It's possible that "Myth" 2 was upheld rather than nullified. The killer was apparently a US Army veteran and probably felt like his life was in danger so used his training and a medium powered semiautomatic weapon to defend his life. I'm not saying he made the correct decision in hunting without authorization on private land or carrying more than 5 rounds for hunting, but that doesn't mean he didn't use a firearm in self defense.
• Myth Two: When people are well armed and trained to use their weapons, they can protect themselves against gun violence.
Vang in his own statement supports "myth two":
Vang stated that Vang observed 3 other subjects coming on an ATV. Vang stated that Vang then turned his reversible coat from orange to camo. Vang stated that he also reloaded his magazine with 5 or 6 bullets. Vang stated that Vang did not shoot at these men because they had guns with them.
shooting people in the back is extremely poor use
of "self defense".
If all were armed , the Vangster may have had an argument.
He has no defense no matter how many shysters the Hmong
community hires for this dirtbag. Typical of the Cochran
defense, they will make this about race/culture.
Not precisely. Thai Vang was both a veteran of the CIA paramilitary forces operating in Laos, and the US Army. About which, you'll find more here.
And Thai Vang was also one of the very first of the Hmong resettled to the US by the agency. I think we'll find out that there's a whole lot more about this story that hasn't come to light yet....