Texas HB196 A Focus For Texas Legislature

A source in Austin reports State Representative Terry Meza‘s Texas HB196 will be a focus for the Texas legislature in the upcoming session starting in January 2021. One Republican said it was “better than Christmas.”

Texas HB196
Meza seen here with Beto O’Rourke – the former candidate who said Hell yes, we‘re going to take away your guns.

Meza sparked a backlash when she proposed changes to the state’s “castle doctrine,” through Texas HB196, which allows the use of deadly force to protect property.

Facebook has numerous posts attributed to Meza regarding HB196. Calls and emails to her office were not returned so these statements have not been validated.

HB 196 Facebook Post

Privately Republicans are rejoicing saying Democrats have stepped in the muck again.

The point to rising crime numbers throughout Dallas and other cities including officers being attacked and the Democrats filing a bill to stop citizens and home owners from protecting their own property.

One legislative staffer said Denton County had to arrest Dallas’ serial killer because their police chief is in a relationship with a BLM activist with a felony record. Instead of protecting the public, they are filing HB196 which looks to protect criminals.

Some Democrats complain too continuing a pattern of infighting since Election Day when Democrats failed in their expectations to be leading the state house in 2021.

We just lost every winnable seat possible and we have state reps thinking HB196 will bring the suburbs back to voting for us. Democrats continue to say ‘we did it‘ while losing winnable races.

Meza’s bill filing comes just as a local Democrat and criminal judge was arrested for DWI.

Texas HB196

The specific text of Terry Meza’s bill can be found here and is included below.

87R1395 JCG-D
 
 By: MezaH.B. No. 196
 
 
 A BILL TO BE ENTITLED
 AN ACT
 relating to the use of deadly force in defense of a person or
 property.
        BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF TEXAS:
        SECTION 1.  Sections 9.32(a) and (c), Penal Code, are
 amended to read as follows:
        (a)  A person is justified in using deadly force against
 another if the actor:
              (1)  is [if the actor would be] justified in using force
 against the other under Section 9.31; [and]
              (2)  is unable to safely retreat; and
              (3)  [when and to the degree the actor] reasonably
 believes the deadly force is immediately necessary:
                    (A)  to protect the actor against the other’s use
 or attempted use of unlawful deadly force; or
                    (B)  to prevent the other’s imminent commission of
 aggravated kidnapping, murder, sexual assault, or aggravated
 sexual assault[, robbery, or aggravated robbery].
        (c)  Notwithstanding Subsection (a)(2), a [A] person who is
 in the person’s own habitation [has a right to be present at the
 location where the deadly force is used], who has not provoked the
 person against whom the deadly force is used, and who is not engaged
 in criminal activity at the time the deadly force is used is not
 required to retreat before using deadly force as described by this
 section.
        SECTION 2.  Section 9.41, Penal Code, is amended to read as
 follows:
        Sec. 9.41.  PROTECTION OF ONE’S OWN PROPERTY. (a) A person
 in lawful possession of land, including a habitation on the land, or
 tangible, movable property is justified in using force against
 another when and to the degree the actor reasonably believes the
 force is immediately necessary to prevent or terminate the other’s
 trespass on the land or unlawful interference with the property.
        (b)  A person unlawfully dispossessed of land, including a
 habitation on the land, or tangible, movable property by another is
 justified in using force against the other when and to the degree
 the actor reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary to
 reenter the land or recover the property if the actor uses the force
 immediately or in fresh pursuit after the dispossession and:
              (1)  the actor reasonably believes the other had no
 claim of right when he dispossessed the actor; or
              (2)  the other accomplished the dispossession by using
 force, threat, or fraud against the actor.
        SECTION 3.  Section 9.42, Penal Code, is amended to read as
 follows:
        Sec. 9.42.  DEADLY FORCE TO PROTECT PROPERTY. A person is
 justified in using deadly force against another to protect land,
 including a habitation on the land, or tangible, movable property
 if the actor:
              (1)  is [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.
        SECTION 4.  Sections 9.32(b) and (d), Penal Code, are
 repealed.
        SECTION 5.  The change in law made by this Act applies only
 to an offense committed on or after the effective date of this Act.  
 An offense committed before the effective date of this Act is
 governed by the law in effect on the date the offense was committed,
 and the former law is continued in effect for that purpose.  For
 purposes of this section, an offense was committed before the
 effective date of this Act if any element of the offense occurred
 before that date.
        SECTION 6.  This Act takes effect September 1, 2021.

One Reply to “Texas HB196 A Focus For Texas Legislature”

  1. “Unable to safely retreat” This means a person(s) living in their home who is confronted by a criminal(s) who forcibly and/or illegal enter it would have the burden of proof to demonstrate how and why they were unable to safely retreat. Obvious question is, retreat to where ? So a person lawfully living in their home is supposed to run away to protect the life of a criminal from the use of deadly force. Clearly this language offers protection the criminal and diminishes the rights of the self-defending citizen. It would be ironic to see what the outcome might be if Representative Meza, her family, or supporters of this ridiculous law change were themselves subject to a home invasion or robbery and forced to practice a safe retreat instead of defending themselves, their family, or their home.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *