Texas is a somewhat different.

by Charles, Tuesday, May 19, 2015, 17:00 (3480 days ago) @ Wildcat
edited by Charles, Tuesday, May 19, 2015, 17:05

In Texas self-defense along with insanity and a few others are "affirmative defenses" which if proved with bar a conviction. However the burden of proof is on the defense to establish their affirmative defense. However, the burden of proof is "by a preponderance of the evidence" and not "beyond a reasonable doubt", as it is for the state to sustain a conviction.

Defense of others is another such affirmative defense, but the shooters gets the same right of defense as did the person in danger. If the person in danger has a legit self defense claim then so do the shooter. If not then there is no defense of others defense.

The classic illustration is where a fellow looks down an alley and sees a scruffy person holding a gun on another guy. The good citizen shoots the scruffy guy with the gun who turns out of be under cover cop. Bad shooting. So if pays to call 911 unless you are 100% certain of what is going down.

In your case, the mom would have a right of self defense and therefore the son with the 22 rifle would be in the clear. However cops and DAs don't like to make judgment calls, they would rather charge the person and let the jury sort it out. I don't like that, but that is what happens more often than not. DAs don't like to dismiss cases involving gun violence as it might come back to bite them in the next election.