I think there is a fundamental misunderstanding about why this was such a high profile cultural flashpoint. This was a perfect storm of gun rights meets political intimidation.
That's it.
To many Americans, Kyle's act of bringing an assault rifle to that kind of situation instantly painted him as a force of intimidation meant to silence speech. Consequently, when he got himself into a situation that was way over his head, he was able to use the fact that he had an assault rifle as a part of his defense that he was afraid for his life. To many, this was basically a situation of having your cake and eating it too.
Should the first individual who went after Kyle have had more restraint? Probably. But they weren't the one holding a weapon manufactured to kill people. Kyle was. In fact, many people had guns that night. But the only person who killed anyone was Kyle. A kid who had too little respect for life and way too large of an ego.
Now people are worried of copy-cat vigilantes. I'm not implying that Kyle's intention was to kill in Kenosha. I think that was a legitimately unfortunate chain of events. But other people will see this and come to extreme conclusions about what is or is not acceptable. And just because the law deemed what Kyle did to be acceptable, it will be of little comfort to future victims of stand your ground type claims of authority over who lives and dies.
No one would have died that night had Kyle not had a gun. People need to stop bringing guns to public spaces. We are too paranoid and trigger happy to be trusted with that kind of power, and there never seems to be a good guy with a gun when you need them. Likely because the legitimately good people are rarely the type who could stomach pulling the trigger.