I don't believe that is true. SYG law is not relevant to this case though IMO.
The law does not require that the individual who resorts to deadly force be right.
No, Susan, I am certain that that is not the case. One is still required to believe, by the 'reasonable man' standard, that one's life or another person's life is in imminent danger. As a Constitutional scholar you should know better than to characterize a law without knowing it.
PC is rotting your brain, Dude, Something I would expect Susan to say, but to her credit, she refrained.
"Being right" in this context, is NOT the after the fact definition of "right." It is the personal honest belief of the victim of an attack, at the moment, right or wrong.