Georgia shooting of a black man
- Thread starter Variable
- Start date
- Replies 1,192
- Views 39,568
After much thought Ima say this about this...I defer to Judge Judy. She says all her decisions are made on the But For Defense. Follow the incident backwards towards the But For. This carries me to..But For the men jumping in the truck and giving chase this would never have happened and the young fellow would be alive.
By the way, what in the name of common sense was the fella in the truck bed gonna do? Was he to "bull dog" the man down like in a rodeo? There is So much goofy going on here it defies reason. It seems simple on the surface but Really what kind of rational person takes it on their self to Do something like this? Good Lord!!!!
By the way, what in the name of common sense was the fella in the truck bed gonna do? Was he to "bull dog" the man down like in a rodeo? There is So much goofy going on here it defies reason. It seems simple on the surface but Really what kind of rational person takes it on their self to Do something like this? Good Lord!!!!
No, but if you approach them with proper deference they may perceive it as such, which is what matters.
This is a prime example of what I am saying.
More like lets kill a man of color.
Actually it does not have to be something you just witnessed. Georgia law states:
"A private person may arrest an offender if the offense is committed in his presence or within his immediate knowledge. If the offense is a felony and the offender is escaping or attempting to escape, a private person may arrest him upon reasonable and probable grounds of suspicion."
Since they suspected him of burglary, which is a felony, the standard is reasonable and probable grounds of suspicion if the person is escaping or attempting to escape, and apparently the common law for burglary would include a house under construction in Georgia.
Again, I am paraphrasing this is from Andrew Branca's podcast and he has a lot more legal education and training than I do.
I have noticed almost always when someone says ..It doesn't matter if you're Black or White..….They're white.
I have a man that I work with every day. He has been my Number 1 man for 35 years. In 35 years he has never been late for work, Not a Day. He has missed two days of work in 35 years. He was in the hospital. He has been an example to 3 sons on what a Man should do in life. He has been stopped half a dozen times because he " fit the description". In my 72 years I have never been stopped for that "offence". Yes.....he is black. If anybody believes today that it doesn't matter if you're Black or White to LEs, you're fooling yourself.
That's the local perspective in Horry County. Your situation could very well differ. In this area retired Poleeece are more vocal than the ones still on the job.
"Suspicion" does not equal immediate knowledge.
Not trying to alter your convictions but ...
You have an example of one person, which in the grand scheme of things means nothing.
I can show you a white man that has the same ethics and a Mexican man that does also.
It doesn't matter if your skin is dark or it is light, what matters are the convictions of your heart and your intent.
And to the point of being pulled over ...
could it be if you are looking for a certain set of physical features a larger percentage of the time, you just might get thrown into that mix. Maybe your guy does fit the description at the time he is pulled.
Last edited:
I freely admit to living in a closed and small circle. My life's experiences are what I use to form my opinions. Charts and graphs and numbers don't impact me. I would have saved a lot of money and heart ache if I had not operated this way. Again, just speaking personally, my outlook on others is formed by my 72 years of life's experiences. Mine can be different than yours and the other way around...and I'm fine with that.
Let's start by breaking this into three questions:
- were the father and son's actions smart or stupid?
- were the father and son's actions morally right or wrong?
- were the father and son's actions legal or illegal?
I do have difficulty reaching an absolute conclusion about whether the actions were legal or illegal. I am not an expert on Georgia citizen's arrest case law, nor do I imagine that anyone on CFF is such an expert. When a nationally-known firearms lawyer like Andrew Branca says the case may hinge on the technicalities of state law, I am perfectly willing to suspend my conclusion about legality until more information becomes available.
As I wrote much earlier in this thread: As it often the case, there may be a huge gap between what is right or wrong and what is legal or illegal.
Zimmerman: Hey, we've had some break-ins in my neighborhood, and there's a real suspicious guy-- it's Retreat View Circle. The best address I can give you is 111 Retreat View Circle. This guy looks like he's up to no good, or he's on drugs or something. It's raining and he's just walking around, looking about.
