Self defense law in PA allows for: "A private citizen is justified in using the same amount of force as if he were directed to prevent the crime by a peace officer,
except that lethal force may not be used unless the defendant reasonably believes that it is necessary to prevent death or serious bodily injury to himself or another. At the direction of a peace officer, a private citizen need not retreat from making a lawful arrest, and may use any force he believes necessary to defend himself or another from bodily harm while making the arrest."
ALSO...
U.S. courts are split with respect to an additional factor in the lawfulness of the use of deadly force in self-defense. A minority of jurisdictions require a victim to retreat to the wall if it is safe to do so, before using deadly force. ‘Retreat to the wall’ is generally construed to mean taking any reasonable and apparent avenue of exit. However, even minority jurisdictions do not require retreat under three circumstances.
There is no duty to retreat from one’s own home, if one is being or has been robbed or raped, or if the victim is a police-officer making a lawful arrest. In 1996 the Pennsylvania Superior Court held that "although a person is afforded discretion in determining necessity, level and manner of force to defend one’s self, the right to use force in self defense is a qualified, not an absolute right."
Pennsylvania is a retreat jurisdiction.
If I'm reading that right... you did right. Shooting them would have put YOU in jail, since they were no longer a threat to yourself or your family when they ran away.
All of this comes from Peter Hobart. The full article is at:
http://www.ittendojo.org/articles/general-4.htm
Please read his disclaimer at the end of his post. As always there's "wiggle" room in the law, and you never know what the judge or jury will do.