Sponsored

Forum Crawler

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 14, 2020
Threads
2
Messages
328
Reaction score
527
Location
USA
Vehicle(s)
2020 Gladiator
Occupation
Working for the man every night and day
First of all, that’s a JK, not a JL. Totally different ignition system and electronics than a JL/JT. Probably popped the column and bypassed the keyed ignition switch. They still require a chip key, so it will crank (and go into neutral) but won’t run.
Yep, looks like a JK. Thread title says JL...
Sponsored

 

Troybilt

Well-Known Member
First Name
Troy
Joined
Jun 1, 2016
Threads
69
Messages
2,093
Reaction score
3,589
Location
Ohio
Website
troynemitz.smugmug.com
Vehicle(s)
2020 JTR
Occupation
Parks Operations
You can shoot someone for stealing your shit in Cali?
In Ohio, you cannot shoot someone for theft. Only if your life, or the life of someone else, is threatened.
We don't even joke about it.
I joke about it all the time. It makes me smile talking about dropping asshats.
 

Levi.Butler

Well-Known Member
First Name
Levi
Joined
Dec 2, 2020
Threads
10
Messages
341
Reaction score
567
Location
Houston, TX
Vehicle(s)
2020 Gladiator Rubicon
Build Thread
Link
Occupation
Data Engineer
You can shoot someone for stealing your shit in Cali?
In Ohio, you cannot shoot someone for theft. Only if your life, or the life of someone else, is threatened.
We don't even joke about it.
You can't in CA either, and you'd be hard pressed convincing anyone that this was in defense of life.
You can in Texas!


Texas Penal Code § 9.41 explains that the use of force against another person is justified when:

  1. You are in lawful possession of land or tangible, movable property;
  2. You reasonably believe that the force is immediately necessary; and
  3. You are trying to prevent another person's trespass or unlawful interference with that property.
 

Dewyaw

Well-Known Member
First Name
Jeff
Joined
Jul 23, 2020
Threads
15
Messages
383
Reaction score
475
Location
Houston
Vehicle(s)
2021 Jeep Gladiator Mojave, 2015 Jeep Wrangler Hard Rock; 1987 Jeep Wrangler Laredo; 1988 Porsche 911, 2005 Toyota Tacoma TRD Pro, 1994 Toyota Pickup 4x4. Not all at the same time.
You can in Texas!


Texas Penal Code § 9.41 explains that the use of force against another person is justified when:

  1. You are in lawful possession of land or tangible, movable property;
  2. You reasonably believe that the force is immediately necessary; and
  3. You are trying to prevent another person's trespass or unlawful interference with that property.
I’m in Houston too, you sure you aren’t confusing “use of force” with “use of deadly force”? I’m not entirely sure you can run out blasting someone who is stealing your car. Unfortunately.
 

Sponsored

Levi.Butler

Well-Known Member
First Name
Levi
Joined
Dec 2, 2020
Threads
10
Messages
341
Reaction score
567
Location
Houston, TX
Vehicle(s)
2020 Gladiator Rubicon
Build Thread
Link
Occupation
Data Engineer
I’m in Houston too, you sure you aren’t confusing “use of force” with “use of deadly force”? I’m not entirely sure you can run out blasting someone who is stealing your car. Unfortunately.
There is no stipulation on 'use of force' it's simply whatever force you feel was absolutely necessary to stop the threat.

There are actually a few crimes expressly written that use of whatever force is necessary is justified. Arson/Theft/a few more.

Even more simply though... in Texas... the castle doctrine is 100% extended to your vehicle. If you smoke a dude coming through your back door, attempting to do who knows what, are you justified? Yes. Same logic applies to your vehicle.
 

Levi.Butler

Well-Known Member
First Name
Levi
Joined
Dec 2, 2020
Threads
10
Messages
341
Reaction score
567
Location
Houston, TX
Vehicle(s)
2020 Gladiator Rubicon
Build Thread
Link
Occupation
Data Engineer
I’m in Houston too, you sure you aren’t confusing “use of force” with “use of deadly force”? I’m not entirely sure you can run out blasting someone who is stealing your car. Unfortunately.
Here ya go... the law is actually very clear...


