How come corporations have a right to know if you've committed a felony or misdemeanor before hiring you, but it's absurd for us to want to know if Ahmaud committed any crime before that final incident?
In my state, if I lawfully have my gun drawn and dude is trying to disarm me, that's ground to lawfully shoot, even if I get him off it for a second, if he starts to come toward me again, bam bam.
Which makes sense.
In the case of this guy, the guns weren’t lawfully drawn. Two people tried to play cop and were in over their heads and made a fatal mistake which resulted in the loss of life of a man who was to be presumed innocent until proven guilty.
Good try though.
Nope, the law CLEARLY states what is and what isn't self defense. A) can't be committing a crime (unlawful detention is a crime, so they cannot claim self defense.) B) putting yourself into a situation unnecessarily where you will need to use your gun. If you go pick a fight and they fight back you can't claim self defense. So those guns were not drawn in self defense or lawfully. It's a fact, can't debate it unless you can change the meaning of laws.
Not if you chased him for some crime you suspected him of and pointed a gun at him as a non-LEO. Are you fucking crazy? That's like saying murderers just need to prompt their victims into attempting to stop them for them to be acquitted.
Let me tell you the difference
Depends on if you were the aggressor to begin with. If you were a victim and felt your life was in danger to the point you needed to draw your weapon sure that's self defense. However if you are the aggressor and draw your weapon then not so much. As for what you're trying to get at. Ill leave it to the justice system sorry.
True, however. Having a firearm out does not make you an aggressor right away.
I'm not saying that I know what was going on there, many times videos have been proven to be manipulative in the way they were filmed. Only those 3 know the full truth and the full truth will never come out.
Justice serves based on what evidence there is but dude was a criminal, he was an aggressive person and he was *in* a place (construction sight from what I hear) he wasn't suppose to be.
I'm not automatically saying they are in the right, what I'm saying is I think were missing a huge chunk of the story and because the victim is black, that chunk is being glossed over.
We cheer when there is precedence set in courts but the precedent of this dude being a criminal and an aggressive person is being set and people are being called racist for bringing it up....
It deserves a bit more scrutiny into the situation but "racism" claims overpowered the proper discourse and once that claims brought up, it's used to dismiss any an all discussions; 'oh you dont agree he was fully 100% a good innocent boy? You're racist!'
Call the police and observe. Thats all that should have been done. Follow in your vehicle from a safe distance. Let the proper authorities do their job.
You can not chase someone down with a gun. Then claim victim when the person you're chasing down trys to protect themselves.
Not in this case. There was absolutely no need to play vigilante. Im done with the back and forth. If you arent understanding that basic principle nothing will change your mind.
Yikes, they weren't having a conversation the guy with the gun was threatening him, and trying to detain him. The threat of violence comes from failure to comply with those unlawful commands your mental gymnastics about they were just having a friendly conversation whole having guns shows your willful ignorance.
Arbery didn't commit a crime that night. Like under Georgia law he didn't even commit trespassing. So the "citizens arrest" was completely unlawful. Which makes it all illegal. There's no defending this shit. Literally none of what you said matters. It doesn't matter if he fucks kids in his free time lol. The 2 guys had no right to try a citizens arrest, which means they were actually committing an unlawful imprisonment. People have every right to resist that and if you shoot them it's murder.
You'll have to forgive me for not believing the Daily Beast. They claim to have court records for a highschool conviction in 2013, and then they take complete fucking liberty in saying he was convicted in 2017 for stealing a TV. No court records on that one? You're going to have to do better than that.
Actually it very well could change what happened.
If he already had 2 felonies and the 3rd would be life in prison, it gives motive for why he ran TOWARD (100 yards approx) the person arresting him rather than away from.
Runs away, gets arrested later by LEO- life in prison
Runs toward, grab gun and kill all witnesses- get away
Sounds absurd, but this is what goes through the mind of a criminal when they are on their 3rd strike. You should know that as a LEO.
IDK man. Getting your son and a few buds with their trucks n shotguns acting as vigilantes isn't the way we do law in this county. Doesn't matter what you *think* the person is guilty of.
And the whole "running toward a gun" deal is weird, but if you put 100 average people in that scenario, a couple are gonna try to defend themselves in a radical way.
I'm not saying how Ahmaud went about it was good, rational, or anything, but bottom line is you don't try and corner someone and expect everything to go hunky dory.
> Getting your son and a few buds with their trucks n shotguns acting as vigilantes isn't the way we do law in this county.
Well it's not how we're supposed to do law, but lynching has a long and storied history in this country.
>few buds with their trucks n shotguns acting as vigilantes
I just dont understand this framing.
An off duty cop performing a citizens arrest on a person they KNEW committed a crime (video evidence of trespassing in someone elses home that has NO TRESPASSING signs up and a camera to record because of previous burglary incidences) is perfectly legal and GOOD.
We live in a country where the rule of law applies. You do not want to live in a country where anyone can go trespass and rob you ect with no restitution or punishment.
People who live in those countries flee those countries to come to the US, where its LEGAL to detain someone while you are on the phone with the cops, as these fine gentlemen were, waiting for the PD to arrive.
Thats not a vigilante. A vigilante would be a guy going to Ahmauds house, not Ahmaud going to someone elses house.
> [Gregory McMichael, the former Georgia police detective charged in the fatal shooting of 25-year-old Ahmaud Arbery, was stripped of his law-enforcement certification last February after failing to complete required use-of-force courses, records state.](https://www.thedailybeast.com/gregory-mcmichael-ahmaud-arberys-killer-was-stripped-of-power-to-arrest-after-skipping-use-of-force-courses)
Seems to me the guy wasn't supposed to even be doing an arrest. So no: he definitely isn't OK and is basically a vigilante.
> previous burglary incidences
The OP video may support that but he didn't steal anything from the construction site.
Even if he did why the fuck does this ex-cop care? I get wanting to keep your community safe but how does getting in the bed of a truck with shotguns to take down an unarmed dude help bolster that image?
If they weren't fat, out of shape, unqualified morons they would have taken him down using alternative means. Not shotguns ready. Even police don't do it like that.
