ok. The context for what I was stating is the same. And, please, feel free to post you in depth analysis of the statute at your convenience.

The purpose of my posts is to clarify facts and impart some knowledge to the forum members, not to belittle you.
You seem to take some of my comments as personal insults to you and respond with snide comments.
I can't help it if that is your reaction.
If you are aren't willing to take them as constructive, then my in depth analysis on any subject would be futile.
I will still continue to make my posts for those who are willing to read them.
Hopefully some of the forum members will gain some insight and knowledge about the subjects that are discussed.

I'm willing to read them!

Aww, I wish we had a warm cuddly smilie.

I don't take it personal and I apologize for snide remarks.

You're a good man wildbill. You keep me on my toes

thetexan wrote:I don't take it personal and I apologize for snide remarks.

You're a good man wildbill. You keep me on my toes

thetexan wrote:I don't take it personal and I apologize for snide remarks.

You're a good man wildbill. You keep me on my toes

Thank you, sir.
It is my nature to challenge and question things that don't seem right or make sense to me.
I try to keep everyone on their toes. And other forum members try to keep me on mine.

WildBill wrote:

thetexan wrote:I don't take it personal and I apologize for snide remarks.

You're a good man wildbill. You keep me on my toes

Thank you, sir.
It is my nature to challenge and question things that don't seem right or make sense to me.
I try to keep everyone on their toes. And other forum members try to keep me on mine.

Speaking of which, how'd that thing with you and Jane work out?

Oldgringo wrote:

WildBill wrote:

thetexan wrote:I don't take it personal and I apologize for snide remarks.

You're a good man wildbill. You keep me on my toes

Thank you, sir.
It is my nature to challenge and question things that don't seem right or make sense to me.
I try to keep everyone on their toes. And other forum members try to keep me on mine.

Speaking of which, how'd that thing with you and Jane work out?

I should also mention that I try to show my utmost humility and use my wicked sense of humor in my posts.
She is fine, bless her heart. Please send PM to discuss.

WildBill wrote:

thetexan wrote:I don't take it personal and I apologize for snide remarks.

You're a good man wildbill. You keep me on my toes

Thank you, sir.
It is my nature to challenge and question things that don't seem right or make sense to me.
I try to keep everyone on their toes. And other forum members try to keep me on mine.

And in all honesty I feel unbelievably fortunate to have all the folks who have commented impart their own bits of wisdom and experience regarding my post. Opinions are are also just as valuable as they encourage constructive debate. The benefits of all of this is that I wake up tomorrow with a little more confidence and much better understanding of the statutes that apply to CHL/LTC. I said it before and I mean it.... This forum is awesome! For someone such as myself who only recently started carrying "within" the law, the information is invaluable. In some ways I'm much more anxious now about potential conflicts I could face any day, than I ever was when I carried for YEARS without a license. WHO WOULD HAVE THUNK IT!

A sincere thanks to all.

thetexan wrote:

FCH wrote:

Mavs00 wrote:...as him just using his fists on you hardly justifies feeling that your life is in "danger"...

I strongly disagree. When a full grown man is coming at you with his fists, you can definitely be killed.

The law requires a reasonable fear requiring an immediately necessary use of deadly force, only when and only to the extent necessary to avoid the injury or death. AS LONG AS THAT FEAR REQUIRING THE IMMEDIATE NECESSITY TO AVOID SERIOUS BODILY INJURY OR DEATH IS REASONABLE it doesn't matter if he's coming at you with a fist, a pillow, a nerf bat, or a feather boa! And would certainly include any instrument of deadly force.

AS LONG AS YOUR FEAR IS REASONABLE.

I guess I may have been "personalizing" the situation a bit too much. I'm 6ft, 230#..... and been in more than few "scrums" in my day (and look the part) and I'm not sure that I (or my lawyer) would be able to convince a jury that I had a "reasonable belief of SERIOUS bodily injury or death" if I used deadly force in this situation and the aggressor turned out to be unarmed, or armed only with a feather boa

Getting back to the initial scenario, I would be "knocked" on the ground, so that would certainly help the case, but still... we've all seen how whacky juries can be. But, with all that said, I certainly understood your point and ultimately appreciate your comments.