Oregon: 161.219 Limitations on use of deadly physical force in defense of a person. Notwithstanding the provisions of ORS 161.209, a person is not justified in using deadly physical force upon another person unless the person reasonably believes that the other person is: (1) Committing or attempting to commit a felony involving the use or threatened imminent use of physical force against a person; or (2) Committing or attempting to commit a burglary in a dwelling; or (3) Using or about to use unlawful deadly physical force against a person. [1971 c.743 §23] the rub in this statute is that it is not the final reality that determines it, but the "reasonable belief" of the person using using the deadly force. for instance, if you honestly believe that someone is going to use deadly force against you, and that belief is reasonable, then you are justified to use deadly force. case law is full of examples to illustrate this. the cases for instance where the police officer chases the felon down and yells for him to stop and "freeze", but the idiot reaches into his pocket instead and the cop shoots him. whether the guy was reaching for a gun or a lighter or his cell phone doesn't matter, just the reasonable belief on the part of the cop that he was reaching for a gun is enough. clear? lol. oregon law is always a work in progress. as to lawsuits, the old axiom is that there is no fence around the courthouse, anyone can sue anyone for anything. collecting is another thing. follow the law, use reason and common sense and only act if you have no other alternative left and you will be fine.