We'll be what many Canadians believe the typical American and say incredulously, What do you mean they have no legal right to defend their homes with guns? It's a home invasion, for crying out loud. Isn't that threat by itself enough to warrant self defense by whatever means? How are you supposed to know how big of a threat the intruder might be? He's broken into your home; certainly that demonstrates he has no scruples about you and your family.
We simply don't understand that line of thought at all. Obviously, it invites home invasion. What's to be afraid of when the homeowner cannot effectively do anything about a burglar but, apparently, run? We have to presume that's the case, because if you can't shoot an unarmed home invader then wouldn't it equally qualify as murder if you hit him over the head with a bat?
Really, now. Your home, indeed all of your personal property, is an extension of you. You have the moral right to protect it as much as the moral right for self protection of your family and friends. Aggression must be seen as exactly that; presuming that aggression will not necessarily result in the need for deadly force is just plain naive. You're better off presuming that aggression, especially that such as home invasion, will end up a deadly threat and treating it that way.
But no legal right to protect your home with firearms? We can't fathom that attitude at all.