patrick.net

If owner would have shot him, that is one thing. If a random other person shoots, then it becomes very different. Just call the damned police and/or owner, if you know him. If you do not know the owner, then how do you know that guy snooping about the house is a criminal and not owner's son-in-law?

In our neck of woods, it is OK to walk through house being built in your neighborhood. I would not do it in a place I am not familiar with, but in our block or neighboring ones I have done it myself.

WineHorror1 says

From what I can see, the gun isn't pointed at him until he grabs it. Sooo, he pointed it at himself. What. An. Idiot.

Agreed most botched endeavors are unplanned reactions from others.

In many places, entering construction sites has a long tradition of being met with violence. For concern over the tools & material, much less the property itself.

rd6B says

In our neck of woods, it is OK to walk through house being built in your neighborhood. I would not do it in a place I am not familiar with, but in our block or neighboring ones I have done it myself.

Sure you can do it, most builders/rehabbers would go ballistic by me if they had people walking through a construction site without permission. Construction workers are generally licensed, bonded and insured. A random citizen walks through and falls down stairs with no railing or a balcony area with no railing and dies or severely injures themselves, it's a massive lawsuit regardless of trespassing.

Had a builder show one of their homes under construction to a prospective buyer, with a broker. Woman/client broke her ankle. $700k later and increased insurance premiums and you can guess the builder and broker were not too thrilled. Ultimately it's up to the owner/builder to secure a property, but I'm kind of shocked about the "no big deal" attitude here from adults walking on construction sites that aren't their property. It's illegal and secondly a lot more dangerous than most people think. You have zero idea what has and hasn't been safely secured before workers left.

Now if there is a crew or owner on site, that's a different story. Clearly no one was there in this case.

WookieMan says

Construction workers are generally licensed, bonded and insured.

IL must have a different reality from TX
Construction workers are picked up under Highway 59 in Houston, where illegals congregate looking for work. Only a few qualified ones actually work for the builder.

OccasionalCortex says

Especially when we were kids.

Exactly, I admitted as much in an earlier comment. 25 is not a kid though. Kids shouldn't do it either as well, but that's harder to stop unless you're going to be a hover parent 24/7. Adults should know better.

rd6B says

IL must have a different reality from TX
the construction workers are picked up under Highway 59 in Houston, where illegals congregate looking for work. Only a few qualified ones actually work for the builder.

This happens in IL as well, but it's usually just day labor. Very few quality construction guys will keep those guys on if they're illegal. Whoever hires them still would generally be on the hook for any issues that happened on site.

If you've been building for 2+ years and haven't been sued, you're doing it wrong. lol. It's a very litigious business from defects to injuries. If I was building, and your aren't working on the house or the client, you ain't stepping foot in the place. Any builder that doesn't care about random trespassers is looking to go out of business from just one fall/death.

Relevant information has come to light:

Ex-detective charged in death of Ahmaud Arbery lost power to make arrests after skipping use-of-force training

The former police detective whose actions in the fatal shooting of Ahmaud Arbery in Georgia were defended as a citizen's arrest was stripped of his law enforcement certification and power to arrest a year before the deadly encounter, according to personnel records acquired by The Washington Post.

Gregory McMichael's certification was suspended in February 2019 after repeated failures to complete required training, according to documents from the Brunswick Judicial Circuit District Attorney's Office, including a warning in 2014 that McMichael had neglected to finish mandatory firearms and use-of-force courses.
...
...

A February 2019 memo signed by McMichael and other officials in the district attorney's office stated he "will not engage in any activity that would be construed as being law enforcement in nature."

