1
0

It's not looking good for the Texas vigilante killing.


 invite response                
2020 May 10, 8:58pm   7,303 views  243 comments

by Tenpoundbass   ➕follow (9)   💰tip   ignore  

Everything about this story has been wrong, from the guys jumping in their truck and actually getting out and holding the suspect at gun point.
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

« First        Comments 113 - 152 of 243       Last »     Search these comments

113   Tenpoundbass   2020 May 15, 9:37am  

I think the optics of the Father and Son, wouldn't be as bad, had they confronted him with this.

114   Bd6r   2020 May 15, 9:42am  

Tenpoundbass says
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.

+10000000000000000000
best summary I have seen here
I am all for guns (living in TX has really changed the way how I think about them), but you need to go an extra mile in being careful if you have them.
115   WookieMan   2020 May 15, 9:53am  

Tenpoundbass says
But if we're going to have gun rights, then people need to answer and be accountable when they use them.

100% agree. That's why I said it was a bit over the top. 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.

I think some here are conflating that I think the outcome was proper. I don't. I'm looking at it from purely a legal aspect. I don't care about the people in all honesty. The media is portraying this as something it is not. That's of bigger concern, especially with our current circumstances with CV-19. Manipulation is a scary thing and it needs to be defeated every time it shows it's ugly face.
116   PeopleUnited   2020 May 15, 11:48am  

WookieMan says
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.


I thought the two men who were arrested are accused of a crime? The media and BLM types are portraying this as a race crime. They are saying the men murdered the departed. They claim that justice means putting these men in prison. They claim the departed was innocent and the two men with guns are guilty. If the two men did something unethical then is this not evidence of guilt? That is the danger of taking the position that they should not have carried weapons to defend themselves. The very fact that an unarmed man attacked them despite clearly seeing they were armed is evidence that every citizen needs the right to bear arms to defend themselves. The armed men are alive, the unarmed man WHO ATTACKED another human being is dead.

I personally would NOT advise intervening by calling the police NOR by confronting the intruder, unless he/she is threatening you or physical harm to another person. Take photos, take video, and if you witness a crime bring the video to the police after the situation is over. But calling the police just brings increased risk of violence and poor outcomes to your own personal health and could cost you your life. Just ask Justine Damond’s fiancee.
117   Patrick   2020 May 15, 12:45pm  

PeopleUnited says
Take photos


And post them on patrick.net.

Get an anonymous email to register before posting the image, like from https://www.mailinator.com/ and post it from a library, say, so I won't even have your IP address if I get subpoenaed.

Well, no libraries are open at the moment, but you get the idea.
118   MisdemeanorRebel   2020 May 20, 9:18am  

Arbery's arrest for stealing a TV from a Walmart

www.youtube.com/embed/cD0m1Ar7Kfg

He wuz a good boy, dindu nuttin'. Jus' the victim of Ray Cism by da Whites.
119   MisdemeanorRebel   2020 May 20, 10:14am  

Yet another incident: Arbery gets nasty with police, tries to return to vehicle after being told his license is suspended and he cannot drive it away.

https://www.nbc12.com/2020/05/19/video-shows-georgia-officer-tried-stun-ahmaud-arbery/

Media Biased Headlines:



120   GNL   2020 May 20, 10:22am  

Nah man, I dindu nufin.
121   mell   2020 May 20, 10:24am  

Just went out for som ice T n' skittlez ma!
122   GNL   2020 May 20, 10:27am  

A low IQ is a very dangerous thing to have.
123   PeopleUnited   2020 May 22, 1:41pm  

WineHorror1 says
A 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.
124   GNL   2020 May 22, 1:56pm  

PeopleUnited says
WineHorror1 says
A 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.

Your smart meter is just a bit weak. Check your batteries.
125   PeopleUnited   2020 May 22, 6:28pm  

Not saying he wins a prize, other than the Darwin Award. But he did learn from his first tasing to wear the thick coat.
126   Tenpoundbass   2020 May 22, 9:59pm  

If there's a question whether or not the guy deserved to be shot down, based on his historical behavior alone. Then probably.
The fact is he was not gunned down by the law enforcement while he was in the commission of a crime.
He was gunned down after leaving a dwelling without taking anything. He was perused as as suspect prowler criminal and he resisted arrest. He went as far as to assault his assailants, as that's what they were at that point. They have no legal authority until the police come and ascertain that it was a lawful citizens arrest. People forget unlawful arrest and holding people against their will is a serious crime. You better not commit a bigger crime while you are holding your "Suspect" before the police get there.

