It seems to me that the whole qualified immunity, self-defense/stand-your-ground, and just comply rhetoric has a lot of people thinking it is ok to bring a gun into a fistfight. People are so terrified that any attacking person is going to cause such serious harm that it is ok to just shoot them. This is not the case in some states and guess what... people are still allowed to use self-defense. It just needs to be proportional to the threat....
... This is a long standing legal theory that usually dates back to cases where young men in their 20s/30s would get "fighting words" from a significantly older (60s-80s) and then it would escalate into a one sided fight where the young guy would say he did nothing wrong because it was 1) invited and 2) mutual combat or self-defense. It turns on whether a the imaginary "reasonably prudent person" (though no such person exists at all times in all circumstances) would perceive a threat....
...However, since we are bombarded daily with the idea that anyone, everywhere, at all times is a deadly threat, many people earnestly believe any form of perceived threat, actual or otherwise, is justification for another citizen or the state to just shoot someone to kill. People think that it is ok to shoot people just to protect property now (not talking about entering your domicile but robbing cars or a clearly empty building. We are seeing it with property that is not the aggressor's...