Road Rage and Self Defense

[casingpoint]

A person acts recklessly, or is reckless, with respect to circumstances surrounding his conduct or the result of his conduct when he is aware of but consciously disregards a substantial and unjustifiable risk that the circumstances exist or the result will occur.

That pretty well encompasses going about in public today in and around Houston.

[HankB]

But after you've ticked someone off on the road, and you see them follow you into a parking lot, it's probably a safe assumption that you have seriously ticked them off.

Which leads me to ask another question.

The deliveryman told detectives that the man who had just exchanged words and gestures with him, followed him into the store and pulled a knife.

Depending upon what, precisely, the deliveryman told detectives, is it possible that PC §9.32.(2) ("...did not provoke the person against whom the force was used...) might come into play in this case?

If the deliveryman admits--not saying he did; just a hypothetical--that he did, in fact, participate in the exchange of words and gestures with the other driver, could the issue of provocation be brought into this?

This sounds like a possible case of escalation.

In every CHL class I've taken, a lot of emphasis was placed on DE-escalation; even if you did nothing to start a confrontation, by reacting in what some might see as a belligerent manner, you can end up being seen as partially liable.

So on those (fortunately) very rare instances that a road-rager takes exception to my driving, I smile, shrug, wave, and let the miserable so-and-so think I'm apologizing for whatever he thinks I did. He gets to drive off thinking he's Alpha Male King of the Road, and I don't have to employ deadly force to defend myself or my passengers. That's a good ending for me. (And if he DOES push it to the extreme, I feel secure legally, ethically, and morally that I did NOTHING to make the situation worse.)