Not too long ago, A friend, Bryan, posted a video on his blog. The video, shot in Canada, details a use of force situation. While the force used may generally have been justified, I thought I would take it upon myself to relate this video to the laws of the State of Texas. (Yes, boys and girls, I know this was shot in Canada, but I’m assuming that the use of force laws are much more strict there anyway…)
The video can be found here…
Aparantly, the driver of the BMW cut off the two rednecks in the truck. The two rednecks in the truck decided that they were highly irritated at the driver of the BMW. Probably because they were in a manly pickup truck, and the driver of the BMW was in, well, a BMW.
It appears that certain words were exchanged at one point, (the only thing I really caught was “aboot“). Though the driver of the BMW attempted to evade the rednecks, he also seemed to egg them on a little bit after a certain point. The gestures from the driver of the BMW and his girlfriend were not conducive to proper conflict resolution, justified as they may be.
The driver of the BMW, through mistake or design, drove down a dead end road. Upon reaching the end of the road, the video shows the elder redneck rummaging around in the back of his “manly pickup” for a baseball bat. As the elder redneck was searching for his bat, the driver of the BMW was reaching for his weapon. As the redneck approached the driver, he presented his weapon. The conversation, at this point, on the part of the driver of the BMW should have consisted simply of, “Get back in your vehicle, leave me alone, or there will be trouble”. Instead, the driver of the BMW used the opertunity to gloat a little, and ventilate–Human nature, certainly, but we must all remember to try to eliminate emotion from our use of force decisions.
The driver of the BMW instructed his girlfriend to confiscate the video camera, which he retained. This was unlawful. Rightous? Sure. Unlawful? Most certainly. In Texas, this would be aggrevated robbery, which is a crime that has no statutory defense that parallels this situation.
What would I have done were I in this situation? After about 1.5 miles of evading the rednecks, I would simply have called the police. Perhaps the driver of the BMW did not have a cell phone? I drive a 2001 Chevrolet Suburban. Not nearly as expensive a vehicle as the BMW. I have two cell phones. Previously, I drove a 1995 Chevrolet Caprice (Read: hooptie). I only had one cell phone at the time.
Were I unable to summon the aid of law enforcement, I would probably have simply driven to a police station, or something of that nature. A public place such as a Wal Mart parking lot would even have been sufficient.
Though my combative skills are adequate, in my opinion, to successfully stop the threat, it is not my responsibility as a citizen, nor my duty, to deal with someone in this situation. I am not, at this time, a law enforcement officer, so I therefore do not have the authority to seize individuals who have not committed a felony, nor a breach of public peace, and even if I do legally seize someone, I still have a duty to present them to a magistrate. More than likely, if I walk into the local Justice of the Peace office with a hog-tied redneck and a pistol in my hand, there will be more than a few issues. Though my familiarity with the law empowers me to make an arrest in a legal fasion, the simple fact of the matter is, I really would rather have a police officer make the arrest. Should I actually be forced to employ deadly force, I would assume the grand jury would ask the question, “Why had you not called the police?”. A question like that could mean the difference between a “no bill,” and a “bill of indictment”. Granted, a bill of indictment is not a conviction, nor does it indicate guilt–It simply indicates that there is sufficient evidence against an individual to warrant a felony trial. Felony trials tend to be expensive, so an innocent man will loose either his money, his liberty, or both.
So, the next time you gun-pakin’ types out there are in a similar situation, remember: Texas law generally states that deadly force, or the threat of deadly force by the presentation of a concealed handgun, is justified only to prevent such things as the imminent commission of murder, sexual assault, aggrevated sexual assault, aggrevated kidnapping, robbery, aggrevated robbery, arson, burglary of a habitation, theft during the night time, and criminal mischief during the night time. You will have to articulate to the police and the grand jury that you were indeed in fear of your life or the life of another, and that there is no way that you could have retreated from the confrontation. (It is important to note, however, that in Texas, you are not expected to retreat in your own home. Your home is the “ultimate retreat”, if you will, and therefore, there is no place left to reatreat to…)
Just some food for thought, folks…
