[Shooter 2.5]

Easy.
A female store clerk shoots and kills a male as he's coming around the counter armed with a hammer.

The store does not sell hammers.

Are you going to tell me a veteran officer can't find the evidence in that scenario to "no bill" the clerk without the case going to trial?

[WL-law]

Easy.
A female store clerk shoots and kills a male as he's coming around the counter armed with a hammer.
The store does not sell hammers.
Are you going to tell me a veteran officer can't find the evidence in that scenario to "no bill" the clerk without the case going to trial?

Well, before we were talking about "defense of property". Now you are talking about self-defense, and that right exists anywhere -- but the facts must support it. The law recognizes a greater right to use lethal force based on all the facts and physical characteristics -- so the judgment call will be easier when a woman is defending against a man, and I think the your conclusion is right in your hypo.

But in the case we were talking about, 2 men had guns, and surprised the assailant -- not the other way around. I find it implausible that they didn't have a way to stop the burglar without using deadly force -- but again that's what trials are for.