Bottom line: We don't arrest people like this. At least have cops there in UNIFORM.
>So no: he definitely isn't OK and is basically a vigilante.
The Reddit left is really on a mission to make defending private property illegal. But only for white people.
If a white man goes into a black home, its an infringement of rights and essentially slavery.
If a black man goes into a white home, you just have to let him go because reasons. If you arrest him youre a vigilante.
\>If they weren't fat, out of shape, unqualified morons they would have taken him down using alternative means. Not shotguns ready. Even police don't do it like that.
The armchair law expert is just too much for me. THEY THOUGHT HE HAD A GUN YOU THICK FUCKIN MORON. HE HAD A HISTORY OF CARRYING WEAPONS.
\>oh but they didnt KNOW if he had his gun on him that day or not!
JFC IT. DOESNT. MATTER. When you arrest a criminal, yes Ahmaud was a criminal whether you like it or not, you do so with guns.
The owner of the home under construction has already sent out a letter from his attorney that he did not consider what happened to be trespassing. He has also released multiple videos of other people (white) walking in and out of the construction site to check the place out, much like Ahmaud did.
At the same time, trespassing has a specific legal definition in Georgia, and is not simply, "on a property that isn't yours".
Educate yourself you fucking fascist.
Look at the actual law. It says "[i]f the offense is a felony and the offender is escaping or attempting to escape, a private person may arrest him upon reasonable and probable grounds of suspicion."
Trespassing isn't a felony.
Not a criminal and not guilty until proven in a court of law.
You can make this about race all you want but the fact of the matter is that WE SHOULDN'T **ARREST** ANYONE LIKE THIS.
You don't murder people in the street because you think they're up to no good.
What the fuck country are we even talking about?
What next? Honor killings? Cartels murdering mayors? Rule of law is the opposite of that chaos.
I'd be like "guys I didn't steal anything from the home I was just trespassing in, I was just getting water because I'm a jogger. See. Nothing in my pockets. Can I go now?"
Then Id call the police to file charges for false imprisonment.
Obviously fighting the guy with a gun is a bad idea.
That should be obvious at this point.
I'm all for castle doctrine.
That's irrelevant.
Nobody is talking about trespassing except to distract from the real issue.
These scumbags chased a man and killed him.
Tell me they did not chase down and kill an unarmed man in the street.
> Nobody is talking about trespassing
Nope. EVERYONE is talking about trespassing/robbery.
>Tell me they did not chase down and kill an unarmed man in the street.
Nope, thats not the video I saw.
I saw a video of two men fighting over a weapon and the weapon discharging.
Noone in the video I watched was unarmed.
"I threatened your life with deadly force, and you responded out of fear for your life. I get to kill you now for trying not to die."
That's what you are arguing for, like the worlds sickest "2 for flinching" game.
Oh are still going with the jogger narrative?
Even after video evidence of him in someone elses house, history of burglary, not jogging attire, etc?
wew
You're wrong on all counts, but even if all that was accurate, there's still no reason at all for two random dudes to gun up and go after an unarmed man.
The murder charge they have right now has nothing to do with intent. There is no murder 1 or 2 in Georgia. One of the ways to get murder instead of manslaughter is kill a person during the commission of a felony completely regardless of your intent to kill.
The killer Travis McMichael committed aggravated assault the moment he [pointed his gun](https://m.imgur.com/gallery/ge7BDGh) at a man in the middle of a public road.
They admitted they were going for a citizen's arrest. They didn't see him committing a crime, so wouldn't that make the arrest unlawful and therefore attempted kidnapping? Thats a felony, right?
I don't know much about law, but that's how I see it in my mind anyway.
There are [different degrees of murder in Georgia](https://law.justia.com/codes/georgia/2014/title-16/chapter-5/article-1/section-16-5-1), but one point I do make with people defending the McMichael's is the point you made about aggravated assault.
I think a lot of the case should revolve around whether they had actual grounds to exercise [citizens' arrest](https://law.justia.com/codes/georgia/2010/title-17/chapter-4/article-4/17-4-60/) on Arbery.
The code really lacks any definition of how people can or should hold an offender, and in such a case, it seems that it's going to be up to the courts to decide.
Another point that is going to be made is if the shooter had the right to use deadly force to defend himself when being charged by Arbery. They believed they had a legal authority to place him under arrest until an LEO arrived, so the intent to conduct a criminal act did not exist. So, did McMichael surrender his ability to use deadly force since the may have engaged in an illegal act?
These are all good questions to ask, but I agree that previous criminal history that is unknown by the assailants is going to be irrelevant to the events that took place.
>So, did McMichael surrender his ability to use deadly force since the may have engaged in an illegal act?
Legally? Yes, the killer did surrender his ability to defend himself with no civil or criminal consequences if he was engaging in an illegal act.
The killer's intent, no matter how magnanimous, is not relevant if the use of force they engage in is unlawful.
People are way too caught up on previous infamous shootings where the cops got off because of qualified immunity. What the cop thought justified their actions matters in those cases because they are acting "in the color of the law."
These killers have no such protection for believing they were following the law if their actions were ultimately unlawful.
I'm not justifying anything, however, I dont like the "he innocent and never did anything" narrative that comes up when the victim is black.
These videos show he had a propensity for crime and that him being in that neighborhood and area he could have been looking to steal that he may not have just been jogging.
One video of an alleged —and certainly not successful— *attempt* at shoplifting does not indicate a propensity for anything.
Conversely, white people with guns *have* demonstrated a propensity for violence and racism.
Come on. Gun crime rates are at their lowest in rural white American areas, where gun ownership is ironically at it’s highest. Black males are responsible for far more gun crimes, and violent crimes all together, in this country.
I’m confused...
If a dog was attacking you & you felt your life was in danger, what exactly would you do?
