2282
Comments (1538)
sorted by:
293
BigMikesDingALing 293 points ago +401 / -108

I never paid close attention to this case until yesterday. Watched the video and it very much seems like the jogger grabbed the shotgun and the shooter reacted. Definitely massive amounts of reasonable doubt that should not have led to a murder conviction.

edit: There was also video of an eyewitness third party who said the jogger initiated the altercation and grabbed the gun. Should have been a slam dunk aquittal.

387
Tiquortoo 387 points ago +637 / -250

They chased him down and tried to apprehend him in the street. They were the aggressor. Defending these idiots is not smart.

204
TheRougarou 204 points ago +234 / -30

I’m not defending these guys bc I don’t know about the case, but leaving justice and the defense of our cities up to the police is just as retarded. They are the bad guys now, so someone has to step up.

100
GoingCamaro 100 points ago +189 / -89

The law is the law. And misdemeanors do not fall under the jurisdiction of a citizen's arrest. There may be some states with more leniency, but typically non-violent crimes are handled by law enforcement and for good reason.

I agree we need reforms, but it starts at the education level, educating people on their rights and maybe some high school courses on police training so people know what to do and how to respond. Otherwise, no I don't want civilian vigilante's shooting people over tools. If someone is taking YOUR shit that belongs to YOU, fine. Third party you aren't directly involved with? Call the Sheriff.

119
Graceunderfire 119 points ago +155 / -36

Except they didnt shoot him for taking tools, they shot him for attacking them when they approached him. Is approaching people illegal?

165
RegularAmerican 165 points ago +185 / -20

I don't want leftists detaining me at gunpoint because of suspected crimes if I want to visit Portland or San Francisco. I know they aren't legally accountable the way police Technically are. I definetly understand the reasoning why we can't support that. It wouldn't go well.

56
senious 56 points ago +57 / -1

As the police in San Francisco literally tell you to work with burglars and not resist them in any way while simultaneously refusing to come out and actually deal with these crimes. I'm kind of flabbergasted that you don't understand that the police aren't going to help you any longer.

20
HeavyMetalPatriot 20 points ago +21 / -1

LAPD sent out the same notice to COMPLY with the demands of criminals. So if they want to rape your daughter, don't you dare cause them any upset.

20
RegularAmerican 20 points ago +27 / -7

There's a reason I don't go to places like that. I know they won't protect me. It's funny tho that people like you think the court and a jury will protect you for doing the right thing in today's climate. That is really misguided.

I will resist no matter what the police, the media, or anyone tells me I should do if I'm about to be harmed or killed. I'd also protect myself from a government thug the same way I would a street thug. I do not discriminate when it comes to self defense. If you're a threat you're a threat. I also think it's not wise to go chasing down what you think is a threat. Because there's alot of people who will shoot you if you try to stop them. Arbery was not armed. If he was the mcmichales would have been knowingly entering a shootout. they actually got lucky.

I'm not gonna say Arbery was a good boy who dindu anything wrong. And I'm not going to say the dad and son are guilty of murder. But this is a really dumb one to get behind. I think that's what the left wants so they can paint the picture of us they already have.

2
jomten 2 points ago +2 / -0

We need to learn to stop being so tethered to any particular location.

If the local mafia doesn't want to protect the people paying the protection money, we can move somewhere they will.

46
tucker2020 46 points ago +52 / -6

100%

9
BidenLikesMiners 9 points ago +12 / -3

UFCKING BIGOTS, YOU WILL BE TAKEN IN FOR MISGENDERING THE GAY XIRS AT THE MANDATORY TRANS PARADE. THIS IS A SERIOUS HATE CRIME IN CA NOW

29
45fan 29 points ago +32 / -3

Would you be stupid enough to attack the people holding the guns?

33
SquiggyMcPepe 33 points ago +43 / -10

No, but I wouldn't go chasing after someone on the suspicion of theft and instead call the cops instead. I definitely would not go chasing after someone with shotguns. I'm sure the ahmed guy was scoping for future robberies but you can't just roll out in your pickup with two of your buddies with shotguns and go chasing in this current environment. They acted stupidly and are paying the price. Sucks but people need to think fully before they act nowadays.

17
RegularAmerican 17 points ago +21 / -4

No. I'd have already drawn and emptied my entire magazine the moment I felt I was being kidnapped or detained by someone armed. Although I'm not a burglary suspect and just a guy who likes to just follow the law I can't say I'd have the same level of expectation of guys running after me with guns. I'd assume it was to harm me not help.

