iDRY Vacuum Kilns

Sponsors:

Tresspass issues

Started by SwampDonkey, October 21, 2007, 09:25:15 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

SwampDonkey

I didn't want to have to start a new thread here, but wanted to tuck this post in with an ongoing Tresspass thread. Couldn't find one, so here's one.

Went up to the woodlot this morning to see some of the local ignorant, disrespectful, low lifes tore down some new property signs I had posted out front. I just went back up and put some more posts in and need to go to the store for signs. I figure it was done yesterday and I see fresh beer cans and bottles up and down the road. I hope they had a good time.  ::)
"No amount of belief makes something a fact." James Randi

1 Thessalonians 5:21

2020 Polaris Ranger 570 to forward firewood, Husqvarna 555 XT Pro, Stihl FS560 clearing saw and continuously thinning my ground, on the side. Grow them trees. (((o)))

Texas Ranger

Metal signs, 110 lead to signs, no more problems. 8)
The Ranger, home of Texas Forestry

scgargoyle

How 'bout a sign that looks like a target, and in very small type reads "You're blocking my target."
I hope my ship comes in before the dock rots!

SwampDonkey

Pretty limited in the signage department. I just use those Dollar Store ones, good enough to get torn down.  ::) I got the new replacement signs up a bit ago though. Deer season opens next week, so I suppose some bonehead tore down the signs so they can say it's not posted. I know all the little tricks people play around here.

There was one land owner that had someone trespass on their lot and cut brush. They must have visited their property after the fact and dug up the road entrances and put up signs. Within a month the signs were all torn down.

It's worst when you get a new crowd move into the neighborhood. They clean out the old sheds, back yards and basements of their new place and toss it out in your woods.  :-X >:(
"No amount of belief makes something a fact." James Randi

1 Thessalonians 5:21

2020 Polaris Ranger 570 to forward firewood, Husqvarna 555 XT Pro, Stihl FS560 clearing saw and continuously thinning my ground, on the side. Grow them trees. (((o)))

metalspinner

Put some tire spike strips in the entrance under some leaf litter.  That will take care of it.
I do what the little voices in my wife's head tell me to do.

stonebroke

Take a ladder with you when you put up the new signs . If you put them 10 to 12 feet high they can't get to them and the visibility is better.

Stonebroke

dutchman

Been posting the property for 20 + years,signs are @ every 50 Feet.
The same lines are torn down every year, So they say didn't see
any.
It only gets better when you catch them on the property.

JD350Cmark

I'd take photos of your property where you have signs posted and consider having a report taken by law enforcement.  I've been down this path and those two items helped.  Get it on record that you are having continous problems.
2004 Wood-Mizer LT40HDG25

rebocardo

Do you have any signs that say "Trespassers will be shot and eaten"?



SwampDonkey

I wish the moose could read, then I'd put them up to.  :D :D :D

I don't have a lot of troubles, just a bad actor once in awhile under the influence of a mind altering substance.  ::)
"No amount of belief makes something a fact." James Randi

1 Thessalonians 5:21

2020 Polaris Ranger 570 to forward firewood, Husqvarna 555 XT Pro, Stihl FS560 clearing saw and continuously thinning my ground, on the side. Grow them trees. (((o)))

beenthere

rebo
The good-eatin type animals can't read. ::) 8)
south central Wisconsin
It may be that my sole purpose in life is simply to serve as a warning to others

stonebroke

In NY Posted signs have to be up on may 1st, They can tear them down on May 2nd and the property is still pos ted for that year.

Stonebroke

WDH

I had trespassers yesterday on ATV's in the young pine plantation.  Said they were "lost".
Woodmizer LT40HDD35, John Deere 2155, Kubota M5-111, Kubota L2501, Nyle L53 Dehumidification Kiln, and a passion for all things with leafs, twigs, and bark.  hamsleyhardwood.com

Dave Shepard

How about a sign that says "Smile, you're on candid camera" at the bottom? Or a bear trap at each sign. ::) J/K


Dave
Wood-Mizer LT40HDD51-WR Wireless, Kubota L48, Honda Rincon 650, TJ208 G-S, and a 60"LogRite!

