Oh dear.

This really isn't the best case to hang your 'racism doesn't exist' hat on.

Running off to collect guns and jump in the car to follow a guy is also clear premeditated. The calls to the police even make it more obvious.

Hey if we call the police first we are even more justified to chase after this black guy with our guns.

---

Bold point 1: So the new standard is, "I get to shoot you because I don't know for sure that you're unarmed"?

Bold point 2: How many times has someone pulled up in front of you and gotten out with a shotgun, facing towards you? Do you consider having your path blocked by someone with a shotgun to be threatening? And if the person who gets out with a shotgun ends up using it on you, wouldn't there have to be some intent involved on the part of the person who pulled a shotgun in the first place?

The extent to which some of you are bending over backwards to defend the murder of an unarmed man because he was on someone else's unoccupied property, or because blocking someone's path and brandishing a shotgun at them isn't a threat, or because no one can prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that he was not armed...I mean, what the [BLEEP]? Am I allowed to go around shooting people because I don't know beyond a shadow of a doubt that they're not armed?

Screw privilege. Some of you need to check your brain cells and make sure the neurons are still doing their thing. I block your path with a truck. I get out with a shotgun. I brandish said shotgun at you. I shoot you. You die. Somehow there's no intent on my part, even though I'm the one who blocked your path, hopped out with a shotgun and opened up a new putting green in your chest. But no, it's your fault because you didn't run screaming like a baby in your basketball shoes.

If it's a white guy doing what Arbery was doing, whatever that was, we never hear about this because no one gets shot. Because it was a black guy in a white neighborhood, the Stormfront brigade showed up and decided that petty theft of an unoccupied structure warranted blockading someone with a shotgun. I'd also like to point out that there were two 911 calls. In the first, the caller reported a black man inside a house under construction, and the caller could not articulate for the 911 operator what the man had done wrong, just that he had "taken off down the street". A second 911 call came in from someone else saying--literally--that there was "a black man running down the street".

So, again, explain how there's not intent to kill on the part of someone who blocks someone else's path, brandishes a shotgun, then puts a hole in that person's chest. Explain how there's no racial motivation when the two 911 calls made prior to the shooting are mostly to entirely focused on "a black man running down the street" without articulating any crime or threat. There was apparently enough perceived threat to stop the man with a shotgun, but not enough of one to explain the situation to a 911 operator as anything other than "a black man running down the street."

You want to say it's not racially motivated? Ok. No one showed up wearing bedsheets and burning a cross before shooting him, but as I've said over and over, all anyone was able to speak to on 911 was "a black man running down the street". And then they shot him. Because he was a black man running down the street. Their own words. Not mine.

Bull.  Just out and out SJW bull.  Argue the facts, argue the law.  Theres no proof that these guys factored race into their decisions, but most people have judged them guilty just because they're white.  

We have video of the guy chasing the residence, and then fleeing when confronted by a neighbor.  Just because they mentioned his race in a physical description doesnt mean that they went out to fulfill their caverns quota of dead black boys.  

Morally, I wouldn't pursue someone with lethal force for a property crime.  That's me.  Personally I wouldn't write a law empowering citizens to pursue and arrest a citizen once they left the scene of a crime.  

Those personal preferences have zero bearing on the fact that if Mcmichaels believed Ahmad committed a felony then he has the legal authority to arrest him.  Arrest by definition is against someone's will.  This case hinges on whether they had reasonable immediate knowledge of a felony and if saying "we want to talk to you" fails the citizens arrest standard.  That's it!

Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't you and TJ both black Americans?

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

There's more and more evidence suggesting the McMichaels could have had probable cause to enact a citizens arrest. If Arbery tampered with the connection to the public water system, that's a more serious crime than trespass or burglary. Since it got called in to the utility, it probably couldn't be shut off at the main valve of the house. Maybe Arbery tried to steal the main valve. Remember, one of the previous thefts at that house was copper pipe, and a man matching Arbery's description was filmed in the house on multiple occasions. If enough water was running to impact the crime scene it must've been a pretty serious break. .

There's also the mystery about whatever was dropped in the road. Did Arbery drop it, and if so, was it something he got from the house or did he bring it with him as a burglary tool? Was it a sawz-all to cut the piping?

