🚀 go-pugleaf

Since a few people have posted replies I'll throw out a few more things to
think about.     

Whether you choose to shoot or not, perhaps it would be a good idea
to increase the distance between you and the bad guy, instead of
standing so close (remember we're about 10 feet apart).  Your #1 concern
should be to stay alive.  Shooting the bad guy may be part of what you
need to do.  Certainly the closer you are to him the more danger you are in  
whether he has a weapon or not (and it's wise to assume that he has one).

Let's take the "shoot first" branch of the decision tree:
You see the guy, that adrenal rush of fear hits, and you start shooting.
There's nobody else in the house and the kids aren't downrange.
The guy drops in place.  Somehow you manage not to hit the VCR, which is
conveniently undamaged.  This is all terribly optimistic. 

More realistically:  you shoot.  The guy doesn't react at first and you shoot
him some more.  He stumbles off out of your sight and goes quiet.
You still don't know whether there is anyone else in the house or not.
Your kid opens the bedroom door to see what's going on.
Now what?

Let's take the "armed negiotiation" branch:
According to all the experts, holding someone at gunpoint waiting for the
police to arrive is a bad idea.  So basically your goal in not shooting is
to coerce the bad guy into leaving.  You've still got to check on the kids
and you still don't know whether anyone else is in the house.
This is where backing up (and leaving the lights off) may become very
important.  Let's make it interesting:  you challenge, the bad guy says
"screw you", and walks back into the den, carrying the VCR. You hear
the kitchen door open and close.  Now what?

Karl