Which situation justifies the use of deadly force according to the guidelines?

The use of deadly force is justified primarily when there is an imminent threat to life, particularly your own or that of an innocent person. This aligns with moral and legal standards that prioritize the protection of human life above property or other concerns. Guidelines surrounding the use of force often stipulate that it should be proportional to the threat faced, and when there is a reasonable belief that there is a risk of death or serious bodily harm, deadly force may be warranted. This principle is grounded in the right to self-defense and the responsibility to safeguard others from grave threats.

Other situations presented do not provide a sufficient basis for the application of deadly force. For instance, preventing property theft typically does not escalate to the level of threat that would warrant such a response. Public disturbances, while potentially dangerous, are generally managed through non-lethal means unless they pose an immediate risk to safety. Similarly, a suspect fleeing the scene poses a challenge, but the flight itself does not typically justify the use of deadly force unless it is accompanied by a direct threat to someone's life. The emphasis on defending human life is what makes the second option the correct and most justified choice in this context.