(05-10-2020, 02:11 PM)Bullseye Wrote:

(05-10-2020, 01:51 PM)JagNGeorgia Wrote: If your implication is that he’s a racist and this is the motive for his encounter with Arbery then the mugshot would show that Arbery is a criminal and then fully capable of being the person on video burglarizing the home. You posted that picture to establish motive and nothing else. Pictures alone don’t explain what happened any more than his mugshot proves he’s a burglar.

How about you stop making vague implications and be clear with your posts instead?

You said you can believe it to a posts that addressed multiple points. If you didn’t want someone asking what you can believe, then you should’ve said it clearly.

People in this thread, including the OP, have dismissed out of hand the possibility this is racially motivated.  As for the mugshot, for my purposes in this point, or for the purposes of the applicable law, it doesn't matter if Arbery has a prior arrest for anything.  Prior arrests  do not trigger the citizens arrest statute, nor do the have any bearing on the self defense statute.

For the hard of reading, the author of the post to which I replied said he could not believe people would defend the two yahoos.  Flsportsgod then expresses disbelief about people villifying the African American for defending himself.  That's what I can believe.

Whenever a killing of an unarmed African American happens, there is always a rush to vilify them. Always.  The mere possibility that an African American might have a reasonable apprehension or fear of imminent physical bodily harm or death is almost never considered.

Even in the Botham Jean case, idiots were saying he should not have reacted to someone uninvited trying to enter HIS apartment, and observing he ha marijuana.

Is that clear enough, or do I need to use stick figures and sock puppets?

I know you get uber sensitive every time we talk about race, but how about dialing back and make sure your clear before you assume the reader misunderstood you. 

It’s possible that you said you can believe that two white dudes loaded up firearms and approached a black dude about something he didn’t do. Or, it’s possible you meant to say you can believe that people are defending two white guys for murdering a black guy that didn’t do anything. Or, it’s possible that you can believe that people wouldn’t understand what is going through a black guys mind when approached by two armed white dude. 

There’s always speculation that an unarmed black guy was doing something to justify it. To that I do agree. I also agree that this are seldom open and shut cases, and you can usually find instances when that unarmed black guy wasn’t innocent (Michael Brown). Not every case is a Tamir Rice, and they’re treated as such but only when a white guy kills a black guy. 

Maybe you should use puppets next time. You’d definitely make more sense.

---