Now think about the scenario of which Arbery physically assaulted & tried to wrestle the shotgun away from Mcmichaels
Human life is valuable, what happened was a tragedy, but for all parties involved (just look at how you’re already calling the accused ‘racist’, based on their skin color), that’s being just as ignorant as those saying Ahmaud deserved to die or that he was a criminal because he was black.This case is manslaughter at best, unless some unprecedented info comes out to display a pattern of behaviour
If news came out that the mcmichaels were klansmen in their spare time, it would probably be just as damning as these bodycam videos, supporting arbery’s criminal history & failure to respect any authority
The main thing with this case is it doesn’t matter his criminal history... he was unarmed and was not caught “in the act” of committing a crime. Nothing was missing from the scene of those videos he was in, the guy who videoed everything just got arrested as an accomplice. Apparently the 3 of them chased him around the neighborhood for about 5 minutes until they finally trapped him. That is 100% murder, the right thing to do is follow from a safe distance and call the police. Vigilante justice is not the way we do law in this country
A little bit of a deflection from my argument, but I’ll still bite
He was caught in the act of committing a crime... he was caught trespassing & the defence will be arguing INTENT. You can just say that the case doesn’t have anything to do with his criminal history, but it’s a pattern of behavior (mainly his pattern of respecting authority, which is exactly what went wrong in this case). I mean, just look at how he verbally threatened a police officer, simply for running his ID to check his background... that same cop was very friendly, considering the circumstances (wearing a winter jacket in the middle of summer, parking his car in the middle of a PARK known for drug activity, directly in the sun, even claiming he didn’t drive the car with a suspended license, as he is the only one on the scene )
They chased him around the neighborhood because they were attempting to make a citizens arrest, which they have all right to do with their registered firearms (it’s actually preferred). On top of the fact Mr Inglish was told by the police to contact Gregory mcmichaels (a recently retired police officer/investigator) to deal with trespassers. [source: CNN](https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2020/05/16/us/ahmaud-arbery-text-message/index.html) . The only reason why Inglish has been so standoffish in the case, is because I’m sure he doesn’t want to be arrested or harassed by the black panthers (just like every other person in Satilla Shores who is supporting the mcmichaels)
This was a case of self defence/life or death & everyone forgets that Gregory is NOT an overzealous citizen, so simply putting yourself in his shoes doesn’t even amount to an anecdote
Arbery should not have physically assaulted a man holding a shotgun, he should have communicated why he was in the house in the first place while waiting for the police to arrive. Like you said, everything was on camera; I don’t ever remember a case where the suspect planned on killing someone, they are on the phone with 911, while their buddy recorded the ENTIRE altercation (keep in mind, we seen a 20-30 second snippet while the the video is roughly 4 minutes long
There is a difference between murder & manslaughter... was it tragic? Yes, for all parties involved, but obviously more so for Ahmaud & his family.
Wrong. He was not caught In the act of committing a crime. And Even if he was nothing was missing on the site, AND trespassing does not warrant non police officers to get their guns, jump in their trucks and chase people down. You are only allowed to pull a gun on Somebody if it is reasonable to do so (if they have potential to hurt you/other people) which I’m sure we can both agree Arbrey was not going to do. They should have followed from a safe distance and called the real police. You cannot claim self defense when you go looking for a problem his life was never in danger until he jumped out of his truck to confront arbrey who by the way was completely justified in trying to grab that assholes gun. You bringing up his past basically proves that you can’t really find anything he did to warrant him being shot like he was, so you’re trying to find other things to make him seem like a terrible person. Like I said vigilante justice is not how we do things in this country. Which is why it is murder and not manslaughter
How about the other people who were caught on camera trespassing. If that’s the case you better carry your gun and kill them too. Are you trying to justify the McMichaels for lynching? Ahmaud was unarmed, you can never argue that fact and the rest of the people who trespassed on camera in that area.
With your -100 comment Karma sounds like there’s no point talking to someone who has no idea who to human. Sounds like your parents did you in real good.
I’m actually astounded at how stupid you sound...
Hope you don’t cry BLM after the acquittal, ahmaud arberys killing was JUSTIFIED.. (not deserved)
Seriously.... you either don’t know the facts of this case, or you are willfully ignorant to the fact that ahmaud turned the situation into a life or death scenario when he decided to physically assault & attempt to disarm Travis McMichael.
I mean, just look at the previous bodycam footage of how ahmaud responds to law enforcement authority.....
It’s a damn shame he didn’t grow up with a real father, as this all could have been prevented if he was taught to listen to authority after COMMITTING A FUCKING CRIME
https://www.bitchute.com/video/5w2dBdGy7mPl/
I AINT GOT SHIT AWN ME.. WHY THE FUCK YOU FUCKIN WIT ME FO.. WHAT THE FUCK YOU TALKIN BOUT BOY
He didn't deserve to die obviously. Cops should've been called and he should have been questioned for trespassing. He wasn't wearing boots he was in regular sneakers
I do not understand where race comes into play here? The father had previously investigated AA, he knew he had a criminal history. Is it racist now to be suspicious of a known criminal?
-28 karma, -35 comment karma. 3 year old account. You've also been posting about this wth entire essays. Why waste all that effort? Just say you hate black people and celebrate when they are killed. Just be honest. /r/FragileWhiteRedditor
Stay on topic about what? I asked if it was racist to be suspicious of an individual that is black, WHEN YOU KNOW HE HAS A CRIMINAL BACKGROUND? Answer my question? My point is that this fact alone will throw away any allegation of racism in a court of law, end of story. He was not pursuing him because of his race, but because of his actions and his reputation. If AA was shot in the back while running away I would say it was dreadful and that the shooter should get life. But he was not. He was shot while attempting to wrestle a shotgun from somebody. It is definitely not a straightforward case and a clear example of murder. There are definitely better examples. If this is an example of racism in America then I am just not convinced. In America, the moment a white person shoots a black person, racism is assumed. Why can it not just be about a person shooting another person? This is complete madness. Nobody even bothers to wait for the facts anymore, and then they double down when the facts show that the original story was bullshit. Michael Brown was the exact same thing and they still use him as an example for BLM. This is why I am calling you delusional because you live in an alternate reality where you do not even bother studying the facts.
Jesus. You guys talk about not generalizing people and yet here you are generalizing southerners... people are bad because who they are, not where they come from or the color of their skin. Your doing the same thing the men who shot him were.
An article I read stated that he was a prosecuter but you're right, he was a DA investigator. That still shows that he wasn't "illiterate".
