patrick.net

PeopleUnited says

What crime was committed?

Manslaughter?

krc says

The ones in the truck promoted the violence simply by threatening the "suspect" with violence.

Not enough info to say that. I thought i read the police discussed citizen's arrest w mcmichaels during a prior convo about arbery's tresspassing. The police were called by multiple neighbors that day, suggesting guilty behavior.

Ex: lets say i shoplift $20 worth of stuff in Georgia and someone watches me do it. They wouldnt be allowed to citizens arrest me BUT i would know damn well why they wanted to talk to me w a gun.

Arbery knew damn well why he was being confronted.

Also, didnt the police report suggest the gun accidentally discharged as arbery pulled the barrel? I dont think Mcmichaels was trying to shoot him during the scuffle.

From what we know so far, id suggest zero criminal guilt but perhaps they owe some wrongful death $$. Perhaps a manslaughter conviction is justified.

We dont know yet.

Murder seems WAY out there though.

PeopleUnited says

krc says

But this is an example where we should all agree these guys were out of line

Why should we all agree? What crime was committed?

What if we don’t agree?

They were negligent at minimum. Their irresponsibility ended a man's life. The arrogance that they knew how to handle the situation was negligent. Manslaughter, as an earlier post posited, would be the appropriate response. They decided that they were the law. I bet the prosecutor over-charges unfortunately. And, the fact they charged the person videotaping the incident again should tell us all to turn off our camera!

Hard to see how the 2A survives with the constant attacks from the left and the 2A supporters that can't even bring themselves to condemn basically a horrible decision by a couple of idiots. At some point, little by little, these examples erode the confidence that most should have in the sacrosanct value of 2A. Remember that 2A relies on the support of the people.

Sad.

krc says

And, the fact they charged the person videotaping the incident again should tell us all to turn off our camera!

So true. Or at least, don’t post the video!

krc says

condemn basically a horrible decision by a couple of idiots

Was a bad idea to get involved, would be more productive and patriotic have to let suspect go and went back to watching TV.

krc says

Remember that 2A relies on the support of the people.

We are doomed if a man can trespass, refuse to agree to explain himself to the cops, and attack another human being without right of self defense on the part of those attacked, and yet that is what is being said here. Apparently there are many people who support trespassing, resisting arrest and violent attacks. Glad those rights are NOT granted in the Constitution.

PeopleUnited says

krc says

And, the fact they charged the person videotaping the incident again should tell us all to turn off our camera!

So true. Or at least, don’t post the video!

krc says

condemn basically a horrible decision by a couple of idiots

Was a bad idea to get involved, would be more productive and patriotic have to let suspect go and went back to watching TV.

krc says

Remember that 2A relies on the support of the people.

We are doomed if a man can trespass, refuse to agree to explain himself to the cops, and attack another human being without right of self defense on the part of those attacked, and yet that is what is being said here. Apparently there are many people who support trespassing, resisting arre...

Police have sad that no crime was committed by the "suspect." They have said that multiple times - you can dispute that if you want but that is the fact and the way the case will be presented to the jury. The owner of the property himself said nothing was disturbed, and no one has stated that he cross over a fence or broke into the site. If we want to track down and shoot anyone who walks through a construction site, then the law should be explicit: "You have the right to kill anyone you "think" was trespassing on a construction site". Stupid. To kill someone over a "trespass" situation or thinking there was burglary when that was not the case, again, is negligent. We can excuse these dopes all we want - they were simply wrong.

I shouldn't have to explain myself to anyone unless the "state" has a reason to subpoena me and exercise a search warrant. It is interesting that many believe government over-reaches, but then excuse "non-police" fools that either deliberately or mistakenly evaluate the situation and believe it requires "armed intervention." Any citizen that tried to "arrest me" at gun point when I have done nothing wrong - well I know they are mistaken and that could mean I am dead anyway since they obviously "think" I did something seriously enough to justify threats of death - and that is what carrying a gun represents. I will resist and exercise my right to live.