These guys Botched a Citizens arrest, and are now at the mercy of 12 jurors. I hope the non partisan ones are picked.

I'm a Trump supporter, but I don't want to live in a world where Bubba, his son and the guy across the street can gun down someone over a property dispute with no questions asked.
This isn't a race issue nor is it a gun issue, it's a demanding accountability for incompetent gun owners. They can't pop off a cap every time they want to make a point with impunity.

America is going to lose our right to bear arms, if the Pro 2@ don't learn the difference in defending home, liberty and family, and chasing someone down and shooting them because you think he took the neighbors shit from a construction site.
127   SoTex   2020 May 22, 10:15pm  

Tenpoundbass says
chasing someone down and shooting them


Maybe.

When I saw the video it looked different to me. Chasing him (armed) to keep track of him until the 911 finally showed up? All I saw was him chasing THEM and grabbing a shotgun and nearly putting it in his own damn mouth.

Talk about an idiot: https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/moron-idiot-imbecile-offensive-history
128   SoTex   2020 May 22, 10:16pm  

Tenpoundbass says
These guys Botched a Citizens arrest, and are now at the mercy of 12 jurors.


The guy filming is charged with murder now so I don't particularly feel the judgmentals have a full set of mentals.
129   PeopleUnited   2020 May 23, 5:25am  

Tenpoundbass says
America is going to lose our right to bear arms, if the Pro 2@ don't learn the difference

between media hype and a constitutionally protected God given right. And if we allow idiots to punish the majority for the mistakes of the few. That logic would mean cops should not have guns because sometimes they make mistakes. Don’t be an enemy of the 2nd amendment by promoting the falsehoods.

Driving cars is more dangerous than 2nd Amendment arms. If these guys wanted to kill a man they could have easily run him down. It seems they wanted him to live, and preferred a nonviolent confrontation. But when he attacked an armed man, the departed proved he was a violent offender and he got what he deserved.
130   Tenpoundbass   2020 May 23, 9:13am  

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!)
131   GNL   2020 May 23, 9:17am  

Tenpoundbass says
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!)

I hope the jury does not see it the same way as you.

Georgia law shows they did nothing wrong. If the dumbass dindu didn't run at them and punch them and grab their gun, he'd be alive. How is that not clear to you?
132   WookieMan   2020 May 23, 9:29am  

WineHorror1 says
Georgia law shows they did nothing wrong.

That's really all that matters. Feelings and what is legal/illegal in other states not named Georgia is a moot point. I don't like what they did, but if it didn't break a law, who cares? Oh wait, he was black.....
133   Automan Empire   2020 May 23, 10:03am  

Tueller Drills are a firearm training exercise to see how close an enemy can be before he can run up and disarm you faster than you can draw and fire on him. Average is around 25 feet I understand.

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!
134   MisdemeanorRebel   2020 May 23, 10:05am  

Automan Empire says

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!


It also shows they weren't redneck vigilantes out for a lynching.
135   Tenpoundbass   2020 May 23, 10:09am  

WineHorror1 says
I hope the jury does not see it the same way as you.


Well if more thought like me, then the Democrats wouldn't be able to call for "Sensible Gun Laws"(really a gun grab).

If we weren't so quick to defend everyone that goes home to retrieve a gun to return to settle arguments.

If you have to get a gun and chase someone down, you're doing gun ownership wrong period.

The guy was not in the shape to feed Auhmud the but of his shot gun and take a few souvenir teeth with him. Then they had no business getting out of the truck.
Yes Auhmud brought it upon himself. And I'm sure if the case isn't politicized and if we don't let the Liberals make a Race issue out of it. I'm sure a jury will the whole episode for what it was.

He would be cleared of Murder, or Man Slaughter, it would be proved that in the end it was self defense. But at the least they would get two years for unlawful discharge of a firearm.

