[Kevin]

Homeowners have rights as well -- the right to be secure in their own homes from burglars, for example.

I think the policy here is that the law allows the homeowner to shoot before a situation threatening her life comes to fruition.

When legislators write these sorts of statutes, they're looking at a situation where if they define homeowners' rights too broadly, a few burglars will lose their lives. On the other hand, if they define homeowners' rights too narrowly, either there will be deaths or injuries dealt to those who are trying to comply with the law, e.g., observing a duty to retreat, etc., or there will be prosecutions of individuals who are really only trying to defend their homes.

Yeah, vigilantism is bad. I think that from a law and order standpoint, what this guy did was morally corrupt, however, I don't know if he actually broke the law -- I don't really think he did.