Ever see "Hang-em-High"? :)

These are not "cops". Where did you read that? One was a retired investigator - right? The other his son. They are relying on georgia law that lets you make essentially a citizen arrest. And again, it was done negligently. I don't see how anyone, looking at the video and the statements so far, couldn't see these guys were morons.

You are also "assuming" he attacked the person with the gun - which I would probably have done myself in that situation if I felt I could get the upper hand. Wouldn't you? Anyway - I couldn't see that in the video. Where are you seeing that? If you are simply representing what the killers are saying, then if I were them that is what I would say as well. Since the main "suspect" was killed, the killers can say whatever they want. Too funny.









.

OccasionalCortex says

krc says

The owner of the property himself said nothing was disturbed

So? That doesn't define 'trespassing'.

Actually it does. It is not trespassing when there are no obstacles such as a fence or closed door, That is why I fence my property line where I want no one to be. The fact that he didn't disturb anything means, I believe, that he had access to the property without limitation. He did not "occupy" it so it doesn't rise to trespass - and that is why the police are saying the same. Even if he did open a door, wouldn't it make more sense to call the police. Isn't that the responsible course of action? They chose to be irresponsible. Pure and simple.

Good trolling though... I took that bait!

I seriously can't believe that anyone who walks through a construction site should be confronted and killed. The "suspect" did nothing that you and I wouldn't have done. The confrontation clearly started when the suspect was beside the truck and out of the camera view. Of course the killers are going to say whatever they want,. The fact they were in this position to begin with was negligent.

The actual video so everyone can see it. If there is another video, let me know. I clearly hear a gunshot while the truck shields them.
And, if I am the only one left alive of course I am going to say "I was attacked." The only ones who know the truth are the ones alive and they are motivated to put their actions in the best possible light. Frankly, though, I would have attacked him myself as he clearly was not well prepared and simply thought wielding a gun would enforce "obedience" - but I can't say that the "suspect" did the same based on the video.

IF they were trying to arrest, they were in poor position and did a negligent job. They decided that they were the jury and executioner - and should face the appropriate consequences.

https://www.tmz.com/2020/05/05/shooting-video-unarmed-black-man-killed-ahmaud-arbery-georgia-jogging/

I was curious how different the law is between CA and GA....

https://bixonlaw.com/georgia-trespassing-101/

Trespassing seems intwined with property damage > $500.00. Video from the site shows that dozens of people over the course of a day wandered through the site, including women and children, implying there was no access restriction to the property. I don't see how this is trespassing. The owner clearly didn't care enough to lock up the site apparently.

Is there a video where the suspect damaged the property? I couldn't find one....

OccasionalCortex says

krc says

It is not trespassing when there are no obstacles such as a fence or closed door,

Again, you twist reality when actual reality doesn't suit you.

The owner of the property himself said nothing was disturbed does not equate to It is not trespassing when there are no obstacles such as a fence or closed door

And you do it again:

krc says

I seriously can't believe that anyone who walks through a construction site should be confronted and killed

Because nobody got killed for that. Confronted yes, as is the case in Georgia law. Trespassing on a construction site is a felony. Citizens can make an arrest in that case.

And he wasn't killed for trespassing. He was killed for grabbing a gun and the owner had no choice other than the cede control of said gun and th...

Where is trespassing of a construction site a felony? I am not seeing that. The laws I have looked up so far all seem to indicate the max for trespassing is a misdemeanor. Burglary is a felony. I don't think the suspect committed either - if that actually matters. The killers definitely didn't know whether he committed no crime, a misdemeanor crime, or a felony crime. And they didn't care to know either - which is just confirmation of their negligence.

When people get around to recognizing that a man was trespassing on a construction site, perhaps with theft being the purpose of the trespassing, as witnessed by a concerned neighbor. Then the suspect ran away from those questioning him and eventually violently attacking an armed man. When people recognize this clear video evidence, then we can have a serious conversation about who committed the crime.

PeopleUnited says

When people get around to recognizing that a man was trespassing on a construction site, perhaps with theft being the purpose of the trespassing, as witnessed by a concerned neighbor. Then the suspect ran away from those questioning him and eventually violently attacking an armed man. When people recognize this clear video evidence, then we can have a serious conversation about who committed the crime.