There's so much we might never know about this case. I'd sure like to know what was said when they approached Arbery in the truck. And it definitely wasn't the old guy's first rodeo. He didn't want to be in the cab. Pops was gonna take the shot if Arbery pulled a gun. Might be why they eventually stopped - at some point they probably figured Arbery was not armed. At that point a gun battle was not likely, but it looks like Arbery chose to initiate one.

---

I haven’t seen ALL the tapes. But from what I have seen I will say that perhaps Arbwry may not have been completely innocent but these two “rednecks” racist or not (leaning towards it) thought they were doing the right thing. Things got out of hand. Even if Arbery was guilty of scoping the place out and or trying to steal from the site, it doesn’t warrant the death penalty. Assuming that it was a citizens arrest gone wrong, it’s just unfortunate for everyone involved and the public in general. I think eventually those two will be acquitted. But wouldn’t be surprised if found guilty. Long story short, be damn sure you’re in the right before pulling a gun. I think they had the shotgun out to “prevent” but when the suspect took that as a threat he fought back. Thus resulting in the problem we have now. Had he submitted, everyone would be alive and free. Not sure I can put blame on either, but If I had to, more so the father and son that tried to take the law into their own hands. Whether it was justified by GA law or not.

---

This is your first post in the thread.

First thing you've gotten correct.  That is my first post.  Do you have a reason to reference it?
In the video I saw a man chasing a truck.  You seem to have seen a truck chasing a man.

The gang-banger photo was found on an investing forum.  I've heard of 4chan/8chan but never been there.  Never heard of the other ones you listed.

Pot and kettle. Accusing me of jumping to conclusions, when you've got this whole thing solved.

---

I'll play you in ping pong. 

First thing you've gotten correct.  That is my first post.  Do you have a reason to reference it?
In the video I saw a man chasing a truck.  You seem to have seen a truck chasing a man.

The gang-banger photo was found on an investing forum.  I've heard of 4chan/8chan but never been there.  Never heard of the other ones you listed.

Pot and kettle. Accusing me of jumping to conclusions, when you've got this whole thing solved.

I'm trying to accumulate facts if that's what you mean.  When new facts are introduced (broken water pipe), I try to fit the new info into some kind of logical pattern.  I see very few attempting to exercise their brains on this one; many knew all they cared to know after reading one headline.

And something bothered me about the positioning of the men in the truck, so I thought about it for a while, considering what we know about the experience of the older man. He could likely cover Arbery from twice the distance Arbery could return accurate fire.  So if this was a murder it would have been over before the truck ever got close.  Pops had several clear shots at Arbery, but didn't fire until after the shotgun was fired.

Another thought just occurred. Why was the man chasing the truck? Because there was only one way out of the neighborhood and the cops were on the way.

---

Bull.  Just out and out SJW bull.  Argue the facts, argue the law.  Theres no proof that these guys factored race into their decisions, but most people have judged them guilty just because they're white.  

We have video of the guy chasing the residence, and then fleeing when confronted by a neighbor.  Just because they mentioned his race in a physical description doesnt mean that they went out to fulfill their caverns quota of dead black boys.  

Morally, I wouldn't pursue someone with lethal force for a property crime.  That's me.  Personally I wouldn't write a law empowering citizens to pursue and arrest a citizen once they left the scene of a crime.  

Those personal preferences have zero bearing on the fact that if Mcmichaels believed Ahmad committed a felony then he has the legal authority to arrest him.  Arrest by definition is against someone's will.  This case hinges on whether they had reasonable immediate knowledge of a felony and if saying "we want to talk to you" fails the citizens arrest standard.  That's it!

Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't you and TJ both black Americans?

I am.  That matters why?

---

Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't you and TJ both black Americans?

I am.  That matters why?

It doesn't matter, it's just interesting.  News junkies like us might assume we know someone's point of view based on what they look like.  But you are obviously an exception.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

Bull.  Just out and out SJW bull.  Argue the facts, argue the law.  Theres no proof that these guys factored race into their decisions, but most people have judged them guilty just because they're white.  

We have video of the guy chasing the residence, and then fleeing when confronted by a neighbor.  Just because they mentioned his race in a physical description doesnt mean that they went out to fulfill their caverns quota of dead black boys.  

Morally, I wouldn't pursue someone with lethal force for a property crime.  That's me.  Personally I wouldn't write a law empowering citizens to pursue and arrest a citizen once they left the scene of a crime.  

