[gvf]

Ignoring this nuts definition of a "failed" act of self-defense:

You threatened him, but didn't pull the trigger. You have to ask yourself if you have the inner fortitude to pull the trigger if it ever comes to that.

(Right, a real failure: no injuries of any kind.... to anyone and the threat gone.....terrible outcome....),
your question:

The question is, with a man inside your car (leaning inside) and threatening you for your money, life, when is the appropriate time to defend yourself?

was actually answered by yourself:

As an aside, we were able to pull away, and he fell out of the car. I didn't have to shoot.

You didn't have to shoot, so, you didn't. You followed what is the usual foundation of SD law and its ethical intent: the necessity of having "the reasonable belief - [in the legal sense of the Reasonable Person : i.e., any reasonable person in the same circumstance would believe the same thing] - of one's IMMINENT death/serious injury with no other action possible but to take a potentially lethal self-defense action in order to stop this imminent attack" Sounds like prior to all those conditions prompting such an action, you tried one last, or the other person driving did: you pulled away, and fate intervened as the car moved: the attacker fell out of the car.

You did fine, you waited until that was nearly all there, the Reasonable Belief, the "appropriateness", but then bingo! you or another who was driving take off in the car causing the attacker to fall out and the threat to diminish. No reason then to shoot.
So, you weren't killed, the attacker wasn't hurt or killed, AND the attack stopped. You defended yourself by drawing your gun and being at the ready, and then by driving away. All of this worked. This was no failure, but a success.


What would have happened with other theoretical outcomes some posted,had they actually occurred? (E.g.., you had shot earlier on.) You don't know, anything could have happened. Likely though one or both of you would have ended up dead or very hurt or another person would have, and you'd have had monumental potential upset to your life, internal and external: a LOT of grief of all sorts.

And you state your question well: what was the APPROPRIATE TIME to shoot, for YOU to shoot in THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, AT THAT TIME, under the influence of YOUR instincts. Some others - even if they are legally correct that a person, once his car has been forcibly entered, CAN shoot - mistake that technical permission with the APPROPRIATENESS of such an act, which are not always the same thing. Nor were they in your moment of truth. Their criteria - ("he's in the car, legal green light, go do it")- treats CCWs as people desirous of shooting and killing, just needing circumstances that fulfill technical legal requirements before they can go at it and activate their true desires.

My true desire is to stay safe, and only to do so by shooting, or by any lethal SD action, if that is truly the last house on the street. Sounds like this describes you too. if so: Excellent! And an excellent job in that tight situation!