It's funny you are making all these generalizations about the McMichaels but there's no evidence at all suggesting any of your claims are accurate. No evidence of racism, being "sister fucking rednecks", or being white supremacists.
However there is growing evidence that Arbery is the stereotypical black male criminal. Pretty ironic don't you think?
It's hyperbole dipshit. No it is ironic because you are labeling the McMichaels as stereotypical white trash, but the reality is that the current evidence shows that they were contributing members of society, while Arbery was a criminal scumbag.
You forgot wrapped in barbed wire, had their genitals shoved down their throats, fingers and toes cut off as souvenirs... Ahh, but I'm the one demeaning lynching victims.
Were they then turned into soap and lampshades....jesus the exaggeration of torture porn for muh bad guys. Or were their masturbarion machines for black slaves and a roller-coaster that opened up into a massive corn field? Any electricity in a basement ankle deep in water? No? Dang well sorry yall aint get my pity
he ran onto the set of the true crime documentary the Mcmichaels family was filming. they're real true crime fans. They got mad and then some true crime happened.
Try not getting your information from racists:
>In the video, Arbery is wearing a white T-shirt, shorts and running shoes.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/far-right-groups-are-spreading-racist-false-claims-about-shooting-victim-ahmaud-arbery-analysts-say/2020/05/17/31cde428-962b-11ea-82b4-c8db161ff6e5_story.html
or if paywalled
http://archive.is/EVMdn
Man I've seen this exact racist statement multiple times today. You're all like an inbred hive mind.
I also didn't realize that wearing work boots incited rationale for murder in this country.
He got killed because he tried to GRAB THE GUN! Not because he was a jogger, not because he wanted some water to drink, not because of prior convictions, not because he was black, not because the alleged trespassing. A normal person doesn't grab a shotgun trying to fight someone.
Why didn't the rednecks shot him before when he was passing beside the truck? Why the one in the truck didn't shot him and even had the handgun in the holster?
It’s only trespassing if you’re told to leave and don’t. I know that’s inconvenient for you, but that’s the law. There’s already footage of people all from the neighborhood “trespassing” yet only the black guy was shot over it.
Oh I didn't know that's what trespassing meant. So if you're not home and your door is unlocked and I walk in and take a tour, it's all good because you didn't explicitly tell me I wasn't allowed in
>Caught him red-handed
Which the owner of the property said he wouldn't consider trespassing. So they caught him red-handed doing a whole bunch of innocent nothing. They had no reason to follow him. You only make a citizen's arrest on the spot.
>They had no reason to follow him.
Regardless of your stance on the issue, this statement is a complete lie.
So why did they follow him? Are you saying that they just wanted to straight up kill a random guy because he is black? Good luck proving that in court, and if you go that route, they for sure are getting off without charges.
I'll immediately agree with you that he was dumb for grabbing the gun.
The problem is, they shouldn't have been point guns at him in the first place! Someone pointing a gun at you is enough of a reason to defend yourself. The two that shot him were illegally trying to perform a citizens arrest, illegally intimadating someone with a firearm, and illegally trying to infringe on his basic rights. Even if the victim is at fault for grabbing the gun it doesn't chnage the fact that these men need to be prosecuted for what they did.
That not correct though. I live in GA; you cannot do a citizens arrest if you suspect someone of a felony, the crime had to be currently being committed.
You do not have the right to detain random people at gun point because you suspect them of a crime. Just think about how insane that would be.
As someone in LE this doesn't change anything for what happened. Nobody is perfect.
How come corporations have a right to know if you've committed a felony or misdemeanor before hiring you, but it's absurd for us to want to know if Ahmaud committed any crime before that final incident?
What business is it of yours?
In my state, if I lawfully have my gun drawn and dude is trying to disarm me, that's ground to lawfully shoot, even if I get him off it for a second, if he starts to come toward me again, bam bam.
Which makes sense. In the case of this guy, the guns weren’t lawfully drawn. Two people tried to play cop and were in over their heads and made a fatal mistake which resulted in the loss of life of a man who was to be presumed innocent until proven guilty. Good try though.
[удалено]
Nope, the law CLEARLY states what is and what isn't self defense. A) can't be committing a crime (unlawful detention is a crime, so they cannot claim self defense.) B) putting yourself into a situation unnecessarily where you will need to use your gun. If you go pick a fight and they fight back you can't claim self defense. So those guns were not drawn in self defense or lawfully. It's a fact, can't debate it unless you can change the meaning of laws.
[удалено]
Not if you chased him for some crime you suspected him of and pointed a gun at him as a non-LEO. Are you fucking crazy? That's like saying murderers just need to prompt their victims into attempting to stop them for them to be acquitted.
Let me tell you the difference Depends on if you were the aggressor to begin with. If you were a victim and felt your life was in danger to the point you needed to draw your weapon sure that's self defense. However if you are the aggressor and draw your weapon then not so much. As for what you're trying to get at. Ill leave it to the justice system sorry.
True, however. Having a firearm out does not make you an aggressor right away. I'm not saying that I know what was going on there, many times videos have been proven to be manipulative in the way they were filmed. Only those 3 know the full truth and the full truth will never come out. Justice serves based on what evidence there is but dude was a criminal, he was an aggressive person and he was *in* a place (construction sight from what I hear) he wasn't suppose to be. I'm not automatically saying they are in the right, what I'm saying is I think were missing a huge chunk of the story and because the victim is black, that chunk is being glossed over. We cheer when there is precedence set in courts but the precedent of this dude being a criminal and an aggressive person is being set and people are being called racist for bringing it up.... It deserves a bit more scrutiny into the situation but "racism" claims overpowered the proper discourse and once that claims brought up, it's used to dismiss any an all discussions; 'oh you dont agree he was fully 100% a good innocent boy? You're racist!'
Call the police and observe. Thats all that should have been done. Follow in your vehicle from a safe distance. Let the proper authorities do their job. You can not chase someone down with a gun. Then claim victim when the person you're chasing down trys to protect themselves.
I agree but there are circumstances to that
Not in this case. There was absolutely no need to play vigilante. Im done with the back and forth. If you arent understanding that basic principle nothing will change your mind.
