Ahmaud Arbery shot in Georgia by white men

MartyMcFly

Woodpecker
Roddie’s crime is similar to when you drive a gateway car during a robbery and a murder occurs, you’re just as guilty as whomever pulled the trigger.

Agreed that these 3 guys fouled up big time, no issues from me on the verdict.
This is a law that I found to be ridiculous. The one who pulls the trigger should face the toughest penalty. The only time this is not true is when someone uses real threats to pressure someone else to pull the trigger. Imagine you only plan to rob a store and your partner decides to pull a trigger. Charging both equally is not true justice.
 

Samseau

Owl
Orthodox
Gold Member
The problem is that while Arbery is no doubt a criminal.... The defendants chased the guy, hit him with a car, and attempted to falsely imprison him in their citizens arrest.

If he was hit with a car, that definitely changes the picture!

From the wiki page:

As Arbery approaches the pickup truck, shouting can be heard.[59] Arbery then crosses from the left side of the road to the right side and runs around the passenger's side of the truck. After passing the truck's front, Arbery turns left.[58][60][62] Meanwhile, Travis McMichael, holding his shotgun, approaches Arbery at the truck's front.[61][63] The camera's view of the confrontation between Arbery and Travis is momentarily blocked.[64]

Several media accounts of the video report that the audio of the first gunshot seems to be heard before Arbery and Travis struggle with each other.[57][62][65] Some media accounts first report a struggle, and then mention the gunshot(s).[60][66] Other media accounts describe that it was "not possible" to see from the video what was happening when the first gunshot was fired,[67] or report that the truck "blocks the view of how the men first engage each other" with regard to when the gunshot is heard.[68]

But no such mention of a car hit is ever mentioned, anywhere, so are you sure the car hit happened?

Watching video footage also reveals no car hit:


However, the wiki is correct in that we see that no direct footage is recorded when the first shooting occurs. On top of that, there are lots of conflicting reports between witnesses of what happened. And finally, they lacked grounds for a proper citizens arrest. Combined with a lousy attorney and witnesses who incriminate themselves... suddenly the guilty verdict isn't too far fetched.

Because there is a lack of footage at the moment of the shooting, I really have no idea if Arbery charged in fear of his own life or not. If they were pointing a gun at him while yelling for him to stop or get killed, then Arbery still acted completely irrational, but in a stressful situation then it makes sense he could act in such a way. If Arbery was dodging gun fire and decided to go for a last stand, I could understaand that too, but in the video Arbery is fighting the man before the first shoot is discharged. That is self-defense.

Arbery may be innocent, but he's also dead. Why on earth would anyone charge someone with a gun? 99% of people simply freeze. Arbery would have won in regular court, and civil court afterwards, for false imprisonment.

As far as I can tell, the two conflicting sides of this story are:

1. People have a right to protect their community.
2. People cannot falsely imprison someone.

If it was established in court that these men had no good motive to mount a citizens' arrest (lack of proof), then there is still the separate question of whether or not someone has a right to defend themselves when charged by someone else holding a gun. Additionally, had Arbery been armed, it would have escalated into a shootout almost immediately, because someone brandishing a gun at you is obviously going to cause fear for someone's life.

These men did not do a good job of playing cop. They needed to calmly speak to the suspect with no gun brandished, and get his side of the story. They jumped to an arrest phase with not enough evidence and it resulted in a self-defense situation. To be a good cop, sometimes you must put yourself in harms way. The father was standing in the truck with a pistol, so there was no need for the man confront Arbery to brandish his weapon either on a mere trespassing charge.

I would charge the the father-son combo with manslaughter but not murder. The idea they had malicious intent to murder is ridiculous and the video shows no such thing, they were merely trying to protect their community, but it could be the case that "murder with malice" is lightly defined in Georgia.

The man who filmed it should not be charged with anything, this is 100% evil. This man filmed the truth so that people could have it, and instead he is punished for life? Say goodbye to anymore good Samaritans filming, what a garbage verdict.

But overall, false imprisonment is wrong, threatening someone to stop or die with minimal evidence is also wrong. False imprisonment of someone is probably worth 1-5 years in prison in most states. That it lead to a death is a serious crime, but not indicative of murder.

I believe regular people should be allowed to enforce the law. Citzens arrest is no different than an officer's arrest. The idea that a police officer has a better moral compass, or that the judge or jury does, is simply absurd. God gave everyone the same capacities to determine right from wrong.

But, that said, if you are going to act as a cop, you better damn well know the law and be prepared to be in danger while reserving judgement about a suspect. Threatening to shoot someone until they answer your questions is...

1. Unproductive, as 99% of people will lie about what they are doing.
2. Quite likely to harm innocents.

A Christian cannot execute a policy that could risk harming innocents. Not only does Jesus teach this, such as when Jesus refuses the request to rain fire and brimstone on Samaritans, but also how God refuses to rain fire and brimstone on Soddom and Gomorrah until every innocent person was evacuated from the city. It's also in the parable of the wheat and the chaff; God refuses to pull out any weeds in fear of harming even a single innocent.

So, based on the evidence presented thus far, we can conclude that there was Anti-White zealotry in over-convicting the defendants, especially for the man who filmed, but if it were my Kingdom I'd give both the father/son 20 years in prison for manslaughter. Definitely not murder, and in my perfect world murderers would get the death penalty. The fact that these guys were given murder charges instead of manslaughter shows Anti-White racism, but not an extreme amount.

Naturally, I could be wrong about anything above, feel free to tell me why!
 

Saul

Pigeon
Their testimony signed their own deaths. They recorded what they did. Then could not remeber what they exactly said or did on the witness stand. These guys are going to jail.

You cannot become your own judge, jury and executioner.

It does not matter what color this guy was and it does not matter what he may have done at some other point in time. The court is only going to look at what pertains to this particular instance.

The woman prosecutor flat out made it seem like these guys had on numerous acted like cops. But they have no authority and never said they were conducting a citiczens arrest.

I have linked 2 videos of this guy's own testimony. He hung himself.

They are not done yet, with their day in court either. They are going to be sentenced still. Then they are gonna face federal hate crime laws.

The show is just getting started. :'o
 

Samseau

Owl
Orthodox
Gold Member
What if police had shown up and tried to apprehend Ahmaud for questioning, Ahmaud refuses to comply, he starts escalating, then ran at the cop who had his gun drawn, punched him and grabbed at his gun. Cop would have shot. Almost guaranteed.

This is by far the best defense of the situation.

I have to agree and cannot rule this as murder. But if the cop tried to apprehend someone with a lack of proof, that is false imprisonment. And if leads to a death, then I cannot see how that's not manslaughter. False imprisonment is wrong.

The fact that cops routinely false imprison people is another story, and that our justice system throws innocents people in jail all the time is another story, and in no way do I support any of these things.

But a nice Christian country should not have people brandishing guns at each other; if Travis had kept his shotgun holstered behind his back (with his father on lookout with the pistol), and Travis was still attacked despite trying to peacefully question Arbery, then shooting in self-defense would have been 100% justified with no manslaughter. But the moment you have false imprisonment (telling people to stop or die) then you've got a real problem.

Not saying that false imprisonment is necessarily true either, but it's literally the only way I could see the Micheals being guilty of anything.
 

Gimlet

Kingfisher
Ahmad was a loser up to no good. I believe he was scrounging around looking for something to steal. But the defendants were not in fear of their lives when they started the chase, and there is no legal justification to kill someone to protect the neighborhood. Come on guys.
 

Samseau

Owl
Orthodox
Gold Member
Their testimony signed their own deaths. They recorded what they did. Then could not remeber what they exactly said or did on the witness stand. These guys are going to jail.

You cannot become your own judge, jury and executioner.

It does not matter what color this guy was and it does not matter what he may have done at some other point in time. The court is only going to look at what pertains to this particular instance.

The woman prosecutor flat out made it seem like these guys had on numerous acted like cops. But they have no authority and never said they were conducting a citiczens arrest.

I have linked 2 videos of this guy's own testimony. He hung himself.

They are not done yet, with their day in court either. They are going to be sentenced still. Then they are gonna face federal hate crime laws.

The show is just getting started. :'o


The show is indeed getting started, although the main event isn't quite what you think it will be. A world without law and order will be a scary one indeed, and this court ruling does not inspire much confidence in our justice system.
 

Samseau

Owl
Orthodox
Gold Member
Ahmad was a loser up to no good. I believe he was scrounging around looking for something to steal. But the defendants were not in fear of their lives when they started the chase, and there is no legal justification to kill someone to protect the neighborhood. Come on guys.

Much more complicated than that I'm afraid. Watch the video, the man with the gun is clearly attacked before the first shot goes off. If you did that to a cop, you'd be dead as well. People have a right to self-defense. The problem, however, is that apparently these guys were yelling at Arbery to stop or die, which requires serious grounds to justify such a command, and it appears the Michaels had no such justification to imprison someone like that. Being shady is not enough to reasonably imprison someone.
 