5
notCIA 5 points ago +8 / -3

I would attack anyone I thought was going to kill me if I was unable to get away from them. Problem being I carry so the next goon squad that chases me down a public road pointing guns at me after I cut through their neighbors yard is getting aired out.

3
Firespawn 3 points ago +8 / -5

You never know. If you did nothing wrong (in your mind) and you were approached and put in a position to fear for your life, that's just something you don't know until put in that position. Might cross your mind that you could get the jump and take the gun, it's fight or flight mindset. Obviously he chose poorly, but to say you know what you'd do, when it was a split decision moment, is foolishness on yours and anyone else's part. He may have thought it was the only chance he had in that they were going to kill him regardless. Impossible for any of us to say, not being in his frame of mind.

1
chelbull1337 1 point ago +1 / -0

I see your point, but low IQ can lead someone to think that they are being attacked or about to be attacked when they are surrounded by strangers with guns.

At this point, the strangers with guns are giving the criminal a valid self defense case.

It is much WISER to just let cops handle things like this!

16
ottomanboyscout 16 points ago +16 / -0

The guy was a former cop turned P.I. and the neighborhood was instructed by the police officers to call him if there were more robberies because of the defend the police shit they said they didn't have the man power to look into the neighborhood thefts closer

2
notCIA 2 points ago +9 / -7

What was the end goal of the pursuit? If they didn't plan on having the cops come arrest him at some point, you are building a very damning explenation against them. If they did, why did they try to physically restrain him while brandishing firearms over a nonviolent crime? As for them being cops, I know plenty and they are very careful about use of force when dealing with nonviolent crimes. These guys knew better and shouldn't have tried to physically detain him, especially since he wasn't able to get away.

6
swifty123456 6 points ago +11 / -5

then dont got to commie shitholes! do you go to north korea? no then why the fuck would you go to portland and san fran

6
RegularAmerican 6 points ago +7 / -1

Pretty soon you will realize they've infected almost all parts of the US with the urban centers in particular. I don't think we should write those places off like north Korea. That's not our land. San Fran and Portland belong to us too and we have a say in the matter.

24
radioactiverobot 24 points ago +29 / -5

They approached him with guns drawn.

15
AlcoholicRetard 15 points ago +24 / -9

Much like the guy who got his arm blown off by Kyle.

6
brotatofarmer 6 points ago +10 / -4

Lol right? Thats a pretty good point.

3
notCIA 3 points ago +6 / -3

Quite literally. Simply change it so that Kyle had tresspassed right before this and Grosskruetz was attempting to be robocop and it's that situation.

1
justinkayz 1 point ago +1 / -0

Bye-cep had a gun...the "jogger" didn't

2
Hattmall 2 points ago +3 / -1

They actually didn't. When the shooting occured they were stopped and Arbery was running up behind them. They had followed him slowly until he turned around and went behind them, but he turned around again. At no point did they bring out guns until he was running up on the truck. The shooting happen only a few seconds after the first time he pulled the shotgun out.

18
Pepeflavorednoodles 18 points ago +35 / -17

The problem is they don’t even know he took the tools, and he ran, and they chased in trucks. You aren’t supposed to shoot somebody you caught breaking into your home if they saw your gun and ran for it. Once they leave your property law says this no longer merits a lethal response. And this was a lot less then that.

28
MAGAlifeChoseMe 28 points ago +36 / -8

They didn't shoot because he had stolen anything. They shot because he ran at them threw a haymaker and grabbed the barrel of the gun. But, don't let objective truth and reality get in your way.

If you want to argue that they shouldn't have followed him I'm down with that, but your assessment is retarded.

10
deleted 10 points ago +24 / -14
9
Pepeflavorednoodles 9 points ago +17 / -8

That’s the thing though. Because they followed him, they made a situation that would have been over keep going. Once they run, it’s over in the laws eyes for private citizens. He went for them after they made it clear it wasn’t over. That’s the part they shouldn’t have done.

3
paganbutterchurner 3 points ago +4 / -1

That doesn’t matter if they chase you down with shot guns drawn. They cornered him . Yea he shouldn’t have done that approached him. But how would you feel if 3 people chased you with guns. People’s other run or fight

2
Firespawn 2 points ago +11 / -9

You've obviously never heard of fight or flight. If you have, then in this moment, you're being intentionally obtuse. We have no audio and have no idea what was said, but if I'm thinking some strangers are likely going to kill me and I have a moment to defend myself, I'm taking it. Either way, it's likely I'm going to die... I'm going down fighting. Some of you refuse to put yourself on that side of the argument and it's pretty easy to see why.

