No reasonable, intelligent person will buy your argument. I'm all in favor of self defense, but no reasonable person is going to be putting rounds downrange like this guy did. I actually had a situation seven months ago where two thugs were trying to break into my motel room through the balcony slider. I grabbed my Glock 23 and put it up against the glass. As soon as the thugs heard it tapping the glass and saw what is was, they bolted. My trigger finger was pointing straight forward, parallel to the slide the entire time. At no time did I consider firing a round, as the threat ended as soon as they saw I was armed. Had they continued to press their entry after they saw me, I would have waited for them to breach the slider. Had that happened, and they forced their way into my room, then I would have been justified in using deadly force, because I would have been in fear for my life and my wife's life. But this guy in Massachusetts, he screwed up big time and he will pay the price. Not only that, he just gave the anti-gun crowd more ammunition in their fight to destroy the Second Amendment.
There is no duty to retreat inside your home against strangers.
Some states even have that extended to the property line.
What I am stating is that regardless of any laws that any government writes to the contrary it is the natural, God-given right of every person to protect themselves and their property. Laws may vary by state and many states would never prosecute this guy (it is called federalism, look it up).
It appears that Massachusetts is one of those states who trammel on the people’s right to self-defense and that is what jury nullification is for.
Feral, drunk, teenaged men have killed, maimed, and robbed a lot of people from time immemorial. If that’s a game that teenagers want to play then they have to be prepared to die as a consequence.