Castle Doctrine Question

[Bruno2]

In at least Ok and TX we have a castle doctrine that protects us from civil action against us if we are ivolved in a self defense shooting. This law protects us from being sued by a perp or the perps family when they are shot during a defensive situation. However, the question is how far does the civil immunity carry? IOW, are you protected from accidently shooting a bystander in the mix? I have heard in at least TX the ruling comes down to your reaction basicly being a reflex to the situation you are thrown into. Meaning the civil immunity protects you from civil action from the bystander or bystaner's family . The perp is the one with the civil action liability as well as the responsibility from the death of the bystander. The perp will get charged in criminal court for the injury of the bystander as well as being wie open to civil action.

Do these theory's hold water as far as the laws are concerned?

 

[Steve in PA]

Sorry, but I don't think shooting the wrong person is going to be covered under Castle Doctrine. In other words, you decide to use force, you better make sure you stop the right threat.

 

[shiftyer1]

I cannot answer your question.....but I feel it's my responsibilty to protect my family. I'll be damned if I consider conditions or permissions.

The other thing that confuses me is........if I have passed all the required paperwork to purchase a gun, why do I have to jump thru some more hoops to carry the thing? Did ya'll forget that folks don't just buy things to look at?

Please forgive my babbeling, seems i'm in a mood tonite

 

[Kleanbore]

Posted by Bruno2: In at least Ok and TX we have a castle doctrine that protects us from civil action against us if we are ivolved in a self defense shooting. This law protects us from being sued by a perp or the perps family when they are shot during a defensive situation.

That's not quite accurate, and the difference could prove costly.

If one is involved in a shooting and claims that the shooting was lawfully justified, it is possible for the person who was shot to file a civil suit. What the civil liability protection does is permit the defendant to request that the court throw out the suit. That requires the defendant to provide some evidence that the shooting was justified. The judge may or may not agree.

However, the question is how far does the civil immunity carry? IOW, are you protected from accidently shooting a bystander in the mix?

No.

There are those who have written that the law in one state so applies, but that goes against the concept of tort law as developed over many centuries, and it is unlikely to prevail, unofficial interpretations of the criminal stature notwithstanding.

The perp is the one with the civil action liability as well as the responsibility from the death of the bystander.The perp will get charged in criminal court for the injury of the bystander as well as being wie open to civil action.

In all but a few states, the perp would likely charged with felony murder should the bystander die. The person lawfully shot can be sued by the bystander's estate, but that does not prevent a suit against the shooter from proceeding.

 

[Art Eatman]

My understanding of Texas law is that there is no protection for an Oopsie. Shoot a bystander, odds are that the minimum criminal charge would be aggravated assault or Involuntary Manslaughter.

 

[9mmepiphany]

In all but a few states, the perp would likely charged with felony murder should the bystander die. The person lawfully shot can be sued by the bystander's estate, but that does not prevent a suit against the shooter from proceeding.

That is my understanding also. The shooter might be criminally charged, but it wouldn't likely be vigorously perused, if the shooting is found to be justified, but he would be fair game for a civil suit by the bystander's estate

As Art said, no protection for an Oopsie