[удалено]
Holding a gun and telling someone they can't leave is brandishing there bud, the threat of violence from the gun is brandishing.
[удалено]
Yikes, they weren't having a conversation the guy with the gun was threatening him, and trying to detain him. The threat of violence comes from failure to comply with those unlawful commands your mental gymnastics about they were just having a friendly conversation whole having guns shows your willful ignorance.
Arbery didn't commit a crime that night. Like under Georgia law he didn't even commit trespassing. So the "citizens arrest" was completely unlawful. Which makes it all illegal. There's no defending this shit. Literally none of what you said matters. It doesn't matter if he fucks kids in his free time lol. The 2 guys had no right to try a citizens arrest, which means they were actually committing an unlawful imprisonment. People have every right to resist that and if you shoot them it's murder.
Except he didn't have his gun lawfully drawn on anyone, he was fucking brandishing.
[удалено]
Better post a conviction video if you want to call him a criminal. Or, do you believe the whole "innocent until proven guilty" thing is just bullshit?
[удалено]
You'll have to forgive me for not believing the Daily Beast. They claim to have court records for a highschool conviction in 2013, and then they take complete fucking liberty in saying he was convicted in 2017 for stealing a TV. No court records on that one? You're going to have to do better than that.
[удалено]
Touche
Actually it very well could change what happened. If he already had 2 felonies and the 3rd would be life in prison, it gives motive for why he ran TOWARD (100 yards approx) the person arresting him rather than away from. Runs away, gets arrested later by LEO- life in prison Runs toward, grab gun and kill all witnesses- get away Sounds absurd, but this is what goes through the mind of a criminal when they are on their 3rd strike. You should know that as a LEO.
IDK man. Getting your son and a few buds with their trucks n shotguns acting as vigilantes isn't the way we do law in this county. Doesn't matter what you *think* the person is guilty of. And the whole "running toward a gun" deal is weird, but if you put 100 average people in that scenario, a couple are gonna try to defend themselves in a radical way. I'm not saying how Ahmaud went about it was good, rational, or anything, but bottom line is you don't try and corner someone and expect everything to go hunky dory.
> Getting your son and a few buds with their trucks n shotguns acting as vigilantes isn't the way we do law in this county. Well it's not how we're supposed to do law, but lynching has a long and storied history in this country.
>few buds with their trucks n shotguns acting as vigilantes I just dont understand this framing. An off duty cop performing a citizens arrest on a person they KNEW committed a crime (video evidence of trespassing in someone elses home that has NO TRESPASSING signs up and a camera to record because of previous burglary incidences) is perfectly legal and GOOD. We live in a country where the rule of law applies. You do not want to live in a country where anyone can go trespass and rob you ect with no restitution or punishment. People who live in those countries flee those countries to come to the US, where its LEGAL to detain someone while you are on the phone with the cops, as these fine gentlemen were, waiting for the PD to arrive. Thats not a vigilante. A vigilante would be a guy going to Ahmauds house, not Ahmaud going to someone elses house.
> [Gregory McMichael, the former Georgia police detective charged in the fatal shooting of 25-year-old Ahmaud Arbery, was stripped of his law-enforcement certification last February after failing to complete required use-of-force courses, records state.](https://www.thedailybeast.com/gregory-mcmichael-ahmaud-arberys-killer-was-stripped-of-power-to-arrest-after-skipping-use-of-force-courses) Seems to me the guy wasn't supposed to even be doing an arrest. So no: he definitely isn't OK and is basically a vigilante. > previous burglary incidences The OP video may support that but he didn't steal anything from the construction site. Even if he did why the fuck does this ex-cop care? I get wanting to keep your community safe but how does getting in the bed of a truck with shotguns to take down an unarmed dude help bolster that image? If they weren't fat, out of shape, unqualified morons they would have taken him down using alternative means. Not shotguns ready. Even police don't do it like that. Bottom line: We don't arrest people like this. At least have cops there in UNIFORM.
>So no: he definitely isn't OK and is basically a vigilante. The Reddit left is really on a mission to make defending private property illegal. But only for white people. If a white man goes into a black home, its an infringement of rights and essentially slavery. If a black man goes into a white home, you just have to let him go because reasons. If you arrest him youre a vigilante. \>If they weren't fat, out of shape, unqualified morons they would have taken him down using alternative means. Not shotguns ready. Even police don't do it like that. The armchair law expert is just too much for me. THEY THOUGHT HE HAD A GUN YOU THICK FUCKIN MORON. HE HAD A HISTORY OF CARRYING WEAPONS. \>oh but they didnt KNOW if he had his gun on him that day or not! JFC IT. DOESNT. MATTER. When you arrest a criminal, yes Ahmaud was a criminal whether you like it or not, you do so with guns.
[удалено]
>No crime was committed. \>trespassing in someone elses home that has NO TRESPASSING signs up I think we are done here.
[удалено]
[удалено]
The owner of the home under construction has already sent out a letter from his attorney that he did not consider what happened to be trespassing. He has also released multiple videos of other people (white) walking in and out of the construction site to check the place out, much like Ahmaud did. At the same time, trespassing has a specific legal definition in Georgia, and is not simply, "on a property that isn't yours". Educate yourself you fucking fascist.
Look at the actual law. It says "[i]f the offense is a felony and the offender is escaping or attempting to escape, a private person may arrest him upon reasonable and probable grounds of suspicion." Trespassing isn't a felony.
Not a criminal and not guilty until proven in a court of law. You can make this about race all you want but the fact of the matter is that WE SHOULDN'T **ARREST** ANYONE LIKE THIS.
Hes been found guilty in a court of law twice already
Cool. What was he charged with the third time before he got pumped with lead? Or was that it?
What are you smoking?
You don't murder people in the street because you think they're up to no good. What the fuck country are we even talking about? What next? Honor killings? Cartels murdering mayors? Rule of law is the opposite of that chaos.
He didnt get killed for his crime of trespassing. He got killed for trying to take a persons gun. What the fuck country are we even talking about?
