Let me make it really simple. If you are carrying and you get in a confrontation, walk away. You can end it at any time but you don't need to. How difficult is that to understand. Sorry, just having my fill of it today so yes I am being terse. Likely I am not making myself clear but that is the best I got for you. Stand your ground is if you are threatened. These guys were not threatened. They could have walked away without any consequence.
You seem to be under the misapprehension that I somehow don't understand what you're saying; this is incorrect.
I disagree with you.
And that seems to be a worthwhile position judging from nonsense like "these guys were not threatened" and "Stand your ground is if you are threatened."
I dare say you have taken an ingrained mindset and elevated it into a moral postulate, so much so that you seem to have trouble conceiving of the proposition not being self evident. It is not, and your position is that of people who only begrudgingly admit the right to armed self defense, festooning it with so many caveats that it becomes largely a dead letter.
The Millers were doing nothing untoward in the video, unless you count being armed as untoward. Further, they were being expressly threatened by a mental case that was clearly unhinged. You've functionally asserted they had a duty to withdraw.
My questions is "predicated on what" other than an implied duty to preserve the life of their assailant?