The Texas Legislature its on way to approve a bill that would give the people the right to use deadly force against individuals who try to aggravate them outside of their home. Until now, the Castle Doctrine only allows the use of deadly force when being attacked at home. In other wiords, up untill now, the castle doctrine, which dates back into the old west era, allowed for person to use deadly force against anyone who tried to break in their home, without having to prove they tried to retreat, If the attack was anyplace outside their home, they had to prove they tried to retreat, or else they would be charged with manslaughter at least, what the NEW castle doctrine pretends is to allow the use of deadly force to be used anywhere without that person having to prove he tried to back down..... I think this bill is wrong & should not become the law, because it will cause prosecutors headaches when trying to prosecute murderers who did it willingly, What do you think?
2007-03-24 10:42:36 · 11 answers · asked by Joe 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Law Enforcement & Police
Read Read Read the law first... the current law states "(2) if a reasonable person in the actor's situation would not have retreated " (sec 9.32 part 2). This applies to the home also, as the current law is written. In the revised version of the law this part is removed, the provisions for "occupied vehicle" and "place of business and employment" are added. It also removes the criminals "right" to sue you if you injure him for trying to steal from your home and "winning" your home in civil court. As for the law dating back to "the old west era" - the Castle Law originated in England in the 1700's (see Wikipedia). This is a good law and I am glad that I can defend my home and family, without worrying that I will be sued later for doing so.
2007-03-27 18:49:43 · answer #1 · answered by Wild Bill 1 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I think as long as you are not a felon and have been trained and tested with a weapon, you have the right and should be allowed to carry a concealed weapon. And in the same circumstances that a police officer would use his weapon an individual should be able to do the same. why should criminals be the only ones that can carry a weapon to do their crimes and hurt law abiding citizens along the way. I deserve the right to die defending my life or the life of a family member rater than to become a hostage and having to be at the mercy of my attacker just because he is armed and I am not. And people for the most part are not blood thirsty crazed killers only a few are, so I really don't by the argument that if we can carry guns that all the sudden we will be running around shooting each other in the streets over a parking space.
2007-03-24 18:10:44 · answer #2 · answered by Sir Hard & Thick 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I totally agree with the new law known as The Castle Doctrine. It is my understanding that the only change to our existing law would be the perpetrators rights. If I feel threatened, I should be able to defend myself, as well as my family with deadly force if necessary. Speaking from experience, if someone, assuming a stranger, enters your home against your will, you don't have much time to react, much less worry about the consequences. You go into shock, or at least I did. Had I not had easy access to a gun, who knows what the outcome would have been. My gun jammed, and the perpetrator left, THANK GOD! When the police arrived they asked me several questions like was he black or white. This had happened during daylight hours, yet I had no clue. Next, they asked what was he wearing, and I did not know, even though he was standing about 4 feet in front of me. And yes, I had retreated, locking myself in my bedroom, but he kicked the door in, which is when the gun failed to fire.
Also my husband was robbed at gunpoint while in a place of business about 1 1/2 years ago. It changed him forever. Unless you have lived though such an experience, it's impossible to understand. The first thing he did after his experience was apply for a permit to carry a concealed handgun, and then he purchased several. He carries one on him at all times.
I know there is no perfect law to protect everyone, but if it weren't for the bad people in this world, we wouldn't need such laws. For those who chose a life of crime, they should also be prepared for the consequences.
Jan
2007-03-26 23:30:09 · answer #3 · answered by Jan 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I think your answer, "I think this bill is wrong & should not become the law, because it will cause prosecutors headaches when trying to prosecute murderers who did it willingly" is LAME.
This is not about addressing the legal system woes, it is about self defense. Personally, if anyone comes into my home uninvited, while I am present, I would have to assume it is to harm me or they are prepared to harm me if I resist their main intention (robbery).
I question the motive of anyone who would not support the right of someone to protect himself and have to wonder whether that person is a criminal himself or simply does not place high enough value on the lives of himself or his family.
This will actually save lives of INNOCENT people who may not defend themselves, despite having the means, because they are worried about being prosecuted. As far as the criminals go, who gives a damn - everyone has a choice and they chose wrong!
I hope I am NEVER in a position to have to use deadly force, but I hope I would not hesitate if I was forced to make that decision.
2007-03-28 08:18:09 · answer #4 · answered by Ray 1 · 2⤊ 0⤋
First off, allowing people to defend themselves outside of their homes is NOT a 'castle doctrine', no matter what anyone calls it. That said, as long as there is a legitimate treat, why should I be required to RUN from a criminal anywhere? THEY are breaking the law, not me.
2007-03-24 20:27:06 · answer #5 · answered by STEVEN F 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Texas needs to pass this as soon as possible,I live in Florida and it went into effect last year I think every night and day people are being raped and robbed and killed in Orlando the police are powerless. With all the illegals coming into our country you don't know who is going to try to rob or kill you. Our government has failed the people and to protect our boarders. And also every member of our government needs to be replaced as soon as possible starting with the white house and congress (they are nothing more than corprate whores). My advice to you, get a gun and learn how to use it.
Remember the 2nd amendment makes all the others possible.
2007-03-24 18:04:43 · answer #6 · answered by jackwrench 1 · 2⤊ 0⤋
"it will cause prosecutors headaches when trying to prosecute murderers"
The prosecutors wont get a headache, because the murderers will have been shot dead where they stand.
If people want to try something here in Texas, we say go for it.
Evil doers beware, Texas is prepared!
2007-03-28 02:30:55 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Dam Skippy!
2007-03-28 13:25:40 · answer #8 · answered by dsavidge.geo 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I imagine they're probably still having problems with Katrina evacuees.
2007-03-24 19:27:20 · answer #9 · answered by ? 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
do you live in texas? if not you should not worry about it, it is none of your concern, i live in texas and i agree with that bill.
2007-03-24 19:19:32 · answer #10 · answered by cardboardmanx 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