Dispatcher: Okay, he's just walking around the area...
Zimmerman: ...looking at all the houses.
Zimmerman: Something's wrong with him. Yup, he's coming to check me out, he's got something in his hands, I don't know what his deal is.
Zimmerman: Okay. These assholes they always get away.
Now if he was seen climbing out a window with a 50" Sony monitor then yes, but Zimmerman SWATTED this guy just like the two men in GA.
Fynn
Well-Known Member
I feel bad for this man's family but... this "version of the truth" made my morning coffee come out my nose lol.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/probable-cause-clear-ahmaud-arbery-152820394.html
Although the murder took place in February, the bureau only became involved late Tuesday evening, according to GBI Director Vic Reynolds.
Reynolds said Friday that "probable cause was clear to our agents pretty quickly."
Although the murder took place in February, the bureau only became involved late Tuesday evening, according to GBI Director Vic Reynolds.
Reynolds said Friday that "probable cause was clear to our agents pretty quickly."
Last edited:
That is correct. It will be interesting to match the timeline from the 911 live call to the timeline of the phone video. Did they call before or after the shots were fired?It's OK to have opinions. But in reality that's all they are.
MacEntyre
Shoot on Sight!
2A Bourbon Hound OG
Charter Member
Benefactor
Life Member
Multi-Factor Enabled
None of that changes anything. Actually, it makes it worse if the shooter knew the fellow's background.
In the US, the Government has a monopoly on the initial use of force. Others are not allowed to start gunfights.
Qball
Member
2A Bourbon Hound OG
Charter Life Member
Benefactor
Supporting Member
Multi-Factor Enabled
This story is a mess.
The only question I need answered (as a jury member or human being) is this:
Did the man jogging threaten anyone (especially the father and son) and did the father and son feel that they could be subjected to bodily harm or loss of life by the jogger?
Before anyone says "Well, the younger guy with the shotgun was trying to defend himself from the jogger because he was attempting to take his shotgun away"....... I say this:
The jogger wasn't a threat to begin with and they should have left him be since he wasn't harming another human being by jogging, running, or escaping down the street.
It comes down to this and it isn't rocket science:
The man was unarmed. He could have been running because of a non-violent crime he committed or he could have been jogging for exercise.
The guys in the pickup could have let him continue on his way without intervention and utilized other means such as camera surveillance and so forth to solve the neighborhood problem.
Unfortunately they decided on the course of action we are discussing here on this forum.
The only question I need answered (as a jury member or human being) is this:
Did the man jogging threaten anyone (especially the father and son) and did the father and son feel that they could be subjected to bodily harm or loss of life by the jogger?
Before anyone says "Well, the younger guy with the shotgun was trying to defend himself from the jogger because he was attempting to take his shotgun away"....... I say this:
The jogger wasn't a threat to begin with and they should have left him be since he wasn't harming another human being by jogging, running, or escaping down the street.
It comes down to this and it isn't rocket science:
The man was unarmed. He could have been running because of a non-violent crime he committed or he could have been jogging for exercise.
The guys in the pickup could have let him continue on his way without intervention and utilized other means such as camera surveillance and so forth to solve the neighborhood problem.
Unfortunately they decided on the course of action we are discussing here on this forum.
Short answer. No. It wont.
Not as long as there's a political left.
Both sides play the card, the dog whistle just blows different.
Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
I’ve always hoped that in one election, just one, that every single black American would vote straight ticket republican. Not because I fully think they should “come to the right side.” But because for once in decades the political left would realize that they can’t afford to just offer lip service while delivering nothing of true value, and the right would realize what political capital they have wasted and both sides would suddenly realize they need to actually pay attention. Most left leaning politicians just accept that the majority of the minority vote will go to them so they >really< don’t have to do anything, and on the other end the right leaning politicians have written them off because they historically haven’t listened anyway, so why cater to a population that won’t sway their opinion.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
DAs advise on-scene LEOs about arrests, particularly when an arrest may violate a person's rights under laws like stand-your-ground self-defense. A person's rights cannot be un-violated, but a person can be arrested later.
