The Ahmaud Arbery Shooting

[LCC]

So after a 160+ responses, if running a poll on this thread the results would look like this:
- the vast majority of respondents know blatant murder when they see it
- a few respondents think like the shooters, hence justify their actions

A mirror image of gun ownership in our country, the bad actions of the few badly tainting the responsibile actions of the many.

 

[blues7]

So after a 160+ responses, if running a poll on this thread the results would look like this:
- the vast majority of respondents know blatant murder when they see it
- a few respondents think like the shooters, hence justify their actions

A mirror image of gun ownership in our country, the bad actions of the few badly tainting the responsibile actions of the many.

We are a nation of laws, like it or not...and the presumption of innocence is afforded to even those we may find morally, ethically or otherwise wanting.

Your painting members here with a broad brush is seemingly no better than those you abhor.

Some of us here have actually participated in the judicial system and ensured that justice was done in the cases we brought forward.

You sound like you'd make a great, impartial juror. (Sarcasm intended.)

 

[flagman1776]

While Arbery might have been casing the house under construction... maybe even 'probably' was... the premises was not secured or posted. The limited video from inside does not show him searching for items to steal. At most, he might have been charged with misdemeanor trespass. So even with the additional video evidence, I don't believe Arbery could have been successfully charged with a felony.
After reporting a suspicious person... they CHOSE to arm themselves. They CHOSE to pursue him. Rather than following and directing the Police to him, so the Police could stop and question him. They CHOSE to confront him. They pulled in front, stopped the pickup, blocking the path. When he tried to avoid them, they confronted him with a shotgun. THEY are the AGGRESSORS.

 

[fredj338]

While Arbery might have been casing the house under construction... maybe even 'probably' was... the premises was not secured or posted. The limited video from inside does not show him searching for items to steal. At most, he might have been charged with misdemeanor trespass. So even with the additional video evidence, I don't believe Arbery could have been successfully charged with a felony.
After reporting a suspicious person... they CHOSE to arm themselves. They CHOSE to pursue him. Rather than following and directing the Police to him, so the Police could stop and question him. They CHOSE to confront him. They pulled in front, stopped the pickup, blocking the path. When he tried to avoid them, they confronted him with a shotgun. THEY are the AGGRESSORS.

This imo is basically the Zimmerman case. The confrontation was started by someone toting a gun & now their plea is self def because they had to protect the gun? Self defense is not chasing someone that is apparently unarmed, just because you have a gun. Civilians dont do this, I dont care what you are retired from. Pick up the phone, dial 911 & go back to your house, car, whatever.

 

[bulletslap]

I watched the videos repeatedly. IMHO, the lying lamestream media completely misrepresent what happened, in their ongoing effort to twist the facts to meet their racist (pro-black; anti-white) agenda. This is the media race baiting us, creating fake racial conflict by lying about current events in order to unnecessarily exacerbate racial unrest in the USA.

What I saw was that a man trespassed at a construction site, then ran away as though running away from a crime scene. I do not see joggers routinely running in the middle of the street, then attacking people. This was not a simply jogging expedition by the perpetrator; this was a vicious attack by a muscular and violent man. In fact, that is exactly what the runner was doing: running away form the crime scene. Two good Samaritans try to stop the bad guy, a known criminal, running away from a crime scene. The known criminal runner attacks one of the good Samaritans, and most appropriately gets shot for his attack on the victims.

It was perfectly reasonable self defense for the man, who was getting attached by a young, buff, athletic aggressor trying to take away his gun, to shoot the aggressor. There was certainly a disparity of force. The runner/attacker was strong, muscular, buff and extremely aggressive. The victims were fat and lacking in muscles.

I think that the two victims (the white men) were in reasonable fear of imminent death or serious bodily injury from the runner (black guy), who ran at them victims and attacked them. That gave the victims the right to deploy deadly force to stop the attack, which is exactly what they did.

The arrests, two months after the fact, are politically (racially, anti-white person) motivated arrests, much like the Treyvon Martin case, following a justified self defense shooting. The victims should never have been arrested; they exercised their God-given, legally justified right to self defense when under attack by a significantly physically stronger aggressor.

What are the chances that my post gets deleted due simply to my opinion? 90%.

I think you are on to something, as it seems the first 3 DAs didn’t want to prosecute.

I don’t think what these two guys did was very wise, even though it may have been legal. All of this can change as more facts are known. The popular media can’t be trusted to report unbiased news, so my default setting is 180 degrees from what they tell me.

