Video emerges of Georgia jogger attack; case headed to grand jury

[jc456]

All hell breaks loose in that he has two men he doesn't know confront him with a gun.

The "hell" didn't start breaking loose until he decided to run at McMichael. No hell was breaking loose until that happened.

Nobody had done anything that would reasonably place Arbery in apprehension of IMMEDIATELY receiving a violent injury (see Georgia statute).

.

We don't hear the audio. We don't know what if any was the verbal exchange. That is the big issue. I am curious how this gets decided in the court system.

I heard freeze. that's it. it was quite faint. still never saw them confront the black man. they did not approach him at all. he approached them.

If someone on the street told you to freeze, would you? They are not police officers. This will go to trial for sure. Let's see what happens?

well like I already said, I'd ignore them and run the other way. I'd avoid any confrontation where I have no advantage. It seems more reasonable to leave and seek cover or leave completely the other direction. just seems much more logical and healthy. also try and maintain myself aware of my surrounding so I never get into that situation.

Except maybe he thought they would shoot him in the back? Is that possible? You're also not a 25-year old kid who thinks he is invincible. At 25, I would have fought ISIS by myself.

well they could have done that anytime before he ever got to where that truck was. Their intent wasn't to shoot him. it was clear since they didn't when they drove by him. reasonable people have judgement, recognize their surrounding and look for a way out of the scenario. he had many choices.

 

[jc456]

Victim believed he was in grave danger IMO.

But, that is not the standard. He may have believed that he was in danger, but he was not in reasonable apprehension of immediately receiving a violent injury.

Example:
I pull my fist back and act like I am going to punch you, and you see it and flinch. That's assault. My action put you in reasonable apprehension that you were about to get punched. Your flinch demonstrates or proves your reasonable apprehension.

Pointing a gun at him may have put him in reasonable apprehension, but coupled with yelling freeze, or the fact that he didn't get shot immediately and he ran at McMichael, demonstrates that he was NOT in reasonable apprehension.

.

Tough to gauge without a strong audio.

True, but had McMichael pointed the gun, a reasonable person would have flinched or ran or stopped and put their hands up. I would argue that no reasonable person, having a gun pointed at him, would provoke the person pointing the gun, by running at him and trying to take it.

So, it may be a case where McMichael did point the gun and Arbery was completely stupid, I suppose.

.

25-year olds are stupid and believe they are immortal. I did.

25 year olds do act stupid. less stupid from 18. It's called maturity and experience.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

I posted several videos. Why did you only mention the first one? Your entire argument is based on lies. I posted several examples. Would you like 10 more that have nothing to do with someones home? 20? 30? How many must i post before you admit you are wrong?

I don't have time now to go into this further but I will answer your questions later on this evening if I have time.

In the meantime, I just checked with a CJTC firearm instructor (Washington State Criminal Justice Training Commission) and he directed me to the specific page and paragraph in their training manual that answers your question which follows below. This is the same training I completed when I obtained my first WA Concealed Pistol License 19 years ago.

CRIMINAL PENALTIES FOR UNLAWFUL USE OF FORCE
Use of force or deadly force when law does not allow it may result in your arrest for assault or homicide.
Criminal charges for an assault with a firearm do not necessarily require that the gun be fired; for example, someone who threatens another without legal justification by pointing a gun at him or her has committed an assault.

An assault with a firearm is usually considered to be a first or second-degree assault (both of these are felonies). Conviction of such a crime may carry a sentence from ten to 20 years. Should your use of force result in the unlawful death of another person, you may be charged with either manslaughter if your recklessness caused the death, or murder if you intended to kill the person.

Penalties for manslaughter may be up to ten years in prison. Murder carries a sentence up to life in prison, unless certain aggravating circumstances exist, in which case the court may impose the death penalty [Washington State no longer has a death penalty as of a few years ago].

It is your responsibility as the person carrying or using a weapon to use it responsibly and within the law. Neither your employer nor any other person is criminally responsible for your acts with a firearm. Under criminal law, you alone have the responsibility for any display or firing of a firearm. If you have any doubt about your ability to make crucial life-and-death decisions regarding the use of deadly force, then you should not carry a firearm.

None of that has anything at all to do with our debate. You said its illegal to point a gun at someone. I showed you that is not true. Good samaritans can absolutely point a gun at a suspected criminal.

LMAO... those two were definitely not "good Samaritans".

Wow...the stupidity.

Sure they were. They were tracking a criminal whom they recognized from crime scene footage. That is by definition a good samaritan.

Criminal or Violent Criminal? Killing someone without a judge and jury makes one a good Samaritan? Oh...

When someone attacks you, you have the right to self defense. A man trying to take your gun away is a dire threat.

