It's this simple - George Zimmerman was stalking Trayvon Martin

[hfojvt]

18. usually you defend yourself from a gun

by putting your hands up and saying 'please don't shoot me'. Punching a guy with a gun is more likely to get you shot unless you knock them out or grab the gun. Taking a big chance either way, when the armed person might easily have no intention of shooting.

Point is that if "being followed" is seen as a justification for Trayvon beating the crap out of Zimmerman then it can just as easily be used as a justification for Trayvon, had he been armed, to have shot Zimmerman. That is the argument being made, because Trayvon felt threatened, he is free to attack.

Well, then the same argument would apply for an armed white guy being followed by a black guy. To feel threatened, and blow that guy away and claim he was "standing his ground". Is that really a path we want to walk down?

So the argument here is

being followed = serious threat allowing Trayvon to stand his ground
and
getting his nose broken and being pummelled = no threat at all, not allowing Zimmerman to stand his ground. I guess because he could have slithered away on his back, no doubt leaving a thick layer of slime as he went.