Trayvon II: Ahmaud Arbery

[Dric902]

1 minute ago, Moshe said:

Families always contend that.  Regardless how thuggish the person was.  Apparently, some families have a very different standard of what a good "boy," (their words, not mine as usual), regardless whatever heinous thing put them in the position they ended up in.  

The video is not from family

[Moshe]

Just now, Dric902 said:

You may be confusing a couple of different high profile case

.

Not really.  Treyvon was brought up as part of a thread, and that is what I was answering to.  

[Dric902]

Michael Brown was the one strongarming a clerk

Martin was the one with Skittles and tea

Arbery was going for a run and wasn’t killed by a cop (like Brown) or the guy he was beating (Zimmerman) but by two guys with no badge or reason to believe they were in danger from the runner. 

Zimmerman was disengaging, if you want to call it engaging.

Brown was charging a cop

“Be a good witness” keeps you out of trouble. 

“Stop or I’ll shoot” bang.....gets you prison

 

.

 

 

[Moshe]

17 hours ago, gwalchmai said:

Arbery had been previously arrested for carrying a gun into a High School as an adult. He was also arrested previously for theft. and  several counts of obstructing a law enforcement officer.

He violated his probation when he was convicted in a shoplifting case in 2018. Barnhill.  As the family would say, " He was a 'good' boy."

[Fnfalman]

2 minutes ago, Moshe said:

Arbery had been previously arrested for carrying a gun into a High School as an adult. He was also arrested previously for theft. and  several counts of obstructing a law enforcement officer.

He violated his probation when he was convicted in a shoplifting case in 2018. Barnhill.  As the family would say, " He was a 'good' boy."

Well, sounded like he needed a good killing then. 
 

let’s go downtown ghetto and kill them all. For the good of the society, right?

[Dric902]

10 minutes ago, Moshe said:

Arbery had been previously arrested for carrying a gun into a High School as an adult. He was also arrested previously for theft. and  several counts of obstructing a law enforcement officer.

He violated his probation when he was convicted in a shoplifting case in 2018. Barnhill.  As the family would say, " He was a 'good' boy."

So he should be shot and killed?

I don’t care what his family says, he could be a bank robber for all it matters.......you can’t shoot him in the street

As a citizen....previous LEO, retired, super secret squirrel operator.......you must be in danger of immediate grievous bodily harm or death, to the standard of a “normal and prudent person”, to shoot the threat. 

You cannot shoot a fleeing felon, even if you know they are a felon,

unless you or another is in immediate danger.  <that’s a period right there

Active police have a different standard, they have an obligation to protect the public.

“Active” isn’t retired, former, or wannabe.

being Billy Badass gets you time

 

.

 

.

Edited May 10, 2020 by Dric902

[Moshe]

4 minutes ago, Fnfalman said:

Well, sounded like he needed a good killing then. 
 

let’s go downtown ghetto and kill them all. For the good of the society, right?

Simply disproving the narrative that this guy was not a criminal, and was already suspected in several burglaries, because he liked to escalate his crimes.  Now, as far as gang members that terrorize the people that have to live in those communities, I think you have a solid point.

[Moshe]

Just now, Dric902 said:

So he should be shot and killed?

I don’t care what his family says, he could be a bank robber for all it matters.......you can’t shoot him in the street

As a citizen....previous LEO, retired, super secret squirrel operator.......you must be in danger of immediate grievous bodily harm or death, to the standard of a “normal and prudent person”, to shoot the threat. 

You cannot shoot a fleeing felon, even if you know they are a felon, unless you or another is in immediate danger.  <that’s a period right there

Active police have a different standard, they have an obligation to protect the public.

“Active” isn’t retired, former, or wannabe.

being Billy Badass gets you time

 

.

 

.

Dispelling, the "He was a good boy," BS that I am tired of having shoved at us.  Also, curiously, how did his family have the power, to negating the attorney for the accused?  You heard, me accused.  Apparently, they have been adjudged guilty by thread?  Perhaps we can get Christine Blasey Ford in here to prove them guilty without the benefit of being judged by 12 of their peers?

[PPQer]

13 minutes ago, Fnfalman said:

Well, sounded like he needed a good killing then. 

I don't think anyone is saying that.  Some of us just see there is potentially more to the story. 

