[Melusine]

Exactly Dave, what a great post!
What I've always wanted to ask is this: why are some people so quick to yell "I'll kill the bastard whot walks into my house!!" First of all, I think guns ARE part of the problem. Since less people have guns where I live, most burglars will NOT expect violence if they are caught, and hence will not kill the inhabitants of a house they burgle "to be on the safe side" (mentioning this because it's an argument I often hear). So since burglars usually just steal stuff and flee when caught, there is less chance they'll feel the need to bring a gun to defend themselves. But let's not get into that gun debate again... the point I'm working towards is: if you cannot be sure a thief will kill you and your family, why shoot them dead the first chance you get? To me that IS excessive force. Look, if the guy enters your bedroom, sure I would say there's a reasonable chance he's a threat. But like I said, where I live most of them enter your house planning to STEAL, not to MURDER. Most of the time they flee when they fear the inhabitants heard them.
So why would you shoot to kill? Why not shoot in both kneecaps if you're "only" defending yourself?
I can totally understand that if you have a reasonable fear you or your family is in danger, that you'd want to make sure nothing happens to them. But why always shoot to kill? Why do I never hear someone "I'll shoot him in the legs" or somewhere else that has less chance of being lethal.
Murder IS worse than theft! Of course the thief is totally wrong for entering your house, and the consequences are his own fault. But YOU determine what those precise consequences are, and I for one cannot understand the ease with which people condemn themselves to having killed a person.