"To that end, Mr. McMichael will not carry a firearm or badge, nor will he operate any vehicle in the motor pool outfitted with lights, siren or police radio equipment," the memo stated.



https://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Ex-detective-charged-in-death-of-Ahmaud-Arbery-15269309.php

LOL at arguing motives. Black guy going into strangers house wasn’t just “looking around”. Then somehow running from the scene not in his neighborhood, now he is a “jogger”. Then when confronted by two guys with guns he runs towards them and attacks guy holding a shotgun. Are we going to call every criminal that runs away a jogger now?
If the two guys with guns motive was just to kill the guy there would have never been a struggle the guy would have been shot before he even got close. They had the right to do a citizens arrest and they had the right to have a gun, wither it was a stupid idea or not.
The two guys are not what put everything in motion.
We all know if a white cop showed and got rushed by him, we would have had the same outcome except the officer would have had more legal protections.
Only thing I agree with anyone on is that the two guys were stupid for trying to stop a criminal.

RC2006 says

The two guys are not what put everything in motion.

That was kind of my point. If he just kept walking down the street there would have been zero problem. Even if he just stopped and was like shit, those guys got guns. Let me just explain what I was doing. Or just make up some shit, the cops come, you have nothing stolen on you so you explain you were just checking out a vacant house. You get hit with a small fine and move on with your life.

I've been confronted by neighbors and cops a couple dozen times breaking into foreclosed properties at the direction of the bank. Some situations got tense. Never once did I ever think of going after the people confronting me or talking shit back to someone. You deescalate the situation if you're there on legal grounds. If you're not, apparently you run and try to grab a guys gun.

Am I taking crazy pills or something? The weapon was legal. If Georgia allows citizen arrests, then the confrontation was legal. The person that was visibly seen entering a property was confronted and decided to go after the people thinking he was there illegally. What am I missing here?

WookieMan says

What am I missing here?

Oprah says NO!

" the two guys were stupid for trying to stop a criminal."
That's the core reason for societal decay though, at least to me. It's not like they were Covid snitchers, they were attempting to maintain civility by enforcing property laws they thought were broken.

steverbeaver says

they were attempting to maintain civility by enforcing property laws they thought were broken.

Amen. Doesn't matter how often you/we did it as kids or even adults. It's still an illegal act without permission. There's really not much else to discuss. A chain reaction happened because of the mans decision to enter the property illegally.

More from the sfgate article:

>>He (the neighbor Mr. English who was building a house) met Gregory McMichael after Arbery was killed, when McMichael approached him on the property and asked about the video from the day of the killing, according to the statement.

Ghosh, I bet Gregory McMichael is pretty happy that Mr. English did not threaten and chase said Mr. McMichael with a gun and then shoot him (for trespassing onto the construction site and/or for trying to defend himself against a threatening person with a gun). That would have been some real juicy poetic justice, would it not?

rd6B says

If owner would have shot him, that is one thing. If a random other person shoots, then it becomes very different. Just call the damned police and/or owner, if you know him. If you do not know the owner, then how do you know that guy snooping about the house is a criminal and not owner's son-in-law?

In our neck of woods, it is OK to walk through house being built in your neighborhood. I would not do it in a place I am not familiar with, but in our block or neighboring ones I have done it myself.

So, people aren't able to protect their own neighborhood?

WookieMan says

RC2006 says

The two guys are not what put everything in motion.

That was kind of my point. If he just kept walking down the street there would have been zero problem. Even if he just stopped and was like shit, those guys got guns. Let me just explain what I was doing. Or just make up some shit, the cops come, you have nothing stolen on you so you explain you were just checking out a vacant house. You get hit with a small fine and move on with your life.

I've been confronted by neighbors and cops a couple dozen times breaking into foreclosed properties at the direction of the bank. Some situations got tense. Never once did I ever think of going after the people confronting me or talking shit back to someone. You deescalate the situation if you're there on legal grounds. If you're not, apparently you run and try to grab a guys gun.

Am I taking crazy pills or something? The w...

Nothing. Don't let assholes gaslight you.

RC2006 says

Then somehow running from the scene not in his neighborhood, now he is a “jogger”.

You have no idea whether he was running before visiting that house under construction or not. If you were ever a runner you would know it's not unusual to slow down for a walk in the middle of a run.

We know very little, other than that he checked out a home under construction, which in some peoples books is not a big deal. That, and that he started running out of the neighborhood after that. Maybe he had been out for a walk (something a lot of people do these days when your cooped up the rest of the time), and then it changed to a run when he got dirty looks for, you know, being black in the wrong place.

That and the one other thing we know is that a couple of assholes chose to stop him armed to the hilt guns drawn. I don't think we know how that feels in that situation. Maybe he resisted becasue he's heard of people going to prison for less.

We just don't know all that much. My claim is more about what we don't know than what we do know. You guys are the ones coming up with the narrative that somehow justifies those guys stopping him with guns drawn.

There simply is no justification. Period !

marcus says

We know very little, other than that he checked out a home under construction, which in some peoples books is not a big deal

It's illegal if uninvited. There's not even an argument to be had at this point. You and anyone disagreeing are 100% wrong. Flat out wrong. He committed a crime regardless of how minor anyone thinks it is, which I do. It was illegal.

marcus says

RC2006 says

Then somehow running from the scene not in his neighborhood, now he is a “jogger”.

You have no idea whether he was running before visiting that house under construction or not. If you were ever a runner you would know it's not unusual to slow down for a walk in the middle of a run.

We know very little, other than that he checked out a home under construction, which in some peoples books is not a big deal. That, and that he started running out of the neighborhood after that. Maybe he had been out for a walk (something a lot of people do these days when your cooped up the rest of the time), and then it changed to a run when he got dirty looks for, you know, being black in the wrong place.

That and the one other thing we know is that a couple of assholes chose to stop him armed to the hilt guns drawn. I don't think we know how that feels in that situation. Maybe he resis...

Marcus,

Get the law changed if you don't like it. Maybe even run for office. Your tagline could be...

"Private property is for trespassing." or some other ridiculousness like that.

It's amazing how Black Males shrink in age when they fall victim to self-defense.

They showed Trayvon Martin's 8th Grade Pic, and they're trying to say a 26-year old with prior gun violations is also a "Kid".

marcus says

armed to the hilt guns drawn.

Come on!
They had a shotgun and a revolver. Not even semi with extra clips. The minimal patnet standard of armed to the hilt is belt-fed with a thousand rounds.

And you better like yams.

WookieMan says

marcus says

We know very little, other than that he checked out a home under construction, which in some peoples books is not a big deal

It's illegal if uninvited. There's not even an argument to be had at this point. You and anyone disagreeing are 100% wrong. Flat out wrong. He committed a crime regardless of how minor anyone thinks it is, which I do. It was illegal.

I agree but there's always the principle of a response relative to the threat or crime. One may be able to argue a citizens arrest with arms drawn is not an appropriate response since there was no immediate threat and the extent of the crimes of any was also not established. However 99% would have come out alive of such a situation by not attacking/assaulting the person wanting to talk to you. So I'd call it tragic but mostly self inflicted. Certainly no grounds for any murder or hate crime charges, even lesser manslaughter is very likely too much. This is Trayvon Martin reloaded and the leftoid race baiters and their lamestream media accomplices will lose this fight once again.

mell says

WookieMan says

marcus says

We know very little, other than that he checked out a home under construction, which in some peoples books is not a big deal

It's illegal if uninvited. There's not even an argument to be had at this point. You and anyone disagreeing are 100% wrong. Flat out wrong. He committed a crime regardless of how minor anyone thinks it is, which I do. It was illegal.

I agree but there's always the principle of a response relative to the threat or crime. One may be able to argue a citizens arrest with arms drawn is not an appropriate response since there was no immediate threat and the extent of the crimes of any was also not established. However 99% would have come out alive of such a situation by not attacking/assaulting the person wanting to talk to you. So I'd call it tragic but mostly ...

They likely want to lose so they can say, "see, systemic racism is alive".

Almost all violent racism is assault and murder of white people by black people.

Almost never the other way around.

WookieMan says

Am I taking crazy pills or something? The weapon was legal. If Georgia allows citizen arrests, then the confrontation was legal. The person that was visibly seen entering a property was confronted and decided to go after the people thinking he was there illegally. What am I missing here?