And a man pointing a gun at you is also a dire threat. No gun and there is no death in this case. Don't stop the truck in the middle of the street and act like a cop.

This.

No one would have died if they had not done this.

I agree. The question is what should be their punishment for acting stupid?

I don't think it's murder, but they don't get off easy, unless they are somehow justified (like somebody reported seeing the guy armed and attempting to burglarize an occupied residence).

.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

I posted several videos. Why did you only mention the first one? Your entire argument is based on lies. I posted several examples. Would you like 10 more that have nothing to do with someones home? 20? 30? How many must i post before you admit you are wrong?

I don't have time now to go into this further but I will answer your questions later on this evening if I have time.

In the meantime, I just checked with a CJTC firearm instructor (Washington State Criminal Justice Training Commission) and he directed me to the specific page and paragraph in their training manual that answers your question which follows below. This is the same training I completed when I obtained my first WA Concealed Pistol License 19 years ago.

CRIMINAL PENALTIES FOR UNLAWFUL USE OF FORCE
Use of force or deadly force when law does not allow it may result in your arrest for assault or homicide.
Criminal charges for an assault with a firearm do not necessarily require that the gun be fired; for example, someone who threatens another without legal justification by pointing a gun at him or her has committed an assault.

An assault with a firearm is usually considered to be a first or second-degree assault (both of these are felonies). Conviction of such a crime may carry a sentence from ten to 20 years. Should your use of force result in the unlawful death of another person, you may be charged with either manslaughter if your recklessness caused the death, or murder if you intended to kill the person.

Penalties for manslaughter may be up to ten years in prison. Murder carries a sentence up to life in prison, unless certain aggravating circumstances exist, in which case the court may impose the death penalty [Washington State no longer has a death penalty as of a few years ago].

It is your responsibility as the person carrying or using a weapon to use it responsibly and within the law. Neither your employer nor any other person is criminally responsible for your acts with a firearm. Under criminal law, you alone have the responsibility for any display or firing of a firearm. If you have any doubt about your ability to make crucial life-and-death decisions regarding the use of deadly force, then you should not carry a firearm.

None of that has anything at all to do with our debate. You said its illegal to point a gun at someone. I showed you that is not true. Good samaritans can absolutely point a gun at a suspected criminal.

LMAO... those two were definitely not "good Samaritans".

Wow...the stupidity.

Sure they were. They were tracking a criminal whom they recognized from crime scene footage. That is by definition a good samaritan.

Criminal or Violent Criminal? Killing someone without a judge and jury makes one a good Samaritan? Oh...

When someone attacks you, you have the right to self defense. A man trying to take your gun away is a dire threat.

And a man pointing a gun at you is also a dire threat. No gun and there is no death in this case. Don't stop the truck in the middle of the street and act like a cop.

This.

No one would have died if they had not done this.

I agree. The question is what should be their punishment for acting stupid?

I don't think it's murder, but they don't get off easy, unless they are somehow justified (like somebody reported seeing the guy armed and attempting to burglarize an occupied residence).

.

Manslaughter will be the verdict for the shooter. Not sure for the dad.

 

[Faun]

Nothing in that statute about "assault" or "violent injury" being necessary to resort to lethal self-defense. And yes, facing someone brandishing a firearm after chasing you down does produce a reasonable fear of "imminent use of unlawful force."

You pretty much ignored the entire statute.

"A person is justified in threatening or using force against another when and to the extent that he or she reasonably believes that such threat or force is necessary to defend himself or herself or a third person against such other's imminent use of unlawful force;

What force did Arbery use? What imminent use of force did McMichael employ?

"a person is justified in using force which is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm only if he or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent death or great bodily injury to himself"

Arbery's act of running at McMichael and trying to take his gun by punching him is not consistent with the actions of one who reasonably believes that doing so is necessary to prevent death or great bodily injury. In fact, it's just the opposite.

.

Chasing Arbery by car and then blocking the street and getting out with a firearm, demonstrates a reasonable fear of imminent use of force.

 

[Faun]

(b) A person is not justified in using force under the circumstances specified in subsection (a) of this Code section if he:

(1) Initially provokes the use of force against himself with the intent to use such force as an excuse to inflict bodily harm upon the assailant;
(2) Is attempting to commit, committing, or fleeing after the commission or attempted commission of a felony; or
(3) Was the aggressor or was engaged in a combat by agreement unless he withdraws from the encounter and effectively communicates to such other person his intent to do so and the other, notwithstanding, continues or threatens to continue the use of unlawful force.

Arbery didn't provoke the force displayed against him. That was brought on by the McMichaels who chased him down because they Gregory McMichael saw him running. He was also not the initial aggressor. Again, the McMichaels were by chasing him down.

