Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 2/19/2006 7:16:07 PM EDT
ok, let's say "hypothetically" my roommate's ex girlfriends boyfriend comes over to our apartment and attempts to start something(lots of drama there, don't want to get into it). chances are he'll be unarmed but he's well trained in martial arts

at what point am I able to take action?
Link Posted: 2/19/2006 7:18:44 PM EDT
deadly force may be used to stop unlauful deadly force.
Link Posted: 2/19/2006 9:00:53 PM EDT

Originally Posted By kingpinGTI:
ok, let's say "hypothetically" my roommate's ex girlfriends boyfriend comes over to our apartment and attempts to start something(lots of drama there, don't want to get into it). chances are he'll be unarmed but he's well trained in martial arts

at what point am I able to take action?



Probably not too long after the point where you or your roommate are stupid enough to open the door...
Link Posted: 2/19/2006 9:26:02 PM EDT
Please please please dont listen to anyone here.


Read the law for yourself.

You cannot possibly describe all the subtle nuances of the totallity of the crcumstances, to let anyone here guide you on the instant in which you can take another life:

www.capitol.state.tx.us/statutes/docs/PE/content/htm/pe.002.00.000009.00.htm#9.01.00



(3) "Deadly force" means force[0] that is intended or
known by the actor to cause, or in the manner of its use or intended
use is capable of causing, death or serious bodily injury.




§ 9.04. THREATS AS JUSTIFIABLE FORCE. The threat of
force is justified when the use of force is justified by this
chapter. For purposes of this section, a threat to cause death or
serious bodily injury by the production of a weapon or otherwise, as
long as the actor's purpose is limited to creating an apprehension
that he will use deadly force if necessary, does not constitute the
use of deadly force.





§ 9.22. NECESSITY. Conduct is justified if:
(1) the actor reasonably believes the conduct is
immediately necessary to avoid imminent harm;
(2) the desirability and urgency of avoiding the harm
clearly outweigh, according to ordinary standards of
reasonableness, the harm sought to be prevented by the law
proscribing the conduct; and
(3) a legislative purpose to exclude the justification
claimed for the conduct does not otherwise plainly appear.





§ 9.31. SELF-DEFENSE. (a) Except as provided in
Subsection (b), a person is justified in using force against
another when and to the degree he reasonably believes the force is
immediately necessary to protect himself against the other's use or
attempted use of unlawful force.
(b) The use of force against another is not justified:
(1) in response to verbal provocation alone;
(2) to resist an arrest or search that the actor knows
is being made by a peace officer, or by a person acting in a peace
officer's presence and at his direction, even though the arrest or
search is unlawful, unless the resistance is justified under
Subsection (c);
(3) if the actor consented to the exact force used or
attempted by the other;
(4) if the actor provoked the other's use or attempted
use of unlawful force, unless:
(A) the actor abandons the encounter, or clearly
communicates to the other his intent to do so reasonably believing
he cannot safely abandon the encounter; and
(B) the other nevertheless continues or attempts
to use unlawful force against the actor; or
(5) if the actor sought an explanation from or
discussion with the other person concerning the actor's differences
with the other person while the actor was:
(A) carrying a weapon in violation of Section
46.02; or
(B) possessing or transporting a weapon in
violation of Section 46.05.
(c) The use of force to resist an arrest or search is
justified:
(1) if, before the actor offers any resistance, the
peace officer (or person acting at his direction) uses or attempts
to use greater force than necessary to make the arrest or search;
and
(2) when and to the degree the actor reasonably
believes the force is immediately necessary to protect himself
against the peace officer's (or other person's) use or attempted use
of greater force than necessary.
(d) The use of deadly force is not justified under this
subchapter except as provided in Sections 9.32, 9.33, and 9.34.

Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 883, ch. 399, § 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974.
Amended by Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 900, § 1.01, eff. Sept. 1,
1994; Acts 1995, 74th Leg., ch. 190, § 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1995.


§ 9.32. DEADLY FORCE IN DEFENSE OF PERSON. (a) A
person is justified in using deadly force against another:
(1) if he would be justified in using force against the
other under Section 9.31;
(2) if a reasonable person in the actor's situation
would not have retreated; and
(3) when and to the degree he reasonably believes the
deadly force is immediately necessary:
(A) to protect himself against the other's use or
attempted use of unlawful deadly force; or
(B) to prevent the other's imminent commission of
aggravated kidnapping, murder, sexual assault, aggravated sexual
assault, robbery, or aggravated robbery.
(b) The requirement imposed by Subsection (a)(2) does not
apply to an actor who uses force against a person who is at the time
of the use of force committing an offense of unlawful entry in the
habitation of the actor.

Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 883, ch. 399, § 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974.
Amended by Acts 1983, 68th Leg., p. 5316, ch. 977, § 5, eff.
Sept. 1, 1983; Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 900, § 1.01, eff. Sept.
1, 1994; Acts 1995, 74th Leg., ch. 235, § 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1995.


§ 9.33. DEFENSE OF THIRD PERSON. A person is justified
in using force or deadly force against another to protect a third
person if:
(1) under the circumstances as the actor reasonably
believes them to be, the actor would be justified under Section 9.31
or 9.32 in using force or deadly force to protect himself against
the unlawful force or unlawful deadly force he reasonably believes
to be threatening the third person he seeks to protect; and
(2) the actor reasonably believes that his
intervention is immediately necessary to protect the third person.

Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 883, ch. 399, § 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974.
Amended by Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 900, § 1.01, eff. Sept. 1,
1994.


§ 9.34. PROTECTION OF LIFE OR HEALTH. (a) A person is
justified in using force, but not deadly force, against another
when and to the degree he reasonably believes the force is
immediately necessary to prevent the other from committing suicide
or inflicting serious bodily injury to himself.
(b) A person is justified in using both force and deadly
force against another when and to the degree he reasonably believes
the force or deadly force is immediately necessary to preserve the
other's life in an emergency.

Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 883, ch. 399, § 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974.
Amended by Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 900, § 1.01, eff. Sept. 1,
1994.

Link Posted: 2/19/2006 10:13:32 PM EDT
i would prevent it if possible


it's an "ex" not a present so there isnt any reason to me. let it go.
Link Posted: 2/20/2006 7:31:49 AM EDT

Originally Posted By eklikwhoa:
i would prevent it if possible


it's an "ex" not a present so there isnt any reason to me. let it go.



I agree, if he is actually going to threathen your life than let it go.

And why even let him in? Talk outside or even better through the door.
Link Posted: 2/20/2006 10:03:23 AM EDT
If he has threatened you already, call the police. Make a paper trail in case anything does happen. You'll already have proof that there were threats etc.
Link Posted: 2/20/2006 10:49:09 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/20/2006 10:50:50 AM EDT by texastactical]
Link Posted: 2/20/2006 11:08:31 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/20/2006 11:09:28 AM EDT by wise_jake]

Originally Posted By kingpinGTI:
quick question about using lethal force


There are no quick questions about lethal force.


ETA: Erm..... read what FALARAK wrote.

P.S. Does that advice pertain to your own post, FAL?
Link Posted: 2/20/2006 2:18:14 PM EDT

Originally Posted By SF1058:

Originally Posted By kingpinGTI:
ok, let's say "hypothetically" my roommate's ex girlfriends boyfriend comes over to our apartment and attempts to start something(lots of drama there, don't want to get into it). chances are he'll be unarmed but he's well trained in martial arts

at what point am I able to take action?



Probably not too long after the point where you or your roommate are stupid enough to open the door...



EXACTLY..Don't invite the damn trouble.

Then at your murder trial, the D.A. will introduce into evidence copies of a thread from ar15.com titled "Quick Question About Using Lethal Force"..

Good move dude!
Link Posted: 2/20/2006 2:25:19 PM EDT

Originally Posted By longhorn789:

Originally Posted By SF1058:

Originally Posted By kingpinGTI:
ok, let's say "hypothetically" my roommate's ex girlfriends boyfriend comes over to our apartment and attempts to start something(lots of drama there, don't want to get into it). chances are he'll be unarmed but he's well trained in martial arts

at what point am I able to take action?



Probably not too long after the point where you or your roommate are stupid enough to open the door...



EXACTLY..Don't invite the damn trouble.

Then at your murder trial, the D.A. will introduce into evidence copies of a thread from ar15.com titled "Quick Question About Using Lethal Force"..

Good move dude!



trust me, I have no intent on harming anyone. I want to clarify what my rights are in this situation SHOULD something happen.
Link Posted: 2/20/2006 3:13:35 PM EDT

Originally Posted By kingpinGTI:
trust me, I have no intent on harming anyone. I want to clarify what my rights are in this situation SHOULD something happen.



Rights? We aren't talking about rights.

We are talking about how and when you can do something, and pray "the man" doesn't burn your ass for it.
Link Posted: 2/20/2006 4:46:28 PM EDT
Link Posted: 2/20/2006 4:47:54 PM EDT

Originally Posted By FALARAK:
Please please please dont listen to anyone here.



