And there’s the predicament. The tables are turned, and the shooter’s the only one who has no responsibility to consider the presumption of innocence. The presumption of innocence fundamental to our judicial system, but in this case the judge, jury and executioner’s are exempt. His actions are apparently overlooked unless it can be proven beyond a reasonable doubt that he had no “reasonable belief that the shooter is acting to avoid serious bodily injury or death”.
That bar’s incredibly low. I’ve had that reasonable belief a dozen times, in fights or near fights as a young man or even on the highway with road raged drivers. I knew better than to kill because of it, but apparently the law in NC would have supported my ability to do so, presuming I did not provoke it.
Not enough time to evaluate before pulling the trigger? I’d rather that just be the risk one takes when arming themselves. Perhaps the added gravity of that self danger would promote the kind of forethought and risk avoidance that would minimize these incidents.
Note I didn't say not enough time to evaluate whether a threat exists, just not enough time to come up with unusual reasons to deny it.
Acting on behalf of a third party gives more time to sort things out, because you retain the ability to use force with little risk to self.
I'm one of those people for whom life-threatening situations happen in slow-motion, so as I said, there is time to quit right up to when the hammer falls. An incident years ago ended in an apology, rather than a tragedy because I made sure of what was going on. A friend got a good view of the muzzle end of my .44, cocked and ready, walking in and waking me from a dead sleep by opening the door. (Threats had been made to my life). I rolled the hammer down (off target) and asked him to please knock next time. We still joke about it.
So never get the idea that the shot is on auto pilot from the time the pistol clears the holster. Would the shot have been legally justifiable? perhaps, but then I'd have had to deal with killing a good friend.
The court can take months of motions and affidavits and testimony to sort out what happens in a few seconds at most. When confronted by a potential threat, you simply don't have that luxury.
As for risk, shooting someone who didn't pose a threat leaves one open to losing everything they have in the Civil Suit, as well as living with the knowledge that they have killed an innocent. Not exactly an absence of consequenes.
I hope I can get through this life without having to kill another human being, but if the necessity arises, I hope I neither hesitate nor miss.