[longtermmemmory]

there is no duty to retreat in your home.

there is no “be nice clause” for home intruders.

[Dead Corpse]

It does make you wonder. How many times do criminals exercise such restraint when the tables are turned the other way round.

What happened to them was their fault by their initiation of theft. They broke into this guys house, and not for the first time. The authorities did nothing effective, as usual.

So we come to this. There was no overt malice here. He just defended his home and took out the trash. There will be no recidivism problem here.

Drug addicts thieving to support their habit are nothing to mourn when they meet a sticky end.

[TurboZamboni]

MN does not have "castle doctrine". If a prosecutor were out to get you(you're a 'tea party' type or vocal 2A supporter) he/she could go after you, although a jury is not likely to buy the 'duty to retreat' in the home.

[tanknetter]

there is no duty to retreat in your home.

there is no “be nice clause” for home intruders.

We're not talking about the guy either retreating or "be(ing) nice."

He shot the girl. Which from my perspective is just fine (although as soon as he noticed on his CCTV system that they were in close to the house he should have called the cops - they wouldn't have arrived until the break-in compelled him to shoot anyways.)

As she was down on the floor bleeding out (which, again, is fine to me - he's under no obligation to render medical assistance himself - although he WAS obligated to call 911 at that point), he apparently went, got a DIFFERENT gun, came back, called her a b*tch, put the gun up to her head and pulled the trigger.

THAT'S not acting in self defense. That's staging an execution.

Do you not understand the difference between the two as they relate to this case?