I wasn't there and have no idea what happened, but what must your worldview be if you think it's odd that when a guy with a gun kills a guy without a gun that there shouldn't at least be some sort of serious investigation.
More than that, if Zimmerman killing the unarmed Martin can be justified under horrible Stand Your Ground laws, it's impossible to see how the reverse wouldn't be true.
Stand your ground seems to be based on the nutty premise that in all conflicts there's a good guy and a bad guy, and that which is which is obvious. Not how things actually work.