This thread would have been a whole lot more entertaining if you would not have intervened with common sense.
Link Posted: 2/20/2006 4:49:12 PM EDT

Originally Posted By longhorn789:
EXACTLY..Don't invite the damn trouble.

Then at your murder trial, the D.A. will introduce into evidence copies of a thread from ar15.com titled "Quick Question About Using Lethal Force"..

Good move dude!




But your honor, they all were non-board certified, legal advisors!!!

Link Posted: 2/20/2006 4:50:36 PM EDT
Link Posted: 2/21/2006 7:16:04 AM EDT
Do like the cops do,shot the SOB and lay a throw away gun next to him.


TG
Link Posted: 2/21/2006 7:18:30 AM EDT

Originally Posted By TexasGunman:
Do like the cops do,shot the SOB and lay a throw away gun next to him.


TG



I saw a Ruger P89 9mm yesterday for $200 cash. Got me thinking about that throw down gun.
Link Posted: 2/21/2006 7:31:38 AM EDT
Link Posted: 2/21/2006 7:33:44 AM EDT
Just too many other things I need with the $200.
Link Posted: 2/21/2006 1:20:00 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/21/2006 1:23:18 PM EDT by wise_jake]

Originally Posted By frisco:

Originally Posted By longhorn789:
EXACTLY..Don't invite the damn trouble.

Then at your murder trial, the D.A. will introduce into evidence copies of a thread from ar15.com titled "Quick Question About Using Lethal Force"..

Good move dude!


But your honor, they all were non-board certified, legal advisors!!!



Actually, you're wrong. All arfcommers are "board-certified" (i.e. certified by this board). Those that aren't get banned.
Link Posted: 2/21/2006 1:22:30 PM EDT

Originally Posted By FALARAK:
Just too many other things I need with the $200.


Man, I think of all the tricks I could pay for with that $200.......
Link Posted: 2/21/2006 1:32:26 PM EDT
You have already talked about it - you know right from wrong - walk away.
You do it and you probaby go down for murder.

Non-violence is the key to resolving conflict.
Link Posted: 2/21/2006 1:35:46 PM EDT

Originally Posted By wise_jake:

Originally Posted By frisco:

Originally Posted By longhorn789:
EXACTLY..Don't invite the damn trouble.

Then at your murder trial, the D.A. will introduce into evidence copies of a thread from ar15.com titled "Quick Question About Using Lethal Force"..

Good move dude!


But your honor, they all were non-board certified, legal advisors!!!



Actually, you're wrong. All arfcommers are "board-certified" (i.e. certified by this board). Those that aren't get banned.




You gonna quote the Penal code too or just stuff it in your mouth?





j/k of course...
Link Posted: 2/21/2006 2:28:49 PM EDT

Originally Posted By GETSUM:

Non-violence is the key to resolving conflict.




What a load of CRAP !!

And I will most likely go to jail for it, but so what, if someone bucks up on me than its FIGHT time.

I was trained by some old school soldiers and they all said, Take care off business first then ask questions.

But that advice is for hand-to-hand, not for gun play. There is a huge difference. If someone is going to use a gun you better be ready for the worst outcome.
Link Posted: 2/23/2006 10:58:54 AM EDT

Originally Posted By frisco:

Originally Posted By wise_jake:

Originally Posted By frisco:

Originally Posted By longhorn789:
EXACTLY..Don't invite the damn trouble.

Then at your murder trial, the D.A. will introduce into evidence copies of a thread from ar15.com titled "Quick Question About Using Lethal Force"..

Good move dude!


But your honor, they all were non-board certified, legal advisors!!!



Actually, you're wrong. All arfcommers are "board-certified" (i.e. certified by this board). Those that aren't get banned.


You gonna quote the Penal code too or just stuff it in your mouth?



j/k of course...


Fucker! Now that I've read that twice (second time's the charm), I'm still laughing.....
Link Posted: 2/23/2006 11:10:23 AM EDT

Originally Posted By wise_jake:
Fucker! Now that I've read that twice (second time's the charm), I'm still laughing.....




I know its stupid funny but without 3rd humor we would have no fun in any legal post....
Link Posted: 2/23/2006 11:40:36 AM EDT

Originally Posted By frisco:

Originally Posted By wise_jake:
Fucker! Now that I've read that twice (second time's the charm), I'm still laughing.....


I know its stupid funny but without 3rd humor we would have no fun in any legal post....


Uh huh huh huh...... "penal code".....
Link Posted: 2/23/2006 11:41:33 AM EDT

Originally Posted By kingpinGTI:
ok, let's say "hypothetically" my roommate's ex girlfriends boyfriend comes over to our apartment and attempts to start something(lots of drama there, don't want to get into it). chances are he'll be unarmed but he's well trained in martial arts

at what point am I able to take action?



