New development in the shooting case of the black georgia jogger

[jc456]

if that dude from the truck aimed his gun at you you bet. that isn't this incident, so curious to why you asked?

This is where both men were when the first shot was fired. Where is the gun aimed


View attachment 335180
Red arrow is white cap on shooter.
Blue Arrow is white shirt on jogger.

How do you know the gun was never aimed at the jogger? You cant know because you can’t see the shotgun during the entire Citizens arrest. That makes you a liar for stating “that isn't this incident”.

the body language of the white cap dude, where the white shirt is in relation to the white cap and the ultimate position of the hands from the jogger on the rifle. You ever aim a rifle before?

BTW, the length of the shot gun is most likely close to three foot long. If you look carefully at your two points of interest, they are less than two feet apart. If the barrel was in front, it would be in the blackman's mouth through his head.

It was a shotgun, not a rifle.

I said shot gun. are you really that fking blind? a shot gun isn't considered a rifle?

You may have corrected it, but a shotgun is NOT a rifle.

nope, I had a shotgun is about three feet long.

 

[jc456]

72# reply to 71#1414

But YOU DON'T HAVE any fact to demonstrate otherwise. You have no fact to demonstrate that Arbery did not attack McMichael, or that McMichal did not shoot in self-defense.

Your reply to Canon Shooter has a serious problem. I have presented facts to you direct that do demonstrate that McMichael was attacking Arbery as the first shot was fired in front of the truck and when McMichael and his shotgun were on the right side of the double yellow line:

View attachment 335151
Arbury seen jogging near the front of the truck.

Half a second later the first shot is fired.
View attachment 335150
Red Arrow points to McMichael’d white cap.
Blue Arrow points to Arbery’s white shirt.

That is the position of the two men when first shot was fired.

SavannahMann in case you are interested.

OK. Let’s get to that. You know that in airplane crashes the accident is not the crash. The crash is where the plane ended up after the accident. So how did they get there?

The event does not begin when the first shot is fired. That is the end result of a lot of questionable and illegal decisions. The first shot is not the start. It is the result. The start is when the two McMorons decided to arm up and chase down and stop a guy.

OH absolutely. I don’t see a self defense case at all according to the law because both of the gunmen were the aggressors the second they set their hands on the weapons and set out to apprehend an unarmed suspect for a felony they did not witness.

I’m merely pointing out that the white extremist argument that it was Arbery’s aggression that justifies a case for self defense by the shooter is just as bogus as the ‘jogging in construction boots’ claims were.

The photo shows that the man armed with the shot gun was committing aggravated assault in the direction of the jogger when the first shot was fired.

He was not just standing by out of the way when Arbery was in full view struggling for the wespon that had already
been fired once.

What garbage, what nonsense, what ignorance and what lies you post....have you no shame?

Or are you just toooooooooo stupid to realize what you are dong?

You concoted some photos and drawings to deceive yourself(but no one else) and ran with it and you cannot stop running with it even though your theory has been debunked.
You have no evidence whatsoever to support what you think.

I asked you to watch the video and tell the board the exact time of the first shot in the video....you could not do that even though the timing on the video as it counted down the seconds was plainly visible....why did you refuse to do that ?because when you watched the video you realized you were wrong...that it destroyed your theory of the white guy with the shotgun crossing over to the other side of the truck and attacking the black dude....thus your b.s. is debunked and you know it.

Because the Video is not the start of the event. For that we have to use McMichael’s own statement to police. The shot is not the start of the event. You can’t start from there. It is like claiming that none of the Touchdowns scored by the other team count because they were in the first half.

The start is irrelevant............the only issue in this case is the assault of the white dude....that is all there is to this case........period....all the rest is just conjecture, lying, persona opinions aka b.s. mixed in with gross ignorance of the law.

So it does not matter what preceded. The only thing that matters is that the black guy attacked the person with the gun. Ok. Why was the person with a gun in the middle of the street? If we are going to start with that doesn’t it make him a potential mass shooter and a danger to everyone right? I mean if we are going to start from that moment then we have to ignore why and just make an assumption right?

Again the only thing of consequence and importance in this case is the assault of the white guy with the shotgun by the black criminal nut case.

All the rest is irrelevant hyperbole.

Although you could claim they are illegally parked....call the Poehleeece and demand they be given a parking ticket. hehheh

Again the only thing of consequence and importance in this case is the murder of the black guy with the shotgun by the white racist asshole..

All the rest is irrelevant hyperbole.

There! I fixed it for you!

what murder, the black man had his hands on the shot gun and directly caused the gun to fire. watch the video once.

Grasping a shotgun does not cause it to fire, nor does it cause a person to fire two more rounds.

sure it does if finger's on a trigger when the person grabs it from your control. squeezing to hold the gun most likely also squeezed the trigger. so you don't see the black man with hands on the gun struggle to whip it out of the guys control? he's spinning the gun back and forth. I am amazed at the number of blind fks in here.

 

[SavannahMann]

First of all the black dude is not normal....he has a mental history, a felony conviction and when he was killed he was in violation of his parole.

Not relevant in any way.

A normal innocent person's reaction to being stalked by men with guns is to get away from them, and then defend themselves if they can't get away.

The dead man acted like any normal innocent person would, like you would in the same situation.

What nonsense you espouse....do you think anyone believes you.

By your standards, if you didn't instantly submit to any gun-wielding person, it would okay to kill you, because you're obviously guilty.

Your standards are clearly stupid and evil.

why would you say that? that isn't what happened. so you should watch the video. it has all the evidence of the incident one needs.

Ok. Taking only the video. A deranged white guy with a fellow deranged individual in the back both of whom are armed and acting reckless are in the street. They are noticed by a fine upstanding citizen who fearing a mass Murder is taking place attempts to save the lives of his fellow citizens and risking his own life charges the armed lunatic unarmed to save lives.

using only the video and nothing else. Prove I am wrong.

so from the video you can tell two people are deranged? wow, you're talented. the courts would love you.

Using only the video with nothing else as you said we had to there is no way to accurately know what happened. There is nothing to say absent any evidence or information from any other source that it did not happen exactly that way. So now what evidence are we going to accept? Just that which helps your narrative? Or all of it which makes your narrative sound as stupid as my description?

well what do you see from the video? why can't you just address the video? I see two guys, one outside the driver door with a weapon, a guy in the truck bed standing up, the truck is stopped and in the middle of one lane, a black man running toward the truck from quite a distance. I also know another vehicle is following the blackman running. I see the black man run toward the driver side of the truck, seems to react to the man with the weapon and runs around to the passenger side of the truck, his path seems to circle to the front of the truck and attacks the man who moved around the driver door. Puts his hands on the weapon, the weapon fires, he continues wrestling with the man and his weapon while punching him in the head, and the weapon goes off again, continues wrestling and punching and while the struggle continues, the weapon goes off one more time hitting the guy who was jogging, he releases the gun and staggers away and falls to the ground. Now you tell me what you see.

Why were the people there? Why were armed men in the middle of the road and blocking the road and circling to cut off the black man jogging? Using only the video, and nothing else. They could have been a lynch mob couldn’t they? Going to kill a black man for sleeping with a white woman?

In the video you can see what happened in a few short seconds of time. You do not get the information that brings context to the events. You don’t get the information that the McMichaels were breaking the law. You do not get the context that Ahmad had entered and left empty handed a house under construction. You do not get the context that the McMichaels saw Ahmad run by and saw nothing else, no criminal activity, and then rushed to get guns and chase him down. You don’t get any context from just the video.

So how you see the video, with no context from anything else, is that two armed white guys in the middle of the street armed and apparently chasing a black guy are attacked. Without any context, that may seem reasonable. I wonder why? I wonder why those guys are there. I wonder what the hell they thought they were doing. I see it and know by Georgia Laws they are breaking the law waving those guns around in public like that. I watch it and know that by Georgia Law, they are in a lot of trouble. Watching nothing but the video, I see a lot of things going on, and Without the context the attack by the black guy is another thing I would wonder about.

The problem is that I have the context. I’ve been reading it a lot. Not just here, but many many other places. And knowing that I have read about the dangers of weapons in public, extensively read about it, long before this, I know that there is a lot of criminal activity in that video.

Here is your problem. You refuse to admit that Georgia law says what it actually says. You don’t want to believe that the White Guys did anything wrong. No matter who tells you they did, no matter how many sources are posted, you just will not consider the fact that these two idiots broke the damned law doing what you wish more people would. If more people did, I’d have my taxes increased in Georgia to afford the new prisons to hold them.

