Greg, you only responded to half of my intended meaning there. Obviously everyone, everywhere, knows that going into a fight with the deck stacked in your favor is better for you. I'm with you there.
The point I was trying to make was that using that as a defense for presenting or using lethal force in an otherwise non-lethal, non-grave bodily harm kind of situation would, in my most humble of opinions, not pass a judge/jury smell test.
That's what I was trying to say. Hope that clears it up.
I agree that if your defense is you took a knife out and stabbed someone because you didn't want to risk getting hurt at all, even through you had many better options, then yes you are going to be convicted.
The nature of police work (And survival in general) is that if you are met with force, the proper response is to meet that force 1 level higher then it. If they have their fists up, you draw your pepper spray/taser/baton, you don't put your dukes up. If they draw a knife, crowbar, bat, chain, etc you draw your firearm.
It seems to be a common theme here that by meeting force with an overriding force, you are in the wrong. That’s completely situation dependent, but I can tell you its a more inaccurate then accurate statement (depending on your state laws). If you are in the right (AKA you're not the one starting a bar fight when your drunk) and a person puts their dukes up like they are going to attack you, there is no reason that you can't meet that force with a overriding force. If all you have is your fists, a knife, and a firearm, drawing your firearm/knife and trying to keep distance could be a proper response. By drawing your weapon you are preparing to defend yourself since you have no idea whets going to happen. Pulling a firearm and shooting the person would be a incorrect response.
Lets again go back to the common theme of meeting force with an overriding force is wrong, and will lead to an escalation of force. If a person is threatening you, they are in the wrong. You counter their threats with force of your own, such as drawing a knife. They pull out a firearm, and then you pull out your firearm. You shoot them. Claims can be made all day that this would be avoidable had the threatened person not escalated the force. However think about it for a minute, who started this situation, and who was acting in self defense?
I can't account for states that might have completely obscene laws regarding how someone can defend themselves. I can however account for having to defend my actions in use of force cases. Its not hard to defend your actions when they are reasonable.
Okay, from what I'm getting you are asking if you can pull your knife and wave it in someone’s face who is antagonizing but, not threatening you to avoid a possible physical conflict with them. That it?
ABSOLUTELY NOT!!
Dude, that is besides being a total chicken **** thing to do, also totally illegal. Also in regards to your theory that it would deescalate the situation, the answer is again NO. If anything your just going to make the whole situation even worse. God forbid if you actually stuck or even cut the guy. NO, ABSOLUTELY NOT.
If you pull a knife and wave it in a person’s face that did nothing other then call you a name, then you’re in the wrong. If you pull a knife and have it at the ready after a person for no apparent reason says they are going to kick your butt, and they have their fists up in a boxer stance, what you did is reasonable. The first person to raise the level of force present with no legal or reasonable reason to do so (Such as to show off, to scare someone that’s not threatening anyone, etc) is in the wrong. Most reactions to such a event will be able to be justified.