Next time some folks with guns come chasing you in a truck with clear intent to harm, then you can accept for yourself the risk that you will be killed and go ahead and stop and say "what's up dude?" Too funny. If you think it is okay for anyone to come up to you and pull you over armed with guns with clear intent to harm in public - well - we will have to disagree.

Another reason that the suspect should have been armed himself. If he had a CC then he would have had a better chance.

I doubt the law in the US will change w.r.t trespass. The west was settled only after fencing - which was required to segregate property from the common. Clearly, most states enforce the "enclosed" statues. Of course Georgia may be an exception but everyone stating it is a felony or a serious crime are kidding themselves. And intent to burglar - really? You know this? I didn't see him carrying anything. Hard to image killing someone over a perceived burglary - and doing it so negligently.

These killers were seriously negligent at best. But now it has become a racial issue and damage to 2A continues because of two complete morons.

There is other video from the construction site and you can clearly see there is no fencing, no signage - nothing. Many people are seen walking onto and into the site, just curious to see what is going on. I guess they are all burglars? :)

krc says

now it has become a racial issue and damage to 2A continues because of two complete morons.

Look in the mirror.

PeopleUnited says

krc says

now it has become a racial issue and damage to 2A continues because of two complete morons.

Look in the mirror.

Too funny. Again, the jogger should have had a CC permit. He would have had a better chance when confronted.

Beware the morons - they are the most dangerous as they take a thread (man walks onto a construction site, therefore he is trespassing, therefore he is a burglar, therefore he should be confronted, therefore he should be killed) and escalate any situation to a "its him or me" situation. Brilliant.

We should expect responsible use of weapons - and that was not exhibited here.

And if you kill someone don't send the video to the press or even make the video! Without the video, this would all be he said/she said and the suspect is dead so they could have said whatever they wanted and agreed to it before talking to the police. That they didn't demonstrates their idiocy.

Let's call a spade a spade. This Arbery kid was arrested stealing a TV. Most shoplifters get away with much more than they were ever arrested before. The kid was a thief. When a thief enters a construction site, he/she is likely looking for something to take to sell real quick, copper pipe or tools something like that. He probably didn't see anything and was on his way. So did he steal anything or commit a crime? No. Would he have if someone left anything of value there? Probably.

These two rednecks represent the very worst of 2nd amendment gone wild. Instead of calling the police (even though they didn't actually see a crime committed), they follow him with guns and literally get into an altercation with him. Guns are for self defense, not for playing vigilante.

Everyone involved in this situation is an idiot. Arbery, the 2 rednecks, and the 3rd idiot that filmed it.

theoakman says

Let's call a spade a spade. This Arbery kid was arrested stealing a TV. Most shoplifters get away with much more than they were ever arrested before. The kid was a thief. When a thief enters a construction site, he/she is likely looking for something to take to sell real quick, copper pipe or tools something like that. He probably didn't see anything and was on his way. So did he steal anything or commit a crime? No. Would he have if someone left anything of value there? Probably.

These two rednecks represent the very worst of 2nd amendment gone wild. Instead of calling the police (even though they didn't actually see a crime committed), they follow him with guns and literally get into an altercation with him. Guns are for self defense, not for playing vigilante.

Everyone involved in this situation is an idiot. Arbery, the 2 rednecks, and the 3rd idiot that filmed it.

I'd agree with that, also TPBs assessment. Good summary. Nevertheless if no (state) laws were broken (not an expert on Georgia law), then the "rednecks" shouldn't get arrested and prosecuted. People need to petition to change the law instead. That's called the rule of law. we can't abolish the rule of law cause the victim was a skittlez boy instead of a honkee. That would be the very definition of racism.

krc says

Remember that 2A relies on the support of the people.

No it doesn't. It's a right not given by law. It's a right that can't be taken by law. It's our right to overlook any law established that try's to overthrow our rights. Rights are not given to us by the law and cannot be taken away by the law.