Now, maybe the Brandishing Laws are too narrow, and too restrictive. But for now, that is the law on the books. If we ignore those laws, claiming they are unfair, do we do so for everyone, or just your heroes the McMichaels?

address the video. you get nothing to assume from the video. what is it you see? I know, and it pisses you off the black man looks guilty of wrestling with the white guy and assaulting him. I get it. it's why it's evidence. you can't imply from a video, the video gives you all you need to know, what happened.

Ok. Now just the video. The very first thing I see is a textbook example of Aggravated Assault by the definition of Georgia law. That is literally the very first thing after a jogger who is being followed and videoed for some reason.

As I said. Many many times. Aggravated Assault is any activity with a weapon that does or can cause injury or death. Running around in the middle of the street with a shotgun after a black guy who is jogging is Aggravated Assault.

I see a struggle. But knowing that the struggle comes after the Felony of Aggravated Assault I know that by Georgia law Self Defense is not an option.

Shall I continue through the shooting?

Now. My opinion is backed up by the charges filed against the folks in the video. But in the video I see an attack carried out by two white guys in a pick up truck against a black guy using Georgia Law as my standard.

 

[SavannahMann]

First of all the black dude is not normal....he has a mental history, a felony conviction and when he was killed he was in violation of his parole.

Not relevant in any way.

A normal innocent person's reaction to being stalked by men with guns is to get away from them, and then defend themselves if they can't get away.

The dead man acted like any normal innocent person would, like you would in the same situation.

What nonsense you espouse....do you think anyone believes you.

By your standards, if you didn't instantly submit to any gun-wielding person, it would okay to kill you, because you're obviously guilty.

Your standards are clearly stupid and evil.

why would you say that? that isn't what happened. so you should watch the video. it has all the evidence of the incident one needs.

Ok. Taking only the video. A deranged white guy with a fellow deranged individual in the back both of whom are armed and acting reckless are in the street. They are noticed by a fine upstanding citizen who fearing a mass Murder is taking place attempts to save the lives of his fellow citizens and risking his own life charges the armed lunatic unarmed to save lives.

using only the video and nothing else. Prove I am wrong.

so from the video you can tell two people are deranged? wow, you're talented. the courts would love you.

Using only the video with nothing else as you said we had to there is no way to accurately know what happened. There is nothing to say absent any evidence or information from any other source that it did not happen exactly that way. So now what evidence are we going to accept? Just that which helps your narrative? Or all of it which makes your narrative sound as stupid as my description?

well what do you see from the video? why can't you just address the video? I see two guys, one outside the driver door with a weapon, a guy in the truck bed standing up, the truck is stopped and in the middle of one lane, a black man running toward the truck from quite a distance. I also know another vehicle is following the blackman running. I see the black man run toward the driver side of the truck, seems to react to the man with the weapon and runs around to the passenger side of the truck, his path seems to circle to the front of the truck and attacks the man who moved around the driver door. Puts his hands on the weapon, the weapon fires, he continues wrestling with the man and his weapon while punching him in the head, and the weapon goes off again, continues wrestling and punching and while the struggle continues, the weapon goes off one more time hitting the guy who was jogging, he releases the gun and staggers away and falls to the ground. Now you tell me what you see.

Why were the people there? Why were armed men in the middle of the road and blocking the road and circling to cut off the black man jogging? Using only the video, and nothing else. They could have been a lynch mob couldn’t they? Going to kill a black man for sleeping with a white woman?

In the video you can see what happened in a few short seconds of time. You do not get the information that brings context to the events. You don’t get the information that the McMichaels were breaking the law. You do not get the context that Ahmad had entered and left empty handed a house under construction. You do not get the context that the McMichaels saw Ahmad run by and saw nothing else, no criminal activity, and then rushed to get guns and chase him down. You don’t get any context from just the video.

So how you see the video, with no context from anything else, is that two armed white guys in the middle of the street armed and apparently chasing a black guy are attacked. Without any context, that may seem reasonable. I wonder why? I wonder why those guys are there. I wonder what the hell they thought they were doing. I see it and know by Georgia Laws they are breaking the law waving those guns around in public like that. I watch it and know that by Georgia Law, they are in a lot of trouble. Watching nothing but the video, I see a lot of things going on, and Without the context the attack by the black guy is another thing I would wonder about.

The problem is that I have the context. I’ve been reading it a lot. Not just here, but many many other places. And knowing that I have read about the dangers of weapons in public, extensively read about it, long before this, I know that there is a lot of criminal activity in that video.

Here is your problem. You refuse to admit that Georgia law says what it actually says. You don’t want to believe that the White Guys did anything wrong. No matter who tells you they did, no matter how many sources are posted, you just will not consider the fact that these two idiots broke the damned law doing what you wish more people would. If more people did, I’d have my taxes increased in Georgia to afford the new prisons to hold them.

Now, maybe the Brandishing Laws are too narrow, and too restrictive. But for now, that is the law on the books. If we ignore those laws, claiming they are unfair, do we do so for everyone, or just your heroes the McMichaels?

It took a few seconds of my life to search your threads, and about 80% of them are about "bad" cops. You've got an obvious problem. Nothing you say about cops in any context can be taken seriously.

Who knows? You probably got busted a few times and have a weak-ass vendetta. Sorry, the thug is dead and he brought it on himself. The courts will agree, unless the jury is stocked with the likes of you.

Earlier in this very thread I posted that I was most often posting about bad cops. I explained why, and have done so consistently many times. Mostly because I detest injustice.

Now, to this case. I don’t think they’ll be found not guilty. If there are one or two staunchly White are automatically right, I think it will end up as a hung jury. But the text of the law supports the position I have taken. The McMichaels did commit Aggravated Assault. That means since they were committing a crime, they are not able to claim Self Defense. That explains the Murder Charge as well.

My opinion and posts have all been based upon Georgia Law. The law that covers this event. Not race. In one post I highlighted the long history of corruption of the County, but that is all. Just one.

I posted links to where other cops are quoted as saying that this was not self defense, and it was aggravated assault. I have posted links to the text of the law, and articles about the law. I have posted where the McMichaels lied in their statements to police.

What haven’t I done? Said what the McMichaels should have done. After the shooting, they should have shut the hell up and asked for an attorney. But Daddy figured his position as a Retired Cop would get him a lot of slack, and it did. Then Daddy’s attorney screwed up royally and released the video. For anyone who knows about gun laws in Georgia, it is an obvious criminal shooting.

I don’t care that the victim is black. I don’t care that the shooters are white. I don’t care. What offends me is the good old boy network trying to prevent any justice in this event. What offends me is the misconduct by the prosecutors, issuing instructions and restrictions on the police after they have decided and recused themselves. That is misconduct. As you said, I always object to misconduct.

The reason is simple. The Constitution. Those rights contained within that document are only as strong as our determination to protect and defend them. It is telling that everyone swearing an oath about the Constitution, swears that they will protect and defend it. That includes your First Amendment Rights, and the rights of anyone else. It is my duty, as a citizen. It is my duty, because the oath I swore when I joined the Army, had no expiration date.

What is funny to me, is that the same people who are arguing that the Constitution and Laws don’t matter here, are the same ones objecting that a cop who posted a video on YouTube and Facebook about his fellow cops were violating the Constitution was fired. Odd isn’t it? That they care so much about the Constitution and the law on one subject, and don’t give a damn about it at all in the very next subject.

 

[jc456]

First of all the black dude is not normal....he has a mental history, a felony conviction and when he was killed he was in violation of his parole.

Not relevant in any way.

A normal innocent person's reaction to being stalked by men with guns is to get away from them, and then defend themselves if they can't get away.

The dead man acted like any normal innocent person would, like you would in the same situation.

What nonsense you espouse....do you think anyone believes you.

By your standards, if you didn't instantly submit to any gun-wielding person, it would okay to kill you, because you're obviously guilty.

Your standards are clearly stupid and evil.

why would you say that? that isn't what happened. so you should watch the video. it has all the evidence of the incident one needs.

Ok. Taking only the video. A deranged white guy with a fellow deranged individual in the back both of whom are armed and acting reckless are in the street. They are noticed by a fine upstanding citizen who fearing a mass Murder is taking place attempts to save the lives of his fellow citizens and risking his own life charges the armed lunatic unarmed to save lives.

using only the video and nothing else. Prove I am wrong.

so from the video you can tell two people are deranged? wow, you're talented. the courts would love you.

