Some of the recent car break-ins, the thieves shoot at the homeowners while they retreat. His claims certainly are possible. It’s also possible he’s making it up to justify his own actions. Other evidence lacking, I choose to give him the benefit of the doubt as he was not the instigator.

You’re getting down voted but are 100% correct. Retreating = getting shot in the back which is unjustifiable.

Edit: some also mentioned that the guy was “reaching” while he was running. Dude was still running. Regardless of whether or not the thief was a piece of shit self defense ended when pursuit began.

Like all legal things in self defense related cases, it's tricky. It's one thing if your assailant was using something like a knife or their fists to hurt someone and then opts to flee. At that point, they no longer have the capacity to harm others as long as everyone keeps their distance, so unless they're perceived as being on the move to hurt someone else (which you would need to prove), you're right in that that would be a bad shoot. However, that sort of proximity phenomenon is off the table with a gun. You can very easily fire a weapon while retreating, and someone with a gun on the move can still pose a threat almost instantly. The assailant firing blindly without even turning is a possibility, and all they have to do is get lucky. All this to say, it's not super clear cut when a gun is perceived to be involved, though his perception on the presence of a firearm is a different discussion and one that will certainly come up alongside this.

Cops shoot people running away from them all the time.

Same thing happened to this guy in newtown. A few kids from waterbury were taking things out of his car in the middle of the night. He came out, they all ran, and he ended up shooting the girl in the back.

[removed]

His mistake was yelling. Shoot first.