Visibly entering a construction site doesn't mean anything. I am 40+ year old and I have interest in house construction, whenever there is construction going on in my neighborhood, I stop by and look around multiple times, I talk to construction workers, and sometimes go and in one particular property that was under construction for many months, I often used to stop by and look around at the quality of work. They even had cameras installed and not once was I stopped. My white neighbor has a habit of going around the neighborhood, opening peoples gates, taking their trash cans, and then returning them later. When you live in a community some curious eyes and curious behavior is expected. That doesn't mean you take out your gun and start chasing the first black guy you see that is acting curious.

alpo says

That doesn't mean you take out your gun and start chasing the first black guy you see that is acting curious.

And if someone does, the correct response is to try to take their gun away right?

alpo says

When you live in a community some curious eyes and curious behavior is expected.

So when you are snooping around a vacant construction site you might expect to gather some curiosity and maybe some of the curious people in the neighborhood might want to know what you are doing and stop to talk to you right? So the correct response is to run away and if that doesn’t work, attack the people who out of curiosity wanted to talk to you?

alpo says

WookieMan says

Am I taking crazy pills or something? The weapon was legal. If Georgia allows citizen arrests, then the confrontation was legal. The person that was visibly seen entering a property was confronted and decided to go after the people thinking he was there illegally. What am I missing here?

Visibly entering a construction site doesn't mean anything. I am 40+ year old and I have interest in house construction, whenever there is construction going on in my neighborhood, I stop by and look around multiple times, I talk to construction workers, and sometimes go and in one particular property that was under construction for many months, I often used to stop by and look around at the quality of work. They even had cameras installed and not once was I stopped. My white neighbor has a habit of going around the neighborhood, opening peoples gates, taking their trash cans, and then returni...

You're not comparing apples to apples. If I see my NEIGHBOR doing something, and I know him/her, it's not NEARLY as CURIOUS as a stranger. You're being racist.

Knowing many of the facts, calling these white dudes racist is racist. Why are you a racist? Why do you hate white people for protecting their neighbors?

We are not going to accept your racist comments anymore. Lines are being drawn. If I was on the jury, at this point, I would vote NOT GUILTY.

alpo says

I am 40+ year old and I have interest in house construction, whenever there is construction going on in my neighborhood, I stop by and look around multiple times, I talk to construction workers, and sometimes go and in one particular property that was under construction for many months, I often used to stop by and look around at the quality of work.

If there are workers there I've already mentioned no biggie. They can tell you to leave or let you walk around. I can promise you, not one intelligent builder would want someone walking around their site unaccompanied. Hence why they put cameras and alarms on site. If they make a decision if they get an alert via camera and choose to not do anything, that's their choice. You have a choice to enter another persons property, but that doesn't take away that it's still illegal to do so.

There's always a potential negative out come when you commit an illegal act. The two guys went over the top for sure. I haven't downplayed that. The chain reaction that commenced after Ahmaud committed an illegal act is all on him though. From entering the property and then rush dudes with guns? Was is necessary for them to draw guns, no. But that really doesn't matter as it was all legal in the state of Georgia. The only illegal act was performed by Ahmaud in this circumstance.

1. The guy stopped and walked through a house under construction. The owner of the home has no problem with his presence.
2. The "men" who followed him, then confronted him, shot and killed him.

Seems like many of you live in the Bay Area, where houses are crammed together and construction sites are pillaged. I'm from the rural west, where a house under construction can be walked through with no problem. It's only an illegal act if the "injured party" claims it to be one. HE DID NOT.

My son has had a couple of run-ins with the law - starting with a pocket-rocket that broke a window when he and his friends were nine. He's a white man, employed, with a college degree. He jogs. If he were to stop and look at a house, it's doubtful the situation would end in his murder by two non-related people who have no claim to the property and are acting on their own hysteria. Most certainly, they wouldn't bring up the pocket-rocket incident, and probably not the ticket for smoking dope.