Using only the video with nothing else as you said we had to there is no way to accurately know what happened. There is nothing to say absent any evidence or information from any other source that it did not happen exactly that way. So now what evidence are we going to accept? Just that which helps your narrative? Or all of it which makes your narrative sound as stupid as my description?

well what do you see from the video? why can't you just address the video? I see two guys, one outside the driver door with a weapon, a guy in the truck bed standing up, the truck is stopped and in the middle of one lane, a black man running toward the truck from quite a distance. I also know another vehicle is following the blackman running. I see the black man run toward the driver side of the truck, seems to react to the man with the weapon and runs around to the passenger side of the truck, his path seems to circle to the front of the truck and attacks the man who moved around the driver door. Puts his hands on the weapon, the weapon fires, he continues wrestling with the man and his weapon while punching him in the head, and the weapon goes off again, continues wrestling and punching and while the struggle continues, the weapon goes off one more time hitting the guy who was jogging, he releases the gun and staggers away and falls to the ground. Now you tell me what you see.

Why were the people there? Why were armed men in the middle of the road and blocking the road and circling to cut off the black man jogging? Using only the video, and nothing else. They could have been a lynch mob couldn’t they? Going to kill a black man for sleeping with a white woman?

In the video you can see what happened in a few short seconds of time. You do not get the information that brings context to the events. You don’t get the information that the McMichaels were breaking the law. You do not get the context that Ahmad had entered and left empty handed a house under construction. You do not get the context that the McMichaels saw Ahmad run by and saw nothing else, no criminal activity, and then rushed to get guns and chase him down. You don’t get any context from just the video.

So how you see the video, with no context from anything else, is that two armed white guys in the middle of the street armed and apparently chasing a black guy are attacked. Without any context, that may seem reasonable. I wonder why? I wonder why those guys are there. I wonder what the hell they thought they were doing. I see it and know by Georgia Laws they are breaking the law waving those guns around in public like that. I watch it and know that by Georgia Law, they are in a lot of trouble. Watching nothing but the video, I see a lot of things going on, and Without the context the attack by the black guy is another thing I would wonder about.

The problem is that I have the context. I’ve been reading it a lot. Not just here, but many many other places. And knowing that I have read about the dangers of weapons in public, extensively read about it, long before this, I know that there is a lot of criminal activity in that video.

Here is your problem. You refuse to admit that Georgia law says what it actually says. You don’t want to believe that the White Guys did anything wrong. No matter who tells you they did, no matter how many sources are posted, you just will not consider the fact that these two idiots broke the damned law doing what you wish more people would. If more people did, I’d have my taxes increased in Georgia to afford the new prisons to hold them.

Now, maybe the Brandishing Laws are too narrow, and too restrictive. But for now, that is the law on the books. If we ignore those laws, claiming they are unfair, do we do so for everyone, or just your heroes the McMichaels?

address the video. you get nothing to assume from the video. what is it you see? I know, and it pisses you off the black man looks guilty of wrestling with the white guy and assaulting him. I get it. it's why it's evidence. you can't imply from a video, the video gives you all you need to know, what happened.

Ok. Now just the video. The very first thing I see is a textbook example of Aggravated Assault by the definition of Georgia law. That is literally the very first thing after a jogger who is being followed and videoed for some reason.

As I said. Many many times. Aggravated Assault is any activity with a weapon that does or can cause injury or death. Running around in the middle of the street with a shotgun after a black guy who is jogging is Aggravated Assault.

I see a struggle. But knowing that the struggle comes after the Felony of Aggravated Assault I know that by Georgia law Self Defense is not an option.

Shall I continue through the shooting?

Now. My opinion is backed up by the charges filed against the folks in the video. But in the video I see an attack carried out by two white guys in a pick up truck against a black guy using Georgia Law as my standard.

nope, you are not describing the video, you are giving a play by play with interpretation. I didn't ask for that. I asked what you see. you still can't answer cause it isn't a good thing for the black man. See, I can see two guys in a truck with a black man hauling ass after them. he looks like the pursuer, and those men are there to defend themselves against him. that's my interpretation. you still don't see the black man running from a distance do you?

 

[Jitss617]

The white folk should be out marching in the streets....

Decent "white folk" understand that this was not a c ase of self defense but, rather, the hunting and the killing of an unarmed man.

Where are all of the white racist protesters who support these guys? Where are they?

This idiot was almost living in the place! These are all break in with reported stolen items every time, the whole neighborhood knew this

 

[Jitss617]

The white folk should be out marching in the streets....

Decent "white folk" understand that this was not a c ase of self defense but, rather, the hunting and the killing of an unarmed man.

Where are all of the white racist protesters who support these guys? Where are they?

This idiot was almost living in the place! These are all break in with reported stolen items every time, the whole neighborhood knew this

 

[jc456]

First of all the black dude is not normal....he has a mental history, a felony conviction and when he was killed he was in violation of his parole.

Not relevant in any way.

A normal innocent person's reaction to being stalked by men with guns is to get away from them, and then defend themselves if they can't get away.

The dead man acted like any normal innocent person would, like you would in the same situation.

What nonsense you espouse....do you think anyone believes you.

By your standards, if you didn't instantly submit to any gun-wielding person, it would okay to kill you, because you're obviously guilty.

Your standards are clearly stupid and evil.

why would you say that? that isn't what happened. so you should watch the video. it has all the evidence of the incident one needs.

Ok. Taking only the video. A deranged white guy with a fellow deranged individual in the back both of whom are armed and acting reckless are in the street. They are noticed by a fine upstanding citizen who fearing a mass Murder is taking place attempts to save the lives of his fellow citizens and risking his own life charges the armed lunatic unarmed to save lives.

using only the video and nothing else. Prove I am wrong.

so from the video you can tell two people are deranged? wow, you're talented. the courts would love you.

Using only the video with nothing else as you said we had to there is no way to accurately know what happened. There is nothing to say absent any evidence or information from any other source that it did not happen exactly that way. So now what evidence are we going to accept? Just that which helps your narrative? Or all of it which makes your narrative sound as stupid as my description?

well what do you see from the video? why can't you just address the video? I see two guys, one outside the driver door with a weapon, a guy in the truck bed standing up, the truck is stopped and in the middle of one lane, a black man running toward the truck from quite a distance. I also know another vehicle is following the blackman running. I see the black man run toward the driver side of the truck, seems to react to the man with the weapon and runs around to the passenger side of the truck, his path seems to circle to the front of the truck and attacks the man who moved around the driver door. Puts his hands on the weapon, the weapon fires, he continues wrestling with the man and his weapon while punching him in the head, and the weapon goes off again, continues wrestling and punching and while the struggle continues, the weapon goes off one more time hitting the guy who was jogging, he releases the gun and staggers away and falls to the ground. Now you tell me what you see.

Why were the people there? Why were armed men in the middle of the road and blocking the road and circling to cut off the black man jogging? Using only the video, and nothing else. They could have been a lynch mob couldn’t they? Going to kill a black man for sleeping with a white woman?

In the video you can see what happened in a few short seconds of time. You do not get the information that brings context to the events. You don’t get the information that the McMichaels were breaking the law. You do not get the context that Ahmad had entered and left empty handed a house under construction. You do not get the context that the McMichaels saw Ahmad run by and saw nothing else, no criminal activity, and then rushed to get guns and chase him down. You don’t get any context from just the video.

So how you see the video, with no context from anything else, is that two armed white guys in the middle of the street armed and apparently chasing a black guy are attacked. Without any context, that may seem reasonable. I wonder why? I wonder why those guys are there. I wonder what the hell they thought they were doing. I see it and know by Georgia Laws they are breaking the law waving those guns around in public like that. I watch it and know that by Georgia Law, they are in a lot of trouble. Watching nothing but the video, I see a lot of things going on, and Without the context the attack by the black guy is another thing I would wonder about.

The problem is that I have the context. I’ve been reading it a lot. Not just here, but many many other places. And knowing that I have read about the dangers of weapons in public, extensively read about it, long before this, I know that there is a lot of criminal activity in that video.

Here is your problem. You refuse to admit that Georgia law says what it actually says. You don’t want to believe that the White Guys did anything wrong. No matter who tells you they did, no matter how many sources are posted, you just will not consider the fact that these two idiots broke the damned law doing what you wish more people would. If more people did, I’d have my taxes increased in Georgia to afford the new prisons to hold them.

