If someone broke into my house I could kill them but I would probably hit them over the head with the baseball bat then when they are knocked out I call the police and they arrest him. If its for self defense purposes sure I think its alright.

Someone mugs me for my money. I kill the mugger in self defense.

I defended my property when the mugger threatened me with theft and violence, 100% justifiable.

Hell yeah.

If I stroll out my bedroom for a midnight toke and see a criminal inside my home, going through and taking my shit, you can bet your ass he's getting a bullet in the head. Or kneecap, if I'm feeling generous.

Actually I'd probably just beat him down with a baseball bat or something. Upon reflection there are a lot of other tenants around me that would likely catch a stray shot if I started shooting my gun in my living room.

Well, according to John Locke, who is the foremost philosopher of the American political system, believed that property was what brought about government. He believed that in a state of nature, people could live successfully outside of society; however, there was no assurance of retaining property. Therefore, the only reason for the institution of a government is to help retain property. So, if you believe that the government is a good thing, then you also believe that property is a good thing. If you believe that property is a good thing, then you, along with Locke, believe that it is a fundamental right of humans; for if you do not have the right to property then you do not have the right to have anything. And because we all have the duty to defend our rights and the rights of others, we would have the right to defend our property by any means necessary; for the only reason someone would threaten your property would be if you were in a state of war with him. Continued, if the government, which is given authority by the majority, rules that killing someone is bad even while protecting your property, then you still have the right to defend your property; for if your life is your unalienable right and you have the duty to defend it, then so too would property be as long as no law enforcement was capable of immediate aid in defense of said property; for law enforcement is instituted to ensure the rights of the people. Therefore, based on Locke's perspective, if law enforcement is not capable of defending your rights to property, then the man trying to take your property has disregarded your rights, causing the two of you to enter into a state of war with one another, therefore justifying the lethal force in defense of said property.

In ever case, if property is threatened by some external entity, killing in defense is justified. Every man has absolute right to property.

If someone is robing my house I'm going to get my dads revolver or shotgun and get them to drop the stuff and get on the ground, if they come at me; bang in the leg.

They try again, bang again.