'Shoot first' laws make it tougher for burglars in the United States
From a self defense stand point you are always balancing the risk with the amount of force. By definition someone breaking into your home is a dangerous situation. I would like to solve the problem with the minimum amount of force, and I am not all that concerned with my possessions.

I would like to solve the scenario as a tactical problem rather than a shooting problem. I would arm myself, dial 911, clear as much of my house as is necessary to make sure my family is safe, get cover and begin issuing verbal commands. This plan accomplishes the goals of protecting the people I care about and using the least amount of force necessary.

The anti-gunner response in the article screams: "I don't understand the issue:"

But for the Freedom States Alliance that fights against the proliferation of firearms in the United States, these new laws attach more value to threatened belongings than to the life of the thief and only serve to increase the number of people killed by firearms each year, which currently is estimated to stand at nearly 30,000.

When the window breaks there isn't very much information about the intent of the invader. Is he coming for your TV or your children? He is getting shot because while the intrusion is consistent with stealing the TV, it is also consistent with serial murderer-rapist behavior. The same people who wouldn't let their kids ride bikes without helmets are willing to risk that the person who puts a crowbar through the window that they aren't their to hurt the kids?