Without in any way saying she didn't have a right to shoot him because she was in fear for her life, what do you think he was there for?
He was a cowardly burglar who did his very best to make sure that no one was home (they choose burglary because they don't want a confrontation). I saw another report that said, after knocking and ringing the bell, he then went out to his car to get a crowbar, broke in, and as reported here, went through the house looking for loot to steal. By the way, this happened at noon. It was obviously not meant to be a robbery, but a burglary.
He wasn't expecting to find her in the closet, let alone in the closet with a telephone and a revolver, with the cops on the way. He was in no hurry since she pretended no one was home. It took him a long time to even go up to the second floor...
The whole thing could have been avoided by answering his knock. No need to open the door, just knock back or say, "We're not interested."
He'd have gone to another house, looking for someone not home.
Ron Paul would suggest that we consider his motives in order to protect ourselves (just as he does with suicide terrorists). I have heard of many instances where children, home alone, pretended not to be home, only to have a burglar break in, thus turning a simple burglary (with its lower penalties) into a much more dangerous situation (obviously, not the kids' fault--but they're the ones in danger).
If I were home when someone knocked and I did not want to open the door, I would yell something ("George, get the pistol!" or "Go away!"), flash the lights, knock back, or somehow indicate that someone was home--especially if they went to their car and were coming back with a crowbar--before they actually got into the house.
If they come in knowing you're home, use the revolver while he's still halfway through the window--don't wait.
Understanding what really happened here may help you forgive, which is also a consideration, as a desire to have someone killed is bad for one's health. It's important to note how poorly these "journalists" reported this story; as we've seen, they aren't very accurate.
What do you think? http://consequeries.com/