Lone big name Gun Rights is alerting Texans to a bill pre-filed by using Texas Rep. Terry Meza; HB 196: AN ACT concerning the use of lethal force in defense of an individual or property. Per LSGR:
…a very being concerned piece of legislation become delivered by means of Irving State consultant Terry Meza. HB 196 seeks to repeal the fortress Doctrine, combating a home-owner from using firearms to look after their property.
yes and no. The bill does strike “robbery, or aggravated robbery” from the record of issues possible use deadly force in opposition t in Sections 9.32(a)(three)(B). but the use of deadly drive — and never simply with a firearm — to evade the lack of “tangible, movable property” is left intact in section 9.forty one.
Now, in my very own state one can not use deadly force to stay away from a theft, however nonlethal force is permissible. And if a criminal is dull enough to increase the circumstance by assaulting you with a view to finished the theft, lethal force would then be on the desk. That’s additionally the case in Texas beneath area 9.31. So I don’t feel that would be too excellent an issue in of of itself, aside from the precedent of limiting rights.
The problem is that HB 196 would additionally do something else, something not easy. Texas has no responsibility for victims to retreat. This invoice would require a victim to try to retreat in the face of an attacker earlier than the use of deadly drive, except for those who are in your own home (section 9.31(c)). This eliminates so-referred to as stand your floor insurance policy.
I name duty to retreat faster Than A speeding Bullet, as a result of in case your attacker is armed with a firearm, that’s how quickly you could need to be for a retreat to work.
Texans should still examine LGSR’s complete alert for an inventory of other dangerous Dem-subsidized 2A infringements.