It makes me angry. It’s unbelievable how this even happened. And we are labeled racists, violent, and intolerant? Must be why us law abiding citizens are causing destruction to our own cities, overtaking cities, and getting away with hurting others…oh wait…
4 Likes
What about company policy and use of deadly force? As a delivery driver, one uses their own vehicle, but they are under the employ of Papa John’s. It seems that the circumstances would allow a personal firearm to be carried in one’s own persinal vehicle.
5 Likes
A company can set any policy that is not otherwise illegal for their employees even when using their own property. So they can still fire you but it does not make it a crime.
5 Likes
It is true, that is why most of them works in law enforcement. Lol
1 Like
I’m glad that the pizza delivery driver was able to defend himself. If this happend the way that it was stated then there should be not reason to charge him for anything. It’s ridiculous in this country even in self defense you have to go through all the political ignorance of the system. Common sense is if it’s self defense then case closed but everyone (system, police, judges) wants to be a political nut job about everything.
4 Likes
The pizza delivery guy deserves a medal and the thanks of a grateful city for ridding it of one menace and teaching the other proto-career felon a lesson. There is in Texas an unwritten defense to shooting someone. It’s called the “needed killin’ defense”. It is employed when the jury determines that regardless of the circumstances if the dead guy needed killin’ that’s enough reason to let the shooter off.
7 Likes
this is great and I love this post of the “needed killin’ defense”. I am not a Texan but… totally gonna quote this here in Utah.
2 Likes
He’d needed killin is a valid defense in parts of Eastern and Western Kentucky! But not Louisville. 
5 Likes
Incorrect. The pizza delivery guy was on private property; in Texas, there is no right to carry on private residential property. The teens who approached him had the right to do so since they
a) Lived there
b) Had the right to carry and protect their residential property
Self-defense only applies when you have the RIGHT to be in a certain place. Pizza delivery guys do not have any right to be on someone else’s residential property, and so his actions constituted an act of aggression.
What the pizza delivery guy in the story did is akin to me carrying inside WinCo Foods or Macy’s, and then when loss prevention tries to detain me, shooting them in response. If I did that, you know I would get charged with armed robbery even if I didn’t actually steal anything.
But the D.A. doesn’t have that same respect for private homeowners or tenants like they do for big businesses like department stores or grocery stores, which is probably why the teens who confronted him are being charged.
The facts are simple. The pizza delivery guy was carrying on private residential property. You cannot carry on someone else’s property without their permission. Try carrying inside of Macy’s, for example, and see what their loss prevention does to you.
Those teens had every right to confront the pizza delivery guy since he could have been an intruder and as residents of the apartment community, they had the right to confront anyone on their property.
By choosing to shoot them, the pizza delivery guy committed trespassing, intrusion, and murder.
An appropriate analogy would be me carrying a gun inside of a grocery store and then shooting any employees who confronted me about it or asked me to leave. That would be a mass shooting to any sane, rational person. But for some reason, you people think it’s “Okay” to carry a gun on the premises of someone’s home, driveway, or apartment parking lot. You think it’s “okay” for a pizza delivery guy who has ZERO right to be on the property to shoot two teenagers who confront him.
It has to do with private property, not company policy. There is no right to carry on someone else’s residential property, much like how there’s no right to carry inside Target or H-E-B.
Those teens had a RIGHT to confront him with guns since Texas has a castle doctrine and homeowners or their tenants have the right to confront any visitors to the property.
It’s akin to a Walmart employee or security guard asking someone walking inside the store with a gun to leave. But instead of leaving the apartment complex when confronted about a gun, the pizza delivery guy chose to escalate the situation, shot both of the teens, and lied about it being “self-defense.”
Even if it was an actual robbery, it doesn’t matter since self-defense doesn’t apply to private property. That’s why stores are allowed to detain customers and if the customer defends themselves with a gun, they go to jail for armed robbery even if they haven’t actually stolen anything.
If a customer can’t defend himself against a store employee who confronts him about carrying inside the store, then pizza delivery guys have no right to shoot someone who confronts them about carrying a gun in an apartment parking lot.
Well this is a two year old thread.
I wonder what the final outcome is?
I am not licensed to practice law in Texas and will not provide legal advice on this but my understanding of Texas law does not prohibit possession of firearms on private property unless certain notice requirements are met.
I am also certain that the right of self defense does exist on private property, even for trespassers if excessive force is used against them.
5 Likes
Thank you for weighing in on this and setting the record straight for the areas you are able to do so + sharing your non legal advice understanding of some other areas. Always good to hear something from an actual attorney
2 Likes
I thought that was only in KY!
1 Like