sgtmaconga

On more than a few post i'll sit back and learn about the wood i love to work on. but this post falls into my living. as a police office for the last 20 years i have to say that several of these reply's are asking for the property owner to end up sued or in realy hot water.

i don't condone spikes or traps that can hurt some kid who is messing around just like we did when we were younger. I would suggest contacting your local law enfoercement or game warden. give them permission to catch your trespassers and you might find the answer to your problem. tell the warden that people are poaching on your land. tell the local officer that you think people are looking for a place to plant dope on your land. this will get them to watch for strange vehicles on your land.
Measure twice cut once

WDH

Woodmizer LT40HDD35, John Deere 2155, Kubota M5-111, Kubota L2501, Nyle L53 Dehumidification Kiln, and a passion for all things with leafs, twigs, and bark.  hamsleyhardwood.com

Dave Shepard

sgt, in case you didn't know, J/K means just kidding. I wouldn't suggest hurting anyone, but I do sympathize with someone dealing with trespassers.


Dave
Wood-Mizer LT40HDD51-WR Wireless, Kubota L48, Honda Rincon 650, TJ208 G-S, and a 60"LogRite!

pineywoods

We have come up on a pretty effective solution to the tresspasser problem. We lease our 200 acres to 3 young neighbors. One is a deputy sheriff, the other two are big redneck bruisers that nobdy in their right mind would mess with. louisiana law allows a landowner to prosecute any body dumping trash or hunting without written permission on their person. ::)
1995 Wood Mizer LT 40, Liquid cooled kawasaki,homebuilt hydraulics. Homebuilt solar dry kiln.  Woodmaster 718 planner, Kubota M4700 with homemade forks and winch, stihl  028, 029, Ms390
100k bd ft club.Charter member of The Grumpy old Men

Handy Andy

  Here in Kansas, painting posts with purple is the same as putting up signs "no hunting without written permission".  Do other states have this?  Makes it easy to post your property, and the cops then will ticket trespassers. But only if you call.
My name's Jim, I like wood.

scsmith42

Another option is to put up a "wildlife camera" focused on the area where the signs are located.  If the camera's record them in the act of destroying your property, you can send them to jail.
Peterson 10" WPF with 65' of track
Smith - Gallagher dedicated slabber
Tom's 3638D Baker band mill
and a mix of log handling heavy equipment.

Tony

Quote from: scsmith42 on October 21, 2007, 11:20:27 PM
Another option is to put up a "wildlife camera" focused on the area where the signs are located.  If the camera's record them in the act of destroying your property, you can send them to jail.

We did just that and they found the camera and destroyed it smiley_furious3 smiley_whip

                                                  Tony
TK1600, John Deere 4600 W\frontendloader, Woodmaster718 planer\moulder, Stihl MS461 Stihl 036 & 021 & Echo CS-370
"You cannot invade the mainland United States.  There would be a rifle behind each blade of grass."  Adm. Isoroku Yamamotto ( Japanese

metalspinner

Quotei don't condone spikes or traps that can hurt some kid who is messing around

Upon further review I would like to change my call of "tire spike strip" to "call your local police". ;) Thanks for setting me straight, SGT.  A hot headed comment from a normally cool headed member. :-[
I do what the little voices in my wife's head tell me to do.

Warbird

Interesting comment on the property owner possibly being sued for putting down spike strips.  I googled and found this:

Taken from: http://www.askthelawguy.info/ask2/2006.03.01_arch.html

Question:
I have a business ... which has a gate around almost all of it. On one end there is an opening that cars have been coming through, to spin donuts on our ball field in back. So I put up a barricade to try to stop this, and they just moved it, or found a way to drive around. So I put up no trespass signs, and put the barricade. But this time I put spike strips down to stop them before they started. A young guy came through the barricade in a big truck and run over the spikes and got four flat tires, and now wants to sue me for the tires. Should I pay him, or take him to court?

Answer:
Interesting question with no simple answer.  While a property owner has the right to exclude others from his property and even use reasonable force to prevent someone from entering his property, in general you cannot set traps to catch trespassers.  The court might find that the spike strips (with no warning that they were present) were a trap.  That means you would be responsible for the damage to the tires.  Think about it this way: a landowner might decide to put up an electrified fence to keep out trespassers, but if the fence was not marked with signs, the owner might be liable for injuries to someone touching the fence.

