Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
So if you give a deposit to a contractor, and he never shows up to do the work, it's okay to drive to his office and shoot him?
No.
Once again, the law in Texas:
Sec. 9.42. DEADLY FORCE TO PROTECT PROPERTY.
A person is justified in using deadly force against another to protect land or tangible, movable property:
(1) if he would be justified in using force against the other under Section 9.41; and
(2) when and to the degree he reasonably believes the deadly force is immediately necessary:
(A) to prevent the other's imminent commission of arson, burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, theft during the nighttime, or criminal mischief during the nighttime; or
(B) to prevent the other who is fleeing immediately after committing burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, or theft during the nighttime from escaping with the property; and
(3) he reasonably believes that:
(A) the land or property cannot be protected or recovered by any other means; or
(B) the use of force other than deadly force to protect or recover the land or property would expose the actor or another to a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury.
There is a line between being civilized and being a patsy.
But a rather clear line between being civilized and being barbaric. It's a shame so many people and even state governments have no compunction regarding prancing right over that line.
Would I be justified in shooting you for your attempt at a gratuitous insult?
Back to the point: I can see where a law like this could have developed in TEXAS as a response to cattle rustling or stealing oil from a well side tank or a similar theft. I still do not think that shooting a person to prevent a theft is justified whereas shooting someone violently assaulting you is.
If she gave the money to the driver it means a third party is involved ,and it is likely that a scuffle with the driver trying to recover the money, resulted in the hooker getting shot .
Just speculating
the law was intended to protect property against those who would do harm to you and the property. NOT a hooker who takes you for your money. Like someone stealling your car by use of force (weapons) and the only way to retrieve the car is to shoot the theif.
Not an unarmed hooker. Was the man completely inept and weak that he couldn't handle a 150 lb. woman?
The jury in this case were complete morons.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