Now, maybe the Brandishing Laws are too narrow, and too restrictive. But for now, that is the law on the books. If we ignore those laws, claiming they are unfair, do we do so for everyone, or just your heroes the McMichaels?

It took a few seconds of my life to search your threads, and about 80% of them are about "bad" cops. You've got an obvious problem. Nothing you say about cops in any context can be taken seriously.

Who knows? You probably got busted a few times and have a weak-ass vendetta. Sorry, the thug is dead and he brought it on himself. The courts will agree, unless the jury is stocked with the likes of you.

Earlier in this very thread I posted that I was most often posting about bad cops. I explained why, and have done so consistently many times. Mostly because I detest injustice.

Now, to this case. I don’t think they’ll be found not guilty. If there are one or two staunchly White are automatically right, I think it will end up as a hung jury. But the text of the law supports the position I have taken. The McMichaels did commit Aggravated Assault. That means since they were committing a crime, they are not able to claim Self Defense. That explains the Murder Charge as well.

My opinion and posts have all been based upon Georgia Law. The law that covers this event. Not race. In one post I highlighted the long history of corruption of the County, but that is all. Just one.

I posted links to where other cops are quoted as saying that this was not self defense, and it was aggravated assault. I have posted links to the text of the law, and articles about the law. I have posted where the McMichaels lied in their statements to police.

What haven’t I done? Said what the McMichaels should have done. After the shooting, they should have shut the hell up and asked for an attorney. But Daddy figured his position as a Retired Cop would get him a lot of slack, and it did. Then Daddy’s attorney screwed up royally and released the video. For anyone who knows about gun laws in Georgia, it is an obvious criminal shooting.

I don’t care that the victim is black. I don’t care that the shooters are white. I don’t care. What offends me is the good old boy network trying to prevent any justice in this event. What offends me is the misconduct by the prosecutors, issuing instructions and restrictions on the police after they have decided and recused themselves. That is misconduct. As you said, I always object to misconduct.

The reason is simple. The Constitution. Those rights contained within that document are only as strong as our determination to protect and defend them. It is telling that everyone swearing an oath about the Constitution, swears that they will protect and defend it. That includes your First Amendment Rights, and the rights of anyone else. It is my duty, as a citizen. It is my duty, because the oath I swore when I joined the Army, had no expiration date.

What is funny to me, is that the same people who are arguing that the Constitution and Laws don’t matter here, are the same ones objecting that a cop who posted a video on YouTube and Facebook about his fellow cops were violating the Constitution was fired. Odd isn’t it? That they care so much about the Constitution and the law on one subject, and don’t give a damn about it at all in the very next subject.

name the statute. why don't you?

 

[jc456]

The white folk should be out marching in the streets....

Decent "white folk" understand that this was not a c ase of self defense but, rather, the hunting and the killing of an unarmed man.

Where are all of the white racist protesters who support these guys? Where are they?

This idiot was almost living in the place! These are all break in with reported stolen items every time, the whole neighborhood knew this View attachment 335207

he was staying there. a drifter habit. squatter.

 

[SavannahMann]

First of all the black dude is not normal....he has a mental history, a felony conviction and when he was killed he was in violation of his parole.

Not relevant in any way.

A normal innocent person's reaction to being stalked by men with guns is to get away from them, and then defend themselves if they can't get away.

The dead man acted like any normal innocent person would, like you would in the same situation.

What nonsense you espouse....do you think anyone believes you.

By your standards, if you didn't instantly submit to any gun-wielding person, it would okay to kill you, because you're obviously guilty.

Your standards are clearly stupid and evil.

why would you say that? that isn't what happened. so you should watch the video. it has all the evidence of the incident one needs.

Ok. Taking only the video. A deranged white guy with a fellow deranged individual in the back both of whom are armed and acting reckless are in the street. They are noticed by a fine upstanding citizen who fearing a mass Murder is taking place attempts to save the lives of his fellow citizens and risking his own life charges the armed lunatic unarmed to save lives.

using only the video and nothing else. Prove I am wrong.

so from the video you can tell two people are deranged? wow, you're talented. the courts would love you.

Using only the video with nothing else as you said we had to there is no way to accurately know what happened. There is nothing to say absent any evidence or information from any other source that it did not happen exactly that way. So now what evidence are we going to accept? Just that which helps your narrative? Or all of it which makes your narrative sound as stupid as my description?

well what do you see from the video? why can't you just address the video? I see two guys, one outside the driver door with a weapon, a guy in the truck bed standing up, the truck is stopped and in the middle of one lane, a black man running toward the truck from quite a distance. I also know another vehicle is following the blackman running. I see the black man run toward the driver side of the truck, seems to react to the man with the weapon and runs around to the passenger side of the truck, his path seems to circle to the front of the truck and attacks the man who moved around the driver door. Puts his hands on the weapon, the weapon fires, he continues wrestling with the man and his weapon while punching him in the head, and the weapon goes off again, continues wrestling and punching and while the struggle continues, the weapon goes off one more time hitting the guy who was jogging, he releases the gun and staggers away and falls to the ground. Now you tell me what you see.

Why were the people there? Why were armed men in the middle of the road and blocking the road and circling to cut off the black man jogging? Using only the video, and nothing else. They could have been a lynch mob couldn’t they? Going to kill a black man for sleeping with a white woman?

In the video you can see what happened in a few short seconds of time. You do not get the information that brings context to the events. You don’t get the information that the McMichaels were breaking the law. You do not get the context that Ahmad had entered and left empty handed a house under construction. You do not get the context that the McMichaels saw Ahmad run by and saw nothing else, no criminal activity, and then rushed to get guns and chase him down. You don’t get any context from just the video.

So how you see the video, with no context from anything else, is that two armed white guys in the middle of the street armed and apparently chasing a black guy are attacked. Without any context, that may seem reasonable. I wonder why? I wonder why those guys are there. I wonder what the hell they thought they were doing. I see it and know by Georgia Laws they are breaking the law waving those guns around in public like that. I watch it and know that by Georgia Law, they are in a lot of trouble. Watching nothing but the video, I see a lot of things going on, and Without the context the attack by the black guy is another thing I would wonder about.

The problem is that I have the context. I’ve been reading it a lot. Not just here, but many many other places. And knowing that I have read about the dangers of weapons in public, extensively read about it, long before this, I know that there is a lot of criminal activity in that video.

Here is your problem. You refuse to admit that Georgia law says what it actually says. You don’t want to believe that the White Guys did anything wrong. No matter who tells you they did, no matter how many sources are posted, you just will not consider the fact that these two idiots broke the damned law doing what you wish more people would. If more people did, I’d have my taxes increased in Georgia to afford the new prisons to hold them.

Now, maybe the Brandishing Laws are too narrow, and too restrictive. But for now, that is the law on the books. If we ignore those laws, claiming they are unfair, do we do so for everyone, or just your heroes the McMichaels?

address the video. you get nothing to assume from the video. what is it you see? I know, and it pisses you off the black man looks guilty of wrestling with the white guy and assaulting him. I get it. it's why it's evidence. you can't imply from a video, the video gives you all you need to know, what happened.

Ok. Now just the video. The very first thing I see is a textbook example of Aggravated Assault by the definition of Georgia law. That is literally the very first thing after a jogger who is being followed and videoed for some reason.

As I said. Many many times. Aggravated Assault is any activity with a weapon that does or can cause injury or death. Running around in the middle of the street with a shotgun after a black guy who is jogging is Aggravated Assault.

I see a struggle. But knowing that the struggle comes after the Felony of Aggravated Assault I know that by Georgia law Self Defense is not an option.

Shall I continue through the shooting?

Now. My opinion is backed up by the charges filed against the folks in the video. But in the video I see an attack carried out by two white guys in a pick up truck against a black guy using Georgia Law as my standard.

nope, you are not describing the video, you are giving a play by play with interpretation. I didn't ask for that. I asked what you see. you still can't answer cause it isn't a good thing for the black man. See, I can see two guys in a truck with a black man hauling ass after them. he looks like the pursuer, and those men are there to defend themselves against him. that's my interpretation. you still don't see the black man running from a distance do you?

Ok help me out. How do I describe the video without interpreting what I am seeing using my education and experience?

