I understand your comments, Big, but I still have concerns. I appreciate the somewhat flowery rhetoric about the undertaker but the bottom line is whether we might willingly shoot someone in the back, someone who was clearly fleeing, clearly not a physical threat, after stealing a candy bar?
I could not do that, shoot someone in the back for theft of 15cents' worth of goods. Maybe others here could do that with impunity. Not I.
And I might also end up in serious legal problems too.
Not my cuppa tea. I have assumed a pretty considerable responsibility in having a lethal weapon and I think that it's my responsibility to use or not use that weapon responsibly, and that doesn't include a "zero tolerance" attitude toward theft. We, as a society, used to cut off someone's hand for stealing a loaf of bread. Islamic extremists would still enjoy that. Again, not my cuppa tea.
Your, um, "essay" on lethal force is pretty rigid and a far too draconian for my own standards of what I think constitutes self defense. And shooting someone in the back while fleeing a petty theft doesn't rise to the occasion.
I'm not too big on burning at the stake for blasphemy, either.