By trespassing the driver was also breaking the law.  He could be prosecuted for trespassing and you could sue him in civil court.  However in a lawsuit for trespass you would only be entitled to nominal damges ($1 or so) unless you could show actual injury to your property.

I think right is on your side, but the law favors the trespasser.  So if I were the judge for your case I would rule that you had to pay for the damage to the tires, but unless the tires were brand new I would not hold you responsible for the full value of new tires.  I would rule that the trespasser owed you $5 for trespassing and I would order him not to enter your property in the future.

Remember though small claims court is about "rough justice."  There is very little argument about the fine points of law.  A friend once told me that actual legal precedent carries about as much weight as a comic book in small claims court.  If I were you I would wait and see if he goes to the trouble to sue you.  Many people don't bother.  If he does sue, counterclaim for trespass.  Then offer to pay for repair of his tires or the cost of used tires.


Personally, I'd try to be there when the trespassers are, if at all possible.  Visibly be carrying a firearm (only if you are trained, only if it is legal in your state, and only if you are prepared to use it in case someone gets really stupid).  Inform them you are the property owner and you don't like trespassers.  Let them know your old lady is in the truck, on the cell phone with the cops.  Also let them know a picture of their license plate(s) has been taken.

Or, if they aren't damaging anything, just take sgtmaconga's advice and leave it be from there on.  ;)

fat olde elf

Interesting comments !!!! Before I built on my 12 acres, I kept it posted. We had some vandalism during construction, Insurance covered that.  Our blessing is the fact that we have 16 Charlotte/Mecklenburg police officers residing within a half mile of us.  One officer "discovered" this little slice of heaven and his peers followed.  They have no jurisdiction out here but I'm sure their presence helps.....They are all great neighbors and I am very grateful for them.   
Cook's MP-32 saw, MF-35, Several Husky Saws, Too Many Woodworking Tools, 4 PU's, Kind Wife.

SwampDonkey

Trouble is the cops have more important things to look after. When you call, they are likely to come from 2 hours away. My ground is on the border with the US and I had one cop come walk my woodlot following my footpaths in January in the snow. I drove up there and seen the pickup and suspected it was cop and I met him up there walking about lost on my paths. Wanted to know who I was and what I was up to. Explained I was the owner and was wondering what he was up to.  ::) He said I shouldn't be up there alone, I could get injured and die. I said it's as good a place as any to die. He walked his way, I walked mine and never seen him again. I still don't know what he thought he was going to see and make trouble over.  Some of those guys walk around with big heads thinking they are going to make the big career making bust. ::)

I'm around my lot often enough to keep tabs on things. The sign vandals are just some local jokers, who don't work and are bored and have an odd imagination about what is fun versus what is stupid. I half expect some day to see the place up in burning cinders. There are people that have nothing but a $200 pickup to their name, but likely not registered or insured and are jealous that anyone owns something the bank hasn't got their name on.
"No amount of belief makes something a fact." James Randi

1 Thessalonians 5:21

2020 Polaris Ranger 570 to forward firewood, Husqvarna 555 XT Pro, Stihl FS560 clearing saw and continuously thinning my ground, on the side. Grow them trees. (((o)))

sgtmaconga

i know of one suit where the trail was spikes and a kid on a dirt bike crashed because of them. the case was lost by the land owner who claimed he did not set the spikes.
Measure twice cut once

bull

 Tresspass laws are changing... There is new case law regarding being injured while tresspassing on land of another..... The property owner has no control over the tresspassers action while they are tresspassing and has not welcomed them onto his land, and " if posted has prohibited their access".
You do not have the right to access the property of another where any indication of a physical boundries are visible or unless posted "public access"...
IE: ( roadside -"edge of public way), fence, stone wall, gate, cable, manicured lawn, landscaping.....
Basically if you do not own the land, you have no right being on the land of another......