Now let’s say the video is of a car going around the corner sideways. I know that shows the car in what is called oversteer or power sliding or drifting. Seeing I know it is illegal on public streets. Apparently all I am allowed to think is car sliding around.

It is our intelligence and experience that allows us to interpret what is going on around us. It is how we can tell at a glance that someone isn’t supposed to have two elbows on the same arm and obviously has broken his arm.

You asked what I saw in the video. What you mean is between 21 seconds and 25 seconds. You do not want us looking before that. You do not want us considering anything after.

It is in a way the same thing we went through with the handicapped parking space shooting in Florida. The video we all watched was supposed to be ignored after the point where the hero was knocked down. We were supposed to ignore the guy backing up before he was shot.

It is interesting how you keep objecting to my description of the events.

 

[Meathead]

First of all the black dude is not normal....he has a mental history, a felony conviction and when he was killed he was in violation of his parole.

Not relevant in any way.

A normal innocent person's reaction to being stalked by men with guns is to get away from them, and then defend themselves if they can't get away.

The dead man acted like any normal innocent person would, like you would in the same situation.

What nonsense you espouse....do you think anyone believes you.

By your standards, if you didn't instantly submit to any gun-wielding person, it would okay to kill you, because you're obviously guilty.

Your standards are clearly stupid and evil.

why would you say that? that isn't what happened. so you should watch the video. it has all the evidence of the incident one needs.

Ok. Taking only the video. A deranged white guy with a fellow deranged individual in the back both of whom are armed and acting reckless are in the street. They are noticed by a fine upstanding citizen who fearing a mass Murder is taking place attempts to save the lives of his fellow citizens and risking his own life charges the armed lunatic unarmed to save lives.

using only the video and nothing else. Prove I am wrong.

so from the video you can tell two people are deranged? wow, you're talented. the courts would love you.

Using only the video with nothing else as you said we had to there is no way to accurately know what happened. There is nothing to say absent any evidence or information from any other source that it did not happen exactly that way. So now what evidence are we going to accept? Just that which helps your narrative? Or all of it which makes your narrative sound as stupid as my description?

well what do you see from the video? why can't you just address the video? I see two guys, one outside the driver door with a weapon, a guy in the truck bed standing up, the truck is stopped and in the middle of one lane, a black man running toward the truck from quite a distance. I also know another vehicle is following the blackman running. I see the black man run toward the driver side of the truck, seems to react to the man with the weapon and runs around to the passenger side of the truck, his path seems to circle to the front of the truck and attacks the man who moved around the driver door. Puts his hands on the weapon, the weapon fires, he continues wrestling with the man and his weapon while punching him in the head, and the weapon goes off again, continues wrestling and punching and while the struggle continues, the weapon goes off one more time hitting the guy who was jogging, he releases the gun and staggers away and falls to the ground. Now you tell me what you see.

Why were the people there? Why were armed men in the middle of the road and blocking the road and circling to cut off the black man jogging? Using only the video, and nothing else. They could have been a lynch mob couldn’t they? Going to kill a black man for sleeping with a white woman?

In the video you can see what happened in a few short seconds of time. You do not get the information that brings context to the events. You don’t get the information that the McMichaels were breaking the law. You do not get the context that Ahmad had entered and left empty handed a house under construction. You do not get the context that the McMichaels saw Ahmad run by and saw nothing else, no criminal activity, and then rushed to get guns and chase him down. You don’t get any context from just the video.

So how you see the video, with no context from anything else, is that two armed white guys in the middle of the street armed and apparently chasing a black guy are attacked. Without any context, that may seem reasonable. I wonder why? I wonder why those guys are there. I wonder what the hell they thought they were doing. I see it and know by Georgia Laws they are breaking the law waving those guns around in public like that. I watch it and know that by Georgia Law, they are in a lot of trouble. Watching nothing but the video, I see a lot of things going on, and Without the context the attack by the black guy is another thing I would wonder about.

The problem is that I have the context. I’ve been reading it a lot. Not just here, but many many other places. And knowing that I have read about the dangers of weapons in public, extensively read about it, long before this, I know that there is a lot of criminal activity in that video.

Here is your problem. You refuse to admit that Georgia law says what it actually says. You don’t want to believe that the White Guys did anything wrong. No matter who tells you they did, no matter how many sources are posted, you just will not consider the fact that these two idiots broke the damned law doing what you wish more people would. If more people did, I’d have my taxes increased in Georgia to afford the new prisons to hold them.

Now, maybe the Brandishing Laws are too narrow, and too restrictive. But for now, that is the law on the books. If we ignore those laws, claiming they are unfair, do we do so for everyone, or just your heroes the McMichaels?

It took a few seconds of my life to search your threads, and about 80% of them are about "bad" cops. You've got an obvious problem. Nothing you say about cops in any context can be taken seriously.

Who knows? You probably got busted a few times and have a weak-ass vendetta. Sorry, the thug is dead and he brought it on himself. The courts will agree, unless the jury is stocked with the likes of you.

Earlier in this very thread I posted that I was most often posting about bad cops. I explained why, and have done so consistently many times. Mostly because I detest injustice.

Now, to this case. I don’t think they’ll be found not guilty. If there are one or two staunchly White are automatically right, I think it will end up as a hung jury. But the text of the law supports the position I have taken. The McMichaels did commit Aggravated Assault. That means since they were committing a crime, they are not able to claim Self Defense. That explains the Murder Charge as well.

My opinion and posts have all been based upon Georgia Law. The law that covers this event. Not race. In one post I highlighted the long history of corruption of the County, but that is all. Just one.

I posted links to where other cops are quoted as saying that this was not self defense, and it was aggravated assault. I have posted links to the text of the law, and articles about the law. I have posted where the McMichaels lied in their statements to police.

What haven’t I done? Said what the McMichaels should have done. After the shooting, they should have shut the hell up and asked for an attorney. But Daddy figured his position as a Retired Cop would get him a lot of slack, and it did. Then Daddy’s attorney screwed up royally and released the video. For anyone who knows about gun laws in Georgia, it is an obvious criminal shooting.

I don’t care that the victim is black. I don’t care that the shooters are white. I don’t care. What offends me is the good old boy network trying to prevent any justice in this event. What offends me is the misconduct by the prosecutors, issuing instructions and restrictions on the police after they have decided and recused themselves. That is misconduct. As you said, I always object to misconduct.

The reason is simple. The Constitution. Those rights contained within that document are only as strong as our determination to protect and defend them. It is telling that everyone swearing an oath about the Constitution, swears that they will protect and defend it. That includes your First Amendment Rights, and the rights of anyone else. It is my duty, as a citizen. It is my duty, because the oath I swore when I joined the Army, had no expiration date.

What is funny to me, is that the same people who are arguing that the Constitution and Laws don’t matter here, are the same ones objecting that a cop who posted a video on YouTube and Facebook about his fellow cops were violating the Constitution was fired. Odd isn’t it? That they care so much about the Constitution and the law on one subject, and don’t give a damn about it at all in the very next subject.

Certainly a long-winded response. You've invoked justice, the constitution and a veritable litany of things but it seems the only thing you care about is your own virtue signalling. You've obviously got a problem with cops and a hell of a lot of self-righteousness.

 

[SavannahMann]

First of all the black dude is not normal....he has a mental history, a felony conviction and when he was killed he was in violation of his parole.

Not relevant in any way.

A normal innocent person's reaction to being stalked by men with guns is to get away from them, and then defend themselves if they can't get away.

The dead man acted like any normal innocent person would, like you would in the same situation.

What nonsense you espouse....do you think anyone believes you.

By your standards, if you didn't instantly submit to any gun-wielding person, it would okay to kill you, because you're obviously guilty.

Your standards are clearly stupid and evil.

why would you say that? that isn't what happened. so you should watch the video. it has all the evidence of the incident one needs.

Ok. Taking only the video. A deranged white guy with a fellow deranged individual in the back both of whom are armed and acting reckless are in the street. They are noticed by a fine upstanding citizen who fearing a mass Murder is taking place attempts to save the lives of his fellow citizens and risking his own life charges the armed lunatic unarmed to save lives.

using only the video and nothing else. Prove I am wrong.

so from the video you can tell two people are deranged? wow, you're talented. the courts would love you.

