logo
 

Go Back   HuntingNet.com Forums > Non Hunting > Politics

Politics Nothing goes with politics quite like crying and complaining, and we're a perfect example of that.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 06-27-2005, 11:54 AM   #1
Nontypical Buck
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Winston-Salem, North Carolina
Posts: 1,150
Default Does this violate use of deadly force rules?

Although the story seems to be light on details, it seems to me that this guy started shooting as the "perps" were fleeing. I don't know what the rules in Texas are regarding the use of deadly force but this guy would probably be looking at some trouble if it happened here in NC.

*********

Homeowner chases down two would-be robbers, killing one
Sergio Lerma describes how he chased down three of the suspects.

By Mark Garay
ABC13 Eyewitness News
(6/27/05 - HOUSTON) "” A homeowner protected his home and his family by shooting at would-be burglars Monday morning. One died, another is in the hospital, and two other suspects got away.

It happened at a home on Texarcana and Lathrop in northeast Houston. Sergio Lerma and his family are thankful they're still alive. Around 1am, Lerma returned home with his brother and a friend to find four men in his front yard.

"I guess they panicked," he said. "One of them ran this way. He got stuck right there. We caught him. The other ones ran to the back. I grabbed my gun and shot him."

Three of the suspects ran through his back yard as Lerma retrieved a nine millimeter pistol from inside his home. He emptied his clip of 16 rounds, hitting two of the burglars. One of them died.

"It's either them or me or my family and I don't know if they had guns or not," said Lerma.

Sergio and his friend hopped in their truck and found the suspect several blocks away. He was able to scrawl their license plate number on his hand and police later discovered the dead burglar nearby.

"I feel kind of bad, but then again, it's either him or me," he said.

Lerma says there have been at least a half dozen similar incidents at his home in just over the last year. Police haven't said if there will be any charges, but the investigation is continuing. One suspect remains in the hospital with an injured shoulder. Two others remain on the loose.
NCOutdoors is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2005, 12:06 PM   #2
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location:
Posts: 215
Default RE: Does this violate use of deadly force rules?

Look up US supreme court decision of Tennessee v. Garner it establishes the precedence for use of deadly force to apprehend a fleeing felon. The case was a burglar that took off running from an officer and got shot in the back and killed.

This case that you posted sounds very similar. The exception is that police officers have qualified immunty and privileged use of force, so they can take action easier than civilians with out getting screwed.

Just a hunch but I bet those guys are gonna get charged ,tried and convicted of manslaughter.
__________________
Bahala Na!
PhoenixMA is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2005, 12:07 PM   #3
Dominant Buck
 
kevin1's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Ramsey , Indiana
Posts: 22,547
Default RE: Does this violate use of deadly force rules?

Texas still has their "horse law" that gives homeowners the nearly unlimited right to use deadly force when protecting their property , so he probably won't get into too much trouble .
__________________
Kevin Haendiges
NAHC Life Member
NRA Member
Wildlife Forever Member
GOA Member
Buckmasters Member
http://hunting-indiana.com
kevin1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2005, 12:13 PM   #4
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location:
Posts: 4,895
Default RE: Does this violate use of deadly force rules?

http://www.self-defender.net/law3.htm

Looks like the homeowner could be in some big trouble...

=======================================
Self Defense Statutes
(Texas Penal Code)
(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, Sec. 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974.
Amended by Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 900, Sec. 1.01, eff. Sept. 1,1994.
Amended by Acts 1995, 74th Leg., ch. 190, Sec. 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1995.
Deadly Force in Defense of Person
"A person is justified in using deadly force against another if he would be justified in using force under Section 9.31 of the statute when and to the degree he reasonable believes that deadly force is immediately necessary to protect himself against the other's use or attempted use of unlawful deadly force, if a reasonable person in the same situation would have not retreated. The use of deadly force is also justified to prevent the other's imminent commission of aggravated kidnapping, murder, rape or robbery."
Defense of Another Person
"A person is justified in using deadly force against an attacker to protect another person if he would be justified to use it to protect himself against an unlawful attack and he reasonably believes his intervention is immediately necessary to protect the other person from serious injury or death."
Deadly Force to Protect Property
"A person is justified in using deadly force against another to protect his property to the degree he reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary to prevent the other's imminent commission of arson, burglary, robbery, theft during the nighttime or criminal mischief during the nighttime, and he reasonably believes that the property cannot be protected by any other means."
"A person is justified in using deadly force against another to pervent the other who is fleeing after committing burglary, robbery, or theft during the nighttime, from escaping with the property and he reasonable believes that the property cannot be recovered by any other means; or, the use of force other than deadly force to protect or recover the property would expose him or another to a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury. (Nighttime is defined as the period 30 minutes after sunset until 30 minutes before sunrise.)"
Protection of the Property of Others

