What's your opinion? Did it sound like the home owner had a truly life threatening situation on his hands? Wasn't he close enough to shoot the kid in the arm or hand? What about a warning shot?
It seems to me these castle-doctrine guys are hiding behind the law which in certain circumstances is a license to kill. What they're really operating on is outrage and disgust that some punk would dare to violate their sacred space. Fear of their life has nothing to do with it.
What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.
