The question should be, what is the definition of 'reasonable' from the viewpoint of the person confronted by a burglar, and not the meaning of it with hindsight which is what the law seems to use.
What is wrong with chasing after someone who broke into your house to make a 'citizens arrest', and you need a weapon as you don't know these days if he has a gun or a knife, and he WILL resist you you've got to subdue the bugger so he don't move. That's real life, not the fantasy world the judges and law live in.
