sued for stopping illegals

[picklesuit]

No that is not completely true. Said person has to try to hurt you REAL bad. "Serious bodily injury". In point of fact, you had better be afraid for your life. The only reason the term serious bodily injury is used is because an ordinary citizen can not know what type of injuries or assaults may be deadly. And don't forget, all this is as a reasonable man would see it. So if Jose breaks into your ranch house looking for food or water and you find him in the kitchen, unarmed, and you shoot him as he stands there, you are probably going to jail.
.

Why I always have my "knife in a bag" just in case...

 

[A4sForever]

....I'm not going to bother arguing with you....

And that's a good thing, Martha ... one can only hope.

 

[wink]

Not over trespass maybe but in Texas the use of deadly force is authorized if it is reasonable to believe that burglary is the intent of the intruder.


From the Texas penal code:
Sec. 9.32. DEADLY FORCE IN DEFENSE OF PERSON. (a) A person is justified in using deadly force against another:
(1) if the actor would be justified in using force against the other under Section 9.31; and
(2) when and to the degree the actor reasonably believes the deadly force is immediately necessary:
(A) to protect the actor 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 actor's belief under Subsection (a)(2) that the deadly force was immediately necessary as described by that subdivision is presumed to be reasonable if the actor:
(1) knew or had reason to believe that the person against whom the deadly force was used:
(A) unlawfully and with force entered, or was attempting to enter unlawfully and with force, the actor's occupied habitation, vehicle, or place of business or employment;
(B) unlawfully and with force removed, or was attempting to remove unlawfully and with force, the actor from the actor's habitation, vehicle, or place of business or employment; or
(C) was committing or attempting to commit an offense described by Subsection (a)(2)(B);
(2) did not provoke the person against whom the force was used; and
(3) was not otherwise engaged in criminal activity, other than a Class C misdemeanor that is a violation of a law or ordinance regulating traffic at the time the force was used.
(c) A person who has a right to be present at the location where the deadly force is used, who has not provoked the person against whom the deadly force is used, and who is not engaged in criminal activity at the time the deadly force is used is not required to retreat before using deadly force as described by this section.
(d) For purposes of Subsection (a)(2), in determining whether an actor described by Subsection (c) reasonably believed that the use of deadly force was necessary, a finder of fact may not consider whether the actor failed to retreat.

It appears Texas is more liberal in this area then many states. The key here though is in the reference to a presumption that justification is met in subsection (a) (2). That is the section that says to be justified you have to be acting to prevent serious injury or death. So, if you kill some one that is breaking into your home, the court will presume, (but I wonder if it is required to) that you were in danger of physical harm that may lead to the justifiable use of deadly force.

I don't get the eagerness to kill someone you catch running out of your home with the toaster, or for breaking a window in the family room to get into the house. If you face the suspect down simply tell him to stay put. If he runs, so be it, if he charges you (presumption he will take your weapon and use it on you) or goes for a weapon, you are justified under any law in any state. I will not be executing any compliant unarmed burglars I get the drop on in my home. If you think that makes you a hero to the community then go for it. It is easier to shoot then deal with the aftermath, legally and personally.

 

[wink]

illegal immigrants jailed in tents

Maricopa County (AZ) Sheriff is moving the illegal immigrant inmates in his jail to tents. Of course the usually suspects are up in arms, to include ACORN and the ACLU. An opponent of the Sheriff, a county board Supervisor and of Mexican decent, has called the move of illegal immigrants to tents "inhumane". One wonders if she considered what the military did with the tents the Sheriff got from the Army to house the inmates in. I guess it is inhumane to house illegal immigrants in tents, but not the military.

http://www.azcentral.com/community/phoenix/articles/2009/02/03/20090203abrk-tentcity0203.html

 

[statesman]

Is this also the Sherrif who uses some 'old school' prison practices like chain gangs etc?

 

[statesman]

It appears Texas is more liberal in this area then many states.

It is Texas remember. We are first in the nation in executions, followed distantly by Virginia, and Im pretty sure that even including VA we execute more people than the rest of the country combined.

Our laws by and large favor personal property over criminal 'rights', except in Travis county but thank god for State law trumping County and City right?

We will even execute a foreign national.

 

[wink]

Is this also the Sherrif who uses some 'old school' prison practices like chain gangs etc?

Yup. Pink under ware, first to go back to black stripe uniforms, chain gangs, one hot meal a day, serves food acquired cheap from grocery stores beyond shelf life or sell by date (but still safe to eat), lots of baloney sandwiches and dry apples. EVERYONE works except those in lock down (rapper DMZ went into lock down yesterday), no coffee, no cigarettes or tobacco of any kind, no Playboys or other "girlie" mags, only two or three TV stations, lately I believe it is CSPAN, Food TV, and Disney. Inmates do all the work at the county cemetery burying the indigent. They even hold a grave side ceremony in their stripes. Officers are prohibited from speaking Spanish to inmates unless it is a safety, medical or security issue, but English classes are mandatory for non English speakers. He sponsors a Girl Scout Troop that meets in the jail so women with daughters can participate with their girls. There are hundreds of regular inmates in tents, not just the illegal immigrants. The units were established back in '91 and are called Intents, and Contents. There has never been an early release due to over crowding. They just put up more tents. All jail terms are served. In California most misdemeanor sentences are not served. Arizona inmates that finish their time in the state pen and then have to transfer to the county jail to serve out a term for an unrelated crime dread going to the jail. They would rather be in the state system.

 

[HueyCobra8151]

Just to play devils advocate here, this website gives Texas crime raw numbers.