Here is what you are alleging, and I don't know that I disagree:

"(a) A person commits the offense of false imprisonment when, in violation of the personal liberty of another, he arrests, confines, or detains such person without legal authority.
(b) A person convicted of the offense of false imprisonment shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one nor more than ten years.
(c) Any person convicted under this Code section wherein the victim is not the child of the defendant and the victim is less than 14 years of age shall, in addition, be subject to the sentencing and punishment provisions of Code Section 17-10-6.2 ."

https://codes.findlaw.com/ga/title-16-crimes-and-offenses/ga-code-sect-16-5-41.html

I don't believe that applies in this case as neither McMichael were charged with false imprisonment.

 

[Gantlemagne]

I posted several videos. Why did you only mention the first one? Your entire argument is based on lies. I posted several examples. Would you like 10 more that have nothing to do with someones home? 20? 30? How many must i post before you admit you are wrong?

I don't have time now to go into this further but I will answer your questions later on this evening if I have time.

In the meantime, I just checked with a CJTC firearm instructor (Washington State Criminal Justice Training Commission) and he directed me to the specific page and paragraph in their training manual that answers your question which follows below. This is the same training I completed when I obtained my first WA Concealed Pistol License 19 years ago.

CRIMINAL PENALTIES FOR UNLAWFUL USE OF FORCE
Use of force or deadly force when law does not allow it may result in your arrest for assault or homicide.
Criminal charges for an assault with a firearm do not necessarily require that the gun be fired; for example, someone who threatens another without legal justification by pointing a gun at him or her has committed an assault.

An assault with a firearm is usually considered to be a first or second-degree assault (both of these are felonies). Conviction of such a crime may carry a sentence from ten to 20 years. Should your use of force result in the unlawful death of another person, you may be charged with either manslaughter if your recklessness caused the death, or murder if you intended to kill the person.

Penalties for manslaughter may be up to ten years in prison. Murder carries a sentence up to life in prison, unless certain aggravating circumstances exist, in which case the court may impose the death penalty [Washington State no longer has a death penalty as of a few years ago].

It is your responsibility as the person carrying or using a weapon to use it responsibly and within the law. Neither your employer nor any other person is criminally responsible for your acts with a firearm. Under criminal law, you alone have the responsibility for any display or firing of a firearm. If you have any doubt about your ability to make crucial life-and-death decisions regarding the use of deadly force, then you should not carry a firearm.

None of that has anything at all to do with our debate. You said its illegal to point a gun at someone. I showed you that is not true. Good samaritans can absolutely point a gun at a suspected criminal.

LMAO... those two were definitely not "good Samaritans".

Wow...the stupidity.

Sure they were. They were tracking a criminal whom they recognized from crime scene footage. That is by definition a good samaritan.

Criminal or Violent Criminal? Killing someone without a judge and jury makes one a good Samaritan? Oh...

When someone attacks you, you have the right to self defense. A man trying to take your gun away is a dire threat.

And a man pointing a gun at you is also a dire threat. No gun and there is no death in this case. Don't stop the truck in the middle of the street and act like a cop.

This.

No one would have died if they had not done this.

I agree. The question is what should be their punishment for acting stupid?

I don't think it's murder, but they don't get off easy, unless they are somehow justified (like somebody reported seeing the guy armed and attempting to burglarize an occupied residence).

.

Manslaughter will be the verdict for the shooter. Not sure for the dad.

I'm finding so strange that the African American community is putting up murals of AA though, he wasn't a hero, at least not to My knowledge... and I mean... they acting as though he's Sable Hood stealing from the White Hood.... which is just horrible because... well not right now because of the state shut downs... but... schisse, states need to reopen... and provide more job opportunities.

As for the McMichaels, charges of false imprisonment and harrassment... that's what I see in this case right now, unless it's determined that AA was shot prior to grabbing Travis's gun. And at least Greg McMichael should be charged in a hate crime, and being part of a terrorist organization, and Travis if he's a KK Klan member too, if this photo of this KKK rally is of Greg McMichael, which the glasses appear to match Greg's arrest photo glasses.

Photo Emerges Appearing To Show Ahmaud Arbery's Killer At KKK Rally

On Saturday, GAFollowers.com shared an image which they claim is of Gregory McMichael at a KKK rally in Georgia back in 2016.

dailyboulder.com

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

I posted several videos. Why did you only mention the first one? Your entire argument is based on lies. I posted several examples. Would you like 10 more that have nothing to do with someones home? 20? 30? How many must i post before you admit you are wrong?

I don't have time now to go into this further but I will answer your questions later on this evening if I have time.