"A person is justified in using force or deadly force against another to protect the property of a third person if he reasonably believes he would be justified to use similar force to protect his own property, and he reasonably believes that there existed an attempt or actual commission of the crime of theft or criminal mischief."
"Also, a person is justified in using force or deadly force if he reasonably believes that the third person has requested his protection of property; or he has a legal duty to protect the property; or the third person whose property he is protecting is his spouse, parent or child."
Reasonable Belief
"It is not necessary that there should be actual danger, as a person has the right to defend his life and person from apparent danger as fully and to the same extent as he would have were the danger real, as it reasonably appeared to him from his standpoint at the time."
"In fact, Sec 9.31(a) [of the Penal Code] expressly provides that a person is justified in using deadly force against another when and to the degree he reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary."
Justification for Using Deadly Force Can Be Lost
"Even though a person is justified in threatening or using force or deadly force against another in self defense or defense of others or property as described in the statute, if in doing so he also recklessly injures or kills an innocent third person, the justification for deadly force is unavailable."
"A person acts recklessly when he is aware of but consciously disregards a substantial and unjustifiable risk with respect to the circumstances surrounding his conduct or the results of his conduct. The risk must be of such a nature and degree that its disregard constitutes a gross deviation of the standard of care that an ordinary person would exercise, viewed from the person's standpoint under all the circumstances existing at the time."
Self Defense Definitions
"Assault is committed if a person intentionally, knowingly or recklessly threatens another with imminent bodily injury, causes bodily injury to another, or causes physical contact with another when he knows or should reasonably believe that the other will regard the contact as offensive or provocative."
"Aggravated assault is committed if a person commits Assault (qv.) and causes serious bodily injury to another, or causes bodily injury to a peace officer, or uses a deadly weapon."
"Burglary is committed if, without the effective consent of the owner, a person: 1) Enters a building, or any portion of a bulding, not open to the public with intent to commit a felony or theft, or 2) Remains concealed in a building with the intent to commit a felony or theft."
"Criminal Mischief is committed if, without the effective consent of the owner, a person: 1) Intentionally or knowingly damages or destroys the property of the owner, or 2) Tampers with the property of the owner and causes momentary loss or sustained inconvenience to the owner or third person."
tardfarmer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2005, 12:15 PM   #5
Nontypical Buck
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Winston-Salem, North Carolina
Posts: 1,150
Default RE: Does this violate use of deadly force rules?


Quote:
ORIGINAL: kevin1

Texas still has their "horse law" that gives homeowners the nearly unlimited right to use deadly force when protecting their property , so he probably won't get into too much trouble .
But once the guys started running, did he still need to shoot to protect his property?
NCOutdoors is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2005, 12:16 PM   #6
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location:
Posts: 4,895
Default RE: Does this violate use of deadly force rules?

Quote:
But once the guys started running, did he still need to shoot to protect his property?
read my post above, the homeowner is in for a nasty surprise (legally)
tardfarmer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2005, 01:23 PM   #7
Nontypical Buck
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Winston-Salem, North Carolina
Posts: 1,150
Default RE: Does this violate use of deadly force rules?


Quote:
ORIGINAL: tardfarmer

Quote:
But once the guys started running, did he still need to shoot to protect his property?
read my post above, the homeowner is in for a nasty surprise (legally)
That's pretty wild stuff. You can shoot a guy because he's running off with a couple of your Lynard Skynard albums. That's old school right there . . . But it's sometimes the best deterrent.

NCOutdoors is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2005, 03:37 PM   #8
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 1,263
Default RE: Does this violate use of deadly force rules?

I think in Texas it's legal.
rick_reno is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2005, 04:59 PM   #9
Giant Nontypical
 
North Texan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: a van down by the river
Posts: 8,529
Default RE: Does this violate use of deadly force rules?

A lot of these laws were placed on the books because Texas was mostly ranching back in the beginning. When things are stolen, especially livestock, chances of recovery are slim to none. Hence the "theft during the nighttime" provision. And Texas courts and juries still lean very heavily in favor of defendants in this type case. The prevailing philosophy is "If he didn't want to get shot, he shouldn't have committed the crime."
__________________
You may beat the rap, but you won't beat the ride!
North Texan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-28-2005, 06:52 AM   #10
Boone & Crockett
 
Aught Six's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Virginia
Posts: 13,219
Default RE: Does this violate use of deadly force rules?

Quote:
The prevailing philosophy is "If he didn't want to get shot, he shouldn't have committed the crime."
Absolutely! You'd think these scumbags would realize that it's just not nice to take other people's belongings. When you go to work to make money to buy the things you need or want, you're giving up part of your life. You shouldn'tmess with people's lives if you want to keep yours.

As far as this person in the above incident being charged? It's up to the DA. Texas is a big state with a variety of politics, and frankly I don't know enough about the area in which he lives. However, I'd say he has more of a chance of avoiding prosecution there than any other state in the country.
__________________
Matthew 18:3-6
Aught Six is offline   Reply With Quote
 
 
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
VABowman refuses to violate man-law GMMAT Bowhunting 16 10-22-2008 10:31 AM
Gossip ..a deadly sin. Chuck7 Religion 39 04-06-2006 06:25 PM
Most deadly........ mrwake Whitetail Deer Hunting 37 03-15-2006 05:10 AM
Do public schools violate our religious rights? BenGarrett Politics 5 03-06-2002 01:01 PM
Deadly Deceptions by MMM........ PABuck_HNTR Politics 4 02-26-2002 09:42 AM

 

All times are GMT -8. The time now is 07:27 AM.