We've got to be smarter and beat the Liberals back by staying ahead of their bullshit, and race smearing politics.

If the 2A consensus is "Well the darkie got what he deserved, look at his past record, those good ole boys dindu nuffin!"

I say this every time one of these grey area shootings come up. And I'm always right, the 2A folks allows it to become all about race, and if they keep it up.

We're going to end up with Chuck and Nancy's "Sensible Gun Laws"(which really means no guns at all).
136   GNL   2020 May 23, 10:46am  

Tenpoundbass says
If the 2A consensus is "Well the darkie got what he deserved, look at his past record, those good ole boys dindu nuffin!"

Ok, let's play a game.

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.

You?

Me: I'd be praising the black guys trying to "law-and-order" Cabrini-Green.
137   PeopleUnited   2020 May 23, 11:04am  

Tenpoundbass says
If you have to get a gun and chase someone down, you're doing gun ownership wrong period.


Roosevelt enacted this same strategy and was later elected president. https://rtpr.com/9-amazing-facts-about-teddy-roosevelt/you-don’t-steal-boat-theodore-roosevelt

“1886, Roosevelt and two friends purchased a “clinker” boat to carry them across the frozen Missouri River. After coming back from a hunting expedition, they found the rope that was securing the boat had been cut and the boat itself was missing. This is probably when most people would notify the authorities…most people. However, Theodore didn’t take too kindly to the act of thievery, so he and his friends built a boat from scratch (in 3 days), tested its durability, and then set off to find the guilty culprits and retrieve their boat. After a few days of navigating the river, at times reaching 0 degrees Fahrenheit, they found the three thieves. What did they do? Well, Roosevelt and his buddies roughed-up and captured the men, and brought them back with them to be arrested. During the long trip back, apparently Roosevelt passed the time reading Dostoevsky’s Anna Karenina to his friends and captives. When they got back to dry land, Roosevelt arrested the three men himself because he was the Deputy Sheriff. The boys got off lucky since Roosevelt only arrested them, because the normal punishment back in those days was death by hanging.”

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.
138   Tenpoundbass   2020 May 23, 6:21pm  

PeopleUnited says
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.


He didn't end up botching the arrest and killing the suspect.

If you're not a bad ass, don't go playing Dog the Bounty Hunter, because you will probably lack the experience to keep control of the situation at all times.
The guy was thrown out of the Police force because he didn't master tactics and procedures. He should have acted like the thousands of other people who have chased suspicious characters like that in their car. Unarmed, and they stay in their car, while they talk to 911. Sure have a gun in the console if the guy pulls a gun out of his waist band, then it's on.

At least thee times in my life, I have been approached by people who was sure I was a culprit. One was Seminole Reservation cop, pulled me over and was convinced I was the guy that drove by earlier and flipped him the bird. And a couple other instances I wont go into. Of course I wasn't the guy and it was all resolved. But I was never confronted by guys chasing me down in a pick up truck, jumping out with a shot gun aimed at me. They always called the cops and then they and the cops came out. The cop always was able to verify I was not the person they were looking for, and everyone lived happily ever after.
139   Tenpoundbass   2020 May 23, 6:31pm  

WineHorror1 says
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.


This isn't a white and black thing, and I'm not calling for gun control, I'm not saying it was a malicious slaying, but they put themselves on the position to do what happens way too often. I think if people know, "Well wait a minute, if I go barging in there with my gun and it doesn't turn out like the cool Texas Walker Ranger idea I have in my head, and someone gets killed. I might go to jail for a couple years at the very least. "
These things would stop happening. And the Left would quit getting their damn racial fodder, Idiots like these three Fuck Sticks keep feeding the Goddamn commie propaganda machine, and I'm sick of it. It's an endless negative feedback loop, of Stupid, unlawful discharges of firearms, at the very least, and then Liberals saying all white people are white supremacist and they need to take all of our guns.

I don't want to play the stupid game, and tired of this Pro 2A and the Commie Resonate response.

Would it kill pro gun people to admit, people should go to jail when they fucked up?