Those personal preferences have zero bearing on the fact that if Mcmichaels believed Ahmad committed a felony then he has the legal authority to arrest him.  Arrest by definition is against someone's will.  This case hinges on whether they had reasonable immediate knowledge of a felony and if saying "we want to talk to you" fails the citizens arrest standard.  That's it!

Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't you and TJ both black Americans?

I’m white

---

I think it's safe to say that a majority of Americans are not into the vigilante justice that happened here. You have a few that are attempting to justify the killing, but MOST people are pretty sympathetic towards Arbery. Even if he was committing a crime, these guys were overzealous in their pursuit, and Georgia should look to rewrite these laws.

That said, why can't it just be criminal? Why the rush towards racism? Blacks are not being gunned down in the street by whites with any kind of regularity, and continuing to espouse that narrative is not helping anything. This is a nation of 300,000,000 people. You're odds of being shot and killed by a white person as a black man are statistically zero. I can't even find current, reliable data on the issue. Maybe, just maybe, people stand to profit off this controversy, and so they sell it to us, not because it's a real threat, but because it supports their policies or their pocket book. I don't get defending these two guys in the same way I don't get trying to instantly label these guys as racists. Show me proof these guys were racist, and I'll change my mind. Until then, that shouldn't be the lead. It's ENTIRELY speculative.

---

I think it's safe to say that a majority of Americans are not into the vigilante justice that happened here. You have a few that are attempting to justify the killing, but MOST people are pretty sympathetic towards Arbery. Even if he was committing a crime, these guys were overzealous in their pursuit, and Georgia should look to rewrite these laws.

That said, why can't it just be criminal? Why the rush towards racism? Blacks are not being gunned down in the street by whites with any kind of regularity, and continuing to espouse that narrative is not helping anything. This is a nation of 300,000,000 people. You're odds of being shot and killed by a white person as a black man are statistically zero. I can't even find current, reliable data on the issue. Maybe, just maybe, people stand to profit off this controversy, and so they sell it to us, not because it's a real threat, but because it supports their policies or their pocket book. I don't get defending these two guys in the same way I don't get trying to instantly label these guys as racists. Show me proof these guys were racist, and I'll change my mind. Until then, that shouldn't be the lead. It's ENTIRELY speculative.

It shouldn't matter if they are racists, the guy is dead either way. What matters is their criminal negligence in attempting to enforce the law themselves, especially when the optics then make it look like lower Alabama circa 1926. They were stupid, a guy died, the DA intervened because he knew the shooter, and it looks suspiciously like it was race based. You don't need proof they were racists to find them guilty of manslaughter by by deity you have to arrest them and investigate, but the optics, again, make this highly flammable. Then you've got people coming out saying the shooters did nothing wrong because the guy might've been a petty criminal and that's just absurd, even the on scene cops knew they broke the law and would've arrested them except for the DA's directive. The whole thing is pathetic.

---

Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't you and TJ both black Americans?

I’m white

Lily, Hispanic, or Florescent though?

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

Pot and kettle. Accusing me of jumping to conclusions, when you've got this whole thing solved.

I'm trying to accumulate facts if that's what you mean.  When new facts are introduced (broken water pipe), I try to fit the new info into some kind of logical pattern.  I see very few attempting to exercise their brains on this one; many knew all they cared to know after reading one headline.

And something bothered me about the positioning of the men in the truck, so I thought about it for a while, considering what we know about the experience of the older man. He could likely cover Arbery from twice the distance Arbery could return accurate fire.  So if this was a murder it would have been over before the truck ever got close.  Pops had several clear shots at Arbery, but didn't fire until after the shotgun was fired.

Another thought just occurred.  Why was the man chasing the truck?  Because there was only one way out of the neighborhood and the cops were on the way.

No, that's not what I mean - while assigning blame to others for skewing their perception, you miss obvious points that should modify your original, subjective opinion. The Brunswick article (with the father/son's quotes), if true, stipulates that it would've been impossible for Arbery to be chasing the truck, as they were the ones chasing him and made multiple attempts to cut off his escape. It's also kinda hard to chase an immobile vehicle with the driver standing outside brandishing a shotgun and the father standing in the bed armed with a .357 mag. 

