A fair number of idiots think you can shoot somebody to protect property....car prowlers, trespassers, porch pirates and such. A righteous use requires a threat to human life. There are specific criteria that define what constitutes a reasonable expectation/fear of bodily harm justifying a lethal force response.
Even then a CPL holder should be fully aware of the considerable civil liability associated with lawful use...as the survivor or their family generally presses forward for damages from the loss of their splendid family member.
A well constructed CPL training course will discuss such issues in considerable depth, including how to minimize civil liability should such a tragedy occur.
Plaintiff's attorney will do everything they can to paint the CPL holder as a gun loving lunatic who loves to shoot people.
Krusty, some states, you can legally do MOST of what you're not liking there. In some cases, theft of movable property, especially at night, the theif pretty much forfiets their rights under the law, and the property owners have the right to use lethal force to stop them..
" Castle Doctrine" as it's commonly known. Reality; as you know, it doesnt apply in all states. Massachusetts, for example, requires you to flee your home before you can fire in "self defense".
I've done CCL/CCW classes in 3 states over the years I'd traveled state to state for work. Each presented the Force Continuim concept as part of the training, but it wasn't emphasized as much as it should have been. As in, only one chapter covered it for under 30 minutes when I took the class in Texas in 97. Pennsylvania about the same, and South Carolina just mentioned it in passing.
Conversely, training for private security in TX, we spent a full state mandated 8 hours on it, and some people still didn't get it.
That's really sad, because if you have a good grasp on the Force Continuim, you quickly realize that you need to learn other defensive methods other than just reaching for the firearm first.
The writings of Massad Ayoob are a good place to start for anyone interested in legally carrying a firearm for defense of self and family. In this day and age, you can and will, get sued for legally defending yourself, and he covers that.
None of these proposals are going to stop criminals from getting and using illegally obtained firearms. None of them pass the smell test under Bruen or Heller. All these will continue to do is further the illegal disarmament of law abiding citizens.