Using only the video with nothing else as you said we had to there is no way to accurately know what happened. There is nothing to say absent any evidence or information from any other source that it did not happen exactly that way. So now what evidence are we going to accept? Just that which helps your narrative? Or all of it which makes your narrative sound as stupid as my description?

well what do you see from the video? why can't you just address the video? I see two guys, one outside the driver door with a weapon, a guy in the truck bed standing up, the truck is stopped and in the middle of one lane, a black man running toward the truck from quite a distance. I also know another vehicle is following the blackman running. I see the black man run toward the driver side of the truck, seems to react to the man with the weapon and runs around to the passenger side of the truck, his path seems to circle to the front of the truck and attacks the man who moved around the driver door. Puts his hands on the weapon, the weapon fires, he continues wrestling with the man and his weapon while punching him in the head, and the weapon goes off again, continues wrestling and punching and while the struggle continues, the weapon goes off one more time hitting the guy who was jogging, he releases the gun and staggers away and falls to the ground. Now you tell me what you see.

Why were the people there? Why were armed men in the middle of the road and blocking the road and circling to cut off the black man jogging? Using only the video, and nothing else. They could have been a lynch mob couldn’t they? Going to kill a black man for sleeping with a white woman?

In the video you can see what happened in a few short seconds of time. You do not get the information that brings context to the events. You don’t get the information that the McMichaels were breaking the law. You do not get the context that Ahmad had entered and left empty handed a house under construction. You do not get the context that the McMichaels saw Ahmad run by and saw nothing else, no criminal activity, and then rushed to get guns and chase him down. You don’t get any context from just the video.

So how you see the video, with no context from anything else, is that two armed white guys in the middle of the street armed and apparently chasing a black guy are attacked. Without any context, that may seem reasonable. I wonder why? I wonder why those guys are there. I wonder what the hell they thought they were doing. I see it and know by Georgia Laws they are breaking the law waving those guns around in public like that. I watch it and know that by Georgia Law, they are in a lot of trouble. Watching nothing but the video, I see a lot of things going on, and Without the context the attack by the black guy is another thing I would wonder about.

The problem is that I have the context. I’ve been reading it a lot. Not just here, but many many other places. And knowing that I have read about the dangers of weapons in public, extensively read about it, long before this, I know that there is a lot of criminal activity in that video.

Here is your problem. You refuse to admit that Georgia law says what it actually says. You don’t want to believe that the White Guys did anything wrong. No matter who tells you they did, no matter how many sources are posted, you just will not consider the fact that these two idiots broke the damned law doing what you wish more people would. If more people did, I’d have my taxes increased in Georgia to afford the new prisons to hold them.

Now, maybe the Brandishing Laws are too narrow, and too restrictive. But for now, that is the law on the books. If we ignore those laws, claiming they are unfair, do we do so for everyone, or just your heroes the McMichaels?

It took a few seconds of my life to search your threads, and about 80% of them are about "bad" cops. You've got an obvious problem. Nothing you say about cops in any context can be taken seriously.

Who knows? You probably got busted a few times and have a weak-ass vendetta. Sorry, the thug is dead and he brought it on himself. The courts will agree, unless the jury is stocked with the likes of you.

Earlier in this very thread I posted that I was most often posting about bad cops. I explained why, and have done so consistently many times. Mostly because I detest injustice.

Now, to this case. I don’t think they’ll be found not guilty. If there are one or two staunchly White are automatically right, I think it will end up as a hung jury. But the text of the law supports the position I have taken. The McMichaels did commit Aggravated Assault. That means since they were committing a crime, they are not able to claim Self Defense. That explains the Murder Charge as well.

My opinion and posts have all been based upon Georgia Law. The law that covers this event. Not race. In one post I highlighted the long history of corruption of the County, but that is all. Just one.

I posted links to where other cops are quoted as saying that this was not self defense, and it was aggravated assault. I have posted links to the text of the law, and articles about the law. I have posted where the McMichaels lied in their statements to police.

What haven’t I done? Said what the McMichaels should have done. After the shooting, they should have shut the hell up and asked for an attorney. But Daddy figured his position as a Retired Cop would get him a lot of slack, and it did. Then Daddy’s attorney screwed up royally and released the video. For anyone who knows about gun laws in Georgia, it is an obvious criminal shooting.

I don’t care that the victim is black. I don’t care that the shooters are white. I don’t care. What offends me is the good old boy network trying to prevent any justice in this event. What offends me is the misconduct by the prosecutors, issuing instructions and restrictions on the police after they have decided and recused themselves. That is misconduct. As you said, I always object to misconduct.

The reason is simple. The Constitution. Those rights contained within that document are only as strong as our determination to protect and defend them. It is telling that everyone swearing an oath about the Constitution, swears that they will protect and defend it. That includes your First Amendment Rights, and the rights of anyone else. It is my duty, as a citizen. It is my duty, because the oath I swore when I joined the Army, had no expiration date.

What is funny to me, is that the same people who are arguing that the Constitution and Laws don’t matter here, are the same ones objecting that a cop who posted a video on YouTube and Facebook about his fellow cops were violating the Constitution was fired. Odd isn’t it? That they care so much about the Constitution and the law on one subject, and don’t give a damn about it at all in the very next subject.

Certainly a long-winded response. You've invoked justice, the constitution and a veritable litany of things but it seems the only thing you care about is your own virtue signalling. You've obviously got a problem with cops and a hell of a lot of self-righteousness.

Or I felt that the reply needed enough information to put it into context.

Now we’re the McMichaels in compliance with the law when they set off in pursuit?

 

[Jitss617]

First of all the black dude is not normal....he has a mental history, a felony conviction and when he was killed he was in violation of his parole.

Not relevant in any way.

A normal innocent person's reaction to being stalked by men with guns is to get away from them, and then defend themselves if they can't get away.

The dead man acted like any normal innocent person would, like you would in the same situation.

What nonsense you espouse....do you think anyone believes you.

By your standards, if you didn't instantly submit to any gun-wielding person, it would okay to kill you, because you're obviously guilty.

Your standards are clearly stupid and evil.

why would you say that? that isn't what happened. so you should watch the video. it has all the evidence of the incident one needs.

Ok. Taking only the video. A deranged white guy with a fellow deranged individual in the back both of whom are armed and acting reckless are in the street. They are noticed by a fine upstanding citizen who fearing a mass Murder is taking place attempts to save the lives of his fellow citizens and risking his own life charges the armed lunatic unarmed to save lives.

using only the video and nothing else. Prove I am wrong.

so from the video you can tell two people are deranged? wow, you're talented. the courts would love you.

Using only the video with nothing else as you said we had to there is no way to accurately know what happened. There is nothing to say absent any evidence or information from any other source that it did not happen exactly that way. So now what evidence are we going to accept? Just that which helps your narrative? Or all of it which makes your narrative sound as stupid as my description?

well what do you see from the video? why can't you just address the video? I see two guys, one outside the driver door with a weapon, a guy in the truck bed standing up, the truck is stopped and in the middle of one lane, a black man running toward the truck from quite a distance. I also know another vehicle is following the blackman running. I see the black man run toward the driver side of the truck, seems to react to the man with the weapon and runs around to the passenger side of the truck, his path seems to circle to the front of the truck and attacks the man who moved around the driver door. Puts his hands on the weapon, the weapon fires, he continues wrestling with the man and his weapon while punching him in the head, and the weapon goes off again, continues wrestling and punching and while the struggle continues, the weapon goes off one more time hitting the guy who was jogging, he releases the gun and staggers away and falls to the ground. Now you tell me what you see.

Why were the people there? Why were armed men in the middle of the road and blocking the road and circling to cut off the black man jogging? Using only the video, and nothing else. They could have been a lynch mob couldn’t they? Going to kill a black man for sleeping with a white woman?

In the video you can see what happened in a few short seconds of time. You do not get the information that brings context to the events. You don’t get the information that the McMichaels were breaking the law. You do not get the context that Ahmad had entered and left empty handed a house under construction. You do not get the context that the McMichaels saw Ahmad run by and saw nothing else, no criminal activity, and then rushed to get guns and chase him down. You don’t get any context from just the video.

So how you see the video, with no context from anything else, is that two armed white guys in the middle of the street armed and apparently chasing a black guy are attacked. Without any context, that may seem reasonable. I wonder why? I wonder why those guys are there. I wonder what the hell they thought they were doing. I see it and know by Georgia Laws they are breaking the law waving those guns around in public like that. I watch it and know that by Georgia Law, they are in a lot of trouble. Watching nothing but the video, I see a lot of things going on, and Without the context the attack by the black guy is another thing I would wonder about.