Gimlet

Kingfisher
Much more complicated than that I'm afraid. Watch the video, the man with the gun is clearly attacked before the first shot goes off. If you did that to a cop, you'd be dead as well. People have a right to self-defense. The problem, however, is that apparently these guys were yelling at Arbery to stop or die, which requires serious grounds to justify such a command, and it appears the Michaels had no such justification to imprison someone like that. Being shady is not enough to reasonably imprison someone.

I saw the video, I saw the man with the gun was attacked. But that does not matter as you know. Georgia has laws, and indeed these men had no right to do what they did. They cannot demand anything of the assailant, and kill him for not complying. They did not have to be there. If a cop shot him in the same situation, clearly the cop would be in the right, and I would be on his side. But that's not what happened. The jury did the right thing. People angry about this are similar to people angry about Rittenhouse getting off. Using emotions instead of reviewing the facts and the laws of the jurisdiction.
 

Samseau

Owl
Orthodox
Gold Member
If a cop shot him in the same situation, clearly the cop would be in the right, and I would be on his side. But that's not what happened. The jury did the right thing. People angry about this are similar to people angry about Rittenhouse getting off. Using emotions instead of reviewing the facts and the laws of the jurisdiction.

If a cop would have been in the right for doing the exact same thing Travis did, then you are in the wrong and are the one being emotional. There is no meaningful moral difference between a cop and any other citizen. All citizens should the right to enforce the law, as long as it's done in a fair and just manner.
 

Gimlet

Kingfisher
If a cop would have been in the right for doing the exact same thing Travis did, then you are in the wrong and are the one being emotional. There is no meaningful moral difference between a cop and any other citizen. All citizens should the right to enforce the law, as long as it's done in a fair and just manner.

The jury enforced the law of GA. A cop and a citizen have different standards. A citizen does not have to run after a potential criminal, then react when said criminal comes back hard and thuggish. Cops do run after them. Citizen can go home., Come on man.
(And I usually don't do debates here and these back and forth arguments, but I respect the heck out of you. Glad to see you back. )
 

Samseau

Owl
Orthodox
Gold Member
A cop and a citizen have different standards.

These people are not cops. They were the redneck Karens of the neighborhood.

This is your false premise. There is no meaningful difference between a cop and a citizen, and the fact that people think there is a difference is a major problem that will be corrected by God's iron laws of the universe as our civilized world collapses under the weight of its own sin.

God judges us all equally, therefore we know there is no meaningful moral difference between a cop or any other citizen. There is no difference between a king and a beggar, all are judged the exact same way by God. Therefore, a king has no more right to enact or enforce law than a beggar. This is biblical truth whether or not anyone wants to accept it.

It is good to be back, thank you for your replies, I too do not bother to argue or debate these issues anywhere else because this is one of the last places on the net where people are rational and God-fearing. So for this reason I know my words will not merely bounce off of you.
 

El Draque

Kingfisher
Orthodox
I'll risk the ire of Americans, by saying a lot of this comes from a false sense of security in your legal system and gun rights.

For years Americans, when commenting on incidences elsewhere, have crowed about how 'no one better pull that crap round here, unlike you Euro Cucks, we got guns!".

BLM Riots exposed how most Americans are sensible enough to realise this just isnt the case, unless their case is absolutely watertight, and anything even vaguely 'vigilante' will have ZOG rain down upon them.

These Redneck Karens, i suspect, epitomise this kind of over-confidence in, verging on ignorance of, the law.

I feel sorry for them, as i dont think they had bad intentions, they were ultimately fools, and no doubt they will be entering a frankly hellish existence for many years, all through a foolish and perhaps at worst arrogant sense of themselves, and their place within their local community.
 

Saul

Pigeon
I am not going to lie and pretend like I have never used certain words or had certain thoughts. But I would suggest not to pity these guys. A chimpanzee could tell you this was a bad idea from the start.
 

El Draque

Kingfisher
Orthodox
I am not going to lie and pretend like I have never used certain words or had certain thoughts. But I would suggest not to pity these guys. A chimpanzee could tell you this was a bad idea from the start.

Have you never had, and acted upon, a bad idea?

Out of foolishness, naiveity, excuberance, over confidence, arrogance etc?

I know i've done that many times over the years, luckily the consequences haven't been remotely as bad as its been for these gentlemen.

I dont believe they had bad intent, i believe it was stupid, arrogant, and ignorant, as i'm sure they will very much now know. But their intent, at its root, seems to me to have been to protect their neighbourhood from crime.
 
Top