TexasArmed
Member
I don't understand why this is even discussed.
Except in TX, if the guy is stealing your bile and you are on the porch you call the cops and be cool.
If you are on your bike in the driveway and he approaches you with a weapon and demands you bile or else he is going to naim or kill you, you shoot.
Property laws in almost all states say that you do not protect your property at the cost of a life.
I have done any searches on it, but I suspect that arson of an occupied dwelling is an exception.
The way the Texas Statute reads is as follows regarding your comment. A criminal cannot count on not being shot just because he is running off with the loot. But the legal costs of
doing so may very well more than the property is worth. I suspect Joe Horn, in Pasadena probably spent a lot more on
his legal defense, since that case was thrown out by a grand jury, he still had lots of legal fees. And the property he was protecting was not even his, and the dispatcher told him not to go outside. All such cases like the one in Florida are automatically turned over to a grand jury. There are lots of
people who do not like our laws in Texas. The case in Florida
will have to be tried on the basis of self defense because SYG
probably does not apply. Zimmerman had no evidence that
Martin had committed a crime, nor a felony, either. If the medical evidence shows Martin broke his nose, and left marks on his back, that were recorded and treated, he may be found
not guilty. In which case there will be enormous efforts there to get the laws changed. I for one, am very glad this case did not occur in Texas.
"Texas Penal Code 9.42"
"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 others 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."