[quote="BillP, post:14, topic:343521"]
That's a pretty broad interpretation of "aggressors" there, since it includes insurrection against duly constituted civil authority.
Furthermore, the "minutemen" opened fire on the British, in essence using deadly force to protect property (which I think is proscribed by the Church) , twice (once on the green and once at the bridge)
continued using deadly force during the entire time the British force was retreating back to Boston.....(which is where the vast majority of the 269 British casualties were incurred).
It is unknown who opened fire first at Lexington Green, "The Shot Heard Round the World". What is known is that the colonists got by far the worst of it.
Once the shooting starts, it was war. Everyone knew that. And in war, you don't allow a beaten foe to retreat unhindered.
You are also incorrect in that the Church does not teach that it is always wrong to use deadly force to protect property. St. Aquinas addressed this in the Summa, in the section on Murder.
On the contrary, It is written (Exodus 22:2): "If a thief be found breaking into a house or undermining it, and be wounded so as to die; he that slew him shall not be guilty of blood." Now it is much more lawful to defend one's life than one's house. Therefore neither is a man guilty of murder if he kill another in defense of his own life.
If a man tries to burn down my house, or burn my crops, or destroy the means of my livelihood, I can use potentially deadly force to stop him.