In the meantime, I just checked with a CJTC firearm instructor (Washington State Criminal Justice Training Commission) and he directed me to the specific page and paragraph in their training manual that answers your question which follows below. This is the same training I completed when I obtained my first WA Concealed Pistol License 19 years ago.

CRIMINAL PENALTIES FOR UNLAWFUL USE OF FORCE
Use of force or deadly force when law does not allow it may result in your arrest for assault or homicide.
Criminal charges for an assault with a firearm do not necessarily require that the gun be fired; for example, someone who threatens another without legal justification by pointing a gun at him or her has committed an assault.

An assault with a firearm is usually considered to be a first or second-degree assault (both of these are felonies). Conviction of such a crime may carry a sentence from ten to 20 years. Should your use of force result in the unlawful death of another person, you may be charged with either manslaughter if your recklessness caused the death, or murder if you intended to kill the person.

Penalties for manslaughter may be up to ten years in prison. Murder carries a sentence up to life in prison, unless certain aggravating circumstances exist, in which case the court may impose the death penalty [Washington State no longer has a death penalty as of a few years ago].

It is your responsibility as the person carrying or using a weapon to use it responsibly and within the law. Neither your employer nor any other person is criminally responsible for your acts with a firearm. Under criminal law, you alone have the responsibility for any display or firing of a firearm. If you have any doubt about your ability to make crucial life-and-death decisions regarding the use of deadly force, then you should not carry a firearm.

None of that has anything at all to do with our debate. You said its illegal to point a gun at someone. I showed you that is not true. Good samaritans can absolutely point a gun at a suspected criminal.

LMAO... those two were definitely not "good Samaritans".

Wow...the stupidity.

Sure they were. They were tracking a criminal whom they recognized from crime scene footage. That is by definition a good samaritan.

Criminal or Violent Criminal? Killing someone without a judge and jury makes one a good Samaritan? Oh...

When someone attacks you, you have the right to self defense. A man trying to take your gun away is a dire threat.

And a man pointing a gun at you is also a dire threat. No gun and there is no death in this case. Don't stop the truck in the middle of the street and act like a cop.

This.

No one would have died if they had not done this.

I agree. The question is what should be their punishment for acting stupid?

I don't think it's murder, but they don't get off easy, unless they are somehow justified (like somebody reported seeing the guy armed and attempting to burglarize an occupied residence).

.

Manslaughter will be the verdict for the shooter. Not sure for the dad.

I'm finding so strange that the African American community is putting up murals of AA though, he wasn't a hero, at least not to My knowledge... and I mean... they acting as though he's Sable Hood stealing from the White Hood.... which is just horrible because... well not right now because of the state shut downs... but... schisse, states need to reopen... and provide more job opportunities.

As for the McMichaels, charges of false imprisonment and harrassment... that's what I see in this case right now, unless it's determined that AA was shot prior to grabbing Travis's gun. And at least Greg McMichael should be charged in a hate crime, and being part of a terrorist organization, and Travis if he's a KK Klan member too, if this photo of this KKK rally is of Greg McMichael, which the glasses appear to match Greg's arrest photo glasses.

Photo Emerges Appearing To Show Ahmaud Arbery's Killer At KKK Rally

On Saturday, GAFollowers.com shared an image which they claim is of Gregory McMichael at a KKK rally in Georgia back in 2016.

dailyboulder.com

Klan? Shocking....

 

[IM2]

Arbery behaved in self defense.

Didn't look like it to me when he RAN AT McMichael. Sorry. That's a FACT you cannot escape. Not buying your bullshit.

.

Then you’re only considering a small fraction of the facts.

Why ignore the rest of the facts?

Like what?

It's not assault to approach someone. It's not assault to say "hey, we want to talk to you." It's not assault to be armed.

It IS assault to run at someone and try to take the item they are holding.

.

But is IS considered assault to point a weapon at someone, whether it's loaded or not.

No its not. Making up fake laws isnt going to score you any points here. Do better next time.

Bruce Finlay

Attorney at Law
P.O. Box 3, Shelton, WA 98584
Home | Bruce Finlay Attorney, Shelton, WA

Pointing a gun at another person in Washington State could result in a class B felony charge of assault in the second degree with a deadly weapon. That crime occurs when a person assaults another with a deadly weapon. Assault is not defined by statute in Washington; this state uses the common law definition, which for these purposes is as follows: “An assault is an attempt, with unlawful force, to inflict bodily injuries on another, accompanied with the apparent present ability to give effect to the attempt if not prevented. Such would be the raising of the hand in anger, with an apparent purpose to strike, and sufficiently near to enable the purpose to be carried into effect; the pointing of a loaded pistol at one who is in its range; the pointing of a pistol not loaded at one who is not aware of that fact and making an apparent attempt to shoot; shaking a whip or the fist in a man’s face in anger; riding or running after him in [a] threatening and hostile manner with a club or other weapon; and the like.” That charge carries a maximum sentence of 10 years in prison and a fine of $20,000.
Continued here: https://armedcitizensnetwork.org/apr-2015-attorney-question

Have you learned something or are you still feeling antagonistic towards me?

