Yes, I read your post - all of it. The wife was definitely brandishing, so their OC law is meaningless, in that regard. Destruction of property is not a violent crime. We may consider it a violent act, but it is not a violent act under the law. Again, I did state that these people will not likely be prosecuted. The justification is not the destruction of property - one, in most states, cannot threaten nor use of lethal force to defend property - but their claims in a later interview that they were threatened - a he said/she said issue, with the exception that there is at least one video recording, though the videos are by people committing the trespassing acts.
I was not trying to denigrate you. I was only pointing out that property crimes are not legal justifications for brandishing or use, or threat, of lethal force. This is especially important as firearm owners, as we are often vilified in the media for merely believing in and exercising our RKBA.