However, I never called it murder. Based on evidence, this is manslaughter clear and simple - arguable that the shotgun was involuntary, arguable that the .357 was voluntary (if that contributed to his death, I don't know if it did, but it was definitely attempted). Self-defense for Arbery despite trespassing, despite being assigned labels as felon/gang-banger/etc. from others, despite running away or running for recreation, despite wrestling with the dude brandishing the shotgun. I'd argue that he continued to attempt to escape from them by running to the right of the truck as opposed to directly at the guy with the shotgun. Shotgun then takes position around the front of the truck/bumper and then it's self-defense time. 

The point I made with my Riverside biking example, where you felt the unavoidable need to get into straw-man attack mode, was that if it were me, I would be fearing for my life at that point and would make every attempt to defend myself.

---

I'll play you in ping pong. 

I'm trying to accumulate facts if that's what you mean.  When new facts are introduced (broken water pipe), I try to fit the new info into some kind of logical pattern.  I see very few attempting to exercise their brains on this one; many knew all they cared to know after reading one headline.

And something bothered me about the positioning of the men in the truck, so I thought about it for a while, considering what we know about the experience of the older man. He could likely cover Arbery from twice the distance Arbery could return accurate fire.  So if this was a murder it would have been over before the truck ever got close.  Pops had several clear shots at Arbery, but didn't fire until after the shotgun was fired.

Another thought just occurred.  Why was the man chasing the truck?  Because there was only one way out of the neighborhood and the cops were on the way.

No, that's not what I mean - while assigning blame to others for skewing their perception, you miss obvious points that should modify your original, objective opinion. The Brunswick article (with the father/son's quotes), if true, stipulates that it would've been impossible for Arbery to be chasing the truck, as they were the ones chasing him and made multiple attempts to cut off his escape. It's also kinda hard to chase an immobile vehicle with the driver standing outside brandishing a shotgun and the father standing in the bed armed with a .357 mag. 

However, I never called it murder. Based on evidence, this is manslaughter clear and simple - arguable that the shotgun was involuntary, arguable that the .357 was voluntary (if that contributed to his death, I don't know if it did, but it was definitely attempted). Self-defense for Arbery despite trespassing, despite being assigned labels as felon/gang-banger/etc. from others, despite running away or running for recreation, despite wrestling with the dude brandishing the shotgun. I'd argue that he continued to attempt to escape from them by running to the right of the truck as opposed to directly at the guy with the shotgun. Shotgun then takes position around the front of the truck/bumper and then it's self-defense time. 

The point I made with my Riverside biking example, where you felt the unavoidable need to get into straw-man attack mode, was that if it were me, I would be fearing for my life at that point and would make every attempt to defend myself.

You fool! You should ALWAYS get down on your knees with your hands on your head when two rednecks in a pickup truck try to run you down in the street. Don't you know your place boy?

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

It's also kinda hard to chase an immobile vehicle with the driver standing outside brandishing a shotgun and the father standing in the bed armed with a .357 mag.

Why do you think this is hard?  Arbery had no trouble doing it.

Why didn't Arbery simply turn around and run the other way?  Because the neighborhood only has one exit and there's a swamp behind many of the homes.  No other escape but to try getting past the truck.

NOTE:  After reading the initial police report and statements from the McMichaels, much of my speculation about the tactics of the 2 men is rendered null.  They didn't saddle up with Pops in the back; initially they were both in the cab.  After unsuccessfully trying to cut Arbery off, Pops got into the truck bed.  It might have happened shortly before the video starts.  But one thing about my scenario remains true.  Pops had several clear shots at Arbery, but didn't fire until after the shotgun was fired.

---

No, that's not what I mean - while assigning blame to others for skewing their perception, you miss obvious points that should modify your original, objective opinion. The Brunswick article (with the father/son's quotes), if true, stipulates that it would've been impossible for Arbery to be chasing the truck, as they were the ones chasing him and made multiple attempts to cut off his escape. It's also kinda hard to chase an immobile vehicle with the driver standing outside brandishing a shotgun and the father standing in the bed armed with a .357 mag. 

However, I never called it murder. Based on evidence, this is manslaughter clear and simple - arguable that the shotgun was involuntary, arguable that the .357 was voluntary (if that contributed to his death, I don't know if it did, but it was definitely attempted). Self-defense for Arbery despite trespassing, despite being assigned labels as felon/gang-banger/etc. from others, despite running away or running for recreation, despite wrestling with the dude brandishing the shotgun. I'd argue that he continued to attempt to escape from them by running to the right of the truck as opposed to directly at the guy with the shotgun. Shotgun then takes position around the front of the truck/bumper and then it's self-defense time. 

