Quote:
Originally Posted by themonk
He's 250 lbs, Martin was 140 soaking wet, there were no weapons found anywhere near Martin, where is it justified to use lethal force? The guy had 110 lbs on the kid who didn't have any form of combat/martial arts training, are you saying that Zimmerman got his ass handed to him by a 18 yo skinny kid and was in fear of his life?
|
Your observations have been formed by Hollywierd and not real life.
How does a 70# dog take down a 250# man? It is not the size of the dog; it is the size of the bite, or the viciousness of the attack. Caught off guard, most untrained people do not react fast enough to prevent, let alone stop an attack, and are always behind the curve. Those that are trained often have embarrassing moments at social occasions.
You are also not taking into account how vulnerable to injury the back of the head is. One rock in the wrong place could have left him a paraplegic in another place dead.
The simple acronym for use of force is AOJ. The suspect has to have the
Ability to put the victim at risk. The suspect has to have the
Opportunity to injure the victim. The suspect has to put the victim in
Jeopardy.
If an LEO had happened on the scene and seen someone bashing someone’s head into the ground, they would have been justified in using force to prevent or stop the attack. If they thought the attack could end in death or serious injury, lethal force may be used.
The facts of the case may not be fully known, but the above facts on use of force, though simplified, are.