Posted by Eagle Eye: Read the other posts. I think my comments will make more sense.
I have, and I'm afraid they do not.
Perhaps, and I'm guessing here, you are mixing three questions: (1) What to do in the clerk-at-gunpoint-scenario; (2) whether one would likely survive if one were to draw on someone already holding a gun; (3) when one is justified in shooting in self defense.
If so, perhaps
, when you say "You can't use your gun unless he goes first", which is nonsensical, you are trying to paraphrase advice that a civilianshould not intervene in the clerk scenario unless things have gone beyond the point of no return.
Or not. Your statement "if he does not produce a gun, you can't produce yours" makes no sense at all.
If someone poses an imminent threat of death or great bodily harm, and if you have not other means of avoiding the threat, you do not
have to wait until "he goes first".
I don't have the time to pull a dozen quotes out specifically.
Fine. Don't worry about the quotes. However, I do strongly suggest that you take the time to study the entire paper to which I provided a link.