If pointing a gun at someone is illegal, why is this guy a hero and not going to jail?



or this guy



or this guy



or this guy



or this guy



or this guy

Man holds suspected church burglar at gunpoint

Should i keep going?

Learn to read, moron. Your own link says it "CAN" happen, not that it WILL happen. If you were a gangbanger who is menacing people with his gun, you would go to jail, but if you are a good Samaritan, you can absolutely point a gun at someone and it is perfectly legal. Making up lies isnt an effective argument. Do better next time.

Do the words "without lawful authority" or "without a valid lawful basis" mean anything to you?

I stopped looking after I saw the word "Homeowner" in the title of the first video. Of course there are exceptions, finding someone in your home or on your property who doesn't belong there is one of them.

So stop being pedantic and admit that you can't just point a firearm at someone when you're out in public simply because you want to "interrogate" them and/or know who they are. That is a easy way to end up with an assault charge or getting shot yourself.

you are wasting your bandwidth

with recent stories of whites killed by blacks such as the elderly couple or the white girl in miami, the dead jogger is just not important anymore

In 2018 according to the Uniform Crime Reports, 3,315 whites were murdered that year. 2,677 were killed by another white, 514 were killed by a black person. Whites were 5 times more likely to be killed by another white person than a black person. These numbers do not indicate a major epidemic of blacks killing whites. What it shows is that the media ignores a very large problem in the white community where 81 percent of all whites who are killed are killed by another white person. Now I don't know about you but 81 percent is a pretty high number and this and higher percentages of white on while murder have been completely ignored by the media for decades. Instead the media has made a big thing out of black on black crime reinforcing a white racist belief of black violence thereby creating the attitudes of such men as the 2 white men who killed Arbery.

So shut up.

 

[IM2]

What's frustrating is that you refuse to get that those men had no right to follow Arbery. Therefore any reason you have for them being armed is irrelevant.

Being armed is irrelevant.

They had no right to apprehend him, but when reporting a potential crime, they had the right to follow him. That’s all they should have done.

And because THEY chose to do more, Arbery is dead...

True, but that is not the SOLE reason Arbery is dead.
Yes it is.
.

T

That response assumes they would have killed Arbery, no matter what he did.

You really believe that?

.

Yes. Why wouldn't I?

That's all I have to say to you on this topic.



View attachment 334604

.

Maybe you watch more than this

What's frustrating is that you refuse to get that those men had no right to follow Arbery. Therefore any reason you have for them being armed is irrelevant.

Being armed is irrelevant.

They had no right to apprehend him, but when reporting a potential crime, they had the right to follow him. That’s all they should have done.

And because THEY chose to do more, Arbery is dead...

True, but that is not the SOLE reason Arbery is dead.
Yes it is.
.

T

That response assumes they would have killed Arbery, no matter what he did.

You really believe that?

.

Yes. Why wouldn't I?

That's all I have to say to you on this topic.



View attachment 334604

.

You might want to look for a longer video then start understanding that McMichael had no right to be there.

Post what you’ve got. I don’t care.

You still think they would have killed him, no matter what. I have nothing else to say. You proved my point.

Case closed.

.

The case was closed before you started your first post. Yes I think they would have killed him. They did kill him. The McMichael son had no reason to be standing there with his shot gun cocked.

What I don’t understand is why did the murder victim run toward the guys with guns. I don’t know about you but if I see guys with guns, I run away from them. It’s just common sense.

I suspect there is more to the story then we are being told.

I understand that didn't happen. There is nothing more to this story but you white boys are looking for any excuse and that's why you are trying to argue about a black man running to a gun.

 

[Gantlemagne]

What's frustrating is that you refuse to get that those men had no right to follow Arbery. Therefore any reason you have for them being armed is irrelevant.

Being armed is irrelevant.

They had no right to apprehend him, but when reporting a potential crime, they had the right to follow him. That’s all they should have done.

And because THEY chose to do more, Arbery is dead...

True, but that is not the SOLE reason Arbery is dead.
Yes it is.
.

T

That response assumes they would have killed Arbery, no matter what he did.

You really believe that?

.

Yes. Why wouldn't I?

That's all I have to say to you on this topic.



