This is an old story, with the usual "if it was me", and barracks lawyers opinions.
Not intending to argue or add to that, I do have an observations or two.
He screwed up not calling immediately.
The phrases he is reported to have said, are exactly what is taught in the "Texas Law Shield" presentation when they promote the protection package (it's not insurance), that guarantees an attorney for you within an hour, all the way to a verdict or dismissal.
They instruct an immediate call, with thoses words ("Im the victim of a crime") and to make no other statement to police except, "I will cooperate fully with your investigation after my attorney is here". Then STFU.
Say nothing else.
So he fucked up the entire course of events when he 1. Didn't call (police and attorney) immediately, and 2. Didn't shut his trap until his Attorney showed up. It is up to the Attorney to tell the story.
Assuming he had that program (that's who teaches the phrasing), he was taught at least once, and possibly every year, about this.
Another point. Once in court, the choice of weapon is not about wether you are trying to kill the assailant, but in stopping the attack. The argument almost always devolves into which weapon ("I just pull out my ..." or I reach under my pillow and grab my ...") is most effective at killing the intruder. Something that will penetrate the intruder, the wall, and kill the neighbor's kid next door, isn't going to win any points in court.
On the other hand a Rem 1100 with an 18 inch barrel shooting 3-5 birdshot (7 or 8's) loads rapidly , may not kill the guy, but the fight is probably over, and the kid in the next room is probably still ok, too.
I'm not arguing that one is better than the other, but mentioning an illustration done by a now-defunct shooting magazine two decades ago, in which they built walls to code, and shot through them with everything in the gun safe. and published the photos. that happens to be where the idea of bird shot came from: no over penetration (stopped at second drywall, from 8 feet. Several of the photos showed over-penetration of handgun rounds, and .223, through not only wall board, but wall sockets, metal conduit, window sills, studs, (the usual wall contents) ("Pistolero Magazine". Anybody remember that mag or particular issue?). The most chilling image was a test shot with a 9mm, ball, at 1200 fps, that penetrated two sheets of drywall (in a code built wall), that went on to penetrate another wall approx 15 feet away, that was waiting for testing, then lodged in the second sheet of drywall in the third wall that was about 20 feet further.
One final note from the Texas Gun Shield class. You may be right, but are you prepared to have to defend that action, that decision in court for the next few years. From inside.
Many, many people, indeed the very vast majority of people (especially those who talk big about it), have never been in a shootout, and have not been adequately educated as to the ramifications of shooting someone even in Texas. Still a lot of false information out there regarding when and how, and regarding what transpires afterwards, and how to navigate the results.
Not intending to argue or add to that, I do have an observations or two.
He screwed up not calling immediately.
The phrases he is reported to have said, are exactly what is taught in the "Texas Law Shield" presentation when they promote the protection package (it's not insurance), that guarantees an attorney for you within an hour, all the way to a verdict or dismissal.
They instruct an immediate call, with thoses words ("Im the victim of a crime") and to make no other statement to police except, "I will cooperate fully with your investigation after my attorney is here". Then STFU.
Say nothing else.
So he fucked up the entire course of events when he 1. Didn't call (police and attorney) immediately, and 2. Didn't shut his trap until his Attorney showed up. It is up to the Attorney to tell the story.
Assuming he had that program (that's who teaches the phrasing), he was taught at least once, and possibly every year, about this.
Another point. Once in court, the choice of weapon is not about wether you are trying to kill the assailant, but in stopping the attack. The argument almost always devolves into which weapon ("I just pull out my ..." or I reach under my pillow and grab my ...") is most effective at killing the intruder. Something that will penetrate the intruder, the wall, and kill the neighbor's kid next door, isn't going to win any points in court.
On the other hand a Rem 1100 with an 18 inch barrel shooting 3-5 birdshot (7 or 8's) loads rapidly , may not kill the guy, but the fight is probably over, and the kid in the next room is probably still ok, too.
I'm not arguing that one is better than the other, but mentioning an illustration done by a now-defunct shooting magazine two decades ago, in which they built walls to code, and shot through them with everything in the gun safe. and published the photos. that happens to be where the idea of bird shot came from: no over penetration (stopped at second drywall, from 8 feet. Several of the photos showed over-penetration of handgun rounds, and .223, through not only wall board, but wall sockets, metal conduit, window sills, studs, (the usual wall contents) ("Pistolero Magazine". Anybody remember that mag or particular issue?). The most chilling image was a test shot with a 9mm, ball, at 1200 fps, that penetrated two sheets of drywall (in a code built wall), that went on to penetrate another wall approx 15 feet away, that was waiting for testing, then lodged in the second sheet of drywall in the third wall that was about 20 feet further.
One final note from the Texas Gun Shield class. You may be right, but are you prepared to have to defend that action, that decision in court for the next few years. From inside.
Many, many people, indeed the very vast majority of people (especially those who talk big about it), have never been in a shootout, and have not been adequately educated as to the ramifications of shooting someone even in Texas. Still a lot of false information out there regarding when and how, and regarding what transpires afterwards, and how to navigate the results.
Last edited:
