I think the Zimmerman trial has provided some comparisons worth considering. For example, both Martin and Zimmerman used deadly weapons. Zimmerman, his pistol, and Martin, the sidewalk. Also, both had opportunities to remove themselves from the situation and chose not to do so.
Of course, there are the differences to consider. For example, Martin had the brain of a 17 year-old while Zimmerman (28) had the benefit of a fully developed brain capable of making mature decisions. Also, Zimmerman had the benefit of training regarding the responsible use of firearms, and he knew the responsibilities associated with being a member of a neighborhood watch. In addition, Zimmerman had the benefit of being in contact with law enforcement personnel and receiving specific and timely instructions regarding how he should handle the situation that night. Martin had none of those benefits.
These comparisons, especially the differences, are what make me believe that Zimmerman had far more control, than Martin, over whether or not the situation escalated. And therefore, Zimmerman had a higher degree of responsibility to prevent that escalation.
Submitted by Virtual Newsroom