You really couldn't make this stuff up......

If I understand correctly, Texas is one of the few (maybe the only?) states that permit the use of deadly force to protect property. Is my understanding correct?

That's 3 kinds of stupid.

Justice is the fraud ring has been stopped.

quote:

Originally posted by V-Tail:
If I understand correctly, Texas is one of the few (maybe the only?) states that permit the use of deadly force to protect property. Is my understanding correct?

Yes.

There is more.

The shooter is a prohibited person; however, it is unclear if he will be prosecuted for either the firearm possession or it’s use.

Well dang, It is just not safe to stage a robbery at a convenience store anymore.

quote:

Originally posted by V-Tail:
If I understand correctly, Texas is one of the few (maybe the only?) states that permit the use of deadly force to protect property. Is my understanding correct?

I don't know about other states, but yes you can.
It actually makes a difference if it is after dark. It's in the statute from way back.

I don't know about how it works away from your home/property, or if it is some one else's property. Cases have successfully extended castle doctrine to your car prior to constitutional carry. I'd be surprised if it is less liberal now.

Pretty good shooting...shooting a fast moving target.

Excellent (or very lucky) shot.

The shooter wasn't protecting property, he was shooting at what he thought was a deadly threat, so perfectly justified almost any state.

The apparent victim (guy at the pumps) should be charged with felony murder since he was committing a felony when his accomplice was killed.

^^^
https://abc13.com/ella-bouleva...ott-killed/14634618/

"HOUSTON, Texas (KTRK) -- Murder charges have been filed against a man who police say was behind an elaborate scheme that turned deadly to obtain immigration documents, according to records.

William Winfrey, 30, is charged in connection to the death of his accomplice, Rasshauud Scott, after a staged robbery ended in gunfire, according to police. ..."



The guy on probation needs a day added to his probation, and then that day deemed "time served" as of the day of the shooting.

Because we gotta have respect for the law.

“Nobody’s talking about the main issue here and that’s gun laws! They need to change”!

Yes sir we need more gun laws. Because more gun laws will stop fucking idiots like your fiancé from doing stupid and illegal things.
The only person in that video that did not prove their stupidity is the narrator.

I make the distance to be between 25 ft. And 35 ft.
( Shooter to target,)


Not bad

quote:

Originally posted by 400m:
“Nobody’s talking about the main issue here and that’s gun laws! They need to change”!

Yes sir we need more gun laws. Because more gun laws will stop fucking idiots like your fiancé from doing stupid and illegal things.
The only person in that video that did not prove their stupidity is the narrator.

I have found that criminals love gun laws.

She should have some accessory charges against her.
You know she knew what they were doing.

I was under the impression that those visas were for victims of domestic abuse or trafficking.

quote:

Originally posted by Skull Leader:
I was under the impression that those visas were for victims of domestic abuse or trafficking.

That's what I was trying to figure out.
Part way down here:
The following table lists the criminal activities that are considered "qualifying criminal activities" for purposes of U visa eligibility.
https://www.dhs.gov/sites/defa...f-Certain-Crimes.pdf

• Abduction
• Abusive Sexual Contact
• Being Held Hostage
• Blackmail
• Domestic Violence
• Extortion
• False Imprisonment
• Felonious Assault
• Female Genital Mutilation
• Fraud in Foreign Labor Contracting
• Incest
• Involuntary Servitude
• Kidnapping
• Manslaughter
• Murder
• Obstruction of Justice
• Peonage
• Perjury
• Prostitution
• Rape
• Sexual Assault
• Sexual Exploitation
• Slave Trade
• Stalking
• Torture
• Trafficking
• Witness Tampering
• Unlawful Criminal Restraint

quote:

Originally posted by 83v45magna:

quote:

Originally posted by V-Tail:
If I understand correctly, Texas is one of the few (maybe the only?) states that permit the use of deadly force to protect property. Is my understanding correct?

I don't know about other states, but yes you can.
It actually makes a difference if it is after dark. It's in the statute from way back.

I don't know about how it works away from your home/property, or if it is some one else's property. Cases have successfully extended castle doctrine to your car prior to constitutional carry. I'd be surprised if it is less liberal now.

Here's the Texas statute:

Texas Penal Code

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.

We had lots of incidents involving property theft where people used deadly force correctly, and less frequent cases where the person's adrenaline dump caused them to make the wrong decision and end up getting indicted or convicted.

In Texas and several other states, the rationale for allowing deadly force at nighttime for theft is that there's no way to identify a suspect because it's too dark.

Wait, wait, wait... let I get this straight.

A woman who's fiance was committing fake robberies as part of a scheme to defraud the government, is shot and killed by a citizen, and she thinks Gun Laws need to be strengthened, and THAT is the problem here??

Actually, the problem is with the media giving her lying ass even a second of air time.

quote:

Originally posted by YooperSigs:
Actually, the problem is with the media giving her lying ass even a second of air time.

Winner!