✔ 最佳答案
I am glad you were able to diffuse the situation peacefully. that must have been a harrowing experience.
The short answer is that in your particular case, if all the facts you provided are correct and could be proven correct in a court of law, you would have been lawfully justified in using lethal force. That will not save you from a trial, it just means that you would have almost certainly been acquitted of whatever homicide you were charged with (unless you accidentally killed an innocent bystander, in which case you may still be charged and convicted of a separate crime).
In the event that something like this happens to you again, you should be fully aware of your state's laws concerning the judicious use of lethal force, and the basic principles that guide defense and prosecution of homicide cases nationwide. This won't be comprehensive by any means, but lets talk law (I am not an attorney, just an informed citizen):
A widely accepted definition of 'judicious use of deadly force':
You may legally use deadly force only when there is an immediate and otherwise unavoidable danger of death or grave bodily harm to the innocent.
In the event of a homicide where the defendant has claimed self-defense, the jury will discern whether the claimant acted in a manner that a reasonable person would have acted under the same circumstances.
ABILITY: Did the assailants have the ability to cause death or crippling injury to you?
Yes. In your case we have a clear example of what is called 'disparity of force.' In a very brief explanation, this means that they had more power to cripple or kill you than you had to do the same to them.
JEOPARDY: Did you have a reasonable expectation that they would attempt to cripple or kill you?
If someone says "I'm going to kill you," and then starts moving toward you with a weapon drawn, you have reason to believe that your life is in jeopardy. This can be extended to waving, pointing, or possibly even openly displaying a gun while making verbal threats.
Yes, you were in jeopardy.
OPPORTUNITY: Having the ability, did they have the opportunity to use lethal force against you?
If a man waves a knife at you and screams, "I'm going to kill you!" and he's at the other side of a football stadium, he may have the ability and the intent to kill you, but he doesn't very well have the opportunity.
In your case, being blocked in and in close proximity to several men armed with pistols, they probably had the opportunity to cause death or crippling injury to you.
Any jury, given those criteria, would have found that you had acted reasonably in the use of deadly force.
In South Carolina, there is a law called the Castle Doctrine, which governs in part the lawful possession of a concealed firearm in any place where you lawfully have a right to be and are expected to be, and have no expectation nor duty to retreat from that place in the event of a lethal force scenario. These places include your home, your place of business, and your car. In some instances, this may be extended to camp sites or other special circumstances (I am not aware if these exceptions are ever made in South Carolina, but they are not explicitly stated to my knowledge).
You had the right to be there, in your car, and were in lawful possession of a handgun. According to South Carolina law, you are not required to retreat or attempt to retreat from your car before using lethal force if you are in danger of death or grave bodily harm.
If you have the means to retreat *with* your car, however, that may be a different story.
As far as I can tell, you had in your power the summary right and command to take the life of another citizen without prior authorization or review.
