Page 11 of 11 FirstFirst ... 91011
Results 101 to 106 of 106

Thread: "F' You and your High powered Rifle"

  1. #101
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Corpus Christi, Texas
    Posts
    2,251
    Feedback Score
    7 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Renegade View Post
    What happened in 2007?
    I forget which house bill it was, but the castle doctrine and the "stand your ground" laws passed (forget the official name for this one if ts different).

    So now, if you are in a defensive shooting that is obviously a clean shoot, it no longer goes in front of the grand jury. I forget the wording on this but basically since 07 a home owner that shoots someone in defense is supposed to be looked at as a victim by investigators and unless there's questionable evidence, there's no grand jury. Before then, they all went to the grand jury to determine the situation.

    Now, it still can go if something is questionable like the guy on the phone with 911 that shot those 2 guys robbing his neighbors house. That went to the grand jury though they quickly no billed it.

    I'll see if I can find the section that addresses the grand jury and investigation and post it here.

    Jon
    Last edited by jonconsiglio; 07-19-11 at 14:29. Reason: Quoted twice
    Proven combat techniques may not be flashy and may require a bit more physical effort on the part of the shooter. Further, they may not win competition matches, but they will help ensure your survival in a shooting or gunfight on the street. ~ Paul Howe

  2. #102
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    2,827
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by jonconsiglio View Post
    I forget which house bill it was, but the castle doctrine and the "stand your ground" laws passed (forget the official name for this one if ts different).
    No, that did not change the Grand Jury process. All deadly force still goes to the Grand Jury. What you are thinking of is The Texas Castle Doctrine Law added this:

    CIVIL PRACTICE AND REMEDIES CODE

    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.

  3. #103
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Corpus Christi, Texas
    Posts
    2,251
    Feedback Score
    7 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Renegade View Post
    No, that did not change the Grand Jury process. All deadly force still goes to the Grand Jury. What you are thinking of is The Texas Castle Doctrine Law added this:

    CIVIL PRACTICE AND REMEDIES CODE

    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.
    No, not thinking of that. I'm 95% sure they changed the process. I've had my attorney tell me that as well as a couple cop buddies. Let me see what I can dig up. If I'm wrong I'll correct it as that's possible.

    Edit - I've been looking and I've seen many stating it still goes to the grand jury. Something said that the process of a no-bill that even the DA may be agreeing with will help protect you in a way and keep you immune from civil liability which as you stated as well, is covered by the castle doctrine.

    Another said that many will go though it's at the discretion of the DA.

    I'll keep looking and if I can't find a definite answer, I'll call my friend/attorney and get an good explanation.
    Last edited by jonconsiglio; 07-19-11 at 16:19.
    Proven combat techniques may not be flashy and may require a bit more physical effort on the part of the shooter. Further, they may not win competition matches, but they will help ensure your survival in a shooting or gunfight on the street. ~ Paul Howe

  4. #104
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Lone Wolf, OK
    Posts
    34
    Feedback Score
    0

    DA

    The DA in Okla. determines if the shooting requires advance to the Grand Jury.At least, that's my take on it here.

  5. #105
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    AZ
    Posts
    25
    Feedback Score
    0
    I took a class from Mas Ayoob (MAG40, NOV 2010), and I made a point to ask about the use of NFA weapons in a home defense situation. (specifically, the use of suppressors.)

    He stated that, in his opinion, it is something that a prosecutor or civil litigant could make an issue. However, that would open the door for your defense attorney and expert witness to explain to the jury all of the additional hoops that one must jump through in order to own such a weapon. Stating to the jury that "my client is such a good guy that the federal government trusts him with machine guns" could be a very powerful statement to a jury to bolster one's "good guy" status.

    He also brought up the idea that it might be helpful to have a letter/prescription from a a doctor/audiologist recommending the use of a suppressor to help prevent permanent hearing damage. This is something that has not been tested in court however.

    That said, Mas also offered the admonition that the more things you have to explain away, the more complicated (and expensive) your defense can get.

  6. #106
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    3,714
    Feedback Score
    4 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by red headed stranger View Post
    I took a class from Mas Ayoob (MAG40, NOV 2010), and I made a point to ask about the use of NFA weapons in a home defense situation. (specifically, the use of suppressors.)

    He stated that, in his opinion, it is something that a prosecutor or civil litigant could make an issue. However, that would open the door for your defense attorney and expert witness to explain to the jury all of the additional hoops that one must jump through in order to own such a weapon. Stating to the jury that "my client is such a good guy that the federal government trusts him with machine guns" could be a very powerful statement to a jury to bolster one's "good guy" status.

    He also brought up the idea that it might be helpful to have a letter/prescription from a a doctor/audiologist recommending the use of a suppressor to help prevent permanent hearing damage. This is something that has not been tested in court however.

    That said, Mas also offered the admonition that the more things you have to explain away, the more complicated (and expensive) your defense can get.
    Mas Ayoob has quite a bit of real world knowledge in criminal procedure being a cop and "professional witness" for all those years.

    He also said in one class (paraphrasing) that in the aftermath of a shooting, even though you may (and should) say to the investigating officers that "while you want to cooperate with the officers, you request your attorney present during all statements and questioning", they will probably readily agree but will try to engage you in small talk to get you talking and thereby inadvertently make statements that helps them.

    He said you will be nervous, horrified, shaking, in mental shock, or just experiencing the effects of adrenaline and most generally not able to shut up once you've found a friendly ear which is only interested in gathering evidence which may not be in your best interest.

    asked what you should do in that case, he suggested you might claim you had chest pains and ask to be taken to the hospital. this would give you time to separate from the situation, collect your wits and give your attorney time to get to you.
    never push a wrench...

Page 11 of 11 FirstFirst ... 91011

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •