A Nashville, TN man was the victim of a home invasion but was able to turn the attack against the suspect by taking the attacker’s gun away and using it against him.
The resident told police that he disarmed the suspect and that he “shot several times at the suspect causing him to flee.”
Witnesses saw a man running down the street after the shots, and a short time later, a man matching the description of the suspect walked into a medical center with gunshot wounds to his hip and shoulder.
Police said the resident’s door “was forced open consistent with the statement of the resident.”
Going hands-on with an armed home invader is seriously risky. It’s much better to have your own gun than attempting to take one from your attacker.
Since there was clear evidence of a forced break-in by an armed suspect, deadly force most likely would have been justified by a resident with his own gun. But once the suspect has been disarmed, is he still a deadly force threat? He certainly could be, but what if the resident had shot the suspect as he was fleeing?
Entry wounds could show evidence of the resident shooting as the suspect was fleeing. I’m not suggesting that’s what happened, we don’t have that evidence, but we all must keep in mind that we can no longer use deadly force when the threat is over.
Shooting to end a physical attack might be justified self-defense to get someone off of you. Continuing to shoot a fleeing suspect could be attempted murder. It’s so important that you know the law ahead of time, so you don’t fall into that kind of trap.