If you want to use land get permission or buy it when its for sale.... Simple....


flip

So what we're sayin' is no pungee traps, clamores, dead falls or tire jacks?  Dang the bad luck.  Dead men can't sue ;)
Timberking B-20, Hydraulics make me board quick

sawguy21

old age and treachery will always overcome youth and enthusiasm

tcsmpsi

Generally, any "device" used to protect property, is considered a Use of Force.  In a state in which force is justified to protect land or tangible, moveable property, consideration is given to the use of a device as justifiable force.  In areas where such justification is given, the use of a device is not justified if its use creates a substantial risk of causing death, or serious bodily injury.

Of course, on the the problems inherent, is establishing what is or is not a "substantial risk".

Handy Andy, this state has "purple paint law".  But, my client is color blind.  Or, can only determine color under proper lighted conditions.  Or...

Very much the same defenses are and have been used with considerations to signs.  Client can't read, or under stressful conditions, client can not comprehend what they read, etc.

In this state, it has also been precedented, that in certain situations, breeds, etc., canines represent the improper use of a device to protect property.

It is always well to remember, that any unjustified use of force, leaves the criminal responsibility of the act its full jurisdiction.

After Hurricane Rita came through, circumstance compounded to the point that I had to 'set property boundries'.  I completely fenced the whole property with 3 strands of barbless wire (so as not to inadvertently injure any behaviorly  challenged human, animals, etc.) and placed very specific signs ( had 100 metal signs made to my specificications) conspicusously on the fence.

A fence is about the most universal of property boundries.  

So far, I've only found one sign shot.   ;D
\\\"In the end, it is a moral question as to whether man applies what he has learned or not.\\\" - C. Jung

stonebroke

In NY if a trepasser crosses a fence  he is considered to be trepassing in the eyes of the law, no ifs ands or buts .

Stonebroke

flip

so that would mean land mines and razor wire are out of the question ???  Why are there laws about tresspass if there are more ways of getting around it?  Could I say,"I had to shoot him because I was afraid that if he fell out of his tree tree stand he put up on my prized sycamore and broke his leg he would try to sue me...I did it to protect him".  That wouldn't work?  I they can sue me for hurting themselves on my property they had no premission to be on I should have the right to help them on their way to getting hurt. 

Can you tell I feel strongly about property owners rights.

The laws should be changed and clearly spelled out that somone that encroaches or enters poperty without the land owners permission will waive all right or claims they may have.  Tresspassers that enter a property due at their own risk.  They hold harmless the land owner in the event of death, incapitation, injury (physical or mental).  The land owner has the right to place upon that property any legal device they see needed to ensure the security of their property.  Property does not need to be posted for any of the above to be enforced. 

It's pretty easy to enforce in court.  "Did you have permission by the owner to be mudding on his land?" Guilty, pay damages to his field and restitution for destroyed crops, pay legal fees and have a nice 3 days in jail.  Next time it's 30.
Timberking B-20, Hydraulics make me board quick

tcsmpsi

All you have to do is to convince enough legislators to vote it through, flip.    ;)
\\\"In the end, it is a moral question as to whether man applies what he has learned or not.\\\" - C. Jung

SwampDonkey

Trespassing is entering someone's property without permission or lawful excuse.

In NB it's trespass:

    * To be on someone's property when permission to be there was granted and later revoked by the owner or occupier of the property.
    * To get permission to enter someone's property for one purpose and do something else.
    * To toss something, such as garbage, onto another person's property, or allow your cattle to enter that property, even if you do not enter personally.

You can sue the trespasser even though the property was not damaged. The amount of compensation in this case would be the price that a reasonable person would pay for the right to pass over the land.

You can also ask for an injunction to stop the trespass from happening again.

Some activities the Trespass Act forbids

# Trespass to agricultural land: You will be a trespasser if you enter land that is identifiable as agricultural land by means of a motor vehicle. You will also be a trespasser if, by means of a motor vehicle, you enter agricultural land in relation to which the owner or occupier has given notice not to trespass. Agricultural land includes lands cultivated or managed for the production of food for humans or livestock, cultivated or managed orchards, pastures, Christmas tree plantations, and seedling and sapling plantations.

# Forest land: You will be a trespasser if you enter, by means of a motor vehicle, any forest land in relation to which the owner or occupier has provided notice not to trespass. Forest land means any land lying outside the boundaries of a city or town and not cultivated for agricultural purposes, on which trees, shrubs, plants or grass are growing. It also includes private roads on such lands. The owner or occupier of forest land who does not want people to bring motor vehicles onto the land must give notice not to trespass there.

