Standing your ground has become synonymous with immunity to prosecution in people’s eyes. I’m not sure where this misconception started but it should be addressed.
The situation in the Chandler Walmart is a good lesson to highlight this. Going ONLY on limited information, we’ll use this as an example. Two men got into an altercation and a fight ensued. One man came out on top with the use of his weapon. The deceased had a choice just as much as the shooter did — they could have both walked away. He chose poorly. The other will have to address his choice.
Those that carry a weapon generally find that they have become more passive and attempt to diffuse situations much more than they would have done unarmed. However, every person is different. In this case, the shooter will have to be able to articulate why his shooting is justified. To not prosecute based on evidence (to include testimonies!) is a good thing so we don’t waste money like Ms. Corey decided to do with our money in Florida. There’s a reason we have grand juries before a case. We let the courts pre-judge evidence to see if a case is there and from there we let the justice system do its work. There are imperfections, but let’s not pretend that every time someone dies a long, costly trial is needed. Let’s not pull out pitchforks and torches because of very limited information in articles. If we did that, we might actually have honest politicians, but I digress.