That doesn't mean a despotic government won't try.

krc says

man walks onto a construction site, therefore he is trespassing, therefore he is a burglar, therefore he should be confronted, therefore he should be killed)

That is the narrative the left is peddling, support for self defense is what they want to eliminate. The left wants the public to rely on the state for everything. Don’t believe it, don’t promote it. Wake up and see they wish to tell us all what we can and can’t do to protect ourselves. If people don’t wake up now, they will soon wake up in a world where all choices are removed, and dissent is not tolerated.

Everyone in this story made at least some choices different than we would have made, but other than attempting to take the weapon that did not belong to him, we have yet to see any evidence of an actual crime. And the man who committed the assault is dead, proving the only thing botched is his assault on an armed man. Let them all have their day in court, the departed could have had his too, had he sought a peaceful outcome.

My Good Guy with gun legislation would have protected this Church's right to blast to hell the first Commie Satanic Scumbag cop that followed Mayor Satan's orders to storm the church with guns. My GGWAG act would have made a 3rd degree murderer out of Mayor Clam Smoocher, for everyone killed in the massacre from her unconstitutional orders.
It would have clearly expressed why we allow Americans to own AR-15's for this very reason.

Quit fighting the wrong fight you stupid wankers, you're going to cost American our greatest fundamental right, because you think people living in a fantasy world that think of their physical capabilities greater than what they really are. Has the right to play Rambo at the slightest gut feeling there's a crime in progress.

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/05/chicago-mayor-lightfoot-defies-president-trump-sends-armed-police-squad-shut-black-baptist-church-southside-chicago/

PeopleUnited says

krc says

man walks onto a construction site, therefore he is trespassing, therefore he is a burglar, therefore he should be confronted, therefore he should be killed)

That is the narrative the left is peddling, support for self defense is what they want to eliminate. The left wants the public to rely on the state for everything. Don’t believe it, don’t promote it. Wake up and see they wish to tell us all what we can and can’t do to protect ourselves. If people don’t wake up now, they will soon wake up in a world where all choices are removed, and dissent is not tolerated.

Everyone in this story made at least some choices different than we would have made, but other than attempting to take the weapon that did not belong to him, we have yet to see any evidence of an actual crime. And the man who committed the assault is dead, proving the only thing botched is his assault on an armed man. Le...

There is no way you can construe this as "self defense". That is a joke - right?
They instigated the confrontation. They were morons in how they made the approach. They had the weapons. The numbers. And they still ended up killing him. Whatever.

OccasionalCortex says

krc says

Trespassing seems intwined with property damage > $500.00

NO. Once again you warp reality. That is ONE of the criteria for trespassing. Not the only one. But you cherry pick one that obviously does not apply, do not mention the others and then claim you are correct.

I did link to the full text of the law. Did you not check that out? There is no way this is trespassing even in Georgia. That is probably why the police and DA have ALL said that the "suspect" violated no laws - I assume you are aware of those statements as well. Regardless, the killers did not know whether "the suspect" broke the law or not. They were just vigilantes where there was no crime.

Believe me, if the DA and the government could show there was a crime and probable cause, they would as the situation would all go away.

I guess if some guys come up and wave you down with shotguns you should just comply? I wouldn't. You can take your chances with these yahoos on your own dime and time. Cheers!

krc says

If someone did that to me and I thought I had a chance to take them out, I would

Exactly, you admit he was trying to “take them out”. Sorry, but if you’re trying to take me out with my own gun, you’re going to lose.

Onvacation says

krc says

Remember that 2A relies on the support of the people.

No it doesn't. It's a right not given by law. It's a right that can't be taken by law. It's our right to overlook any law established that try's to overthrow our rights. Rights are not given to us by the law and cannot be taken away by the law.

Perhaps I am incorrect, but it is a Constitutional right subject to removal by 3/4 of house/senate and approval of 3/4 of state legislatures. Or Contitutional convention. While difficult, you can remove an amendment. I don't remember all the details. Let me know where in the constitution it says you cannot change it....

It is difficult and I think prohibition was the only amendment ever repealed.

The 21st repealed the 18th.