Am I responsible for trespassers who enter my property?

Yes. The common law says that an owner or occupier of property who knows about a danger on his or her property, may owe a duty of care to trespassers if he or she knows that trespassers may come onto the property. There is a duty not to create a danger with the intention of causing harm to trespassers. There is also a duty not to act with reckless disregard toward trespassers. If you know about dangers on the property (such as concealed holes or fences) and you know that trespassers may come onto the property, then you should remove the dangers or warn the trespassers about them.
"No amount of belief makes something a fact." James Randi

1 Thessalonians 5:21

2020 Polaris Ranger 570 to forward firewood, Husqvarna 555 XT Pro, Stihl FS560 clearing saw and continuously thinning my ground, on the side. Grow them trees. (((o)))

isawlogs

Quote from: tcsmpsi on October 22, 2007, 05:33:35 PM
All you have to do is to convince enough legislators to vote it through, flip. ;)

  See .. It should not be so in this protect the foolish inocent nogoodfuranything ..... DanGit we should not have to pass anything to protect us from them ... It should be there but its not  :-\  >:( >:( >:(
A man does not always grow wise as he grows old , but he always grows old as he grows wise .

   Marcel

tcsmpsi

In this state, if one has been given notice not to enter property (e.g, sign, fence, etc.) and one enters anyhow, or if one is asked to leave property and they fail to do so, it becomes criminal tresspass, a jailable offense.  Therefore the tresspasser, in commiting the crime, leaves themselves open to use of force to protect their property.  How much force?  Reasonable and necessary force.  Or, the minimum amount of force necessary.  Also, in this state, when the use of force is justified ( but not deadly force), the threat of deadly force (by the production of a weapon or otherwise), is also justified.

I have found that it is only the very, very rare individual (or group, for that matter) who is not promptly motivated by having the muzzle of a 12 ga. up their snoot, presented by a seriously motivated land owner/caretaker/protector.   ;D

\\\"In the end, it is a moral question as to whether man applies what he has learned or not.\\\" - C. Jung

TexasTimbers

Actually, in Texas, the use of deadly force against tresspassers is lawful at night. There is no "deadly threat" test associated with the law and it has been upheld here consistently.

One notorious case some years ago was where a Houston man shot and killed a repo man who had come to take his truck at night. The guy even knew it was the repo man but could not be prosecuted because the law did not allow for it.

We have alot of "bad law", but here is a case where a "good law" in the hands of a no good jerk makes the water bad for everyone.

Some of y'all may remember when I was sleeping in my shop waiting on my rather consitstent thief to strike again, I had talked to all the local law enforcement. Well, they had come talking to me actually, after they caught wind that I had invited myself into a couple of the local meth labs and politely made some inquiries of nefarious activities.
They said it was not legal for me to do these kind of investigativions. I asked if anyone was pressing charges for anything and had the cops taken any statement from anyone. No, but there have been some complaints "through the grapevine".

That made me wonder if I was stepping on some cops' toes who had his hand in the dirty cookie jar. I now do not believe that was the case but I was plenty paranoid there for a while.

But whenever I would ask a deputy did I have the right to shoot these burglars (I was convinced it was 2 or more) , to a man, they all encouraged me to do that very thing and were not timid about saying it. Even the Texas Ranger who came out to discuss things with me, said I had every right to defend my property the same as my life and limb as long as it was nighttime I could use deadly force if necessary.

I assured him I was not looking forward to  shooting anyone but i felt as though I were dealing with one of the many thieving gangs that have been nabbed here over the years and I was taking no chances to try and determine if they were armed. They have been going onto peoples land in broad daylight and hooking up to cattle trailers, machinery, whatever they can get fast, and blasting off down the road.

The general consensus amongst the law enforcement here was "Call us first! Wink wink. But by all means do not put your life in jeaopardy."

I personaly and physically cornered my thief. I don't advise it though.

Disclaimer: Ain't none of this legal advice. Ask your attorney before you shoot.
The oil is all in Texas, but the dipsticks are in D.C.

TW

You Americans are weird. Very weird.

