It's called Stand Your Ground Law. You have no duty to retreat when threatened, at least in Florida. And you are justified to use any force including deadly force when faced with imminent risk of death or bodily harm.
The general rule to follow is force including deadly force is justified if it is reasonably believed to be necessary to prevent death or great bodily harm to themselves, others, or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.
Someone is said to have used or threatened force reasonably if a “reasonable and prudent person situated in the same circumstances and knowing what the defendant knew would have used the same force as did the defendant.”
Here is example where not subjective. For example, in Florida one does not always have to wait until someone physically attacks, to use deadly force.
I'm stopped in traffic. Five cars are stopped ahead of me. A violent protester assaults the drivers of cars ahead of me. It is therefore reasonable to think the protester will assault me when approached. I am justified in using deadly force when the protesters approach my car, even thought they have yet to directly threaten me.
This part, my friend, is very subjective. I would just hope my instincts are accurate and I dont misjudge the situation.
"This part, my friend, is very subjective".
It's called Stand Your Ground Law. You have no duty to retreat when threatened, at least in Florida. And you are justified to use any force including deadly force when faced with imminent risk of death or bodily harm.
The general rule to follow is force including deadly force is justified if it is reasonably believed to be necessary to prevent death or great bodily harm to themselves, others, or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.
Someone is said to have used or threatened force reasonably if a “reasonable and prudent person situated in the same circumstances and knowing what the defendant knew would have used the same force as did the defendant.”
Here is example where not subjective. For example, in Florida one does not always have to wait until someone physically attacks, to use deadly force.
I'm stopped in traffic. Five cars are stopped ahead of me. A violent protester assaults the drivers of cars ahead of me. It is therefore reasonable to think the protester will assault me when approached. I am justified in using deadly force when the protesters approach my car, even thought they have yet to directly threaten me.