The problem arises when everyone who matters doesn't agree that the shooting was justified. Sometimes someone may use his gun in what he believes is justified self defense, but he doesn't have the final say as to whether or not it's a "good shoot." If the DA or grand jury doesn't agree, he winds up on trial. Now it's not a "good shoot" until the jury decides it is.
I agree. But there has to be some reasonable basis for a prosecution. Without a reasonable basis, it is unlikely a prosecution will move forward. If everyone that matters agrees the shooting was unjustified, then there may be some merit to that conclusion.
That is what is troubling to me about the ACLDN. If there is sufficient evidence to send a matter to a grand jury, and that grand jury decides there is enough evidence to send the case to trial, is it likely the ACLDN will conclude the prosecution is wrongful? I don't know. I don't know what they consider in their decision making process.
Meritless prosecutions occur, no doubt. But in my experience they are rare.
More likely the shooter will become the victim of a meritless lawsuit.
BTW, this is a good topic. I wish more gun owners would think about how they would handle the fall-out from a self-defense shooting.