 

[ColbyBruce]

FYI, joggers do indeed run down the middle of streets. The middle of the street is generally level, has few if any cracks or potholes, and the jogger is less susceptible to attacks by pets.

 

[LCC]

We are a nation of laws, like it or not...and the presumption of innocence is afforded to even those we may find morally, ethically or otherwise wanting.

Your painting members here with a broad brush is seemingly no better than those you abhor.

Some of us here have actually participated in the judicial system and ensured that justice was done in the cases we brought forward.

You sound like you'd make a great, impartial juror. (Sarcasm intended.)

While serving in 72', was a key witness in a military court murder trail in which my life was threatened if I testified. I testified, and my honorable discharge was delayed for months past my original discharge date as a result. The murderer was convicted.

While in marine law enforcement, testified for a very large drug bust that happened in our port on my watch, spent many days on the bench waiting to be called to the stand.

My broad brush was meant to paint the vast majority of members here with my respect for their clear understanding of just what this case represents, a racially motivated murder.

 

[blues7]

While serving in 72', was a key witness in a military court murder trail in which my life was threatened if I testified. I testified, and my honorable discharge was delayed for months past my original discharge date as a result. The murderer was convicted.

While in marine law enforcement, testified for a very large drug bust that happened in our port on my watch, spent many days on the bench waiting to be called to the stand.

My broad brush was meant to paint the vast majority of members here with my respect for their clear understanding of just what this case represents, a racially motivated murder.

While I don't agree with judging the case on the appearances, and before all the evidence has been evaluated, I do appreciate your service and your actions. I know what it's like to swim against the tide, both within and without my federal law enforcement career.

(And I do agree that the optics are bad in the case under discussion.)

I think we're pretty close in age based upon your date of military service.

 

[Rastoff]

This imo is basically the Zimmerman case.

I've heard a few people say this, not just here. While there are some similarities, this is quite different from Zimmerman/Martin in significant ways.

• In the Zimmerman case, Martin was in a gated community where he didn't belong.
  
  
• Aubrey was running down a public road.
  
  
• Zimmerman confronted Martin vocally and with his gun still concealed.
  
  
• The McMichaels confronted Aubrey with guns drawn and pointed.
  
  
• When Zimmerman followed Martin, it was Martin that assaulted Zimmerman.
  
  
• The McMichaels started their contact with Aubrey, by their own admission, with guns drawn.
  
  
• Zimmerman didn't even present his gun until his head was being bashed against the ground. When he did present the gun, his life was clearly in danger.
  
  
• The McMichaels had their guns out and pointed when their lives were not being threatened at all.

No, these cases are markedly different. The only similarity is that it was a white guy(s) with a gun and an unarmed black man.



What really amazes me is that no one is shouting from the rooftops how terrible the police response was. I mean, if this happened here, the McMichaels would be in jail or on bail that same day while all this was sorted out. The real crime here is a government agency that seems to be playing favorites or is racially biased. Why aren't we talking about that?

 

[LCC]

While I don't agree with judging the case on the appearances, and before all the evidence has been evaluated, I do appreciate your service and your actions. I know what it's like to swim against the tide, both within and without my federal law enforcement career.

(And I do agree that the optics are bad in the case under discussion.)

I think we're pretty close in age based upon your date of military service.

just turned 70...and as the great Rodney Dangerfield said, glad to be here, glad to be anywhere..

 

[Triathloncoach]

These racist scum embarrass legal gun owners.

 

[Mike 139]

I


........
What really amazes me is that no one is shouting from the rooftops how terrible the police response was. I mean, if this happened here, the McMichaels would be in jail or on bail that same day while all this was sorted out. The real crime here is a government agency that seems to be playing favorites or is racially biased. Why aren't we talking about that?

Today, @ the Coronavirus News conference, a reporter asked the President about this case. He responded that He was very unhappy about it and that DOJ is looking into it. Like I said in an earlier post, big G would be looking @ it.. The good ole boy infrastructure in place there is going to be investigated. Apparently, the Father had worked as an Investigator in the County attorneys Office....He should have absolutely, positively known better. You can fix ignorance thru education, but you can’t fix stupid.

 

[Tyree1867]

It takes very few instances like this one, adding in armored-up AR carriers at State Capitals protesting public safety orders, to make life as we know it to change. Throw in a few confederate battle flags, run over some folks peacefully protesting, some crazy kid shoots up his high school, and all gun owners will be vilified. Support for reducing our 2nd amendment rights will increase. I’m not being political here. Merely stating my fears. Ask a Canadian how they feel now that they are facing a ban.

