Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: RummyChick

I think the imminent danger and “in defense of others” would cover the person in that case since it was clear he had just killed many.

Although we’re still not clear on which bullet did him in.


133 posted on 11/06/2017 5:46:31 AM PST by americas.best.days... ( Donald John Trump has pulled the sword from the stone.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 125 | View Replies ]


To: americas.best.days...; RummyChick
Texas Law follows. It is similar to what my state has. Obviously it doesn't allow shooting someone that has surrendered, but it does allow shooting someone in the back as they are fleeing. (b) A person other than a peace officer (or one acting at his direction) is justified in using force against another when and to the degree the actor reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary to make or assist in making a lawful arrest, or to prevent or assist in preventing escape after lawful arrest if, before using force, the actor manifests his purpose to and the reason for the arrest or reasonably believes his purpose and the reason are already known by or cannot reasonably be made known to the person to be arrested. (c) A peace officer is justified in using deadly force against another when and to the degree the peace officer reasonably believes the deadly force is immediately necessary to make an arrest, or to prevent escape after arrest, if the use of force would have been justified under Subsection (a) and: (1) the actor reasonably believes the conduct for which arrest is authorized included the use or attempted use of deadly force;  or (2) the actor reasonably believes there is a substantial risk that the person to be arrested will cause death or serious bodily injury to the actor or another if the arrest is delayed. (d) A person other than a peace officer acting in a peace officer's presence and at his direction is justified in using deadly force against another when and to the degree the person reasonably believes the deadly force is immediately necessary to make a lawful arrest, or to prevent escape after a lawful arrest, if the use of force would have been justified under Subsection (b) and: (1) the actor reasonably believes the felony or offense against the public peace for which arrest is authorized included the use or attempted use of deadly force;  or (2) the actor reasonably believes there is a substantial risk that the person to be arrested will cause death or serious bodily injury to another if the arrest is delayed. (e) There is no duty to retreat before using deadly force justified by Subsection (c) or (d).
138 posted on 11/06/2017 1:29:22 PM PST by 21twelve (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2185147/posts FDR's New Deal = obama)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 133 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson