« First « Previous Comments 104 - 143 of 243 Next » Last » Search these comments
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.
he was committing no crime before or during the altercation that caused his death.
alpo saysI 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...
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 ...
he was committing no crime before or during the altercation that caused his death.
Everything they did was legal = they DID NOT go over the top in their actions.
So, people aren't able to protect their own neighborhood?
Jesus Christ. I'm kind of astonished how many people think it's just okay to enter someone's property regardless of condition.
But if we're going to have gun rights, then people need to answer and be accountable when they use them.
Your gun isn't a tool to make people submit to your will under any circumstance.
Not to bring back to a location you left, to settle a disagreement.
Not to chase someone down, you think is getting away with a crime.
But if we're going to have gun rights, then people need to answer and be accountable when they use them.
The media is portraying this as something it is not.WookieMan says
The issue at hand though was it illegal to brandish the weapons in the manner they did? From what I've seen no. Does that make their action ethical or right? No.
Take photos
A low IQ is a very dangerous thing to have.
WineHorror1 saysA low IQ is a very dangerous thing to have.
He was smart enough to wear a parka in summer to reduce the risk of being tased. Probably was not his first time being tased either.
chasing someone down and shooting them
These guys Botched a Citizens arrest, and are now at the mercy of 12 jurors.
America is going to lose our right to bear arms, if the Pro 2@ don't learn the difference
If you pull a gun and someone gets killed, it's man slaughter at the least unless it happened on your property in your home, where the aggressor was coming after you.
They chased him down in a truck, I don't have a problem with guns or people who own them, and damn sure don't have a problem with defending yourself.
But if you going to play bad ass, and things gets out of hand, and someone gets killed blocks down the road from your humble abode.
You've crossed the line and are now in man slaughter charge. I am pro gun, I'm not pro "Yee Haw! Got another'n Pa! Let's git him!"(Blam!)
I am Pro, "You dumb son of a bitch! You picked the wrong fucking house to break into!"(Blam!)
Georgia law shows they did nothing wrong.
When your starting conditions are being IN A TRUCK following the adversary who is on foot unarmed and you end up with him taking control of your gun, that is an EXTREME level of Tueller Drill and firearm control FAIL!
I hope the jury does not see it the same way as you.
If the 2A consensus is "Well the darkie got what he deserved, look at his past record, those good ole boys dindu nuffin!"
If you have to get a gun and chase someone down, you're doing gun ownership wrong period.
If the departed was not a violent offender who attacked an armed man willing to defend himseld, he would still be alive and probably would even be a free man.
The white guys are black, Ahmad is black (still) and the location is Cabrini-Green. I'd bet a high percentage of people who are crying about this situation would have a different view of my comparison event.
He didn't end up botching the arrest and killing the suspect.
I would rather see legislation on hard rules where the use of a weapon is lawful, and when it isn't.
I would rather see legislation on hard rules where the use of a weapon is lawful, and when it isn't.
Quit defending them,
« First « Previous Comments 104 - 143 of 243 Next » Last » Search these comments
There's not a stand your ground law in the US that will back you, if things get out of hand at that point. In almost every scenario, you'll be the aggressor.
Why did Ahmaud Arbery, grab their gun, the video would have cleared him and he could have sued them later.
It's been rumored he was in boots, and was carrying a hammer, though it's clear he wasn't doing either. The video, shows Ahmaud enter the under construction property. But IMHO, it doesn't look like he's casing the place. Now they don't show the whole video, he could have looked innocent until the video stops. Then he could have been snooping and prowling looking for tools, and scoping out any copper wire. Speculation of course, but why release the video and not show the entire three minutes. What was he doing when he noticed the neighbor across the street calling 9-11 before he bolted out the door?
If he was doing nothing more than what it looked like, it could be argued he was stopping by looking for work. That's how I used to get construction work way way on back in the day. Just show up on the job, and ask if they need help.
It's not looking good for the Good Ole Boys, what's in the rest of the video, and why is Ahmaud so brazen to try to take the gun, rather than the prospect of waiting for the police?
Especially given the lack of will to prosecute these days by Liberal judges, Mayors and DA's.
www.youtube.com/embed/rg8CaecNJI8