[swifty]

Originally Posted by bradclark1

They have to be inside the house though. Just on the property isn't enough.

Yeah Steed it's the same over here. Really pathetic when you aren't supposed to protect your own home.

Edit: This is what recently happened in my state; http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/07/24/hom....ap/index.html

In most US states you are right. In order to use deadly force you have to be in fear of your life or the have someone inside your home. But in Texas the law allows one to use deadly force to protect property. It's origins come from the wild west in regards to horse rustling. Because of Texas' size and remoteness if one was to steal/kill the horse it would present risk of death.

§ 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.

Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 883, ch. 399, § 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974.
Amended by Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 900, § 1.01, eff. Sept. 1,
1994.

One law that i wish was still on the books was if a husband came home and found his wife cheating he was legally allowed to kill both. Women did not have this right.