The point I made with my Riverside biking example, where you felt the unavoidable need to get into straw-man attack mode, was that if it were me, I would be fearing for my life at that point and would make every attempt to defend myself.

You fool! You should ALWAYS get down on your knees with your hands on your head when two rednecks in a pickup truck try to run you down in the street. Don't you know your place boy?

He trespassed AND was wearing basketball shoes! Lets get him!

---

It's also kinda hard to chase an immobile vehicle with the driver standing outside brandishing a shotgun and the father standing in the bed armed with a .357 mag.

Why do you think this is hard?  Arbery had no trouble doing it.

Why didn't Arbery simply turn around and run the other way?  Because the neighborhood only has one exit and there's a swamp behind many of the homes.  No other escape but to try getting past the truck.

NOTE:  After reading the initial police report and statements from the McMichaels, much of my speculation about the tactics of the 2 men is rendered null.  They didn't saddle up with Pops in the back; initially they were both in the cab.  After unsuccessfully trying to cut Arbery off, Pops got into the truck bed.  It might have happened shortly before the video starts.  But one thing about my scenario remains true.  Pops had several clear shots at Arbery, but didn't fire until after the shotgun was fired.

They admittedly tried to cut him off with their truck multiple times. Someone you don't know tries to run you down with their car several times and you really don't think you'd perceive it as an attack and try to run away? Then they get in front of you and get out with a [BLEEP] shotgun and you think their intentions are kosher? You guys have lost your minds.

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

Why do you think this is hard?  Arbery had no trouble doing it.

Why didn't Arbery simply turn around and run the other way?  Because the neighborhood only has one exit and there's a swamp behind many of the homes.  No other escape but to try getting past the truck.

NOTE:  After reading the initial police report and statements from the McMichaels, much of my speculation about the tactics of the 2 men is rendered null.  They didn't saddle up with Pops in the back; initially they were both in the cab.  After unsuccessfully trying to cut Arbery off, Pops got into the truck bed.  It might have happened shortly before the video starts.  But one thing about my scenario remains true.  Pops had several clear shots at Arbery, but didn't fire until after the shotgun was fired.

They admittedly tried to cut him off with their truck multiple times. Someone you don't know tries to run you down with their car several times and you really don't think you'd perceive it as an attack and try to run away? Then they get in front of you and get out with a [BLEEP] shotgun and you think their intentions are kosher? You guys have lost your minds.

As if ANY of what BLT and B2 said nullifies involuntary/voluntary manslaughter. 

Murder 1 or 2 - not enough evidence.

Voluntary/involuntary manslaughter - yup.

---

I'll play you in ping pong. 

They admittedly tried to cut him off with their truck multiple times. Someone you don't know tries to run you down with their car several times and you really don't think you'd perceive it as an attack and try to run away? Then they get in front of you and get out with a [BLEEP] shotgun and you think their intentions are kosher? You guys have lost your minds.

As if ANY of what BLT said nullifies involuntary/voluntary manslaughter. 

Murder 1 or 2 - not enough evidence.

Voluntary/involuntary manslaughter - yup.

I disagree, the minute they admitted that he evaded them and they continued to pursue him they made it Murder 2, but I'll settle for a max sentence of Aggravated Assault and Voluntary Manslaughter to be served consecutively.

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

As if ANY of what BLT said nullifies involuntary/voluntary manslaughter. 

Murder 1 or 2 - not enough evidence.

Voluntary/involuntary manslaughter - yup.

I disagree, the minute they admitted that he evaded them and they continued to pursue him they made it Murder 2, but I'll settle for a max sentence of Aggravated Assault and Voluntary Manslaughter to be served consecutively.

Perhaps, but where it gets muddy is the waiting until the physical confrontation to end his life. BLT does make one point very clear - they had every availability to shoot prior to his running up to & around the truck, especially during the pursuit. Given that, it'd be tough to prove Murder 2, let alone Murder 1. It may have been their intent all along, but proving it would be difficult. I'd expect a variety of Agg Assault & Manslaughter as charges.

---

I'll play you in ping pong. 

They admittedly tried to cut him off with their truck multiple times. Someone you don't know tries to run you down with their car several times and you really don't think you'd perceive it as an attack and try to run away? Then they get in front of you and get out with a [BLEEP] shotgun and you think their intentions are kosher? You guys have lost your minds.

True statement is in green.
False statement is in red.

---