The hypothetical situation I described involved the perpetrator merely snatching the bag and running. There was no force or threat of force. Based on the definition you just posted and the quote from the textbook below, this is not robbery and therefore not a forcible felony.
From Illinois Criminal Law: A Survey of Crimes and Defenses:
"Therefore, a simple snatching or sudden taking of property from an unsuspecting person will generally yield insufficient force to constitute robbery."
The purpose of my post was to describe a realistic situation in which the prevention of treason could be a justification for deadly force where it would not normally be justified. Something like a legal mind game.
Regardless of whether it is theft or robbery, are you suggesting that shooting a purse-snatcher in the back as he flees across a parking lot would be generally kosher in this state? I thought not which is why I used it in my example.
I am a retired cop and for eight of those years I was a dog handler. I have arrested , charged and convicted an awful lot of purse snatchers for robbery and a number of them went through Cook County Hospital on the way to the slam because Hans, my 90 lb Schutzhund trained GSD attempted to swallow them whole. Lecture me all you want on your hypothesis based on your reading but having spent a third of my now elderly life chaining people up for robbery I think I out trump you.
Very well. So you believe a citizen in Illinois may legally shoot a fleeing purse-snatcher in the back?