[Dead Corpse]

By defending his actions and claiming that they were acceptable and that any armed citizen would or should do the same, is to proclaim that we are lawbreakers and that we lack the self-control necessary to discern between right and wrong.

Wrong. There is nothing more "just" than an intended victim turning the tables on their aggressor. The matter of punishment is entirely up to the person who had force/fraud/theft initiated against them. That the law limits a victims response is the true injustice.

How many times have we heard about revolving door justice and the law not applying equally? That thieves like this have long careers specifically BECAUSE the law limits what victims can do to stop them.

[wideawake]

The matter of punishment is entirely up to the person who had force/fraud/theft initiated against them.

This statement highlights the flaws in your analysis.

Self-defense has absolutely nothing to do with punishment.

No homeowner has any right mete out punishment as if he were judge, jury and executioner.

If the homeowner sees himself as doling out punishment, he has already crossed the threshold from legitimate self-defense into assault/murder.

A homeowner has a right to defend himself - and to use deadly force if necessary.

He has no right, or privilege, or authority to take revenge or mete out punishment.

That's lawlessness.