Well, not really. Scott actually pulled his gun on three teens who were in the process of breaking into a neighbors car and when one of the teens lunged at him he shot twice. He wasn’t hit or knocked to the ground and head cracked open. Either way I think it was reasonable to shoot but I’m not sure about twice.
He did the right thing by firing twice. Handgun bullets don't usually stop a healthy young man in his tracks, especially if he's drunk on alcohol or drugs. A .44 magnum or a .50 S&W round might do the job, but those revolvers aren't usually employed for self defense purposes. If God forbid my life is ever endangered by an attacker I will fire my .38 spl or .45 acp until he goes down, my gun is empty, or I am overcome because my shots are missing or aren't taking affect quickly enough. The rule of thumb in almost all of those situations is that if you have just cause to use deadly force you have just cause to use it effectively no matter how many shots are fired or what the final outcome may be.
I'm certainly no expert on that sort of thing, but the above sums up what I have read that was written by people who are experts in that field, or at least they claim to be. Use it at your own discretion.
I would have emptied the clip . . .