Here trespassing by non motorized means is legal everywhere, except over the yard itself. Trespassers are not allowed to damage crops or growing trees. You can walk in the forest for a whole day not being able to fill your pockets with litter left by trespassers, even if you see footpaths everywhere. 

The trick is: No trespasser dares to drop any litter because of the likelihood of being spied by another trespasser, who in turn will tell the landowner. This same phenomena keep the poachers away. A shot will be heard by a legal trespasser who in turn will tell the landowner or the hunting club.
Once all decent people stay away from a place, the gangsters are free to rule there.

In fact thre is a strip of destruction in the forest arond all cities and along some mayor roads. Usually that strip is very narrow, because the gangsters do not dare to stay in the forest very long for risk of being seen.

tonich

Quote from: TW on October 23, 2007, 02:33:16 AM
Here trespassing by non motorized means is legal everywhere, except over the yard itself. Trespassers are not allowed to damage crops or growing trees. You can walk in the forest for a whole day not being able to fill your pockets with litter left by trespassers, even if you see footpaths everywhere. 


Quite similar here, in Bulgaria.  :)

tcsmpsi

Kevin,

It is not the trespass 'at nightime' which justifies deadly force.  Theft during the nightime or criminal mischief during the nightime has black and white, in the book, justification.  And always, any force or deadly force must be found to be reasonable and necessary.  And, the very foundation of the act is based on intent of the moment of the act.  (e.g., when you pulled the trigger, was your intent to protect the property, or were you angry and retaliating against the person)

However, in utilizing deadly force, there will be a grand jury.  Which would presume the need for legal representation.  Which ain't going to be cheap, under those circumstances.

Though there may be black and white letter of the law, when an act comes into the system, it can take on the myriad colors of the rainbow.

And, though an act may ultimately be upheld through the court, that ride is not pleasant nor cheap. 

Personally, if it is just a matter of property and no danger to the living, I do not have any worth the responsibilty causing the energy of another to exit Life's flow. 

That act comes with a responsibility that lasts a lifetime.  And, perhaps more.  I don't know that one for certain, yet.

By the way, we are about to come upon the time of year when there will be countless acts of criminal mischief during the nightime across the country.
The old tradition of "wrapping houses". 
Black and white letter of the law justifies deadly force.  One might have just a little trouble proving reasonable and necessary.     ;D
\\\"In the end, it is a moral question as to whether man applies what he has learned or not.\\\" - C. Jung

highpockets

I am not sure when or if this issue will ever be resolved.  I do know from some ten year experience that if anything is going to be done, it must be done by the landowners speaking out. 

Most folks know that Louisiana pretty much dances to the beat of it's own drum. We have experienced some really bad problems with trespass for years.  It is mainly due to people wanting to deer hunt with dogs.  The Legislature passed a law allowing a person to enter property for the purpose of retrieving their dogs.  Ain't that a hoot?  In and around 1985 I formed an organization called LADD.  The sole purpose was get folks to stick together and demand better laws for landowners.  We did manage to get the posted sign requirement taken out and a state silver paint designation allowed.  As time went on the timber companies started leasing their property and the guy paying for his lease started helping patrol this problem.  Over the years I have seen some improvement. 

I still amazes me that we as landowners do not have the rights to our property as I understand The Constitution.  They say the squeaking wheel get the grease, and we ain't it.



   
Louisiana Country boy
homemade mill, 20 h.p. Honda & 4 h.p. for hydraulics.  8 hydraulic circuits, loads, clamps, rotates, etc.

thecfarm

There is a painted law in Maine,but seems like it's 3 white or silver lines?I did not want to say because I can not remember.I have not seen this at all drving down the road.I do not hunt.About the only time I walk on someone elses land is to see how the lot was logged.I will be hauling some trees into my field,limbs and all, to keep out the people who have to drive to the end than come back out.I realize most of them would drive over a log,but I hope the limbs will keep them out this year.I don't mind the people that walk on my land,but I don't like the ones that drive on it.
Model 6020-20hp Manual Thomas bandsaw,TC40A 4wd 40 hp New Holland tractor, 450 Norse Winch, Heatmor 400 OWB,YCC 1978-79

tcsmpsi

Well heck, highpockets, as I understand the Constitution, our primary property rights violators are the legislators themselves, imposing and enforcing property taxes.   :D