If you shot him and he died and I was at your trial and there was not some stitches and broken bones from an assault by him and you said he verbally said he would beat you to death with his "martial arts skillz"and you shot the boyfriend and had opened the door (he did not break it down) I would vote guilty and give you the death penalty because I would believe you had planned it. Not kidding.

If he broke down the door or you or the GF had stitches or broken bones Id vote not guilty. Martial arts and threats dont mean shit unless the guy is beating someone to death.
Link Posted: 2/23/2006 12:09:19 PM EDT

Originally Posted By DevL:

Originally Posted By kingpinGTI:
ok, let's say "hypothetically" my roommate's ex girlfriends boyfriend comes over to our apartment and attempts to start something(lots of drama there, don't want to get into it). chances are he'll be unarmed but he's well trained in martial arts

at what point am I able to take action?



If you shot him and he died and I was at your trial and there was not some stitches and broken bones from an assault by him and you said he verbally said he would beat you to death with his "martial arts skillz"and you shot the boyfriend and had opened the door (he did not break it down) I would vote guilty and give you the death penalty because I would believe you had planned it. Not kidding.

If he broke down the door or you or the GF had stitches or broken bones Id vote not guilty. Martial arts and threats dont mean shit unless the guy is beating someone to death.



do i hear "throw down"?

Link Posted: 2/23/2006 1:12:02 PM EDT

Originally Posted By DevL:

Originally Posted By kingpinGTI:
ok, let's say "hypothetically" my roommate's ex girlfriends boyfriend comes over to our apartment and attempts to start something(lots of drama there, don't want to get into it). chances are he'll be unarmed but he's well trained in martial arts

at what point am I able to take action?



If you shot him and he died and I was at your trial and there was not some stitches and broken bones from an assault by him and you said he verbally said he would beat you to death with his "martial arts skillz"and you shot the boyfriend and had opened the door (he did not break it down) I would vote guilty and give you the death penalty because I would believe you had planned it. Not kidding.

If he broke down the door or you or the GF had stitches or broken bones Id vote not guilty. Martial arts and threats dont mean shit unless the guy is beating someone to death.




Sounds "board-certified" to me
Link Posted: 2/23/2006 1:14:24 PM EDT
Link Posted: 2/24/2006 6:24:36 AM EDT
Wonder if I can use Arfcom to get out of Jury duty....
Link Posted: 2/24/2006 6:43:09 PM EDT
"Sure, it's in the Constitution, son!"

Link Posted: 2/26/2006 7:30:38 AM EDT
sorry for the high jack but maybe this story might help you in a way?

This past Christmas, a drunk driving guy followed me , my wife and baby. It was night time and the guy followed us all the way to my mother n laws house. I didnt noticed he was flowing us until he almost rammed our car as I parked.

He got off with a beer in his hand and something else on the other. I couldnt see. I told my wife to stay in the car with our son. My sidearm was in the trunk, I opened the trunk as he was yelling at me to come over there now! He was too high and drunk to noticed I strapped my fobus and gun to my side. The guy kept yelling at me to go over there or else. I told him "I dont know you, go home, get out of here." They guy got mad and said "Im coming over there. I told him to STOP, and brandished my gun.

By this time my wife was getting our baby out of the car and going inside to call the police. The guy paused and did a double take and said "WHAT IS THAT"? I told him its a firearm, please leave! The guy said "your a cop huh? " WELL KILL ME THEN !!!!! KILL ME!!! and he proceeded to walk my way.

Now at this time I was confused , while my hand was on my side arm. I thought to myself, "should I pop him on the knee, leg, arm?" I am a big guy, 265lbs 6'2''. and he was a big guy too. I thought that wont look good in court. Well I didnt want to kill him, so I decided to fight him. He only had a beer in his hand nothing else on the other hand. I moved my side arm to a 4 o'clock position and got ready.
I had a surefire flashlight so I pulled it out and and blinded him....guess what, that did it. It was as if I sprayed him or something. I dont know what drugs the man took but he kept saying "Im F**cked up! " Kill me!!" and stayed back, the flashlight worked, the guy stayed back, by this time the police were coming and the guy got in his truck and took off. I dont know if they caught him, but the police asked me a few questions and took off. I'm glad the man didnt have a gun or weapon. I didnt want to kill him or vice versa. Or end up in court or in jail.

I think if the guy would of had a gun and shot torwards my car first, then he would be history. thanks for reading and please feel free to comment.
Top Top