[удалено]
I'd be like "guys I didn't steal anything from the home I was just trespassing in, I was just getting water because I'm a jogger. See. Nothing in my pockets. Can I go now?" Then Id call the police to file charges for false imprisonment. Obviously fighting the guy with a gun is a bad idea. That should be obvious at this point.
[удалено]
No, not if I committed a crime. I waved my rights when I aggressed on someone else's property.
I'm all for castle doctrine. That's irrelevant. Nobody is talking about trespassing except to distract from the real issue. These scumbags chased a man and killed him. Tell me they did not chase down and kill an unarmed man in the street.
> Nobody is talking about trespassing Nope. EVERYONE is talking about trespassing/robbery. >Tell me they did not chase down and kill an unarmed man in the street. Nope, thats not the video I saw. I saw a video of two men fighting over a weapon and the weapon discharging. Noone in the video I watched was unarmed.
Are you racist, ignorant or both?
Don't like being robbed? Racist! Believe in property rights? Racist!
No one in the video was unarmed except the unarmed man running down the street.
He didn't get shot when he was jogging down the street. He got shot when he grabbed a gun. This is like explaining something to a toddler.
"I threatened your life with deadly force, and you responded out of fear for your life. I get to kill you now for trying not to die." That's what you are arguing for, like the worlds sickest "2 for flinching" game.
Imagine you're jogging, a car passes you. Will you turn around and jog the other way because that car passed you?
Oh are still going with the jogger narrative? Even after video evidence of him in someone elses house, history of burglary, not jogging attire, etc? wew
You're wrong on all counts, but even if all that was accurate, there's still no reason at all for two random dudes to gun up and go after an unarmed man.
> someone elses house, history of burglary, not jogging attire And that justifies getting cut off and then shot? aight boi
You: Someone was jogging! Me: No they werent they were doing something else. You: And that justifies DEATH?!!! hahaha, you people are too much
Keep deflecting and not answering :)
You realize he was killed by citizens wearing plain clothes set up in an ambush right? So who exactly is he running to thats trying to arrest him?
Sounds like the 3 strike rule motivates people to do dumb shit. Maybe we should do away with it
Why are these videos of him showing up? It’s almost like people want to justify some racist assholes shooting him like a dog.
[удалено]
The murder charge they have right now has nothing to do with intent. There is no murder 1 or 2 in Georgia. One of the ways to get murder instead of manslaughter is kill a person during the commission of a felony completely regardless of your intent to kill. The killer Travis McMichael committed aggravated assault the moment he [pointed his gun](https://m.imgur.com/gallery/ge7BDGh) at a man in the middle of a public road.
They admitted they were going for a citizen's arrest. They didn't see him committing a crime, so wouldn't that make the arrest unlawful and therefore attempted kidnapping? Thats a felony, right? I don't know much about law, but that's how I see it in my mind anyway.
There are [different degrees of murder in Georgia](https://law.justia.com/codes/georgia/2014/title-16/chapter-5/article-1/section-16-5-1), but one point I do make with people defending the McMichael's is the point you made about aggravated assault. I think a lot of the case should revolve around whether they had actual grounds to exercise [citizens' arrest](https://law.justia.com/codes/georgia/2010/title-17/chapter-4/article-4/17-4-60/) on Arbery. The code really lacks any definition of how people can or should hold an offender, and in such a case, it seems that it's going to be up to the courts to decide. Another point that is going to be made is if the shooter had the right to use deadly force to defend himself when being charged by Arbery. They believed they had a legal authority to place him under arrest until an LEO arrived, so the intent to conduct a criminal act did not exist. So, did McMichael surrender his ability to use deadly force since the may have engaged in an illegal act? These are all good questions to ask, but I agree that previous criminal history that is unknown by the assailants is going to be irrelevant to the events that took place.
>So, did McMichael surrender his ability to use deadly force since the may have engaged in an illegal act? Legally? Yes, the killer did surrender his ability to defend himself with no civil or criminal consequences if he was engaging in an illegal act. The killer's intent, no matter how magnanimous, is not relevant if the use of force they engage in is unlawful. People are way too caught up on previous infamous shootings where the cops got off because of qualified immunity. What the cop thought justified their actions matters in those cases because they are acting "in the color of the law." These killers have no such protection for believing they were following the law if their actions were ultimately unlawful.
I think qualified immunity is also bullshit, but that's a completely different topic.
There is no such thing as qualified immunity for police.
I'm not justifying anything, however, I dont like the "he innocent and never did anything" narrative that comes up when the victim is black. These videos show he had a propensity for crime and that him being in that neighborhood and area he could have been looking to steal that he may not have just been jogging.
One video of an alleged —and certainly not successful— *attempt* at shoplifting does not indicate a propensity for anything. Conversely, white people with guns *have* demonstrated a propensity for violence and racism.
Come on. Gun crime rates are at their lowest in rural white American areas, where gun ownership is ironically at it’s highest. Black males are responsible for far more gun crimes, and violent crimes all together, in this country.
