At what point is it justifiable to draw on an unarmed person?

Lets say you end up in a situation where you have an angry dude yelling and making threats. Maybe you bumped into him while walking down the street or maybe he followed you into a parking lot after thinking that you cut him off in traffic. Could just be a random dude with a chip on his shoulder.So anyways, you do what you can to deescalate. You don't engage in an argument, you back away, you try to just keep walking but he persists in his threats.At what point in this type of scenario do you have a right to pull out your gun and warn the guy to back off? I've had some people claim that unless he actually strikes you, you are in the wrong but that just sounds flat out wrong. All it takes is one well placed punch with enough force and at best you're stunned and at worst you're knocked out and seriously injured or possibly dead.What really scares me about a situation like this would be one that takes place with no witnesses or cameras. Say you end up having to shoot someone and they're not armed, how do you prove to the police it was justified? In a case like that, having a busted lip or black eye would clearly be helpful, but again, once a person gets that first punch off, you never know if you're going to be able to defend yourself.I feel a bit silly asking this as I'm taking my CPL class this weekend and will certainly gain a better understanding, but it's been driving me crazy thinking about this type of scenario.Thanks for your replies. via /r/CCW https://ift.tt/3ECZZcZ