View attachment 334604

.

Maybe you watch more than this

What's frustrating is that you refuse to get that those men had no right to follow Arbery. Therefore any reason you have for them being armed is irrelevant.

Being armed is irrelevant.

They had no right to apprehend him, but when reporting a potential crime, they had the right to follow him. That’s all they should have done.

And because THEY chose to do more, Arbery is dead...

True, but that is not the SOLE reason Arbery is dead.
Yes it is.
.

T

That response assumes they would have killed Arbery, no matter what he did.

You really believe that?

.

Yes. Why wouldn't I?

That's all I have to say to you on this topic.



View attachment 334604

.

You might want to look for a longer video then start understanding that McMichael had no right to be there.

Post what you’ve got. I don’t care.

You still think they would have killed him, no matter what. I have nothing else to say. You proved my point.

Case closed.

.

The case was closed before you started your first post. Yes I think they would have killed him. They did kill him. The McMichael son had no reason to be standing there with his shot gun cocked.

What I don’t understand is why did the murder victim run toward the guys with guns. I don’t know about you but if I see guys with guns, I run away from them. It’s just common sense.

I suspect there is more to the story then we are being told.

I understand that didn't happen. There is nothing more to this story but you white boys are looking for any excuse and that's why you are trying to argue about a black man running to a gun.

How does Black boy... Red boy, Yellow boy sound to you? Notice how he says "black man" "white boy." Diminuizing.

 

[IM2]

This is the expected response to this situation. A bunch of ignorant racist term deleted racists talking about a white man who had no mother ******* reason to be holding a gun on somebody in the first place defending himself against some blacks guy who they want to claim ran towards a gun.

It is apparent that after the first shot was fired from the truck at Arbery he saw the other white man pointing the gun at him and knew he was about to be shot so he went for it.

 

[IM2]

What's frustrating is that you refuse to get that those men had no right to follow Arbery. Therefore any reason you have for them being armed is irrelevant.

Being armed is irrelevant.

They had no right to apprehend him, but when reporting a potential crime, they had the right to follow him. That’s all they should have done.

And because THEY chose to do more, Arbery is dead...

True, but that is not the SOLE reason Arbery is dead.
Yes it is.
.

T

That response assumes they would have killed Arbery, no matter what he did.

You really believe that?

.

Yes. Why wouldn't I?

That's all I have to say to you on this topic.



View attachment 334604

.

Maybe you watch more than this

What's frustrating is that you refuse to get that those men had no right to follow Arbery. Therefore any reason you have for them being armed is irrelevant.

Being armed is irrelevant.

They had no right to apprehend him, but when reporting a potential crime, they had the right to follow him. That’s all they should have done.

And because THEY chose to do more, Arbery is dead...

True, but that is not the SOLE reason Arbery is dead.
Yes it is.
.

T

That response assumes they would have killed Arbery, no matter what he did.

You really believe that?

.

Yes. Why wouldn't I?

That's all I have to say to you on this topic.



View attachment 334604

.

You might want to look for a longer video then start understanding that McMichael had no right to be there.

Post what you’ve got. I don’t care.

You still think they would have killed him, no matter what. I have nothing else to say. You proved my point.

Case closed.

.

The case was closed before you started your first post. Yes I think they would have killed him. They did kill him. The McMichael son had no reason to be standing there with his shot gun cocked.

What I don’t understand is why did the murder victim run toward the guys with guns. I don’t know about you but if I see guys with guns, I run away from them. It’s just common sense.

I suspect there is more to the story then we are being told.

I understand that didn't happen. There is nothing more to this story but you white boys are looking for any excuse and that's why you are trying to argue about a black man running to a gun.

How does Black boy... Red boy, Yellow boy sound to you? Notice how he says "black man" "white boy." Diminuizing.

Sounds like you have a problem with the fact that you white boys pissed me the **** off with this ignorant bullshit.

 

[gipper]

What's frustrating is that you refuse to get that those men had no right to follow Arbery. Therefore any reason you have for them being armed is irrelevant.

Being armed is irrelevant.

They had no right to apprehend him, but when reporting a potential crime, they had the right to follow him. That’s all they should have done.

And because THEY chose to do more, Arbery is dead...

True, but that is not the SOLE reason Arbery is dead.
Yes it is.
.

T

That response assumes they would have killed Arbery, no matter what he did.

You really believe that?

.

Yes. Why wouldn't I?

That's all I have to say to you on this topic.



View attachment 334604

.

Maybe you watch more than this

What's frustrating is that you refuse to get that those men had no right to follow Arbery. Therefore any reason you have for them being armed is irrelevant.

Being armed is irrelevant.

