Brooklyn
I stand with John Locke.
Pursuit Discussion: Just because the owner is armed, is he not allowed to pursue to try to see what direction the thieves went? or what make,model, color vehicle they fled in? That would help law enforcement and aid recovery.
Now if in the pursuit, the perps turned and advanced, the pursuer would be required, outside his store, to retreat rather than use deadly force.
If the perps turned, the pursuer began to retreat, never having fired a shot, and then the perps start to fire at him (I know in this case they only had a hammer, but this is a what is question), Is he allowed to return fire? ie- did his initial pursuit forever negate his "in mortal fear defense", or does the escalation of the perps by firing change the situation. ie- when he followed them out of the store, he was not in mortal fear, but when they turned, he became in mortal fear? Or did the act of his following while armed put the perps in mortal fear and allow them to fire?
What does anyone think?
Pursuit by itself is as far as I know not unlawful. But it makes problems when you claim mortal fear , fire,miss and then pursue.
My advice don't.. Especially if suspect is armed.. its a good way to walk i to an ambush out side now that his friends have arrived...
Or you could run,gun in hand, into a responding officer operating under the assumption of a "shots fired" call... or even "officer neededs assistance" and " shots fired.. I do not want to be there.
Now the guy is on video. Good Chance he has a record... it a risks reward situation ... to much risk very little reward....
Legal issues are only one factor....
Ianal.