Should Texas law be changed to reflect the Common Law tradition that no offense occurs unless the individual who threatens another has the apparent or actual ability to carry out the threat? Why or why not?

Question

What will be an ideal response?

Answer 1

Student opinion will vary but some argument for and against the change are as follows:

For change to assault statute to require apparent/present ability to deliver threat:
• Unless there is reason to believe offender intends to carry out threat, minimal harm is done.
• When a statement or action is actually threatening can be ambiguous. Evidence of ability to carry out assertion would assist in proving that conduct/speech was intended as a threat.
• Requiring present ability to carry out threat would assist in determining whether threat was imminent.

Against change to assault statute to require apparent/present ability to deliver threat:
• Persons should be deterred from threatening harm to others regardless of ultimate intentions.
• A mere threat can be upsetting to victim or others even if victim does not expect threat to be carried out.