q******n
发帖数: 649 | 1 大家都在讨论防卫的问题，而且德州枪友众多，我这里就乱扯两句俺们德州的情况，抛
砖引玉。
大家都以为德州枪械泛滥，枪法宽松，其实这是个误区，德州的枪支管理法规还是比较
严格的，至少这个城堡法就是在佛罗里达之后才通过的，并且效仿了佛罗里达的立法。
2007年3月12号，德州参议院30票全票通过SB37号自卫法，3月19号在州众议院宣读，3
月20号133票对33票通过众议院。以下13人反对
Representative Lon Burnam - Representative Garnet Coleman - Representative
Dawnna Dukes - Representative Harold Dutton - Representative Jessica Farrar
- Representative Ana E. Hernandez - Representative Terri Hodge -
Representative Donna Howard - Representative Barbara Mallory Caraway -
Representative Ruth McClendon - Representative Borris Miles - Representative
Paul Moreno - Representative Senfronia Thompson
3007年9月1日在原条款内加入如下条款
The actor's belief that the force was immediately necessary as described by
this subsection is presumed to be reasonable if the actor:
(1) knew or had reason to believe that the person against whom the force
was used:
(A) unlawfully and with force entered, or was attempting to enter
unlawfully and with force, the actor's occupied habitation, vehicle, or
place of business or employment;
(B) unlawfully and with force removed, or was attempting to remove
unlawfully and with force, the actor from the actor's habitation, vehicle,
or place of business or employment; or
(C) was committing or attempting to commit aggravated kidnapping, murder,
sexual assault, aggravated sexual assault, robbery, or aggravated robbery;
(2) did not provoke the person against whom the force was used; and
(3) was not otherwise engaged in criminal activity, other than a Class C
misdemeanor that is a violation of a law or ordinance regulating traffic at
the time the force was used.
(e) A person who has a right to be present at the location where the force
is used, who has not provoked the person against whom the force is used, and
who is not engaged in criminal activity at the time the force is used is
not required to retreat before using force as described by this section
下面是一些德州自卫反击后民事诉讼的建议:
最好在组建民事大培省团（Grand Jury）前让律师把免除/无刑事责任的文件敲定（get
your criminal case no billed before the Grand Jury），然后在大陪审团前就可
以应用“No Bill of Indictment."
在2007年德州就民事豁免(Civil Immunity)做了如下修改括号里面的内容是删减掉的
Sec. 83.001. CIVIL IMMUNITY [AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE]. A [It is an affirmative
defense to a civil action for damages for personal injury or death that the
] defendant who uses force or[, at the time the cause of action arose, was
justified in using] deadly force that is justified under Chapter 9 [Section
9.32], Penal Code, is immune from civil liability for personal injury or
death that results from the defendant's [against a person who at the time of
the] use of force or deadly force, as applicable [was committing an offense
of unlawful entry in the habitation of the defendant]. | t******y
发帖数: 5040 | 2 Sec. 83.001. CIVIL IMMUNITY. A defendant who uses force or
deadly force that is justified under Chapter 9 , Penal Code,
is immune from civil liability for personal injury or
death that results from the defendant's use of force or
deadly force, as applicable.
这还成 | w*******t
发帖数: 960 | 3 收藏了
3
Farrar
【在 q******n 的大作中提到】
: 大家都在讨论防卫的问题，而且德州枪友众多，我这里就乱扯两句俺们德州的情况，抛
: 砖引玉。
: 大家都以为德州枪械泛滥，枪法宽松，其实这是个误区，德州的枪支管理法规还是比较
: 严格的，至少这个城堡法就是在佛罗里达之后才通过的，并且效仿了佛罗里达的立法。
: 2007年3月12号，德州参议院30票全票通过SB37号自卫法，3月19号在州众议院宣读，3
: 月20号133票对33票通过众议院。以下13人反对
: Representative Lon Burnam - Representative Garnet Coleman - Representative
: Dawnna Dukes - Representative Harold Dutton - Representative Jessica Farrar
: - Representative Ana E. Hernandez - Representative Terri Hodge -
: Representative Donna Howard - Representative Barbara Mallory Caraway -
| s**********d
发帖数: 36899 | 4
对方律师总会找出理由来sue你的。。。
【在 t******y 的大作中提到】
: Sec. 83.001. CIVIL IMMUNITY. A defendant who uses force or
: deadly force that is justified under Chapter 9 , Penal Code,
: is immune from civil liability for personal injury or
: death that results from the defendant's use of force or
: deadly force, as applicable.
: 这还成
| r*******0
发帖数: 706 | |
|
