A man is on his own property and hears his own SUV start up. He takes a gun and stands in its path, ordering the occupants to stop. The car continues towards him, and he shoots at it. One person in the car dies.
The other occupant (the attempted thief) is charged with second-degree murder for causing a murder in the act of a felony.
See, I think
this is all fine. If it was me, I wouldn't run out with a gun and start shooting, but I'm not really comfortable with telling someone that they protected themselves too well in a life-threatening situation, and are going to be accused of murder.
The main reason the property owner wasn't charged was Jeb Bush's "no retreat" law, which allows people to use deadly force if they believe their life is in danger. I don't really like the name, because I think in most cases I would choose retreat over engagement, but the choice about whether engagement was avoidable or not is much easier to see in hindsight than at the time.
I really hate stories of people being charged or sued into bankruptcy because they killed an intruder in their home. If someone broke into our flat I would assume that they had violent intentions, and I would do whatever I could to assure myself that they would no longer be a threat to us. I think people who burgle or rob (or certain types of trespassing) are committing a physically-threatening act, and what happens to them when they do that should be on their own heads.