Deadly Force Justified?

[Javier730]

Good discussion!

Now let's take it up a notch: YOU are the victim, You have just driven UNDER the overpass and the rock comes thru YOUR windshield. Assuming you are not instantly murdered by the rock thrower, how do you, Mr. LTC, respond at that point?

Go up there and whip his behind!

[ELB]

The window where deadly force could be legally used and positively affect the outcome (i.e. stop someone from dropping a rock onto car on the highway) would be pretty narrow, but it certainly could exist -- looks like it did in the story linked in the OP.

Consider this from the story (emphasis added):

“We were on our way to Fort Worth and traffic was backed up. I saw the guy on the bridge in front of us and he had a rock over his head,” he said. “I saw him throw it and hit one vehicle. Then he hit the one in frontof us. He had it over his head and I pointed at him to tell him not to do it.Obviously he done it anyway.”

“The rocks landed inside her vehicle. Praise God it didn’t go through on her side because it probably would have killed her,” he said.

So the cars were stopped, and he could plainly see the guy throwing rocks. The rocks were big enough and dropped/thrown hard enough to break through the windshields. He could see the guy ready to toss another one -- there was time to do something about it. What to do? Wagging a finger and verbally challenging didnt' work.

[Soccerdad1995]

The window where deadly force could be legally used and positively affect the outcome (i.e. stop someone from dropping a rock onto car on the highway) would be pretty narrow, but it certainly could exist -- looks like it did in the story linked in the OP.

Consider this from the story (emphasis added):

“We were on our way to Fort Worth and traffic was backed up. I saw the guy on the bridge in front of us and he had a rock over his head,” he said. “I saw him throw it and hit one vehicle. Then he hit the one in frontof us. He had it over his head and I pointed at him to tell him not to do it.Obviously he done it anyway.”

“The rocks landed inside her vehicle. Praise God it didn’t go through on her side because it probably would have killed her,” he said.

So the cars were stopped, and he could plainly see the guy throwing rocks. The rocks were big enough and dropped/thrown hard enough to break through the windshields. He could see the guy ready to toss another one -- there was time to do something about it. What to do? Wagging a finger and verbally challenging didnt' work.

This would be a tough shot for a handgun. Good reason to carry a rifle in your vehicle.

[ELB]

...
This would be a tough shot for a handgun. Good reason to carry a rifle in your vehicle.

Pistol or rifle, would still be a chancy situation, especially for anyone shooting from the highway below to the overpass above. Aside from convincing everyone afterwards that it was indeed a deadly-force situation, a miss, or even a through-and-through, would come down who knows where.

Probably best to get out of the way of the rocks if at all possible.

[Middle Age Russ]

My understanding of events brings me to the answer, "Yes, but..." Yes, deadly force is justified since there is a clear and present threat of death or grievous bodily injury to others. Here is the "but" part, though. Deadly force may be justified BUT if your use of deadly force causes injury to someone other than the bad actor YOU will still be held responsible for those consequences.