Is the use of deadly force justified if a security guard is attacked with a knife?

The justification for using deadly force in a situation where a security guard is attacked with a knife is based on the principle of self-defense. A security guard has the right to protect themselves from imminent and serious harm. If the guard reasonably believes that their life or the lives of others are in immediate danger due to the attack, using deadly force can be considered justifiable as a means of self-preservation.

Self-defense laws generally dictate that individuals may use reasonable force to defend themselves against an imminent threat. When facing an armed attacker with a knife, the perceived threat to life can be immediate and significant, justifying the use of deadly force to neutralize that threat. The crucial factor is that the guard must have a reasonable belief that their life is under direct threat.

In contrast, using deadly force might be viewed differently in more ambiguous situations or where alternative responses may exist. As a result, while the context and specifics of each incident can be critical, the general principle remains that if the threat is perceived as deadly and immediate, then the use of deadly force could be logically justified.