They didn't own the property. They didn't have a claim to it. There was no active threat. They weren't protecting themselves, they weren't protecting their own property. If they felt that there was a problem with a man walking onto a construction site, they could have called 911. By taking their version of the law into their own hands, IMHO they deserve life in prison at the very least.
--------------------------------------
WookieMan says

I've never heard of an adult doing it with no contractors on site. It's trespassing at minimum and most definitely suspicious. White, black, brown, yellow, etc. The only time it's appropriate to even enter someone's yard is to grab a real estate flyer or to knock on the door to present yourself and ask a question if you don't know the owner. Otherwise, just stay on the public easement/sidewalk or the street. Zero reason to enter a random persons property EVER regardless of occupancy. You're only asking for negative outcomes, regardless of who you are.

Call the cops, I did it last Sunday.

WookieMan says

Trespassing is trespassing though. If the owner didn't explicitly invite Ahmaud, then it's trespassing regardless of whether or not the owner wants/would press charges.

Ya might want to brush up on your trespass laws. I'll wait.

WookieMan says

There's really not much else to discuss.

Agreed. and yet, you're spouting what you believe to be salient facts.

WineHorror1 says

Knowing many of the facts, calling these white dudes racist is racist

You don't know "many of the facts." You know the teeny bit that has been released.

GEORGIA LAW:
"(a) A person commits the offense of criminal trespass when he or she intentionally damages any property of another without consent of that other person and the damage thereto is $500.00 or less or knowingly and maliciously interferes with the possession or use of the property of another person without consent of that person.

(b) A person commits the offense of criminal trespass when he or she knowingly and without authority:

(1) Enters upon the land or premises of another person or into any part of any vehicle, railroad car, aircraft, or watercraft of another person for an unlawful purpose;

(2) Enters upon the land or premises of another person or into any part of any vehicle, railroad car, aircraft, or watercraft of another person after receiving, prior to such entry, notice from the owner, rightful occupant, or, upon proper identification, an authorized representative of the owner or rightful occupant that such entry is forbidden; or

(3) Remains upon the land or premises of another person or within the vehicle, railroad car, aircraft, or watercraft of another person after receiving notice from the owner, rightful occupant, or, upon proper identification, an authorized representative of the owner or rightful occupant to depart."

Your buddies were not acting on the behalf of the owner. They weren't authorized representatives. And they didn't confront him on the property, he was committing no crime before or during the altercation that caused his death.

WineHorror1 says

Knowing many of the facts, calling these white dudes racist is racist. Why are you a racist? Why do you hate white people for protecting their neighbors?

We are not going to accept your racist comments anymore. Lines are being drawn. If I was on the jury, at this point, I would vote NOT GUILTY.

Yes there was nothing racist about the botched citizens arrest, and it is most certain. The Liberal scumbags there are going to taint this cut and dry case, with their race baiting bullshit. The duo will be tried on being racists, and the evidence will show they weren't racist. Just liable and reckless with their pursuit to citizen arrest him.
They'll beat the racist rap in court and never be tried for their negligence.

Democrats are always stapling their Dicks to their foreheads, what else is new.

The only one who botched the legal citizen's arrest is Arbery.

He was to stay there until the police arrived.

Instead of standing or running away, he actively engaged the citizens by charging them while they were holding firearms.

Tenpoundbass says

The duo will be tried on being racists, and the evidence will show they weren't racist.

No they will be tried for murder. And just like in this thread, Trump cultists will be defending that those idiots had good reason to make a citizens arrest with guns drawn.

The fact that Trump cultists are arguing in that direction, and that the guy was black is strictly a coincidence.

elliemae says

If he were to stop and look at a house, it's doubtful the situation would end in his murder by two non-related people who have no claim to the property and are acting on their own hysteria.

Exactly because the problem is not so much the trespassing on a vacant construction site, problem is the departed tried to grab another man’s gun. That is illegal in Georgia. In fact it is illegal to take another person’s gun in Commifornia too isn’t it?

elliemae says

he was committing no crime before or during the altercation that caused his death.