The Glynn County DA, Jackie Johnson, apparently recused herself within a day or two of the shooting (February 24 or 25) because a former employee of her office was involved in the case.
The case was handed to the Ware County DA, George Barnhill, who waited for autopsy results (April 1), but he also recused himself (April 6) after the victim's mother complained that his son worked for the Glynn County DA's Office.
The state AG moved the case to the Liberty County DA, Tom Durden, who received the case files on April 22 and had announced plans to present the case to a grand jury when everything exploded in the media.
And while digging around, I found a letter from the Ware County DA to the Glynn County Police Department that gave the DA's thoughts on why the two men should not be charged.
ZanderMan
Well-Known Member
Problem with a dog whistle, only dogs can hear it. Newsflash, people who hear all the racist dog whistles, racists. Fact.
No. Unless you think all white people are hunting down black people. Being a vigilante was the issue. And yes had he not been a former employee of law enforcement and the DA he would have been arrested earlier.
Nice letter, why bother to write it with his opinion if he is turning the case over the the State for another DA to run with? Wink and a nod.
letter from the Ware County DA to the Glynn County Police Department that gave the DA's thoughts on why the two men should not be charged.
letter from the Ware County DA to the Glynn County Police Department that gave the DA's thoughts on why the two men should not be charged.
The PD was undoubtedly receiving a lot of pressure from the community to make arrests and was probably begging for guidance or reassurance. It is not appropriate for a PD to bow to public pressure and arrest someone if the charges are not justified and will be dropped by the prosecutor.Nice letter, why bother to write it with his opinion if he is turning the case over the the State for another DA to run with? Wink and a nod.
Last edited:
MacEntyre
Shoot on Sight!
2A Bourbon Hound OG
Charter Member
Benefactor
Life Member
Multi-Factor Enabled
Wow... Georgia law allows armed vigilantes, according to George Barnhill!
This is not going to end well...
This is not going to end well...
Last edited:
Much like your speculation that once the facts come out it'll look a lot different than the video shows us?
One man unarmed. Another man gets out with a shotgun after parking his truck in the middle of the road.
There is no speculation of those two things.
Im not saying I would have went after the guy with the gun, Ive been in a situation with a gun pulled and it's scary as heck, but everyone reacts differently. He chose to defend himself with all he had - himself.
And, seriously, whats up with dad in the bed?
Unless @BlackGun is LEO and actively trying to prevent other LEO from getting into trouble for their wrongdoings, I dont see how he's the problem.
Im not sure I agree with his part about race having nothing to do with it, we'll see as time goes on, but him stating the LEO was protecting their own doesnt, to me, show anything negative about BG
Now if you want to look at some OLDer members and their nonsense, yeah, they're part of the problem with their ignorance
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2016
- Messages
- 2,547
Nice letter, why bother to write it with his opinion if he is turning the case over the the State for another DA to run with? Wink and a nod.
letter from the Ware County DA to the Glynn County Police Department that gave the DA's thoughts on why the two men should not be charged.
The way I read that letter, it sounds like that DA is doing everything he can to NOT prosecute the 3 guys. He made it sound like Aubrey was the aggresive instigator of the fight. When the DA uses the stand your ground law to justify what the shooter did, the DA doesn't even apply the SOG law to Aubrey's side. The kicker for me was when the DA brought Aubrey's past mental state and prior convictions into the equation using them to justify Aubrey was the aggressor. SMH
Come on.....get back here in the truck bed with me
DrScaryGuy
🌈 Loves rainbows 🌈
2A Bourbon Hound 2024
2A Bourbon Hound OG
Supporting Member
Multi-Factor Enabled
I put them right there along side sexual deviants...
you know, as long as they mind their own business, i don't care.
