On 28/5, the Park City Police Department in Summit County, Utah, received a report about a man threatening family members with scissors and exhibiting violent behavior. When officers arrived, the suspect fled and broke into John Santy's home to hide.

Santy discovered the shirtless, tattooed suspect in his kitchen and immediately drew his gun. "Get on the floor now. I will shoot," Santy shouted at the intruder in a video recording of the event. The suspect initially moved forward but retreated and lay down after hearing Santy cock the gun.

Santy did not shoot. He continued to hold the intruder at gunpoint until police crossed his patio and arrested the man. "I didn't want to shoot him, I didn't want to do that," Santy told local media after the incident.

Santy holds a gun to subdue the man who broke into his home in Utah, US. Video: X/Ochoa

The story quickly spread on social media, igniting a debate in the US about how homeowners should act during a home invasion. Many praised Santy for his composure and restraint in the situation.

"He clearly had gun training, knew how to control the suspect at gunpoint until police arrived, and didn't need to pull the trigger. This is the type of responsible gun owner," one social media user commented.

Others stated they would have acted more decisively if they were in Santy's situation. "If someone breaks into my house while my family is inside, they have chosen to give up their life," one person said.

Another user suggested that from a legal, financial, and personal safety standpoint, a homeowner might be "safer" if they shot the intruder.

John Santy points a gun at the man who broke into his home in Utah, US. Photo: X/Ochoa

However, lawyer Clayton Simms clarified that this interpretation is not entirely accurate. Citizens have the right to defend themselves and others in their homes, but using a firearm must be considered based on the nature and urgency of the threat.

"In this case, using the gun as deterrence proved effective," Simms said. "The gun scared the intruder and made him comply. He heard the gun cock, and I think that was part of the reason he stopped being aggressive."

Simms added that if a homeowner had shot in this scenario, police and prosecutors would later assess whether there were options to subdue the intruder without shooting. If the intruder shows compliance, continued use of force is no longer necessary.

"You cannot shoot a person in the back just because they are in your house," the lawyer stated, noting that using force always carries risks. Even without criminal prosecution, a homeowner could face a civil lawsuit in such cases.

However, prosecutors also consider other factors, such as physical disparity. "He was much bigger, much more muscular than me," Santy described the intruder last week.

Duc Trung (According to KUTV, KTLA, Salt Lake Tribune)