The brilliancy of the constitution is that it can be amended if there is enough outrage. When you have yahoos shooting people for no damn reason except they "feel he may be a burglar" or "he was playing his music too loud" or "he looked weirdly at me", then you risk more sane people saying enough is enough and willing to forgo their natural rights. It is unfortunate. That is why any serious 2A supporter should look at these yahoos and say they are idiots and put them to trial.

krc says

Onvacation says

krc says

Remember that 2A relies on the support of the people.

No it doesn't. It's a right not given by law. It's a right that can't be taken by law. It's our right to overlook any law established that try's to overthrow our rights. Rights are not given to us by the law and cannot be taken away by the law.

Perhaps I am incorrect, but it is a Constitutional right subject to removal by 3/4 of house/senate and approval of 3/4 of state legislatures. Or Contitutional convention. While difficult, you can remove an amendment. I don't remember all the details. Let me know where in the constitution it says you cannot change it....

It is difficult and I think prohibition was the only amendment ever repealed.

The 21st repealed the 18th.

The brilliancy of the constitution ...

Ok - looks like 2/3 and not 3/4 when I looked it up. There is a clear defined process...

This murder case has nothing to do with the second amendment, and anyone getting a hard dick at the prospect, that it will move the proverbial needle, will just end up soaked in Liberal tears as usual.

Why don't y'all fight the good fight, and demand clear laws that defines protection vs menace? Trying to politicize tragedies, mistakes, accidents, and people not clear on their legal boundaries as a gun grab. Will never fucking work. So don't creme your jeans, fancy pants.

ignoreme says

krc says

If someone did that to me and I thought I had a chance to take them out, I would

Exactly, you admit he was trying to “take them out”. Sorry, but if you’re trying to take me out with my own gun, you’re going to lose.

Once someone pulls a gun it is up to the person targeted (the "suspect" in this case) to make a decision. Will he wait and see if this is just a "hey dude - I want to see what you are up to and have gun to kill you if you look at me wrong" or will he believe that his constitutional right to life liberty and prosperity are being violated by this yahoo and respond accordingly - which would be to defend yourself to the fullest extent.

I guess we know what side you are on.

krc says

The "suspect" did nothing that you and I wouldn't have done.

I would not try to grab the gun of someone trying to make a citizen’s arrest. I would have waited for police.

ignoreme says

krc says

The "suspect" did nothing that you and I wouldn't have done.

I would not try to grab the gun of someone trying to make a citizen’s arrest. I would have waited for police.

Really? I wouldn't. But I have seen too many people robbed at gunpoint in DC to think a "citizen" with gun pointed at me is normal. Perhaps you are willing to take the risk when someone comes up with a gun and starts pointing it at you. That is your decision. The best way to be robbed is for someone to simply tell you they are making a citizen's arrest and you will just fold I guess. Good luck!

theoakman says

Everyone involved in this situation is an idiot. Arbery, the 2 rednecks, and the 3rd idiot that filmed it.

100% agree. If anyone of the party wasn’t an idiot, Arbery would be alive today.

It’s probably manslaughter since the guys shouldn’t have rolled up guns drawn. But you try to take someone’s gun they have no choice but to shoot you.

ignoreme says

theoakman says

Everyone involved in this situation is an idiot. Arbery, the 2 rednecks, and the 3rd idiot that filmed it.

100% agree. If anyone of the party wasn’t an idiot, Arbery would be alive today.

It’s probably manslaughter since the guys shouldn’t have rolled up guns drawn. But you try to take someone’s gun they have no choice but to shoot you.

We will see. It will be what the jury believes. The contact was instigated behind the truck where the video did not see what happened. After that, it was clearly a struggle. And once you are in that struggle you aren't going to stop until you get control of the lethal weapon.
Again, if there is no camera this is a non-issue.

Tenpoundbass says

This murder case has nothing to do with the second amendment, and anyone getting a hard dick at the prospect, that it will move the proverbial needle, will just end up soaked in Liberal tears as usual.

Why don't y'all fight the good fight, and demand clear laws that defines protection vs menace? Trying to politicize tragedies, mistakes, accidents, and people not clear on their legal boundaries as a gun grab. Will never fucking work. So don't creme your jeans, fancy pants.

Agree completely.

krc says

Really? I wouldn't.

Dude, if the guy is going to even make the pretense that he’s making a citizen’s arrest I’m going to take those odds. If he wanted to kill me he could have just run me over with the truck or shot me or something.

If 3 guys are there, one filming, I know I was doing something wrong previously, my first assumption is going to be they want to have the police have a chat with me, not that they are some racist murder cult.

But hey, good luck.

ignoreme says

krc says

Really? I wouldn't.

Dude, if the guy is going to even make the pretense that he’s making a citizen’s arrest I’m going to take those odds. If he wanted to kill me he could have just run me over with the truck or shot me or something.

If 3 guys are there, one filming, I know I was doing something wrong previously, my first assumption is going to be they want to have the police have a chat with me, not that they are some racist murder cult.

But hey, good luck.

And I would take the opposite (I am not even sure they were making a citizens arrest. The verbal recording was garbled, but we will see). Our decisions are all based on experiences from our past, so certainly individuals will respond, well, differently. That shouldn't be a surprise. Running someone over with a truck without surprise is not very likely.

And, I don't think race played a part here. They got a call, someone says some dude in the neighborhood who shouldn't be there was in a construction site that is open to everyone (and yes there is numerous video of other "criminals" from the neighborhood entering the house)... Hey Bubba - let's go check it out! Let's grab out guns and see if we can make him confess to something! Or else...

Better response would be for the suspect's family to take out the killers family as revenge I guess. Just go up and say "citizen's arrest" and start shooting. What would be the difference? That seems to be the next step since we can't even agree that these yahoos acted irresponsibly and should be held accountable.

krc says

ignoreme says

krc says

Really? I wouldn't.

Dude, if the guy is going to even make the pretense that he’s making a citizen’s arrest I’m going to take those odds. If he wanted to kill me he could have just run me over with the truck or shot me or something.

If 3 guys are there, one filming, I know I was doing something wrong previously, my first assumption is going to be they want to have the police have a chat with me, not that they are some racist murder cult.

But hey, good luck.

And I would take the opposite (I am not even sure they were making a citizens arrest. The verbal recording was garbled, but we will see). Our decisions are all based on experiences from our past, so certainly individuals will respond, well, differently. That shouldn't be a surprise. Running someone over with a tru...

You'd be able to make better arguments if you were honest. You'd still be wrong but, at least you'd be an honest person.

WineHorror1 says

You'd still be wrong but, at least you'd be an honest person.

Honest person? That's so old school.

krc says

We will see. It will be what the jury believes.

And that's all that matters. I haven't even looked at the charges, but the only one that maybe could stick is some illegal citizens arrest charge if that was even presented. Which is likely a misdemeanor.

I know people want these guys charged with murder and be convicted, it's just not going to happen. There's no way a jury of 12 or whatever number it is in this jurisdiction, is going to convict these guys of anything beyond a reasonable doubt. Only way is if their attorney is a complete moron, which is always possible. They're likely to end up with a high profile attorney that will do this pro bono for the free advertising and knows that they can get them off.

Hell this thread itself is split 50/50. Not sure how you're going to get a conviction on any charges, at least major ones.

krc says

Just go up and say "citizen's arrest" and start shooting. What would be the difference?

Grabbing the gun.

ignoreme says

krc says

Just go up and say "citizen's arrest" and start shooting. What would be the difference?

Grabbing the gun.

Not really. Assuming no one is stupid enough to film, then you simply shoot and say "yeah, dude tried to grab my gun when I declared I wanted to arrest him. And my name is Bubba by the way. B-U-B-B-A. ". :)

krc says

But I have seen too many people robbed at gunpoint in DC to think a "citizen" with gun pointed at me is normal.

bullshit. if you were routinely canvassing a home or store to rob, had just left that home or store and were then confronted by someone with a gun asking to talk to you, you would know EXACTLY why.

Arbery knew EXACTLY why he was confronted. He probably just didnt want to go to jail and overreacted.

Unfortunately, when he grabs for the man's gun, the man has the right to defend himself with the gun.