We're gonna disagree here.
I couldn't give to shits about the age of the offenders. They are in stolen vehicle(s?), full of stolen stuff, stealing gas...
View attachment 101833
I prefer the Sheriff Grady method.
Right or Wrong, Canada has different laws for the use of force than most States.
Here in Virginia for instance Lethal Force cannot be used to protect property by itself (it can if you are in the dwelling, or conveyance, with certain caveats).
A homeowner may arrest or attempt to arrest a person (or persons) who are committing/committed an offense to which is punishable by imprisonment over 1 year, which basically means a Felony, and what constitutes a Felony can be relatively convoluted. Generally Non LEO arrest w/o warrant is rife with danger if one isn’t well versed on the law.
Now here Disparity of Force has been codified, that allows for Lethal Force to be used when one party is smaller/weaker, or outnumbered by their attackers -- but that is in the protection of life arena, not protection of property.
Coercive Force is pretty much the realm of the state, and any individual actions down that path are very very risky.
“Warning Shots” here is a topic that is so problematic that it is hard even for SME’s in Judicial and LEO UoF to agree all the time.
Any discharge of a firearm is lethal force, regardless if there is a person targeted or not. So the only 'saving grace’ for firing a ‘warning shot’ is that one would have otherwise fired into a person (or persons), and that somehow this use of lethal force was reasonable, as it (subjectively) decreased the likelihood of needing to fire into someone. However where did the ‘warning shot’ go, was it aimed fire into a demonstrably safe backstop?
I won’t claim Warning Shots are never appropriate, but they have so many risk factors involved that they should never be a Go To COA.
-----------------------
Secondly this is crossing the streams on Gun Laws, and Use of Force Laws.