Carpundit writes about an incident in Lawrence, where a crime victim was charged for shooting his assailant. I tend to agree with him about the appropriateness of going after the victim, although I understand the legal rationale.

I recall reading about a case, some time ago, where a police officer, on the ground after being shot, managed to shoot the shooter in the back as he was walking away. I believe the bad guy sued the cop (whom he had shot first!) because, as in the local case, the assault was past and the threat was over.

Again, technically right, but the decision to go after the good guy just doesn't pass the smell test.