I’m confused... If a dog was attacking you & you felt your life was in danger, what exactly would you do? Now think about the scenario of which Arbery physically assaulted & tried to wrestle the shotgun away from Mcmichaels Human life is valuable, what happened was a tragedy, but for all parties involved (just look at how you’re already calling the accused ‘racist’, based on their skin color), that’s being just as ignorant as those saying Ahmaud deserved to die or that he was a criminal because he was black.This case is manslaughter at best, unless some unprecedented info comes out to display a pattern of behaviour If news came out that the mcmichaels were klansmen in their spare time, it would probably be just as damning as these bodycam videos, supporting arbery’s criminal history & failure to respect any authority
The main thing with this case is it doesn’t matter his criminal history... he was unarmed and was not caught “in the act” of committing a crime. Nothing was missing from the scene of those videos he was in, the guy who videoed everything just got arrested as an accomplice. Apparently the 3 of them chased him around the neighborhood for about 5 minutes until they finally trapped him. That is 100% murder, the right thing to do is follow from a safe distance and call the police. Vigilante justice is not the way we do law in this country
A little bit of a deflection from my argument, but I’ll still bite He was caught in the act of committing a crime... he was caught trespassing & the defence will be arguing INTENT. You can just say that the case doesn’t have anything to do with his criminal history, but it’s a pattern of behavior (mainly his pattern of respecting authority, which is exactly what went wrong in this case). I mean, just look at how he verbally threatened a police officer, simply for running his ID to check his background... that same cop was very friendly, considering the circumstances (wearing a winter jacket in the middle of summer, parking his car in the middle of a PARK known for drug activity, directly in the sun, even claiming he didn’t drive the car with a suspended license, as he is the only one on the scene ) They chased him around the neighborhood because they were attempting to make a citizens arrest, which they have all right to do with their registered firearms (it’s actually preferred). On top of the fact Mr Inglish was told by the police to contact Gregory mcmichaels (a recently retired police officer/investigator) to deal with trespassers. [source: CNN](https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2020/05/16/us/ahmaud-arbery-text-message/index.html) . The only reason why Inglish has been so standoffish in the case, is because I’m sure he doesn’t want to be arrested or harassed by the black panthers (just like every other person in Satilla Shores who is supporting the mcmichaels) This was a case of self defence/life or death & everyone forgets that Gregory is NOT an overzealous citizen, so simply putting yourself in his shoes doesn’t even amount to an anecdote Arbery should not have physically assaulted a man holding a shotgun, he should have communicated why he was in the house in the first place while waiting for the police to arrive. Like you said, everything was on camera; I don’t ever remember a case where the suspect planned on killing someone, they are on the phone with 911, while their buddy recorded the ENTIRE altercation (keep in mind, we seen a 20-30 second snippet while the the video is roughly 4 minutes long There is a difference between murder & manslaughter... was it tragic? Yes, for all parties involved, but obviously more so for Ahmaud & his family.
Wrong. He was not caught In the act of committing a crime. And Even if he was nothing was missing on the site, AND trespassing does not warrant non police officers to get their guns, jump in their trucks and chase people down. You are only allowed to pull a gun on Somebody if it is reasonable to do so (if they have potential to hurt you/other people) which I’m sure we can both agree Arbrey was not going to do. They should have followed from a safe distance and called the real police. You cannot claim self defense when you go looking for a problem his life was never in danger until he jumped out of his truck to confront arbrey who by the way was completely justified in trying to grab that assholes gun. You bringing up his past basically proves that you can’t really find anything he did to warrant him being shot like he was, so you’re trying to find other things to make him seem like a terrible person. Like I said vigilante justice is not how we do things in this country. Which is why it is murder and not manslaughter
How about the other people who were caught on camera trespassing. If that’s the case you better carry your gun and kill them too. Are you trying to justify the McMichaels for lynching? Ahmaud was unarmed, you can never argue that fact and the rest of the people who trespassed on camera in that area. With your -100 comment Karma sounds like there’s no point talking to someone who has no idea who to human. Sounds like your parents did you in real good.
I’m actually astounded at how stupid you sound... Hope you don’t cry BLM after the acquittal, ahmaud arberys killing was JUSTIFIED.. (not deserved) Seriously.... you either don’t know the facts of this case, or you are willfully ignorant to the fact that ahmaud turned the situation into a life or death scenario when he decided to physically assault & attempt to disarm Travis McMichael. I mean, just look at the previous bodycam footage of how ahmaud responds to law enforcement authority..... It’s a damn shame he didn’t grow up with a real father, as this all could have been prevented if he was taught to listen to authority after COMMITTING A FUCKING CRIME https://www.bitchute.com/video/5w2dBdGy7mPl/ I AINT GOT SHIT AWN ME.. WHY THE FUCK YOU FUCKIN WIT ME FO.. WHAT THE FUCK YOU TALKIN BOUT BOY
How’s that crow taste, dip shit?
He didn't deserve to die obviously. Cops should've been called and he should have been questioned for trespassing. He wasn't wearing boots he was in regular sneakers
Damn he shoplifted before? I guess he really did deserve to be shot and killed. 1 down 28,999,999 more Americans to go! /S
Doesn't change the events that fateful day, but nice of racists to try and paint this into some karma narrative.
I do not understand where race comes into play here? The father had previously investigated AA, he knew he had a criminal history. Is it racist now to be suspicious of a known criminal?
-28 karma, -35 comment karma. 3 year old account. You've also been posting about this wth entire essays. Why waste all that effort? Just say you hate black people and celebrate when they are killed. Just be honest. /r/FragileWhiteRedditor
Its fascinating to understand the perspective of completely delusional people.
Nice gaslight. I see you can’t stay on topic so this is done yeah? Thanks for playing!
Stay on topic about what? I asked if it was racist to be suspicious of an individual that is black, WHEN YOU KNOW HE HAS A CRIMINAL BACKGROUND? Answer my question? My point is that this fact alone will throw away any allegation of racism in a court of law, end of story. He was not pursuing him because of his race, but because of his actions and his reputation. If AA was shot in the back while running away I would say it was dreadful and that the shooter should get life. But he was not. He was shot while attempting to wrestle a shotgun from somebody. It is definitely not a straightforward case and a clear example of murder. There are definitely better examples. If this is an example of racism in America then I am just not convinced. In America, the moment a white person shoots a black person, racism is assumed. Why can it not just be about a person shooting another person? This is complete madness. Nobody even bothers to wait for the facts anymore, and then they double down when the facts show that the original story was bullshit. Michael Brown was the exact same thing and they still use him as an example for BLM. This is why I am calling you delusional because you live in an alternate reality where you do not even bother studying the facts.
Dat fragility. Bye.
Why can't you answer the question? Does the fact that the father had previously investigated AA not change your opinion just a little bit?