The problem is that I have the context. I’ve been reading it a lot. Not just here, but many many other places. And knowing that I have read about the dangers of weapons in public, extensively read about it, long before this, I know that there is a lot of criminal activity in that video.

Here is your problem. You refuse to admit that Georgia law says what it actually says. You don’t want to believe that the White Guys did anything wrong. No matter who tells you they did, no matter how many sources are posted, you just will not consider the fact that these two idiots broke the damned law doing what you wish more people would. If more people did, I’d have my taxes increased in Georgia to afford the new prisons to hold them.

Now, maybe the Brandishing Laws are too narrow, and too restrictive. But for now, that is the law on the books. If we ignore those laws, claiming they are unfair, do we do so for everyone, or just your heroes the McMichaels?

address the video. you get nothing to assume from the video. what is it you see? I know, and it pisses you off the black man looks guilty of wrestling with the white guy and assaulting him. I get it. it's why it's evidence. you can't imply from a video, the video gives you all you need to know, what happened.

Ok. Now just the video. The very first thing I see is a textbook example of Aggravated Assault by the definition of Georgia law. That is literally the very first thing after a jogger who is being followed and videoed for some reason.

As I said. Many many times. Aggravated Assault is any activity with a weapon that does or can cause injury or death. Running around in the middle of the street with a shotgun after a black guy who is jogging is Aggravated Assault.

I see a struggle. But knowing that the struggle comes after the Felony of Aggravated Assault I know that by Georgia law Self Defense is not an option.

Shall I continue through the shooting?

Now. My opinion is backed up by the charges filed against the folks in the video. But in the video I see an attack carried out by two white guys in a pick up truck against a black guy using Georgia Law as my standard.

nope, you are not describing the video, you are giving a play by play with interpretation. I didn't ask for that. I asked what you see. you still can't answer cause it isn't a good thing for the black man. See, I can see two guys in a truck with a black man hauling ass after them. he looks like the pursuer, and those men are there to defend themselves against him. that's my interpretation. you still don't see the black man running from a distance do you?

Ok help me out. How do I describe the video without interpreting what I am seeing using my education and experience?

Now let’s say the video is of a car going around the corner sideways. I know that shows the car in what is called oversteer or power sliding or drifting. Seeing I know it is illegal on public streets. Apparently all I am allowed to think is car sliding around.

It is our intelligence and experience that allows us to interpret what is going on around us. It is how we can tell at a glance that someone isn’t supposed to have two elbows on the same arm and obviously has broken his arm.

You asked what I saw in the video. What you mean is between 21 seconds and 25 seconds. You do not want us looking before that. You do not want us considering anything after.

It is in a way the same thing we went through with the handicapped parking space shooting in Florida. The video we all watched was supposed to be ignored after the point where the hero was knocked down. We were supposed to ignore the guy backing up before he was shot.

It is interesting how you keep objecting to my description of the events.

The dude has been breaking in that neighborhood for years

 

[Faun]

The white folk should be out marching in the streets....

Decent "white folk" understand that this was not a c ase of self defense but, rather, the hunting and the killing of an unarmed man.

Where are all of the white racist protesters who support these guys? Where are they?

This idiot was almost living in the place! These are all break in with reported stolen items every time, the whole neighborhood knew this View attachment 335207

^^^ More lies from the forum troll. That's not Arbery.

 

[SavannahMann]

First of all the black dude is not normal....he has a mental history, a felony conviction and when he was killed he was in violation of his parole.

Not relevant in any way.

A normal innocent person's reaction to being stalked by men with guns is to get away from them, and then defend themselves if they can't get away.

The dead man acted like any normal innocent person would, like you would in the same situation.

What nonsense you espouse....do you think anyone believes you.

By your standards, if you didn't instantly submit to any gun-wielding person, it would okay to kill you, because you're obviously guilty.

Your standards are clearly stupid and evil.

why would you say that? that isn't what happened. so you should watch the video. it has all the evidence of the incident one needs.

Ok. Taking only the video. A deranged white guy with a fellow deranged individual in the back both of whom are armed and acting reckless are in the street. They are noticed by a fine upstanding citizen who fearing a mass Murder is taking place attempts to save the lives of his fellow citizens and risking his own life charges the armed lunatic unarmed to save lives.

using only the video and nothing else. Prove I am wrong.

so from the video you can tell two people are deranged? wow, you're talented. the courts would love you.

Using only the video with nothing else as you said we had to there is no way to accurately know what happened. There is nothing to say absent any evidence or information from any other source that it did not happen exactly that way. So now what evidence are we going to accept? Just that which helps your narrative? Or all of it which makes your narrative sound as stupid as my description?

well what do you see from the video? why can't you just address the video? I see two guys, one outside the driver door with a weapon, a guy in the truck bed standing up, the truck is stopped and in the middle of one lane, a black man running toward the truck from quite a distance. I also know another vehicle is following the blackman running. I see the black man run toward the driver side of the truck, seems to react to the man with the weapon and runs around to the passenger side of the truck, his path seems to circle to the front of the truck and attacks the man who moved around the driver door. Puts his hands on the weapon, the weapon fires, he continues wrestling with the man and his weapon while punching him in the head, and the weapon goes off again, continues wrestling and punching and while the struggle continues, the weapon goes off one more time hitting the guy who was jogging, he releases the gun and staggers away and falls to the ground. Now you tell me what you see.

Why were the people there? Why were armed men in the middle of the road and blocking the road and circling to cut off the black man jogging? Using only the video, and nothing else. They could have been a lynch mob couldn’t they? Going to kill a black man for sleeping with a white woman?

In the video you can see what happened in a few short seconds of time. You do not get the information that brings context to the events. You don’t get the information that the McMichaels were breaking the law. You do not get the context that Ahmad had entered and left empty handed a house under construction. You do not get the context that the McMichaels saw Ahmad run by and saw nothing else, no criminal activity, and then rushed to get guns and chase him down. You don’t get any context from just the video.

So how you see the video, with no context from anything else, is that two armed white guys in the middle of the street armed and apparently chasing a black guy are attacked. Without any context, that may seem reasonable. I wonder why? I wonder why those guys are there. I wonder what the hell they thought they were doing. I see it and know by Georgia Laws they are breaking the law waving those guns around in public like that. I watch it and know that by Georgia Law, they are in a lot of trouble. Watching nothing but the video, I see a lot of things going on, and Without the context the attack by the black guy is another thing I would wonder about.

The problem is that I have the context. I’ve been reading it a lot. Not just here, but many many other places. And knowing that I have read about the dangers of weapons in public, extensively read about it, long before this, I know that there is a lot of criminal activity in that video.

Here is your problem. You refuse to admit that Georgia law says what it actually says. You don’t want to believe that the White Guys did anything wrong. No matter who tells you they did, no matter how many sources are posted, you just will not consider the fact that these two idiots broke the damned law doing what you wish more people would. If more people did, I’d have my taxes increased in Georgia to afford the new prisons to hold them.

Now, maybe the Brandishing Laws are too narrow, and too restrictive. But for now, that is the law on the books. If we ignore those laws, claiming they are unfair, do we do so for everyone, or just your heroes the McMichaels?

address the video. you get nothing to assume from the video. what is it you see? I know, and it pisses you off the black man looks guilty of wrestling with the white guy and assaulting him. I get it. it's why it's evidence. you can't imply from a video, the video gives you all you need to know, what happened.

Ok. Now just the video. The very first thing I see is a textbook example of Aggravated Assault by the definition of Georgia law. That is literally the very first thing after a jogger who is being followed and videoed for some reason.

As I said. Many many times. Aggravated Assault is any activity with a weapon that does or can cause injury or death. Running around in the middle of the street with a shotgun after a black guy who is jogging is Aggravated Assault.

I see a struggle. But knowing that the struggle comes after the Felony of Aggravated Assault I know that by Georgia law Self Defense is not an option.

Shall I continue through the shooting?

Now. My opinion is backed up by the charges filed against the folks in the video. But in the video I see an attack carried out by two white guys in a pick up truck against a black guy using Georgia Law as my standard.

nope, you are not describing the video, you are giving a play by play with interpretation. I didn't ask for that. I asked what you see. you still can't answer cause it isn't a good thing for the black man. See, I can see two guys in a truck with a black man hauling ass after them. he looks like the pursuer, and those men are there to defend themselves against him. that's my interpretation. you still don't see the black man running from a distance do you?