SUBCHAPTER D. PROTECTION OF PROPERTY

Sec. 9.41. PROTECTION OF ONE'S OWN PROPERTY. (a) A person in lawful possession of land or tangible, movable property is justified in using force against another when and to the degree the actor reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary to prevent or terminate the other's trespass on the land or unlawful interference with the property.
(b) A person unlawfully dispossessed of land or tangible, movable property by another is justified in using force against the other when and to the degree the actor reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary to reenter the land or recover the property if the actor uses the force immediately or in fresh pursuit after the dispossession and:
(1) the actor reasonably believes the other had no claim of right when he dispossessed the actor; or
(2) the other accomplished the dispossession by using force, threat, or fraud against the actor.

Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 883, ch. 399, Sec. 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974. Amended by Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 900, Sec. 1.01, eff. Sept. 1, 1994.


Sec. 9.42. DEADLY FORCE TO PROTECT PROPERTY. A person is justified in using deadly force against another to protect land or tangible, movable property:
(1) if he would be justified in using force against the other under Section 9.41; and
(2) when and to the degree he reasonably believes the deadly force is immediately necessary:
(A) to prevent the other's imminent commission of arson, burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, theft during the nighttime, or criminal mischief during the nighttime; or
(B) to prevent the other who is fleeing immediately after committing burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, or theft during the nighttime from escaping with the property; and
(3) he reasonably believes that:
(A) the land or property cannot be protected or recovered by any other means; or
(B) the use of force other than deadly force to protect or recover the land or property would expose the actor or another to a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury.

Ultimately... you have to sleep with your decisions at night (taking human life changes a person) and there is a real possibility that you still end up in court defending your actions (which isn't cheap) but... it is justified under the law.
 

Terry

Well-Known Member
First Name
Terry
Joined
Aug 18, 2020
Threads
10
Messages
709
Reaction score
1,355
Location
Rialto, California
Vehicle(s)
2020 Gladiator Rubicon
Occupation
Private Investigator
Vehicle Showcase
2

Terry

Well-Known Member
First Name
Terry
Joined
Aug 18, 2020
Threads
10
Messages
709
Reaction score
1,355
Location
Rialto, California
Vehicle(s)
2020 Gladiator Rubicon
Occupation
Private Investigator
Vehicle Showcase
2
Here ya go... the law is actually very clear...


SUBCHAPTER D. PROTECTION OF PROPERTY

Sec. 9.41. PROTECTION OF ONE'S OWN PROPERTY. (a) A person in lawful possession of land or tangible, movable property is justified in using force against another when and to the degree the actor reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary to prevent or terminate the other's trespass on the land or unlawful interference with the property.
(b) A person unlawfully dispossessed of land or tangible, movable property by another is justified in using force against the other when and to the degree the actor reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary to reenter the land or recover the property if the actor uses the force immediately or in fresh pursuit after the dispossession and:
(1) the actor reasonably believes the other had no claim of right when he dispossessed the actor; or
(2) the other accomplished the dispossession by using force, threat, or fraud against the actor.

Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 883, ch. 399, Sec. 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974. Amended by Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 900, Sec. 1.01, eff. Sept. 1, 1994.


Sec. 9.42. DEADLY FORCE TO PROTECT PROPERTY. A person is justified in using deadly force against another to protect land or tangible, movable property:
(1) if he would be justified in using force against the other under Section 9.41; and
(2) when and to the degree he reasonably believes the deadly force is immediately necessary:
(A) to prevent the other's imminent commission of arson, burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, theft during the nighttime, or criminal mischief during the nighttime; or
(B) to prevent the other who is fleeing immediately after committing burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, or theft during the nighttime from escaping with the property; and
(3) he reasonably believes that:
(A) the land or property cannot be protected or recovered by any other means; or
(B) the use of force other than deadly force to protect or recover the land or property would expose the actor or another to a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury.

