PA Bill Number: HB829
Title: In preliminary provisions, further providing for definitions;
Description: An Act amending the act of April 12, 1951 (P.L.90, No.21), known as the Liquor Code, in preliminary provisions, further providing for definitions;
Last Action: Referred to RULES
Last Action Date: Jul 2, 2024
Texas legislator wants to diminish the right to home defense :: 12/10/2020
According to State Representative Terry Meza, Texans shouldn’t have the right to use lethal force when defending their homes. Meza filed HB 196 in anticipation of the Texas Legislature’s next session, dead set on repealing portions of Texas’ castle doctrine law.
As the law currently stands, deadly force is justified when someone reasonably believes that it’s necessary to protect against an unlawful use of deadly force or the imminent commission of a host of violent crimes including aggravated kidnapping, murder, rape, and robbery. The person also has to be lawfully present where the use of force occurs, can’t provoke the use of force, and can’t generally be engaged in unlawful activity.
If Representative Meza has her way, the person using defensive deadly force would be required to retreat if able, and cannot use force to prevent a robbery.
There’s nothing wrong with the way Texas’ castle doctrine is currently written apart from the fact that you shouldn’t have to codify the right to use force to defend yourself, others, or your property so long as you didn’t initiate the altercation. The crimes that Texans can defend themselves against all include an element of force. Yes, robbery requires force too.
Codifications of the Castle Doctrine only became necessary after judicial and political inventions imposed duties to retreat on otherwise lawful instances of self defense. The simple fact is, no innocent person deserves to be punished for defending against an unlawful use of force.