People here are desperate to virtue signal and are saying they chased him down.  That is a lie.  I say lie because they can see the video for themselves.  Video doesn't leave a lot to the imagination.  How can that be true when they were parked and he ran to them?  They are saying they hunted him down and murdered him, and that didn't happen.  Stupidity happened.  Stupidity is the difference between first degree murder and manslaughter or 2nd degree.

In the decades of watching videos of altercations, there is often one step a typical law abiding citizen does to change the perspective of guilt.  In this case, the innocent "jogger" making first physical contact, and the idiots trying to "question" him or hold him for police.

 

 

[Fnfalman]

12 minutes ago, Moshe said:

Simply disproving the narrative that this guy was not a criminal, and was already suspected in several burglaries, because he liked to escalate his crimes.  Now, as far as gang members that terrorize the people that have to live in those communities, I think you have a solid point.

So you contend that he was robbing the neighborhood instead of jogging?

[Fnfalman]

Just now, PPQer said:

I don't think anyone is saying that.  Some of us just see there is potentially more to the story. 

People here are desperate to virtue signal and are saying they chased him down.  That is a lie.  I say lie because they can see the video for themselves.  Video doesn't leave a lot to the imagination.  How can that be true when they were parked and he ran to them?  They are saying they hunted him down and murdered him, and that didn't happen.  Stupidity happened.  Stupidity is the difference between first degree murder and manslaughter or 2nd degree.

In the decades of watching videos of altercations, there is often one step a typical law abiding citizen does to change the perspective of guilt.  In this case, the innocent "jogger" making first physical contact, and the idiots trying to "question" him or hold him for police.

 

 

So, you know more about this case than GBI? You investigated and examined all evidences?

[Dric902]

Just now, Moshe said:

Dispelling, the "He was a good boy," BS that I am tired of having shoved at us.  Also, curiously, how did his family have the power, to negating the attorney for the accused?  You heard, me accused.  Apparently, they have been adjudged guilty by thread?  Perhaps we can get Christine Blasey Ford in here to prove them guilty without the benefit of being judged by 12 of their peers?

It matters less than nothing if he was a criminal, an illegal, drug dealer, what the narrative is, what his family says.

If you saw Jeff Dahmer running down the street, knew who he was and what he does...you cannot shoot him unless you, or another, are in immediate danger

pump up your hairy chest all you want online, you’ll go to jail

 

.

[Fnfalman]

11 minutes ago, Moshe said:

Dispelling, the "He was a good boy," BS that I am tired of having shoved at us.  Also, curiously, how did his family have the power, to negating the attorney for the accused?  You heard, me accused.  Apparently, they have been adjudged guilty by thread?  Perhaps we can get Christine Blasey Ford in here to prove them guilty without the benefit of being judged by 12 of their peers?

He may not have been a “good boy” but what crime was he committing that caused two non-law enforcers to confront him with guns?

 

[PPQer]

2 minutes ago, Fnfalman said:

So, you know more about this case than GBI? You investigated and examined all evidences?

All I know is what I saw in the video.  Apparently the GBI wasn't much more informed at that time because they were only recently brought in to arrest the shooters.  

I suspect by now, the GBI has a much better view of the incident, including Arbery's criminal history, stolen property reports, and neighborhood eyewitness accounts.  

Most of us are going only by the video, and we've said nothing more.  The video that shows Arbery running up to their truck, and physically assaulting the shooter.

You don't "chase someone down and murder them" by parking in the road and letting him attack you.  You could say they laid a trap, but I don't think they were smart enough for that.

 

[PPQer]

A word on virtue signaling:

The worst racist will often go out of their way to appear "woke".  I work with a guy who has a saying that "if every white gun owner could kill 10 _________ before they die, it would turn the country around".  He freely discusses the apparent violent nature of certain demographics, and the apparent reason for crime stats in areas like Memphis, Detroit, Jackson MS, and Baltimore.

Let a person of color be in the dept, and you would think the same guy had a tatoo of MLK on his heart, and his picture on an altar.  I'm used to seeing virtue signaling and recognize it when I see it.  It can also be called over compensating.

[AK_Stick]

8 minutes ago, PPQer said:

All I know is what I saw in the video.  Apparently the GBI wasn't much more informed at that time because they were only recently brought in to arrest the shooters.  

I suspect by now, the GBI has a much better view of the incident, including Arbery's criminal history, stolen property reports, and neighborhood eyewitness accounts.  

Most of us are going only by the video, and we've said nothing more.  The video that shows Arbery running up to their truck, and physically assaulting the shooter.

