Glock Forum - GlockTalk banner
1 - 16 of 16 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
111 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
So yesterday I completed the Texas LTC course and received my CHL-100 certificate. The class was very informative and I learned a lot.

But during the whole course they really in many respects scared the crap out of me when it came to the civil ramifications of using my weapon in a completely legal way to protect myself or my family.

They made it clear that even if someone breaks into your house and attacks your children, using your firearm may cost you your entire 401k or worse.

Then later in the class they brought in these guys called "Texas Law Shield" to sell legal services in the event of a DGU (defensive gun use).

Anyways, I did some further research and it seems like Texas Law Shield has had some dubious history. Furthermore, I read up on Texas 83.001 which says the following. Won't this protect us financially following a DGU (assuming innocent bystanders are not involved)?

Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code (T.C.P.R.C)

TITLE 4. LIABILITY IN TORT

CHAPTER 83. USE OF DEADLY FORCE IN DEFENSE OF PERSON

Sec. 83.001. CIVIL IMMUNITY.

A defendant who uses force or deadly force that is justified under Chapter 9, Penal Code, is immune from civil liability for personal injury or death that results from the defendant’s use of force or deadly force, as applicable.
 

·
Senior Member
Joined
·
3,251 Posts
I am in TX and have been carrying for over 15 years. I read the law several times a year to stay up to date on it, and make sure that I am aware of any changes. That being said, I am no legal expert, and as such, have consulted a couple of LEO's I know and some attorneys that I've worked with and they agree with your reading of it. If your shoot is ruled justifiable, then yes, you enjoy civil immunity... the part where you may need to drain the 401(k) is hiring an attorney to defend you during the preliminary motions to dismiss civil prosecution based on 83.001

In other words, just because you DO have immunity, doesn't mean that a BG's family won't try to sue you anyway. There have been numerous times when those law suits occur even after video evidence proves that BG was asking for it and got what he deserved.
 

·
Exploring Alternate Routes
Joined
·
5,429 Posts
We live in a society of litigation. Anyone can sue over anything. Right or wrong.

YMMV
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
18,905 Posts
Doesn't a person need to have standing to be able to sue someone else?
To successfully sue, yes. But it's still gonna cost you.
 
  • Like
Reactions: nursetim and Lord

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
18,905 Posts
A defendant who uses force or deadly force that is justified under Chapter 9, Penal Code, is immune from civil liability...

Who determines that you were justified? If your case never goes to trial, is there such a determination on record? If there's no formal finding, does it become something open to review (I.e., litigation)? Dunno, my state does it differently.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
111 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 ·
A defendant who uses force or deadly force that is justified under Chapter 9, Penal Code, is immune from civil liability...

Who determines that you were justified? If your case never goes to trial, is there such a determination on record? If there's no formal finding, does it become something open to review (I.e., litigation)? Dunno, my state does it differently.
I am not trying to argue with any of y'all. I'm just very upset by the way this is handled in the USA.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
18,905 Posts
I am not trying to argue with any of y'all. I'm just very upset by the way this is handled in the USA.
Please don't think I'm arguing. Like I said, AZ does it differently. (Loser pays costs and lost wages, including attorney fees).
 
  • Like
Reactions: jmohme

·
Exploring Alternate Routes
Joined
·
5,429 Posts
A defendant who uses force or deadly force that is justified under Chapter 9, Penal Code, is immune from civil liability...

Who determines that you were justified? If your case never goes to trial, is there such a determination on record? If there's no formal finding, does it become something open to review (I.e., litigation)? Dunno, my state does it differently.
Any shooting will be taken to a Grand Jury. They decide if there is justification to take to criminal trial.
No Grand Jury indictment means it is very doubtful to prove something "unjustified".
However the family or the perp may still try. It would be a very difficult bit of information to overcome though.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
18,905 Posts
Any shooting will be taken to a Grand Jury. They decide if there is justification to take to criminal trial.
No Grand Jury indictment means it is very doubtful to prove something "unjustified".
However the family or the perp may still try. It would be a very difficult bit of information to overcome though.
But the standard isn't "prove it's not justified". The immunity comes when it's found justified.

