Which is entirely reasonable. Except that it appears the presence of a gun turned what might have been a physical assault with both participants surviving into an existential struggle of kill or be killed. Each participant, accurately, may have believed he had no choice but to gain possession of the gun to potentially keep it from being used on him. Once in possession there was no choice but to use it to keep from losing possession.
IOW, the presence of a highly deadly weapon took options off the board rather than increasing them.
I support 2A rights, but the mere presence of a gun can create a situation in which its use becomes almost imperative.
In each of these cases, is it possible, perhaps even likely, that somebody (cop or thug) would have wound up dead even without a gun being present? Sure, but the gun made it almost certain.
George Zimmerman could well have ended up dead if he did not have a gun. I can deal with that just fine. Thug brings fists to a gun fight, thug loses.
You want a disarmed police force? I’m as disgusted as anyone over police abuse of power, no-knock SWAT raids and the like, but disarming is swinging the pendulum back to an equal but opposite level of crazy.
In both instances the attackers went for the gun and got killed as a result. You’re blaming the gun just as the left does. The blame resides with the attackers who attempted to wrest the gun. No attack, no wresting. No wresting, no shooting.
Behavior.
In the Zimmerman case, the evidence suggests that the perp wasn't aware of the presence of the gun until quite late in the altercation, long past the point where he'd begun to beat Zimmerman senseless, long after the point where Zimmerman's life was in serious jeopardy. The evidence is that the perp STOPPED beating Zimmerman, STOPPED beating Zimmerman's head into the concrete curb, once he figured out that Zimmerman had a weapon, and started to struggle for the weapon.
If not for the presence of the firearm, it is most probable that George Zimmerman would have been cold-bloodedly murdered by the perp via blunt force trauma. It is the presence of the firearm that evened the odds sufficiently so that Zimmerman could escape death.
As to the hint that the cop shouldn't have had a weapon, I can scarcely even countenance it. The presence of the weapon isn't what caused the altercation to become deadly. It is the presence of a determined, drugged-up thug that caused the altercation to become deadly. The presence of the weapon just ensured that the correct person wound up dead.
sitetest