USCCA's legal services plan only kicks in if the use of force was lawful.
.png)
[UPDATED] Seeking perspective on a situation my neighbor is going through...
- Thread starter JColumbus
- Start date
The #1 community for Gun Owners in Texas
Member Benefits:
Fewer Ads! Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership Discuss anti-gun legislation Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses Discover free outdoor shooting areas View up to date on firearm-related events Share photos & video with other members ...and so much more!
Member Benefits:
"EXACKERLY" !
If you do "draw", the story will be distorted from that point on.
Never draw unless absolutely forced-to. . . . .
"Brandished" has gone wild, the prosecutors ALWAYS use that one. . . .
Bueno Suerte a Carlos !
.
Last edited:
Seriously?
Stand your ground law only means you dont have to try to retreat before defending yourself. Peroid end of concept. Its isnt a magical talisman that makes all other use of force justification go away.
Lonesome Dove
A man of vision but with no mission.
Put a lid on it and walk away. Reading all that's been replied is a clue.
Keep in mind that if we're talking aggravated assault then the law, as todd pointed out, only requires that you "exhibit" your weapon. This case is kind of a "gimme" for a prosecutor, so a plea deal is what Carlos' lawyers need to be working on 24/7.
Leaving the scene ranges from a Class C misdemeanor to a second degree felony depending damages and injury.
BuzzinSATX
Well-Known
All IMO. I’m no lawyer.
When he gave chase and stopped her vehicle, he became the aggressor. Self defense is a weak defense. He could have followed at a distance I suppose, but when he engaged, he started treading on dangerous grounds.
Pulling his gun was a stupid move too. One husband vrs. A 21 year old and his father? Clearly a foolish move IMO.
Good people do stupid things. He deserves what he gets, as does the lady who hit and run, but separate offenses.
When he gave chase and stopped her vehicle, he became the aggressor. Self defense is a weak defense. He could have followed at a distance I suppose, but when he engaged, he started treading on dangerous grounds.
Pulling his gun was a stupid move too. One husband vrs. A 21 year old and his father? Clearly a foolish move IMO.
Good people do stupid things. He deserves what he gets, as does the lady who hit and run, but separate offenses.
Five pages in, and this thread has stayed on subject, but it also seems to have largely come to a conclusion..., though the poll reponse seems to show more what we might like, rather than what the law actually allows...
I really appreciate Todd directly applying the law to this case as it was presented. Seems Carlos did well beyond what the law allows...
Slightly off subject, a question was raised in my mind by leVieux's relating in another thread that
In Carlos case, the OP says...
While these two actions seem to have little in common, they do both include something of a "defensive display", though I'm not clear whether that would be as defined by law.
In leVieux's case he was obviously CC and acted to display his weapon. In Carlos' case, I infer that he was CC and drew his weapon in order to display it. Both were trying to forestall escalation...
In either case, if they had been OC (perhaps not legal at the time of leVieux's case), their weapon would have been naturally displayed and no action to display it required...
Seems likely that a cop in Carlos' shoes would minimally have layed in hand on his OC'ed weapon, and that action would have been seen as justified, but in leVieux's case, and especially Carlos' case, because they CC'ed, they thought what could possibly be construed as an aggressive action (assault?) was necessary to display their weapons, one not necessary if they had OC'ed.
My question is whether OC offers a defensive advantage, considering the law? Allowing a more overt display of the possibility of deadly force without any action required to show that capability?
If Carlos had OC'ed, could he have reasonably layed his hand on his gun, as many a cop I've seen has done in a threatening situation?
I really appreciate Todd directly applying the law to this case as it was presented. Seems Carlos did well beyond what the law allows...
Slightly off subject, a question was raised in my mind by leVieux's relating in another thread that
In Carlos case, the OP says...
While these two actions seem to have little in common, they do both include something of a "defensive display", though I'm not clear whether that would be as defined by law.
In leVieux's case he was obviously CC and acted to display his weapon. In Carlos' case, I infer that he was CC and drew his weapon in order to display it. Both were trying to forestall escalation...
In either case, if they had been OC (perhaps not legal at the time of leVieux's case), their weapon would have been naturally displayed and no action to display it required...
Seems likely that a cop in Carlos' shoes would minimally have layed in hand on his OC'ed weapon, and that action would have been seen as justified, but in leVieux's case, and especially Carlos' case, because they CC'ed, they thought what could possibly be construed as an aggressive action (assault?) was necessary to display their weapons, one not necessary if they had OC'ed.
My question is whether OC offers a defensive advantage, considering the law? Allowing a more overt display of the possibility of deadly force without any action required to show that capability?
If Carlos had OC'ed, could he have reasonably layed his hand on his gun, as many a cop I've seen has done in a threatening situation?
Axxe55
Retiretgtshit stirrer
Usually a misdemeanor charge, unless there are injuries or a fatality, then it could get kicked up to a felony charge.
Axxe55
Retiretgtshit stirrer
If such had happened at the original scene of the accident, then self-defense if such would apply, but the key factor is that Carlos and his father pursued the woman, to another location and all that now goes out the window.
You can't instigate the situation then cry you're the victim in order to use a self defense claim in the use of deadly force in Texas.
Axxe55
Retiretgtshit stirrer
That they took up chase of the woman is the biggest factor that negates anything they might have been justified in doing.
I'm sure the woman was on the phone with her husband and telling him two crazy men are chasing her, and as a husband, if I were in his shoes, I would have done the same thing. I would be threatening to kick some ass big time.
One of the most valuable lessons I learned about carrying was that I was not some sort of avenger or super cop, but in most cases instead of inseting myself into things better left to LE, was to be the best witness possible so they can catch the bad guys. The woman committing hit and run, makes her the bad guy in this situation.
Axxe55
Retiretgtshit stirrer
But he got his head bashed in on the concrete curb too.
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
-
Ft. Bend Gun Show / Premier Gun Shows & American Gun Shows
- Latest: D0ntTr3@d0nM3
