[MrB]

“strong arm robbery” - that would be “unarmed”, wouldn’t it?

Obviously, if he was “unarmed”, then he presented no threat to the alleged “robbery” victim.

[Thommas]

Obviously, if he was “unarmed”, then he presented no threat to the alleged “robbery” victim.

This comment was missing the sarcasm (/s)tag, right?

[rfreedom4u]

Obviously, if he was “unarmed”, then he presented no threat to the alleged “robbery” victim.

People are killed by the hands/fists of others too often. Unarmed does not mean no threat.

[oh8eleven]

Obviously, if he was “unarmed”, then he presented no threat to the alleged “robbery” victim.
Surely you jest and/or forgot your "/s" tag.
Even at my peak as a Marine I'd have a tough time with this "teen."

[Bon of Babble]

Even if he didn’t have a gun, he was “armed” - with his fists, feet and his sheer size.

The clerk being intimidated in those photos looks terrified - too bad HE didn’t have a gun - there’s a reason Col. Colt called it the “equalizer.”

[noinfringers2]

In my opinion being ‘unarmed’ does not transform into ‘no danger’. Physical beatings can be/are dangerous to the point of maiming or death and looking at the size of the ‘young boy’ and his pictured actions I tend to think he was a bully boy.