You accidentally pull a trigger and some random person gets shot, used to be called manslaughter. Today 90% of the time with a good lawyer and $100,000 you'll beat it in court as an accident.
But if you randomly tossed a hammer up in the sky in a crowded street, and it struck and killed someone. It would be some degree of murder.
What makes lawful gun owners impervious to any consequences for their bad decisions when things don't go as plan and they kill someone?

The gun is there for your protection, and to keep the Commie Cannibal Anarchy at bay if that day comes. It's not a beer opener, back scratcher or something you retrieve to settle an argument.
140   PeopleUnited   2020 May 23, 7:04pm  

Tenpoundbass says
He didn't end up botching the arrest and killing the suspect.


Because the suspects Roosevelt encountered had enough respect and/or sense to know when to wave the white flag. The departed lacked that sense/respect which is why he is departed. He chose to attack. He could have been reasonable and sat down while waiting for the police to arrive. He chose violence instead. He chose his own fate.
141   Tenpoundbass   2020 May 23, 7:56pm  

OK I got one more for you. If you pull a gun on someone for any reason, and it turns out you were wrong for holding the suspect with a gun, then you should be sued for and arrested. Now that's under the best circumstance nobody died. Now add someone does die.

Look we can't have a society where half the people think they can run around with their gun doing the police's job, on non Emergency situations.

I would rather see legislation on hard rules where the use of a weapon is lawful, and when it isn't.
I think if you chase someone down, In a non emergency situation, where no serious or violent crime was committed, and hold them at bay with a gun.
If you go retrieve a gun and return to a location, it's unlawful in my opinion, if there is no serious threat to warrant such action.
Sure chasing down someone that just murdered someone, assaulted or rapped is one thing. But chasing down suspicious black, brown, or white people and holding them at bay with a gun. Is a big fucking No No! Call the police and coordinate with them, don't go ahead on, and play Deputy Barney Fifh.
I defend you right to defend yourself, and your home with your gun, and your right to have that gun for that reason alone.

It ends, when you go looking for a fight. No matter how noble or right you think it may be. There's a reason people flunk out of the police academy. And time and time again, it's these people that end up doing this shit. Quit defending them, they are going to cost everyone our Gun Rights.
142   CBOEtrader   2020 May 23, 8:15pm  

Tenpoundbass says
I would rather see legislation on hard rules where the use of a weapon is lawful, and when it isn't.


Thats exactly what citizens arrest laws do. Personal knowledge of a felony is the line in Georgia.

I expect this courtcase to argue whether these two had that personal knowledge and if Arbery's behavior constitutes felonious behavior.
143   PeopleUnited   2020 May 23, 8:40pm  

Tenpoundbass says
I would rather see legislation on hard rules where the use of a weapon is lawful, and when it isn't.

In other words, voicing support for “common sense gun laws.” Guess we know the truth now.

Tenpoundbass says
Quit defending them,

Will quit defending them when someone can tell me what law they broke! Till then I will ask anyone who loves liberty to quit blaming the victims for being attacked!!
144   AD   2020 May 23, 9:05pm  

NoCoupForYou says

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.


You would have to evaluate the circumstance as far as was the shooter in fear of his life. Think of our favorite neighborhood security watchman George Zimmerman. He was tackled and in a fight when the gun went off. Zimmerman did not shoot Trayvon Martin when Trayvon was running away.

That is what needs to be evaluated as far as whether a legal gun owner committed murder or not. Did they shoot Arbery in the back ? And how many times ?
145   MisdemeanorRebel   2020 May 23, 9:09pm  

ad says
That is what needs to be evaluated as far as whether a legal gun owner committed murder or not. Did they shoot Arbery in the back ? And how many times ?


Exactly. Fortunately, we have the video, which shows Arbery running at the truck, then around it, and then quickly pivoting left to attack younger McMichaels, delivering a few hooks and trying to grab the shotgun.

Other than asking him to stop and stopping the truck in front of him, the McMichaels did not run down and pursue Arbery further, nor did the shoot him from inside a vehicle or other situation where it was unnecessary and overly aggressive. In the beginning of the video, when Arbery begins charging, the shotgun is not being pointed at McMichaels.

