With this case, it's actually pretty quite hard to kill someone by grabbing them around the neck. Although it sounds bad, the reality is that it takes some work to get someone by the throat/trachea (the classic Marine move), it takes a while to get someone to pass out (MMA) style, and it's really hard to break someone's vertebrae.
Entirely incorrect. As someone who has been on both ends of multiple styles of MMA/Jiu-Jitsu chokes and strangles, you can lose conciousness in less than 7 seconds if applied properly. And during the seven seconds the "ride" is not a pleasant one. Your ability to react and defend appropriately
with years of force on force training is a few seconds at best.
The average able-bodied adult male is cannon fodder for chokes and strangles when applied with ill intent from a trained individual.
Now, in fairness to the above comment and unarmed attackers in general, there is a very small portion of the general population that is versed in these techniques, and a smaller portion still that would use them for evil ends. My two cents here is that if someone grabs your neck/throat in an unarmed conflict, you are in SERIOUS trouble and should react by whatever means necessary to mitigate the threat.
Which brings us to "What is mitigation"? Is it shooting the person? Possibly. In the event that there are multiple assailants, and you are being strangled/choked (the two attacks will be considered interchangeable from this point on) in for example a prone position with your assailant on top of you, you're Goddamn right that this is a "deadly force" encounter.
This person is clearly attempting to kill you, and there are other threats present as well. I don't know of anyone strangling someone "halfway" to prove a point. I'm sure it's happened, but it's fringe area for sure. In this instance, I as a private citizen, life-long unarmed combat practicioner and responsible law-abiding adult view this as a righteous shoot.
Now, a different scenario where someone puts his hand on the back of your neck as you are engaged in a fist fight (This is very common in a boxing-style "Tie up" or a Muay Thai "clinch"). You are still in a unarmed conflict where bodily injury of some type is all but guaranteed, but the threat of grave injury or death is signifigantly less. Here, unless the victim is a 5 foot tall woman of 100 pounds and the assailant is very large man, you've got the makings of a fist fight. Do I stick to my original statement that you are in trouble when someone has a hold of your neck during an unarmed conflict?
Absolutely. From this position, knees to the face, elbows to the temple, head butts and a host of other close range attacks can be delivered with devastating results. I would mitigate the scenario, not by shooting the person, but by responding in kind.
The point here is that any unwelcome contact to the neck or throat should taken VERY seriously, and dealt with quickly and efficiently.
Although this will happen right around the time pigs fly, were something like this (a choking self-defense scenario) to make it to trial, I'd like to have each juror choked almost to the point of unconciousness at some point during the trial proceedings (obviously for the "experience" with their consent). The post that stated that we as a species have gotten removed from the wild was 100% true.