Ok help me out. How do I describe the video without interpreting what I am seeing using my education and experience?

Now let’s say the video is of a car going around the corner sideways. I know that shows the car in what is called oversteer or power sliding or drifting. Seeing I know it is illegal on public streets. Apparently all I am allowed to think is car sliding around.

It is our intelligence and experience that allows us to interpret what is going on around us. It is how we can tell at a glance that someone isn’t supposed to have two elbows on the same arm and obviously has broken his arm.

You asked what I saw in the video. What you mean is between 21 seconds and 25 seconds. You do not want us looking before that. You do not want us considering anything after.

It is in a way the same thing we went through with the handicapped parking space shooting in Florida. The video we all watched was supposed to be ignored after the point where the hero was knocked down. We were supposed to ignore the guy backing up before he was shot.

It is interesting how you keep objecting to my description of the events.

The dude has been breaking in that neighborhood for yearsView attachment 335222

Wait. Are you now saying that the video alone is not all the evidence you need?

 

[Jitss617]

The white folk should be out marching in the streets....

Decent "white folk" understand that this was not a c ase of self defense but, rather, the hunting and the killing of an unarmed man.

Where are all of the white racist protesters who support these guys? Where are they?

This idiot was almost living in the place! These are all break in with reported stolen items every time, the whole neighborhood knew this View attachment 335207

^^^ More lies from the forum troll. That's not Arbery.

Lol pics is a lie? Lol hahah

 

[Jitss617]

First of all the black dude is not normal....he has a mental history, a felony conviction and when he was killed he was in violation of his parole.

Not relevant in any way.

A normal innocent person's reaction to being stalked by men with guns is to get away from them, and then defend themselves if they can't get away.

The dead man acted like any normal innocent person would, like you would in the same situation.

What nonsense you espouse....do you think anyone believes you.

By your standards, if you didn't instantly submit to any gun-wielding person, it would okay to kill you, because you're obviously guilty.

Your standards are clearly stupid and evil.

why would you say that? that isn't what happened. so you should watch the video. it has all the evidence of the incident one needs.

Ok. Taking only the video. A deranged white guy with a fellow deranged individual in the back both of whom are armed and acting reckless are in the street. They are noticed by a fine upstanding citizen who fearing a mass Murder is taking place attempts to save the lives of his fellow citizens and risking his own life charges the armed lunatic unarmed to save lives.

using only the video and nothing else. Prove I am wrong.

so from the video you can tell two people are deranged? wow, you're talented. the courts would love you.

Using only the video with nothing else as you said we had to there is no way to accurately know what happened. There is nothing to say absent any evidence or information from any other source that it did not happen exactly that way. So now what evidence are we going to accept? Just that which helps your narrative? Or all of it which makes your narrative sound as stupid as my description?

well what do you see from the video? why can't you just address the video? I see two guys, one outside the driver door with a weapon, a guy in the truck bed standing up, the truck is stopped and in the middle of one lane, a black man running toward the truck from quite a distance. I also know another vehicle is following the blackman running. I see the black man run toward the driver side of the truck, seems to react to the man with the weapon and runs around to the passenger side of the truck, his path seems to circle to the front of the truck and attacks the man who moved around the driver door. Puts his hands on the weapon, the weapon fires, he continues wrestling with the man and his weapon while punching him in the head, and the weapon goes off again, continues wrestling and punching and while the struggle continues, the weapon goes off one more time hitting the guy who was jogging, he releases the gun and staggers away and falls to the ground. Now you tell me what you see.

Why were the people there? Why were armed men in the middle of the road and blocking the road and circling to cut off the black man jogging? Using only the video, and nothing else. They could have been a lynch mob couldn’t they? Going to kill a black man for sleeping with a white woman?

In the video you can see what happened in a few short seconds of time. You do not get the information that brings context to the events. You don’t get the information that the McMichaels were breaking the law. You do not get the context that Ahmad had entered and left empty handed a house under construction. You do not get the context that the McMichaels saw Ahmad run by and saw nothing else, no criminal activity, and then rushed to get guns and chase him down. You don’t get any context from just the video.

So how you see the video, with no context from anything else, is that two armed white guys in the middle of the street armed and apparently chasing a black guy are attacked. Without any context, that may seem reasonable. I wonder why? I wonder why those guys are there. I wonder what the hell they thought they were doing. I see it and know by Georgia Laws they are breaking the law waving those guns around in public like that. I watch it and know that by Georgia Law, they are in a lot of trouble. Watching nothing but the video, I see a lot of things going on, and Without the context the attack by the black guy is another thing I would wonder about.

The problem is that I have the context. I’ve been reading it a lot. Not just here, but many many other places. And knowing that I have read about the dangers of weapons in public, extensively read about it, long before this, I know that there is a lot of criminal activity in that video.

Here is your problem. You refuse to admit that Georgia law says what it actually says. You don’t want to believe that the White Guys did anything wrong. No matter who tells you they did, no matter how many sources are posted, you just will not consider the fact that these two idiots broke the damned law doing what you wish more people would. If more people did, I’d have my taxes increased in Georgia to afford the new prisons to hold them.

Now, maybe the Brandishing Laws are too narrow, and too restrictive. But for now, that is the law on the books. If we ignore those laws, claiming they are unfair, do we do so for everyone, or just your heroes the McMichaels?

address the video. you get nothing to assume from the video. what is it you see? I know, and it pisses you off the black man looks guilty of wrestling with the white guy and assaulting him. I get it. it's why it's evidence. you can't imply from a video, the video gives you all you need to know, what happened.

Ok. Now just the video. The very first thing I see is a textbook example of Aggravated Assault by the definition of Georgia law. That is literally the very first thing after a jogger who is being followed and videoed for some reason.

As I said. Many many times. Aggravated Assault is any activity with a weapon that does or can cause injury or death. Running around in the middle of the street with a shotgun after a black guy who is jogging is Aggravated Assault.

I see a struggle. But knowing that the struggle comes after the Felony of Aggravated Assault I know that by Georgia law Self Defense is not an option.

Shall I continue through the shooting?

Now. My opinion is backed up by the charges filed against the folks in the video. But in the video I see an attack carried out by two white guys in a pick up truck against a black guy using Georgia Law as my standard.

nope, you are not describing the video, you are giving a play by play with interpretation. I didn't ask for that. I asked what you see. you still can't answer cause it isn't a good thing for the black man. See, I can see two guys in a truck with a black man hauling ass after them. he looks like the pursuer, and those men are there to defend themselves against him. that's my interpretation. you still don't see the black man running from a distance do you?

Ok help me out. How do I describe the video without interpreting what I am seeing using my education and experience?

Now let’s say the video is of a car going around the corner sideways. I know that shows the car in what is called oversteer or power sliding or drifting. Seeing I know it is illegal on public streets. Apparently all I am allowed to think is car sliding around.

It is our intelligence and experience that allows us to interpret what is going on around us. It is how we can tell at a glance that someone isn’t supposed to have two elbows on the same arm and obviously has broken his arm.

You asked what I saw in the video. What you mean is between 21 seconds and 25 seconds. You do not want us looking before that. You do not want us considering anything after.

It is in a way the same thing we went through with the handicapped parking space shooting in Florida. The video we all watched was supposed to be ignored after the point where the hero was knocked down. We were supposed to ignore the guy backing up before he was shot.

It is interesting how you keep objecting to my description of the events.

The dude has been breaking in that neighborhood for yearsView attachment 335222

Wait. Are you now saying that the video alone is not all the evidence you need?

I’m saying they know he was stealing they have multiple pictures and videos of it.. are you ok with that?

 

[Fang]

Great comprehensive article on the case. Amazingly, it's pretty much a summary of everything I've saying.

The Killing of Ahmaud Arbery – Dana Loesch

 

[Jitss617]

Great comprehensive article on the case. Amazingly, it's pretty much a summary of everything I've saying.

The Killing of Ahmaud Arbery – Dana Loesch

 

[Faun]

The white folk should be out marching in the streets....

Decent "white folk" understand that this was not a c ase of self defense but, rather, the hunting and the killing of an unarmed man.

Where are all of the white racist protesters who support these guys? Where are they?

This idiot was almost living in the place! These are all break in with reported stolen items every time, the whole neighborhood knew this View attachment 335207

^^^ More lies from the forum troll. That's not Arbery.

Lol pics is a lie? Lol hahah

No, you're the liar for falsely claiming they're pics of Ahmaud Arbery.