You don't "chase someone down and murder them" by parking in the road and letting him attack you.  You could say they laid a trap, but I don't think they were smart enough for that.

 

Your continued insistence of your account of what happened even though it counters the statement made by the shooters themselves is puzzling. 
 

why are you lying, when even the shooters admit to chasing him down? 

[PPQer]

I've been reading a thread elsewhere and have seen discussion of the construction site.  I'm not sure where.

A home construction site is pretty much like anything else.  If it is locked, the builder or contractor is trying to keep people out.  Builders don't mind people walking around looking because it's good for business.  But when materials and tools are being stored inside, the site will be locked.  Materials belong to the builder, and the tools belong to the contractor.  It would then be breaking and entering just like a home or a business.  If the site is locked down, then there is damage getting in.  

 

 

[AK_Stick]

Damage that even the shooters said he didn’t cause? 

[AK_Stick]

[TBO]

Simply disproving the narrative that this guy was not a criminal, and was already suspected in several burglaries, because he liked to escalate his crimes.  Now, as far as gang members that terrorize the people that have to live in those communities, I think you have a solid point.

Please post the "several burglaries" source.

According to reports the only police report of a burglary in the neighborhood was one (1) from the beginning of the year... and it was a gun stolen from a vehicle parked in front of the 2 Vigilantes residence.

Sent from my Jackboot using Copatalk

[Moshe]

22 minutes ago, Fnfalman said:

He may not have been a “good boy” but what crime was he committing that caused two non-law enforcers to confront him with guns?

 

So, you have already convicted them?  Christine Blasey Ford would be proud of you.

[PPQer]

1 minute ago, AK_Stick said:

Your continued insistence of your account of what happened even though it counters the statement made by the shooters themselves is puzzling. 
 

why are you lying, when even the shooters admit to chasing him down? 

I saw the video.  I haven't seen much the shooters have said because it doesn't matter.  My comments have only been around the "jogger" running around the front of the truck and attacking the shooter.  It was stupid for the jogger to do that, and stupid for the shooters to be there.  I doubt the shooters are denying that, and I suspect your take on their statements is seriously skewed, your need for virtue signalling and all.  You say they said they "chased him down" when they probably said "they tried to talk to him".  I've seen that much, but there is a big difference in the specifics.

I couldn't care less about the minutia of the entire encounter.  My point has been that he ran at them, and attacked them first, and at that point, the shooter had no choice.  

Again, you don't "chase someone down" by parking in the street and waiting for them to come to you.  You can say they intercepted him, or even laid in wait.  But they didn't chase him down, that is obvious in the video.  He had every ability to get away, he preferred to kill or die.

 

 

 

 

[Moshe]

Just now, TBO said:

Please post the "several burglaries" source.

According to reports the only police report of a burglary in the neighborhood was one (1) from the beginning of the year... and it was a gun stolen from a vehicle parked in front of the 2 Vigilantes residence.

Sent from my Jackboot using Copatalk
 

You know as well as I do, that you never catch someone on their first offense.  The people I dealt with, would admit to 10 DWIs before getting the first one on their record, as if they were proud of it or something.

[PPQer]

25 minutes ago, Fnfalman said:

He may not have been a “good boy” but what crime was he committing that caused two non-law enforcers to confront him with guns?

 

I don't disagree with that at all.  They were STUPID.  The only difference in my view is the difference between 1st degree and 2nd degree murder or manslaughter.

 

[TBO]

I saw the video.  I haven't seen much the shooters have said because it doesn't matter.  My comments have only been around the "jogger" running around the front of the truck and attacking the shooter.  It was stupid for the jogger to do that, and stupid for the shooters to be there.  I doubt the shooters are denying that, and I suspect your take on their statements is seriously skewed, your need for virtue signalling and all.  You say they said they "chased him down" when they probably said "they tried to talk to him".  I've seen that much, but there is a big difference in the specifics.
I couldn't care less about the minutia of the entire encounter.  My point has been that he ran at them, and attacked them first, and at that point, the shooter had no choice.  
Again, you don't "chase someone down" by parking in the street and waiting for them to come to you.  You can say they intercepted him, or even laid in wait.  But they didn't chase him down, that is obvious in the video.  He had every ability to get away, he preferred to kill or die.
 
 
 
 

Totality of circumstances and actions are what is used to judge a situation.

You can't snip & choose bits or focus on a single bit.

Sent from my Jackboot using Copatalk