Even in self-defense, can you afford to pull the trigger?

Had he not had his gun on him that night, Bryce Fortier believes he could be dead. Which is why, despite the aftermath, he still carries his pistol.

If he ever finds himself in the same situation, he says he would pull the trigger again - even if he can't afford to.

RCW 9A.16.110
Defending against violent crime — Reimbursement.

(1) No person in the state shall be placed in legal jeopardy of any kind whatsoever for protecting by any reasonable means necessary, himself or herself, his or her family, or his or her real or personal property, or for coming to the aid of another who is in imminent danger of or the victim of assault, robbery, kidnapping, arson, burglary, rape, murder, or any other violent crime as defined in RCW 9.94A.030.

(2) When a person charged with a crime listed in subsection (1) of this section is found not guilty by reason of self-defense, the state of Washington shall reimburse the defendant for all reasonable costs, including loss of time, legal fees incurred, and other expenses involved in his or her defense. This reimbursement is not an independent cause of action. To award these reasonable costs the trier of fact must find that the defendant's claim of self-defense was sustained by a preponderance of the evidence. If the trier of fact makes a determination of self-defense, the judge shall determine the amount of the award.

(3) Notwithstanding a finding that a defendant's actions were justified by self-defense, if the trier of fact also determines that the defendant was engaged in criminal conduct substantially related to the events giving rise to the charges filed against the defendant the judge may deny or reduce the amount of the award. In determining the amount of the award, the judge shall also consider the seriousness of the initial criminal conduct.

Nothing in this section precludes the legislature from using the sundry claims process to grant an award where none was granted under this section or to grant a higher award than one granted under this section.

(4) Whenever the issue of self-defense under this section is decided by a judge, the judge shall consider the same questions as must be answered in the special verdict under subsection (4) [(5)] of this section.

(5) Whenever the issue of self-defense under this section has been submitted to a jury, and the jury has found the defendant not guilty, the court shall instruct the jury to return a special verdict in substantially the following form: ......

Assault victim fatally shoots assailant outside Westlake Center
Seattle police are still piecing together what happened, but this much is known: A young man was killed on the crowded sidewalk outside Westlake Center, and the confessed shooter was allowed to walk out of a police station.

The man was arrested, but after questioning him and other witnesses, detectives determined they did not have probable cause to book him into the King County Jail. The man was released.

How could somebody afford not to?

Money aint no good without your whole tribe intact.

To me, (YMMV), it seems these laws are written to convince/persuade you NOT to take the law into your own hands. i.e. bleed 'em dry
Only LEO's that are above the law seem to ever get away with - defending themselves or others. (job perks)
They don't want plain citizens defending themselves. It does not matter if the bad guy had the prez in a head lock with a gun pointed at his head and you, average Joe, decide to put a round in the bad guys head with all three networks cameras rolling.
Even though you had plenty of confirmed witnesses, you would still be charged for saving that worthless POS's life.

I.M.O.