This is not true. He tried to take another person’s firearm. That is illegal, and I might add, stupid. The departed won his award. It is the Darwin Award.

That's right. He could have fled or waited for the police.

The video indisputably shows Arbery, who begins standing in the middle of the road at least a few dozen feet away from the truck and younger McMichaels, charging McMichael and throwing several hooks at his face, while McMichaels was holding a shotgun.

It's not a case of McMichaels walking up to Arbery and pointing a firearm directly at him.

Also, no lib has explained why good boy Arbery has a prior gun conviction.

That is 110% the fault of Arbery and nobody else.

Jesus Christ. I'm kind of astonished how many people think it's just okay to enter someone's property regardless of condition. I don't own a gun yet, but this thread has made it very apparent that I need to if this many people think this way. You learn something new every day.

I'd call the cops and confront the person 10 out of 10 times if I saw them going into my neighbors house. Regardless of the intent of the person going in or my relationship with the neighbors. One of my own neighbors I've never met chewed out my friends for fucking with our xmas decorations in the lawn as a prank this past winter. My friends were pissed, I told them I'm happy I have neighbors like that.

The guns were over the top. I don't think anyone posting here is disputing that. Just because you don't know the neighbor or because the owner is okay with it, still doesn't make trespassing on another's property okay. As I said in a previous comment, if they didn't call the cops at all, they're going to have issues. The fact remains none of this would have ever happened if Ahmaud didn't enter a property that wasn't his, for no reason. Everyone can say they do it all the time, that doesn't make it right.

WookieMan says

alpo says

I am 40+ year old and I have interest in house construction, whenever there is construction going on in my neighborhood, I stop by and look around multiple times, I talk to construction workers, and sometimes go and in one particular property that was under construction for many months, I often used to stop by and look around at the quality of work.

If there are workers there I've already mentioned no biggie. They can tell you to leave or let you walk around. I can promise you, not one intelligent builder would want someone walking around their site unaccompanied. Hence why they put cameras and alarms on site. If they make a decision if they get an alert via camera and choose to not do anything, that's their choice. You have a choice to enter another persons property, but that doesn't take away that it's still illegal to do so.

There's always a potential negative out come when...

Wookie,

You fall just a bit short on getting it right.

Everything they did was legal = they DID NOT go over the top in their actions.

elliemae says

1. The guy stopped and walked through a house under construction. The owner of the home has no problem with his presence.
2. The "men" who followed him, then confronted him, shot and killed him.

Seems like many of you live in the Bay Area, where houses are crammed together and construction sites are pillaged. I'm from the rural west, where a house under construction can be walked through with no problem. It's only an illegal act if the "injured party" claims it to be one. HE DID NOT.

My son has had a couple of run-ins with the law - starting with a pocket-rocket that broke a window when he and his friends were nine. He's a white man, employed, with a college degree. He jogs. If he were to stop and look at a house, it's doubtful the situation would end in his murder by two non-related people who have no claim to the property and are acting on their own hysteria. Most certainly, they wouldn't bring up the pocket-rocket incident, and probably not the ticket for ...

You are a scary person because your belief is that the law doesn't matter...only your feelings about the outcome matter. I have a suggestion...

DO NOT BREAK THE LAW

elliemae says

he was committing no crime before or during the altercation that caused his death.

You're kidding, right? Attacking someone and trying to steal from them (the gun) isn't a crime?

WineHorror1 says

Everything they did was legal = they DID NOT go over the top in their actions.

I don't think you're wrong, I'm just more or less talking about how I would have reacted in the situation. I would have just confronted him without a gun, even if open carry was legal in IL. My whole take is the chain reaction leading to Ahmaud's death would have never happened if he just didn't enter someone else's home. They should have just called the cops and confronted him is all I'm getting at.

The guns were legal and their actions appear to be legal regardless of how I would have handled it. Ahmaud made multiple poor decision that day and it cost him his life. I think the two guys had poor judgement in how they handled the situation, but legally they'll very likely get off unless new information comes out. That's really all that matters instead of people's feelings or some here admitting they like to trespass.