Under Georgia law, the McMichaels were correct in conducting a citizen's arrest, and, quite aside from that, justified in self defense for shooting him. I believe on past precedence, trying to grab somebody's legal firearm, always constitutes justified self-defense.
146   astronut97   2020 May 24, 4:49am  

If armed men in two pickup trucks started following you on a neighborhood street and tried to block your path multiple times what would you do, honestly?! In the video just before shooting occurred, Arbery is penned in with Roddie's (the one shooting the video) truck behind him and the McMichaels truck ahead of him and then the younger McMichaels jumps out of the driver's seat brandishing a shotgun. Also, I think it has to be a felony for a citizens arrest to be legally allowed in Georgia and merely walking onto someone's unsecured property isn't a felony, so that alone would make the McMichaels actions illegal.
147   PeopleUnited   2020 May 24, 5:09am  

If a jury, after hearing ALL of the facts, finds that the McMichaels had a reasonable and probable suspicion of burglary, or any felony, then the citizens' arrest was valid. But to say there is ZERO evidence of burglary, is simply not true. Simply running from the police is sufficient to justify a law enforcement detention. In this case, it is clear that when he was confronted by a neighbor, the departed ran out of the house and down the street. That is evidence, but not proof of wrongdoing.
148   GNL   2020 May 24, 6:19am  

Some people are quick to convict white people even with video evidence. Btw, what exactly is a citizens arrest supposed to look like? I didn't get my manual.
149   WookieMan   2020 May 24, 7:09am  

astronut97 says
merely walking onto someone's unsecured property isn't a felony

He could have committed a felony when inside the home. The attitude that it's fine to just walk into a home under construction is still mind blowing to me. There are arsonist out there, people that just like breaking shit or say flooding the basement by turning the water on and letting it fuck things up.

I assisted/worked with builders in Chicago for 13 years. This owner/builder is a unicorn by saying he didn't care Arbery was in the property. His stance is likely a lie as he doesn't want to get sued because a black man was shot after entering his property. He's likely the one that told neighbors to keep an eye on the place. He doesn't want to be associated with Arbery's death at all and become an accessory to murder (there wasn't in this case), so he's lying.

So yes they legally confronted Arbery after he illegally entered a home. Yes, it's perfectly legal to believe a crime was committed. Yes the use of a vehicle was aggressive. Yes they had guns legally drawn. Yes he attacked them. Yes he died. Nothing would have happened at all if Arbery didn't enter the home. And sure, it feels a little like the wild west, but it got that way because people would try to take and harm others in that time. So if you wanted any semblance of a decent society, you sometimes had to take measure to deal with idiots.

These guys just wanted to stop Arbery, it's very clear there was no intent to kill. All he had to do was stop and explain. Having had a gun pointed at me when I was younger, I just complied..... and now I'm here today to annoy you all ;)
150   RWSGFY   2020 May 24, 8:50am  

astronut97 says
If armed men in two pickup trucks started following you on a neighborhood street and tried to block your path multiple times what would you do, honestly?!
.

Depends. If you are absolutely set on not stopping and talking to them, go by what they are armed with: if they have only pistols or shotguns - distance is your friend, so it makes sense to run away, prefferably in the direction their pickup can't follow. If they have rifles you won't be able to gain enough distance on foot even if your name is Usain Bolt.
151   MisdemeanorRebel   2020 May 24, 8:52am  

WookieMan says
He could have committed a felony when inside the home. The attitude that it's fine to just walk into a home under construction is still mind blowing to me. There are arsonist out there, people that just like breaking shit or say flooding the basement by turning the water on and letting it fuck things up.


Yep - I find this attitude unbelievable, never encountered it. Maybe it's a West of the Rockies thing?
152   CBOEtrader   2020 May 24, 9:16am  

astronut97 says
Also, I think it has to be a felony for a citizens arrest to be legally allowed in Georgia and merely walking onto someone's unsecured property isn't a felony, so that alone would make the McMichaels actions illegal


Assuming this will be the core of the case

« First        Comments 113 - 152 of 243       Last »     Search these comments

Please register to comment:

api   best comments   contact   latest images   memes   one year ago   random   suggestions   gaiste