Several criteria points must be met when using Deadly Force in Nevada, and they create an acronym JAM:
1. JEAPORDY: Has the assailant put you in "jeopardy" (danger) of grievous bodily harm or death against you or another?
2. ABILITY: Does the assailant have the "ability" (physical means) to inflict grievous bodily harm or death against you or another?
3. MEANS: Does the assailant have the "means" (a weapon) to inflict grievous bodily harm or death against you or another?
If all three of the above criteria points are met then Deadly Force would be authorized if the individual being attacked could clearly articulate that he/she were truly in fear of their life being taken.
"Bare Fear" in Nevada is not a defense to using deadly force.
One could argue "Preclusion." Def: To make impossible, as by action taken in advance; prevent.
The other side of the preclusion argument is that it is not always possible to preclude because the victim at the time of attack might not have a “clear avenue” of escape without putting himself/herself in further danger of death or grievous bodily harm.
Example #1: A person is confronted/attacked on the 10th story of a parking structure by an assailant meeting the "JAM" criteria. In this instance the victim clearly has an avenue of escape, but jumping off a 10 story parking structure would be certain death for the victim.
Example #2: A person is confronted/attacked in their garage by an assailant meeting the "JAM" criteria. In this scenario the victim has an unlocked door leading from the garage to the inside of the home. The victim clearly has an avenue of escape; therefore the victim could possibly retreat to safety, lock the door and call police.
If deadly force were applied by the victim in the latter, it could be argued that the victim could have retreated to relative safety without the use of deadly force.
No matter how you slice it, the preponderance of the use of deadly force relies solely on the victim’s ability to articulate the fact that they were “truly” in fear of their life being taken, or that they felt that grievous body harm would be inflicted upon them at the time of the attack.
Let me add that more often than not the victim does not have enough time to employ the preclusion option in a violent/deadly force confrontation. Therefore, there is no concrete answer to this question, as every shooting or defensive application is judged on the individual circumstances of the defending action.
Please don’t take the above as legal advice. I suggest that you always consult a criminal defense attorney if you are in question of your self-defense responsibilities.
Just my 2 pennies.....