In 1960 there were 161 violent crimes per 100,000 people
In 2006 there was 510.

In 2007 Texas was ranked #8 in total crimes.

Does having a draconian execution policy inhibit crime?

 

[statesman]

We are number 2 in the nation for total population. What do you think?

 

[Aircrew Instruc]

My hometown Mayor
http://www.smalltowndefenders.com/public/
I told you all to google Hazleton PA

 

[wink]

Does having a draconian execution policy inhibit crime?

What policy do you refer? Criminals executed in any state, are convicted by a court after due process, and in 99.9% of the cases, tried by a jury of the citizens of the community. The government does not set a policy on the number of executions. It is the community, or state's citizens that send these guys to jail, only after they commit a crime and are given due process. All the state does is carry out the sentence of the judge and jury. Seems to me that the people of Texas are OK with sentencing people to death row and the state is just a bit more efficient at carrying out the wishes of their citizens then other states. Bravo to them for effective government.

 

[wink]

My hometown Mayor
http://www.smalltowndefenders.com/public/
I told you all to google Hazleton PA

Section Four regarding hiring of illegal aliens is very similar to the sate laws that went into effect in AZ last year. In AZ, business are required to use E-Verify. The second time you are caught with illegal immigrants on your payroll, you lose your business license in the state forever. It was recently upheld by the US Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. I am sure the good mayor's lawyers will be relaying on that decision to get their ordinance reinstated.

 

[Godspeed]

Yup. Pink under ware, first to go back to black stripe uniforms, chain gangs, one hot meal a day, serves food acquired cheap from grocery stores beyond shelf life or sell by date (but still safe to eat), lots of baloney sandwiches and dry apples. EVERYONE works except those in lock down (rapper DMZ went into lock down yesterday), no coffee, no cigarettes or tobacco of any kind, no Playboys or other "girlie" mags, only two or three TV stations, lately I believe it is CSPAN, Food TV, and Disney. Inmates do all the work at the county cemetery burying the indigent. They even hold a grave side ceremony in their stripes. Officers are prohibited from speaking Spanish to inmates unless it is a safety, medical or security issue, but English classes are mandatory for non English speakers. He sponsors a Girl Scout Troop that meets in the jail so women with daughters can participate with their girls. There are hundreds of regular inmates in tents, not just the illegal immigrants. The units were established back in '91 and are called Intents, and Contents. There has never been an early release due to over crowding. they just put up more tents. All jail terms are served. In California most misdemeanor sentences are not served. Arizona inmates that finish their time in the state pen and then have to transfer to the county jail to serve out a term for an unrelated crime dread going to the jail. They would rather be in the state system.

He also has a show on the FOX reality channel called "Smile, you're under arrest"

It's quite a trip. They send an invitation to people that have warrants out (everything from drug charges to DUI, usually for skipping court). The invitation states that the criminal has won $300 and can earn more money by participating in some sort of event (one episode was a photo shoot, another was a hollywood movie.. My favorite was the opening of a SPA.)

The person shows up to claim their $300 and is told they have to participate in some embarassing shinanigans before finally the host of the show tells them to smile, because they are under arrest. Deputies appear behind them, cuff em' and take em' away.

http://www.foxreality.com/show.php?storyid=83242

 

[nittany03]

It appears Texas is more liberal in this area then many states. The key here though is in the reference to a presumption that justification is met in subsection (a) (2). That is the section that says to be justified you have to be acting to prevent serious injury or death. So, if you kill some one that is breaking into your home, the court will presume, (but I wonder if it is required to) that you were in danger of physical harm that may lead to the justifiable use of deadly force.

I don't get the eagerness to kill someone you catch running out of your home with the toaster, or for breaking a window in the family room to get into the house. If you face the suspect down simply tell him to stay put. If he runs, so be it, if he charges you (presumption he will take your weapon and use it on you) or goes for a weapon, you are justified under any law in any state. I will not be executing any compliant unarmed burglars I get the drop on in my home. If you think that makes you a hero to the community then go for it. It is easier to shoot then deal with the aftermath, legally and personally.

+61. Some of you people have no clue, and had better get one if you expect to have a firearm available for your defense. If you have even thought about home defense and firearms in the same mental sentence, you had better have first read In the Gravest Extreme by Massad Ayoob, or something similar.

Ask rare21, lawman, xnvyflyr, or any other current or former cop on the board. Your weapon is for the defense of your LIFE. NOT your property, Texas excepted! If you shoot someone in self-defense, you WILL be arrested; you WILL be tried and (hopefully) acquitted of murder or manslaughter. You will then likely be sued by whatever family the scumbag had. And oh by the way, if you screwed up and broke the law, so sorry. Meet your new roommate Bubba Ray. Then, after years of trial and litigation, and all the associated attorney's fees, media circus, and damaged reputation, you get to live with the psychological aftermath.

I will defend my life if necessary, but the facts of armed self-defense in this day and age still scare the shit out of me. If they don't scare you, sell your guns. Now.

 

[HokiePilot]

Many states have passed Castle Doctrine laws which essentially codify that there is no duty to retreat prior to using deadly force if you are threatened with deadly force. The levels change when one leaves their home depending on state. Many states also have codified that self defense is an affirmative defense when being sued and will result in an immediate dismissal.

What scares me more than anything is teams of teams of heavily armed men breaking into houses in the middle of the night:
http://blogs.usatoday.com/ondeadline/2007/12/minn-man-shoots.html

http://hamptonroads.com/2008/06/grand-jury-indicts-ryan-frederick-capital-murder-charge