This is one of those extremely frustrating arguments, because even though it's very simple, they'll never even acknowledge your point, much less agree with it.

Yes, absolutely: Burglary alone doesn't warrant public execution or death in general. That's different from someone defending themselves from a violent thug who breaks into their home though. It's not about property itself being more valuable than a human life. It's about violent criminals voluntarily (insofar as some of these lunatics have free will) putting themselves in positions where lethal force in self defense is on the table.

They didn't value their own life. If you break into my house, even if "just" to steal my television...you're the one undervaluing your life, not me. For all I know, this lunatic wants to rape/torture/murder me and/or my family. You're in my house being an asshole without an invitation? It's open season, you piece of shit. I don't want to kill anyone, but I'll damn well defend myself, my family, and - yes! - my property, if I have to.

I'm not sure if libs really can't grasp this, or are just so conditioned they won't let themselves get off the talking points, even if they know deep down they're wrong.

No, I don't value property over human life. Other people can if they want, I'm not even saying it's wrong. But I damn well value my safety over a random thug's life. Fuck around, find out. Even if your crime - were you to actually be arrested and charged - would not receive the sentence of a death penalty...doesn't mean I wouldn't be within my rights to defend myself, including with lethal force. These are not the same scenario at all.

I know we all know, and I'm preaching to the choir here, but it pisses me off. It's the jackass burglar who is valuing property over their own life. Don't want to get "murdered?" Don't be in other peoples' houses, retard. These deaths are avoidable, and the killer is not the primary party at fault.