Use of force in defense of habitation...

I wanted to open a discussion on this topic as I recently moved back to GA and am researching all laws.

I have copied the information below from a Lexis search.

Are ALL 3 items to be met or any of the three? If all 3, then the burden of proof lies heavily with the one pulling the trigger.

R/
Matt


§ 16-3-23. Use of force in defense of habitation


A person is justified in threatening or using force against another when and to the extent that he or she reasonably believes that such threat or force is necessary to prevent or terminate such other's unlawful entry into or attack upon a habitation; however, such person is justified in the use of force which is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm only if:

(1) The entry is made or attempted in a violent and tumultuous manner and he or she reasonably believes that the entry is attempted or made for the purpose of assaulting or offering personal violence to any person dwelling or being therein and that such force is necessary to prevent the assault or offer of personal violence;

(2) That force is used against another person who is not a member of the family or household and who unlawfully and forcibly enters or has unlawfully and forcibly entered the residence and the person using such force knew or had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry occurred; or

(3) The person using such force reasonably believes that the entry is made or attempted for the purpose of committing a felony therein and that such force is necessary to prevent the commission of the felony.

it says there

http://www.georgiapacking.org/law.php

That is a good link. Thanks for providing.
I will further explain my reasoning for asking.
I deal with Building Codes and Life Safety Codes and Standards for a living. After 20+ years of doing so, you learn to carefully review stuff word for word.
In the 3 items listed, there is a semi-colon used at the end of item #1. As we know, semi-colons are normally used to join 2 items. In this case it would seem 1 and 2 are together. The use of the word "or" at the end of #2 excludes item #3 from the others.
I personally think "reasonably believe" and proving "tumultuous" manner are dangerous wording. It would be tough to prove if the dead person cannot be questioned as to intent and manner.
Remember, the burden of proof lies with us. Innocent until proven guilty.
I am aware this may be over analyzing. I just like to cover all.

R/
Matt