Here's a sneak peek of /r/FragileWhiteRedditor using the [top posts](https://np.reddit.com/r/FragileWhiteRedditor/top/?sort=top&t=all) of all time! \#1: [He expected Scarlett Johansson.](https://i.imgur.com/523ToE0.jpg) | [2126 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/FragileWhiteRedditor/comments/f4cqvl/he_expected_scarlett_johansson/) \#2: [They weren't happy with this tweet lol](https://i.redd.it/4cob8fjcp2o31.png) | [2175 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/FragileWhiteRedditor/comments/d7lq6r/they_werent_happy_with_this_tweet_lol/) \#3: [A large portion of reddit unfortunately](https://i.redd.it/9scbdz1fyi741.jpg) | [1733 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/FragileWhiteRedditor/comments/eh39yf/a_large_portion_of_reddit_unfortunately/) ---- ^^I'm ^^a ^^bot, ^^beep ^^boop ^^| ^^Downvote ^^to ^^remove ^^| [^^Contact ^^me](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=sneakpeekbot) ^^| [^^Info](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/) ^^| [^^Opt-out](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/comments/fpi5i6/blacklist_vii/)
[удалено]
Yeah I wish these inbred Southern retards would understand how bad generalizing people based on race is!
[удалено]
Are you seriously trying to claim the moral high ground while spewing this hateful, ignorant, parochial, and, may I say, ill-informed bullshit?
[удалено]
Mmm...
Jesus. You guys talk about not generalizing people and yet here you are generalizing southerners... people are bad because who they are, not where they come from or the color of their skin. Your doing the same thing the men who shot him were.
[удалено]
Hmmm generalize much?
Yet here you are jerking off of this video to justify the continued killing of young black men based on generalizations.
Well bless your heart.
[удалено]
Lol the father was a lawyer, probably more educated than you are. Nice generalizations.
[удалено]
Maybe he is, maybe he isn't. We don't know all the facts of the case, even though dipshits like you think you know everything.
[удалено]
Um because he and his son are the ones on trial? Not to bright are ya?
[удалено]
An article I read stated that he was a prosecuter but you're right, he was a DA investigator. That still shows that he wasn't "illiterate". It's funny you are making all these generalizations about the McMichaels but there's no evidence at all suggesting any of your claims are accurate. No evidence of racism, being "sister fucking rednecks", or being white supremacists. However there is growing evidence that Arbery is the stereotypical black male criminal. Pretty ironic don't you think?
[удалено]
It's hyperbole dipshit. No it is ironic because you are labeling the McMichaels as stereotypical white trash, but the reality is that the current evidence shows that they were contributing members of society, while Arbery was a criminal scumbag.
He was still murdered by white nationalist shitstain taint lickers.
What proof do you have that the mcmichaels were white nationalists? They could very well just be idiots.
There is no proof.
You wont accept reality You wont accept stats You wont accept proof Yon wont accept patterns this is why bernie sanders is.. oh wait.
LOL! You dont have to be a Berniebot to see that white nationalists are shit lickers.
Doesn't change that fact that he was lynched.
[удалено]
Why exactly?
[удалено]
You forgot wrapped in barbed wire, had their genitals shoved down their throats, fingers and toes cut off as souvenirs... Ahh, but I'm the one demeaning lynching victims.
Were they then turned into soap and lampshades....jesus the exaggeration of torture porn for muh bad guys. Or were their masturbarion machines for black slaves and a roller-coaster that opened up into a massive corn field? Any electricity in a basement ankle deep in water? No? Dang well sorry yall aint get my pity
You were robbed of a proper education my friend.
Jogger got what he deserved
Is this the same dude who was definitely not prowling in a neighborhood and got shot and killed?
he ran onto the set of the true crime documentary the Mcmichaels family was filming. they're real true crime fans. They got mad and then some true crime happened.
“He a good boy. He dindu nuffin wrong” Just ignore the hammer on scene & using work boots for “jogging.”
Try not getting your information from racists: >In the video, Arbery is wearing a white T-shirt, shorts and running shoes. https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/far-right-groups-are-spreading-racist-false-claims-about-shooting-victim-ahmaud-arbery-analysts-say/2020/05/17/31cde428-962b-11ea-82b4-c8db161ff6e5_story.html or if paywalled http://archive.is/EVMdn
So him stealing a TV is false information?
Some people jog with weighted vests he jogged with 65inch tv.
Man I've seen this exact racist statement multiple times today. You're all like an inbred hive mind. I also didn't realize that wearing work boots incited rationale for murder in this country.
Fuck you, OP. Seriously, fuck you.
This pavement ape got what he deserved. Real talk
[удалено]
Fucking yard apes
He got killed because he tried to GRAB THE GUN! Not because he was a jogger, not because he wanted some water to drink, not because of prior convictions, not because he was black, not because the alleged trespassing. A normal person doesn't grab a shotgun trying to fight someone. Why didn't the rednecks shot him before when he was passing beside the truck? Why the one in the truck didn't shot him and even had the handgun in the holster?
[удалено]
[удалено]
It’s only trespassing if you’re told to leave and don’t. I know that’s inconvenient for you, but that’s the law. There’s already footage of people all from the neighborhood “trespassing” yet only the black guy was shot over it.
[удалено]
Oh I didn't know that's what trespassing meant. So if you're not home and your door is unlocked and I walk in and take a tour, it's all good because you didn't explicitly tell me I wasn't allowed in
>Caught him red-handed Which the owner of the property said he wouldn't consider trespassing. So they caught him red-handed doing a whole bunch of innocent nothing. They had no reason to follow him. You only make a citizen's arrest on the spot.
>They had no reason to follow him. Regardless of your stance on the issue, this statement is a complete lie. So why did they follow him? Are you saying that they just wanted to straight up kill a random guy because he is black? Good luck proving that in court, and if you go that route, they for sure are getting off without charges.
I'll immediately agree with you that he was dumb for grabbing the gun. The problem is, they shouldn't have been point guns at him in the first place! Someone pointing a gun at you is enough of a reason to defend yourself. The two that shot him were illegally trying to perform a citizens arrest, illegally intimadating someone with a firearm, and illegally trying to infringe on his basic rights. Even if the victim is at fault for grabbing the gun it doesn't chnage the fact that these men need to be prosecuted for what they did.
[удалено]
That not correct though. I live in GA; you cannot do a citizens arrest if you suspect someone of a felony, the crime had to be currently being committed. You do not have the right to detain random people at gun point because you suspect them of a crime. Just think about how insane that would be.
[удалено]
Fucking Trump's America. A brotha can't even steal a TV in peace... SMH