"Aggravated," "trespass," "weapons displayed," "weapons not displayed..."
Feh. Feh, say I.
Get lawyers on it and draw all kinds of fine points, but that's what lawyers do.
Numeration and verbiage varies, but there's a simpler rubric:
"VII. Thou shalt not steal."
G-d said it, and He ain't takin' it back.
Terry, 230RN
"Feh", did you say?
Are you arguing with us, or with the liberal DAs?
I don't think anyone here disagrees with you, but the *punishment* for stealing legitimately could be different based on whether violence (or threat of violence) or breaking-and-entering was involved. I was just explaining the distinction between theft, robbery, and burglary.
The worthless DAs have decided that theft is not worth prosecuting, perhaps because the thieves are their constituents or perhaps out of professional courtesy. 
What's going to happen eventually when there's a pushback is all thieves will be dealt with by their intended victims or by vigilantes as presumed armed robbers. And if it goes far enough the DAs will be targeted as accomplices.
When the justice system abrogates its responsibilities, vigilantism is back on the table.