Ultimately... you have to sleep with your decisions at night (taking human life changes a person) and there is a real possibility that you still end up in court defending your actions (which isn't cheap) but... it is justified under the law.
Law Enforcement must weigh in such investigations what the response displayed by the thief was when caught by the victim when he / she was attempting to stop the theft and or recover their property. In such cases, I always asked the victim not IF they were in fear of their safety and or life, but WHEN they became fearful for their personal safety and or life. This articulation cleared up any future misconception of whether or not they were justified in taking their action. If confronted, and the thief runs, let him go, if he resists and or advances on you then you know what to do.
 

Levi.Butler

Well-Known Member
First Name
Levi
Joined
Dec 2, 2020
Threads
10
Messages
341
Reaction score
567
Location
Houston, TX
Vehicle(s)
2020 Gladiator Rubicon
Build Thread
Link
Occupation
Data Engineer
Law Enforcement must weigh in such investigations what the response displayed by the thief was when caught by the victim when he / she was attempting to stop the theft and or recover their property. In such cases, I always asked the victim not IF they were in fear of their safety and or life, but WHEN they became fearful for their personal safety and or life. This articulation cleared up any future misconception of whether or not they were justified in taking their action. If confronted, and the thief runs, let him go, if he resists and or advances on you then you know what to do.
That's a valid point... in California.

In Texas, the way the law was written and in reference to the video posted, lethal force would be justified based on the fact that it's theft at night and the presence of multiple thieves would most definitely present a very real and valid threat to bodily harm/death if someone was to confront them to stop the theft.
 

Sponsored

Terry

Well-Known Member
First Name
Terry
Joined
Aug 18, 2020
Threads
10
Messages
709
Reaction score
1,355
Location
Rialto, California
Vehicle(s)
2020 Gladiator Rubicon
Occupation
Private Investigator
Vehicle Showcase
2
That's a valid point... in California.

In Texas, the way the law was written and in reference to the video posted, lethal force would be justified based on the fact that it's theft at night and the presence of multiple thieves would most definitely present a very real and valid threat to bodily harm/death if someone was to confront them to stop the theft.
I agree; however, in California, the courts and now especially the DA's do not adhere to common sense. I recall a resident who came home and was confronted in his garage by a thief who was carrying out his big screen. The homeowner shot the burglar while he still held the TV in front of him and was refusing to drop it. the homeowner was then tried for manslaughter because the DA felt the burglar posed no immediate threat to the homeowner other than the loss of an insured home appliance. The jury acquitted..... It's about being proactive. Do whatever is humanly possible to protect your valuables and if you catch a thief, be DAMNED SURE you can articulate a reasonable threat if you use deadly force. My response to theft at home is an elevation of force. I have cameras, alarms, lighting, and an Atticus. Below is Atticus...... My last line of defense is a 9mm Shield and a Binelli Super Nova 12ga. On the street, It's good situational awareness, Taser Pulse Plus, and then a firearm. And... usually my Atticus.

To quote Dom De Luise from Best Little Whorehouse in Texas..... "Texas suits my style".

Atticus on wall.jpg
 

Terry

Well-Known Member
First Name
Terry
Joined
Aug 18, 2020
Threads
10
Messages
709
Reaction score
1,355
Location
Rialto, California
Vehicle(s)
2020 Gladiator Rubicon
Occupation
Private Investigator
Vehicle Showcase
2
You can shoot someone for stealing your shit in Cali?
In Ohio, you cannot shoot someone for theft. Only if your life, or the life of someone else, is threatened.
We don't even joke about it.
Read my posts regarding this......
 

REDBEAST

Well-Known Member
First Name
Jim
Joined
Nov 26, 2019
Threads
4
Messages
141
Reaction score
101
Location
Dallas, TX
Vehicle(s)
2020 Gladiator Rubicon LE, 2017 Jaguar F-Type SVR
Occupation
Retired
You can in Texas!


Texas Penal Code § 9.41 explains that the use of force against another person is justified when:

  1. You are in lawful possession of land or tangible, movable property;
  2. You reasonably believe that the force is immediately necessary; and
  3. You are trying to prevent another person's trespass or unlawful interference with that property.
Use of "force" and "deadly force" are two entirely different things.
Sponsored

 
 



Top