They had no right to apprehend him, but when reporting a potential crime, they had the right to follow him. That’s all they should have done.

And because THEY chose to do more, Arbery is dead...

True, but that is not the SOLE reason Arbery is dead.
Yes it is.
.

T

That response assumes they would have killed Arbery, no matter what he did.

You really believe that?

.

Yes. Why wouldn't I?

That's all I have to say to you on this topic.



View attachment 334604

.

You might want to look for a longer video then start understanding that McMichael had no right to be there.

Post what you’ve got. I don’t care.

You still think they would have killed him, no matter what. I have nothing else to say. You proved my point.

Case closed.

.

The case was closed before you started your first post. Yes I think they would have killed him. They did kill him. The McMichael son had no reason to be standing there with his shot gun cocked.

What I don’t understand is why did the murder victim run toward the guys with guns. I don’t know about you but if I see guys with guns, I run away from them. It’s just common sense.

I suspect there is more to the story then we are being told.

I understand that didn't happen. There is nothing more to this story but you white boys are looking for any excuse and that's why you are trying to argue about a black man running to a gun.

LOL. You weren’t there. So, how do you know what the **** happened?

 

[gipper]

What's frustrating is that you refuse to get that those men had no right to follow Arbery. Therefore any reason you have for them being armed is irrelevant.

Being armed is irrelevant.

They had no right to apprehend him, but when reporting a potential crime, they had the right to follow him. That’s all they should have done.

And because THEY chose to do more, Arbery is dead...

True, but that is not the SOLE reason Arbery is dead.
Yes it is.
.

T

That response assumes they would have killed Arbery, no matter what he did.

You really believe that?

.

Yes. Why wouldn't I?

That's all I have to say to you on this topic.



View attachment 334604

.

Maybe you watch more than this

What's frustrating is that you refuse to get that those men had no right to follow Arbery. Therefore any reason you have for them being armed is irrelevant.

Being armed is irrelevant.

They had no right to apprehend him, but when reporting a potential crime, they had the right to follow him. That’s all they should have done.

And because THEY chose to do more, Arbery is dead...

True, but that is not the SOLE reason Arbery is dead.
Yes it is.
.

T

That response assumes they would have killed Arbery, no matter what he did.

You really believe that?

.

Yes. Why wouldn't I?

That's all I have to say to you on this topic.



View attachment 334604

.

You might want to look for a longer video then start understanding that McMichael had no right to be there.

Post what you’ve got. I don’t care.

You still think they would have killed him, no matter what. I have nothing else to say. You proved my point.

Case closed.

.

The case was closed before you started your first post. Yes I think they would have killed him. They did kill him. The McMichael son had no reason to be standing there with his shot gun cocked.

What I don’t understand is why did the murder victim run toward the guys with guns. I don’t know about you but if I see guys with guns, I run away from them. It’s just common sense.

I suspect there is more to the story then we are being told.

I understand that didn't happen. There is nothing more to this story but you white boys are looking for any excuse and that's why you are trying to argue about a black man running to a gun.

How does Black boy... Red boy, Yellow boy sound to you? Notice how he says "black man" "white boy." Diminuizing.

He calls us crackers all the time. If we call him the n-word, it probably would cause a huge uproar.

 

[Gantlemagne]

What's frustrating is that you refuse to get that those men had no right to follow Arbery. Therefore any reason you have for them being armed is irrelevant.

Being armed is irrelevant.

They had no right to apprehend him, but when reporting a potential crime, they had the right to follow him. That’s all they should have done.

And because THEY chose to do more, Arbery is dead...

True, but that is not the SOLE reason Arbery is dead.
Yes it is.
.

T

That response assumes they would have killed Arbery, no matter what he did.

You really believe that?

.

Yes. Why wouldn't I?

That's all I have to say to you on this topic.



View attachment 334604

.

Maybe you watch more than this

What's frustrating is that you refuse to get that those men had no right to follow Arbery. Therefore any reason you have for them being armed is irrelevant.

Being armed is irrelevant.

They had no right to apprehend him, but when reporting a potential crime, they had the right to follow him. That’s all they should have done.

And because THEY chose to do more, Arbery is dead...

True, but that is not the SOLE reason Arbery is dead.
Yes it is.
.

T

That response assumes they would have killed Arbery, no matter what he did.

You really believe that?

.

Yes. Why wouldn't I?

That's all I have to say to you on this topic.



View attachment 334604

.

You might want to look for a longer video then start understanding that McMichael had no right to be there.

Post what you’ve got. I don’t care.

You still think they would have killed him, no matter what. I have nothing else to say. You proved my point.

Case closed.

.

