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.
I guess my “poke in the MSM’s eye” required more explanation.
I was demonstrating the absurdity of their assertion by stating it plainly instead of their tiptoeing around it an implying it.
It can also transform in a split second into "armed" when he grabs the LEO's weapon, as this case proves.
I'll say this until I'm red in the face: The only "weapon" that ultimately matters is a criminal intent. All the rest is detail.