Plus, just because the state doesn't think they can convict beyond a reasonable doubt doesn't mean that the plaintiffs can't show fault by a simple preponderance.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,793 Posts
Please don't think I'm arguing. Like I said, AZ does it differently. (Loser pays costs and lost wages, including attorney fees).
So some crack head breaks into my home and charges my wife our daughter with a knife so I draw my weapon and fire.
Later my actions are determined to have been justified and no charges are filed, but the crack heads family decides to sue and loses.
Does anyone believe that the courts are going to get any court costs or attorney fees. I know that I will never see any lost wages.

Come over and visit the real world where the bad guy was taken down, The potential victim and family are alive in and well, but flat broke, but the lawyers are doing quite well.

Regardless of how poorly the laws are written concerning self defense, if the time comes, I will defend myself and family and hash out the finial ruin later.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
18,905 Posts
So some crack head breaks into my home and charges my wife our daughter with a knife so I draw my weapon and fire.
Later my actions are determined to have been justified and no charges are filed, but the crack heads family decides to sue and loses.
Does anyone believe that the courts are going to get any court costs or attorney fees. I know that I will never see any lost wages.

Come over and visit the real world where the bad guy was taken down, The potential victim and family are alive in and well, but flat broke, but the lawyers are doing quite well.

Regardless of how poorly the laws are written concerning self defense, if the time comes, I will defend myself and family and hash out the finial ruin later.
Oh, by all means defend your family.

But I think you're missing the real target of the AZ law. It's not getting money from crackhead. It's making the ambulance chaser who takes fender benders on contingency realize that he's not getting a penny. Crackhead can always file pro se, but how hard is that going to be to get tossed?
 
  • Like
Reactions: jmohme

·
Registered
Joined
·
59,811 Posts
A defendant who uses force or deadly force that is justified under Chapter 9, Penal Code, is immune from civil liability...

Who determines that you were justified? If your case never goes to trial, is there such a determination on record? If there's no formal finding, does it become something open to review (I.e., litigation)? Dunno, my state does it differently.
Here in Florida there is a section that limits liability in justified shootings.

http://www.flsenate.gov/Laws/Statutes/2011/Chapter0776/All
776.032

Here any self defense death or police contact shooting would go to the State Attorney's Office (I am not sure if a non police contact shooting would also go to the SAO although I am guessing it might.) The SAO will send a close out letter which reads (or at least used to) to the effect that the investigation revealed the actions were justified and no criminal liability exists. My wild guess is that letter could go a long way toward "proving" immunity.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
33,476 Posts
A defendant who uses force or deadly force that is justified under Chapter 9, Penal Code, is immune from civil liability...

Who determines that you were justified? If your case never goes to trial, is there such a determination on record? If there's no formal finding, does it become something open to review (I.e., litigation)? Dunno, my state does it differently.
Wouldn't any shooting be presented to the DA and maybe the grand jury? Wouldn't the DA passing be proof of that? Or the grand jury returning no true bill?
 

·
Senior Member
Joined
·
3,251 Posts
Any shooting will be taken to a Grand Jury. They decide if there is justification to take to criminal trial.
No Grand Jury indictment means it is very doubtful to prove something "unjustified".
However the family or the perp may still try. It would be a very difficult bit of information to overcome though.
Not all shootings go to DA/Grand Jury here in TX. If it is a clearly justifiable / self defense shoot, the Police can rule it as such. If the DA disagrees later, then he can present it to a GJ. A friend shot and killed a car burglar here in San Antonio at 4:00 am one night (many years ago when I was in military). The burglar was breaking into friend's truck and alarm went off. Friend went out to confront, and burglar pulled a horror movie knife on friend. Friend put two in the chest and terminated threat. Cops ruled justified, DA refused to pursue, no GJ presentation, and even military didn't give it a second look when report came in.
 
1 - 16 of 16 Posts
Top