At what point is it worth killing someone?
On its face, and this is a point the anti-gun folks like to make, is that the contents of your wallet are not worth killing someone over. From a very superficial standpoint, this is absolutely correct - I tend to not carry much cash on me, maybe $20-30 at any given time. That's not worth taking someone's life.
When someone threatens me with deadly force for my wallet, I have no guarantee that handing my wallet over ends that threat (this is Weerd's point exactly). The gentleman in Sean's story thought that by giving up his wallet he'd be okay; that he'd be out the cash and the cost of the wallet itself, but he could cancel the credit cards, get a new driver's license, etc. Instead, they shot him anyways, all over the contents of the wallet (incidentally, this is the kind of story that showcases why I favor the death penalty. A criminal that would shoot a man over a goddamn wallet needs to be put down like a rabid animal).
It's the same when someone breaks into your home. Sure, they might just be after whatever consumer electronics and/or loose cash you might have lying around. Or they may be sickos like the bastards that murdered Kimberly Cates or Half and Susan Zantop, bored kids who decided that murdering people in their homes for fun was a good Saturday night.
I'm not about to gamble my life - or the lives of the people I love and care about - on the good graces of the goblin kicking in my door.
My property isn't worth killing someone over, no. The day when I can divine whether the person sticking a gun in my ribs only wants the $30 in cash I have on me or just wants to kill me so there are no witnesses, well, then I'll rethink my position. Until such a time, I will infer that anyone threatening violence upon my person is after one thing and one thing only - a snoot full of .45 ACP - and give them exactly what they're asking for.
As the late Colonel Cooper was fond of quipping: "I would like very much to ensure that any man who offers violence to his fellow citizen begets a whole lot more in return than he can enjoy."
That is all.
*NOTE: Commenter "anonymous" (boy, that guy is prolific!) actually READ the story at Sean's and points out that the person who was mugged and shot twice was not killed, but merely (???) injured and is in stable condition. The point is the same, of course, it's only by sheer luck he wasn't killed outright.