You need to keep in mind that no country that has a British government background has a Bill of Rights like the US. All they have are what their legislatures have given them. What politicians give they can & have taken away. The US is different, so don't think politicians can just eliminate our God given rights.

 

[Tyree1867]

Just curious, how many involved in this thread would allow one or more non-LEO’s to declare a citizens arrest and forcibly detain you?

I'd be inclined to do so if they were pointing guns at me. Let the PD sort it out & then I'd sue their butts. But then again I have the advantage, in your hypothesis, of knowing I'm guilty of nothing.

 

[Imissedagain]

^^^^
Once they have you under their control, and you did nothing wrong, you're at their mercy and hope is a poor option.
Draw and move to cover.
Firing as necessary.
If they're Cops in uniform, better hope they are professionals and see that your hands are empty!!!

I talk from several experiences.

1. As I rolled down the window on a foggy night, the Cop had the 12 gauge in my face and shouted, " they're Soldiers, not black panthers", as he quickly raised his gun.
"Glad you're a Pro", was my first reply..... followed by, "they're Rangers and I'm an Airman."
Their berets caused the problem.
Late '60s near LA.

Just one event in a memorable evening.

2. Two Heavies pull up in front off my VW convertible, with their Eldorado. They jump out and one appears to chamber his little pistol. NYC early '70s

3.
4.

 

[forrestinmathews]

He ran around the passenger side of the truck. He wasn't impeded on that side. Why didn't he keep on jogging? Because he was not an innocent person. Should be end of the story, but the DA will have to make a show for the public so that everyone feels like something was done even if there is nothing to be done.

 

[Chubbs103]

It is worth pointing out that the McMichaels made more than one attempt to stop Arbrey.

Per their own statement, at the first attempt Arbrey turned around, so they had to try again.

https://int.nyt.com/data/documenthe...52fa09cdc974b970b79/optimized/full.pdf#page=1

 

[fredj338]

I've heard a few people say this, not just here. While there are some similarities, this is quite different from Zimmerman/Martin in significant ways.

• In the Zimmerman case, Martin was in a gated community where he didn't belong.
  
  
• Aubrey was running down a public road.
  
  
• Zimmerman confronted Martin vocally and with his gun still concealed.
  
  
• The McMichaels confronted Aubrey with guns drawn and pointed.
  
  
• When Zimmerman followed Martin, it was Martin that assaulted Zimmerman.
  
  
• The McMichaels started their contact with Aubrey, by their own admission, with guns drawn.
  
  
• Zimmerman didn't even present his gun until his head was being bashed against the ground. When he did present the gun, his life was clearly in danger.
  
  
• The McMichaels had their guns out and pointed when their lives were not being threatened at all.

No, these cases are markedly different. The only similarity is that it was a white guy(s) with a gun and an unarmed black man.



What really amazes me is that no one is shouting from the rooftops how terrible the police response was. I mean, if this happened here, the McMichaels would be in jail or on bail that same day while all this was sorted out. The real crime here is a government agency that seems to be playing favorites or is racially biased. Why aren't we talking about that?

The diff are minimum. The big point is nearly identical. Armed citizens confronting an unarmed alleged suspicious person. Gated community or not, you confront someone in a belligerent fashion, carrying a gun, and it goes physical, you are now bringing a gun to a fist fight. In both instances, no gun, totally diff outcomes. Dumb azz guys playing cop, both wrong & someone died for that, yes the same. You want to see a diff I just dont.

 

[Ziggy2525]

The diff are minimum. The big point is nearly identical. ...

The differences are huge. They weren’t anything at all alike. If that’s the kind propaganda your you’re getting fed in California, it may be time for you to plan your escape now.

Best bet might be an overland escape over the wall into Arizona or Nevada. Desperation move would be a risky water exfil, but that could put you in Oregon and it may not be much better.

 

[CCantu357]

Whenever I hear the term "citizen's arrest", I think of Gomer Pyle.

From what has been reveled so far, there is no reason for this young man to have lost his life. I would be willing to bet that most people on here, if threatened by someone with a shotgun who was not a peace officer, would try and fight back with any means necessary. If the only choice is to run and be shot in back or try to rush the threat, rushing makes sense. And even if the shooter felt it necessary to fire in defense, had he not brandished a shotgun at the young man, none of this would have happened. Politics aside, no one should lose their life over a suspected property crime. The sanctity of life should always be paramount.