As such, it will likely be a bit difficult to convince them to implement too much owner control. 
\\\"In the end, it is a moral question as to whether man applies what he has learned or not.\\\" - C. Jung

flip

We'd have a better chance of convincing Al Gore global warming is not real than to make a pol change the laws.
Timberking B-20, Hydraulics make me board quick

TexasTimbers

tscmpi,

I think we aren't on the same page. I was sharing what Texas law allows for and not what I believe is right or wrong. If people in Texas shot everyone who unlawfully came onto their property at night or daytime there would be killings all the time - night and day, and an emergency session would have to be convened in the state capital to repeal quite a few deadly force  and property rights laws immediately.
Here in relevant part is but one law from the Texas Penal Code:

§ 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.
 

I am sure you know, the state legislatures did the exact opposite of weakening deadly force laws in Texas when on Sept. 1st of this year they enacted the "without retreat" law which extends the use of deadly force beyong your land and home to now include your car, your workplace, and in public. Until then, we had to "attempt to retreat" before using deadly when someone was attempting to commit specified crimes against us. Now it is lawful to use deadly force as a ". . first resort . . and the word "reasonable" has been replaced with the phrase "...whatever force necessary to protect yourself...". The land laws are already in place and so when what little vocal opposition formed during the debate of HB284 and SB378 tried to organize protests, the Texas AG kindly reminded the liberal antigun-nuts opposition that deadly force laws were already on the books and had been for years. This was designed to merely extend them off your land and give them a little more bite by removing the word "reasonable".
Of course no one in Texas has ever been prosecuted for the use of deadly force in self defense on or off his land or even apratment/rental property etc. even before the bill was passed, but we all know why this law was passed anyway. ::)

I am not trying to discuss the philosiphies of it. I, like thousands of others in this state have had plenty of opportunies to use the laws without fear of prosecution, but I am after all not willing to shoot someone unless I really do feel my or one of my loved ones' life is in jearpody, even though Texas law allows for it.

Many landowners have shot and killed trepassers on more than one occassion from pretty great distances and have never been procescuted. It stirs up alot of emotions and opinions in people but I am not going to share my own in detail other than to say I do not consider anyone's   life cheap and am certainly not looking to gun down anyone and everyone who steps foot on my property no matter what is in the sky at the time; sun or moon.

Discretion is the better part of valor and unfortunately it is the true crooks who do not respect other people right to life, liberty, justice that give guns and the right to defend one's own property a bad name.

Remember the cauldron from which Texas culture was born. Property rights was at the forefront. Right or wrong our laws were formed by men who fought to conquer this land and then defend it, and often had to fight hand to hand when they ran out of ammo.

Edit: I almsot forgot it took me 15 minutes to find this but it is ironic. Not making light that a crook was killed. But still a little ironic you probably remember when this happened it was national news for a little while - and I stress *little while*  since the property right owner was a liberal.

Grand Irony
The oil is all in Texas, but the dipsticks are in D.C.

tcsmpsi

Kevin,

There has never been an actual 'duty' to retreat.  The way it was written, is that, if a person (and, I am using lay terms) would otherwise be justified in using deadly force, by all the criteria as set out in Chapter 9: Justifications Excluding Criminal Responsibility, and if the average person in the actor's situation would not have retreated, the deadly force is justified.
Deadly force is always a last resort, legally, morally and spiritually.

The requirement to retreat was excluded, if at the time of the use of deadly force, the suspect was commiting an unlawful entry into the actor's habitation.  The legislative intent, was found that 'habitation' includes any containment facility of the actor (e.g. vehicle, place of business, etc.).

The right to protect is inherent in this nation, due to the fact that this nation's primary principle and foundation of existence is, Individual Freedom.    That each person has the right to live their own life as they see proper.  To follow their own path.  Providing, of course, that path does not adversely effect another.

Though the right to protect exists as a sacred part of individual freedom, the inherent problem (rather a Catch 22, if you will) which exists, is that of using force against another to protect oneself, or others.  In using force against another, in a manner that person would reasonably find objectionable, in itself, violates the sacred condition of Individual Freedom.

