Example 1: Jane is out jogging one evening, when a white van pulls up next to her, and a masked man with a gun jumps out, trying to grab her and drag her into his van. Jane pulls out her pepper spray, sprays the man in the face, and runs away to call police.
Example 2: Jane is out jogging one evening, when a white van pulls up next to her, and a masked man with a gun jumps out, trying to grab her and drag her into his van. Jane pulls out her Glock 42 and fires two shots, killing her attacker.
In the first example, was Jane legally justified in her use of force against the man? What about her use of deadly force in Example 2? The answer to both is yes. … In these hypotheticals, the masked man with the gun was trying to abduct Jane. Whatever his ultimate purpose for trying to grab her, if Jane reasonably believed she was about to be the victim of an aggravated kidnapping, she will be entitled to a legal presumption that her belief was “reasonable” in that the use of force or deadly force was immediately necessary to stop the aggravated kidnapping. Thus, with this presumption, prosecutors will be limited in their ability to second-guess whether Jane should have used less force than she did, or that she should have retreated first. The law will deem her belief in the immediate necessity of her use of force or deadly force “reasonable.”
Source: Texas Gun Law: Armed and Educated published by Texas Law Shield, LLP