Those statutes do NOT declare B&E to be a violent crime. They justify deadly force against an intruder, true. But that doesn't define B&E to be violent.
I believe it is legal in Texas to use deadly force against a mere trespasser at night. Do you therefore believe that trespass is a violent crime?
I think you're missing my point, FRiend.
I am NOT trying to defend the perp, nor am I arguing that he should not have been shot.
My ONLY criticism of the article is that the author misused the word "violent." The perp wasn't violent, given the information from the article.
He just wasn't.
The author shouldn't have used the word that way. That he did so only made the article sound desperate to justify the shooting. It was justified anyway, regardless of the perp's "violence."
He may have BECOME violent at some point, if he hadn't been shot, but up to that point he wasn't.
Okay, what part of “with force” doesn’t imply violence?