The case was closed before you started your first post. Yes I think they would have killed him. They did kill him. The McMichael son had no reason to be standing there with his shot gun cocked.

What I don’t understand is why did the murder victim run toward the guys with guns. I don’t know about you but if I see guys with guns, I run away from them. It’s just common sense.

I suspect there is more to the story then we are being told.

I understand that didn't happen. There is nothing more to this story but you white boys are looking for any excuse and that's why you are trying to argue about a black man running to a gun.

How does Black boy... Red boy, Yellow boy sound to you? Notice how he says "black man" "white boy." Diminuizing.

Sounds like you have a problem with the fact that you white boys pissed me the **** off with this ignorant bullshit.

First of all, I am a Golden Man. Occidental and Oriental Eurasian, Nubian, and Atlantean/Atlantic; Sioux, Aztec, and Algonquin. Fighting racism against racism is simply as wrong.

 

[Gantlemagne]

What's frustrating is that you refuse to get that those men had no right to follow Arbery. Therefore any reason you have for them being armed is irrelevant.

Being armed is irrelevant.

They had no right to apprehend him, but when reporting a potential crime, they had the right to follow him. That’s all they should have done.

And because THEY chose to do more, Arbery is dead...

True, but that is not the SOLE reason Arbery is dead.
Yes it is.
.

T

That response assumes they would have killed Arbery, no matter what he did.

You really believe that?

.

Yes. Why wouldn't I?

That's all I have to say to you on this topic.



View attachment 334604

.

Maybe you watch more than this

What's frustrating is that you refuse to get that those men had no right to follow Arbery. Therefore any reason you have for them being armed is irrelevant.

Being armed is irrelevant.

They had no right to apprehend him, but when reporting a potential crime, they had the right to follow him. That’s all they should have done.

And because THEY chose to do more, Arbery is dead...

True, but that is not the SOLE reason Arbery is dead.
Yes it is.
.

T

That response assumes they would have killed Arbery, no matter what he did.

You really believe that?

.

Yes. Why wouldn't I?

That's all I have to say to you on this topic.



View attachment 334604

.

You might want to look for a longer video then start understanding that McMichael had no right to be there.

Post what you’ve got. I don’t care.

You still think they would have killed him, no matter what. I have nothing else to say. You proved my point.

Case closed.

.

The case was closed before you started your first post. Yes I think they would have killed him. They did kill him. The McMichael son had no reason to be standing there with his shot gun cocked.

What I don’t understand is why did the murder victim run toward the guys with guns. I don’t know about you but if I see guys with guns, I run away from them. It’s just common sense.

I suspect there is more to the story then we are being told.

I understand that didn't happen. There is nothing more to this story but you white boys are looking for any excuse and that's why you are trying to argue about a black man running to a gun.

How does Black boy... Red boy, Yellow boy sound to you? Notice how he says "black man" "white boy." Diminuizing.

He calls us crackers all the time. If we call him the n-word, it probably would cause a huge uproar.

If you can find the instances where he uses crackers as a derogatory term for "White" people, then report it. Treat "Cr-cker" in the same way you treat "N-gger."

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

People like IM2 don’t help.

 

[Coyote]

He's dead because he was chased down and killed by two rednecks.

When Travis McMichael was standing on the driver's side of the truck, Arbery ran to the passenger side. How is that, in any way, unreasonable?

If true, they could've shoot him without leaving the truck. But they didn't, they wanted to talk to him. No intention to kill him, until he went for a gun.

Lemme ask you... why didn't he let go of the gun after first shot, but he still kept going?

You don't "want to talk" with someone when you've chased them down in a vehicle, blocked them, and emerged from said vehicle carrying a gun. That's bullshit.

 

[Coyote]

Why did they stop the truck in the middle of the street? No one an answer that question.

Does it really matter given what this guy decided to do?

Assume they stop the truck in the middle of the road and pull out 40 guns and pointed to them at him.

Not run at the trees

Not run the other way

Not run toward the house is

Not say what do you want

No, charge of the guys hole in the guns and try to take them away.

:Not run at the trees

Not run the other way

Not run toward the houses

Not say what do you want

No, charge at the guys holding the guns and try to take them away.



Not one person here believes that was the right thing to do. Not one of you. You all know that he was acting stupidly or aggressively.

.

Two huge armed white men in a truck. How would he know they wouldn’t shoot him if he ran?

How?

They already passed by him and didn't shoot him.

That doesn't mean anything. They blocked his path. Why would any sane person stop a truck in the middle of the street. You do that in Boston and we are swinging. That is just not a rational move. At least not here in the Northeast.

Yes, they blocked his path. That's what you do when you want to stop someone.

So you admit they wanted to stop him. What right did they have to do that?