Which type of force is NOT justified in defense of property, unless to prevent a forcible felony?

In the context of defending property, the use of force that can potentially result in death or great bodily injury is not justified unless the response is necessary to prevent a forcible felony. This is due to the principle that lethal force should only be applied in situations where there is an imminent threat to life or severe bodily harm. The law prioritizes the protection of human life over property rights, establishing a clear distinction in how much force is deemed acceptable.

While various forms of non-lethal force, such as minimal physical force, gentle persuasion, or non-lethal devices, can be appropriate for protecting property, they do not carry the same legal implications as the use of deadly force. Thus, invoking deadly force can only be rationalized in more serious circumstances where a violent crime is occurring, reinforcing the legal standard that emphasizes the sanctity of life above the protection of property.