This is why we must be given specific and explicit 'exemptions' for using force ( as per the title of the chapter addressing force, Justification Excluding Criminal Responsibility). 

In all effect, the "Castle Doctrine" actually has made very little impact on the rules of force.  The same 'reasonable and necessary' always exists.  Though a person had the black and white 'duty' to retreat if the average person in that situation would have retreated, I have not known a case in which there was court production of it.  In order to have had any effect, first would have to be established what the "average person", under those exact circumstances, was/is.

In reflection, I should mention that I did not regard any personal judgement in the matter.  What motivated my response, is the reading of some folks mention of....ummmmmm... less than favorably applicable uses of force. 
And, it is that I should mention, this is the world wide web.  As such, it is fundamentally open to the whole world to read and/or copy as they will.

I have seen cases made on such statements, regardless of how specifically unintentional they might be.

Being a Use of Force instructor in different discipliines and venues for many, many years, I'm sure I'm 'extra-sensitive' to the matter.  Rather like seeing a picture of one standing directly behind a cut tree as it's falling.   :D
\\\"In the end, it is a moral question as to whether man applies what he has learned or not.\\\" - C. Jung

TexasTimbers

I hear ya. I am not a self defense instructor but am real familiar with most of the relevant case law on the matter.  I think in the end we are not very far apart on our opinions and understanding of the law.

You think your opinions are correct and I know mine are. :D Now that there is a joke Michael don't go throwin pocket knives at me when we meet. ;)

Actually, black and white laws don't really exist. Attorney's and Jurists (judges) argue all the time about what a law means. So a couple of sawyers sure aren't going end up totally on the same page.  :P

Our understanding of the laws may vary but one thing remains sure. It costs us plenty of in board feet cut, to hire professionals to argue each other about what the laws mean that we pay the elected royalty to pass in order to take away protect our freedoms.  :(

I enjyed the conversation. I agree with 98% of what you say. :)
The oil is all in Texas, but the dipsticks are in D.C.

SwampDonkey

Well, didn't take long to generate 3 pages. Some pretty long winded posts until the sky cleared.  ;D ;)
"No amount of belief makes something a fact." James Randi

1 Thessalonians 5:21

2020 Polaris Ranger 570 to forward firewood, Husqvarna 555 XT Pro, Stihl FS560 clearing saw and continuously thinning my ground, on the side. Grow them trees. (((o)))

Blake22

I was having trouble with people "parking" on my farm and the fact that it joins a Jr College campus only makes it worse. This spot is well known and has had decades of people (well you know) enjoying the evening and that was ok until the littering got out of hand. Then a light bulb came on, just join 'em. No, been there and done that. I got my buddy that is in the septic tank business to start dumping his "pump-out truck" there. Good fertilizer. Problem solved. You might say that's a [I have typed a profane word that is automatically changed by the forum censored words program I should know better and could be banned for doing it] place to take a date.
Blake

Warbird


Well done, sir!!   :D :D :D :D

TexasTimbers

Are you sure that isn't a stiff fine and even potential jail term waiting to happen ???
The oil is all in Texas, but the dipsticks are in D.C.

thecfarm

I hauled some trees into the lower end of my field.I left the limbs on to slow them down some.I always have 3-4 people that have to drive through my field.I don't think they stop,they just drive to the back and turn around and come back.Seems like it mostly cars that do it,or at least that is all I ever see.By the time I get into my truck they are long gone.Besides that there is probaly 2 of them and only one of me.There is a good steep ditch and than the field levels out again.They will have to come to the top of the field to get into it now.
Model 6020-20hp Manual Thomas bandsaw,TC40A 4wd 40 hp New Holland tractor, 450 Norse Winch, Heatmor 400 OWB,YCC 1978-79

Blake22

Quote from: TexasTimbers on November 01, 2007, 11:21:22 AM
Are you sure that isn't a stiff fine and even potential jail term waiting to happen ???

This is legal, the "fertilizer" isn't being dumped right after it comes out of the septic tank. It goes into a holding tank where lime is added to reach a certain ph then it is dumped on pastures or hay feilds as fertilizer. But it's still not exactly a wild flower scent if you know what I mean.
Blake

Thank You Sponsors!