This is a clear case of Castle Doctrine. There was NO opportunity for the homeowners to 'retreat' (even though under CO law they had no duty to), w/ her continuing to come towards the homeowners after multiple warnings, that is a clear threat.
So now my question, will the anti-gun advocates, especially Ladd Everitt of the CSGV, support this? It fits all the myriad restrictions and requirements they demand.
Or will they come up w/ some other lame qualifier or excuse why this wasn't 'justified'?
I think we all know the answer.