The defensive gun use itself may not attract charges, but you'd need a great lawyer to avoid being charged with felon in possession- in order to defend yourself with a firearm (or, of more interest to LE, to use the firearm in other ways), you very likely have to be in at least 'constructive possession', in that the weapon is readily available to you, and you know it's there. If the State doesn't think it can prove both of those elements, or indeed a very forgiving DA decides it's not in the public interest to argue a weak case, you won't be charged.
A felon unthinkingly grabbing his wife's usually-secured, legally held firearm as he feels he's physically better equipped to take on burglars might expect leniency, and idiot 'gangsta' types posing with firearms can be a tough prosecution as you have to prove it was legally a firearm, but declining to prosecute Grosskreutz, who was videoed in actual possession, made extremely incriminating statements, and was carrying the gun while engaged in other felonies, seems like wild abuse of discretion.
Edit to add- here's a case where a felon in actual possession successfully argued privilege- it's pretty important that Coleman didn't have the gun on his person, and he only exercised control over it while in fear for his life inside a family member's home- the felon's privilege is restricted to the following circumstances:
We thus conclude that a narrow defense of privilege under Wis. Stat. § 939.45(6) exists to a charge of felon in possession of a firearm. In order to be entitled to the defense, the defendant must prove:
(1) the defendant was under an unlawful, present, imminent, and impending threat of such a nature as to induce a wellgrounded apprehension of death or serious bodily injury, or the defendant reasonably believes he or she is under such a threat;
(2) the defendant did not recklessly or negligently place himself or herself in a situation in which it was probable that he or she would be forced to possess a firearm;
(3) the defendant had no reasonable, legal alternative to possessing a firearm, or reasonably believed that he or she had no such alternative; in other words, the defendant did not have a chance to refuse to possess the firearm and also to avoid the threatened harm, or reasonably believed that he or she did not have such a chance;
(4) a direct causal relationship may be reasonably anticipated between possessing the firearm and the avoidance of the threatened harm;
(5) the defendant did not possess the firearm for any longer than reasonably necessary.
The defensive gun use itself may not attract charges, but you'd need a great lawyer to avoid being charged with felon in possession- in order to defend yourself with a firearm (or, of more interest to LE, to use the firearm in other ways), you very likely have to be in at least 'constructive possession', in that the weapon is readily available to you, and you know it's there. If the State doesn't think it can prove both of those elements, or indeed a very forgiving DA decides it's not in the public interest to argue a weak case, you won't be charged.
A felon unthinkingly grabbing his wife's usually-secured, legally held firearm as he feels he's physically better equipped to take on burglars might expect leniency, and idiot 'gangsta' types posing with firearms can be a tough prosecution as you have to prove it was legally a firearm, but declining to prosecute Grosskreutz, who was videoed in actual possession, made extremely incriminating statements, and was carrying the gun while engaged in other felonies, seems like wild abuse of discretion.
Edit to add- here's a case where a felon in actual possession successfully argued privilege- it's pretty important that Coleman didn't have the gun on his person, and he only exercised control over it while in fear for his life inside a family member's home- the felon's privilege is restricted to the following circumstances: