I read this:

as saying he could not be even detained. However, IANAL, so I will gladly be corrected by arguments.

(1) A person who uses force as permitted in s. 776.012, s. 776.013, or s. 776.031

I see room right there for a strict hard look at any use of force with a big disparity of force or a investigation when the circumstances are murky.

Seriously with all the reports of the increase in “justified” homicide, one would be able to find a better case than this one to use against SYG, despite the fact it was the signal incident. SYG surely does not apply when it’s not self defense but a bigoted stalk, confront and kill.

“Anywhere you have a right to be” and civil immunity have got to go. At home I agree with the idea, but without any special civil immunity.