-3
notCIA -3 points ago +5 / -8

You are like a leftist. They pursued him down the street while holding him at gunpoint. They got attacked because they brandished firearms and he had a credible fear for his life.

18
Hades440 18 points ago +22 / -4

They didn't shoot him for running. They didn't shoot him for stealing tools. They didn't shoot him for being suspicious. They shot him because he tried to take their gun and shoot them.

 

That may not qualify as self-defense because they went after him, but the only alternative is let him take the gun and shoot them and I won't support a justice system that says they're wrong for not letting him kill them. He made the choice to escalate the situation to life-and-death, not them.

5
FORMERCHILDSTAR 5 points ago +9 / -4

You're 95% correct, because it could be argued that they escalated the situation prior to Ahmaud grabbing the gun because they insisted on perusing a fleeing man. If they were actually sworn law enforcement they could have pursued him, but because they weren't they are not entitled to chase him.

2
MapleBaconWaffles 2 points ago +3 / -1

They chased him with guns drawn, and then stood in his way on the street. From his perspective, he has a legitimate concern they're going to shoot him whether he engages with them or not.

0
paganbutterchurner 0 points ago +3 / -3

Only alternative was a to let him take the gun?? Or don’t be a fucking retard and call the cops. Don’t chae people with guns drawn on a hunch

0
Pepeflavorednoodles 0 points ago +1 / -1

Legally they are the escalators. Shooting someone going for your gun is understandable. Making somebody feel like they have to go for your gun gets you in trouble.

-4
dissapointedokie -4 points ago +10 / -14

What a god damn moron you are, intentionally disingenuous.

“I won't support a justice system that says they're wrong for not letting him kill them.”

They started this situation. They chased him down with guns. He had a credible fear for his life in that situation just as you would. But somehow he was wrong for “not letting them kill him” and fighting back instead?

And then you guys wonder why people demonize us.

3
Brellin 3 points ago +4 / -1

one of the thefts involved a loaded pistol stolen out of someone's truck, there was the expectation that he could have been armed with said pistol.

0
MapleBaconWaffles 0 points ago +1 / -1

Yeah, but anyone could be armed. Not sure how much the theft really changes that.

0
Pepeflavorednoodles 0 points ago +1 / -1

Not enough. Again, the error was chasing in the first place.

8
deleted 8 points ago +12 / -4
-1
Veln74 -1 points ago +2 / -3

Not if you suspect Arbery had a gun which they knew he had from his previous criminal record dumbass.

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
3
Vectar 3 points ago +4 / -1

The problem is the false imprisonment, from what I understand. Them chasing him down and telling him to stay put is false imprisonment, which gives him the right to resist. You can't unlawfully detain someone with no evidence of anything happening.

3
deleted 3 points ago +5 / -2
2
Vectar 2 points ago +2 / -0

I was just relaying what I was hearing from other sources with more legal knowledge than myself. I'm not really trying to argue it.

There is a lot of contextual information around this situation that make it pretty foggy, such as the video of him there on other nights, him charging like you mentioned, etc.

1
Necrovoter 1 point ago +2 / -1

Them chasing him down and telling him to stay put is false imprisonment,

Citizens' arrest. Legal in Georgia at the time. This case has been public long enough for you to have seen that information - which means you are being intellectually dishonest.

3
Vectar 3 points ago +3 / -0

A private person may arrest an offender if the offense is committed in his presence or within his immediate knowledge. If the offense is a felony and the offender is escaping or attempting to escape, a private person may arrest him upon reasonable and probable grounds of suspicion.

To be clear, I don't think Arbery was there for any good reason. But they didn't witness him commit a crime in their presence.

42
victory2024 42 points ago +51 / -9

Citizens arrests are allowed for misdemeanors in Georgia. The judge made a mess of the jury instructions.

Also stealing property over $500 is a felony in Georgia, so this wasn't just a misdemeanor.

15
deleted 15 points ago +46 / -31
39
ChicagoforTrump 39 points ago +53 / -14

The kid routinely robbed homes in the neighborhood and used the jogging excuse. He was wearing boots so the joggin narrative is a lie. They had the right to make a citizen’s arrest. They were former law enforcement so they knew their rights. The boy attacked the old man and tried to take his gun. There was a fight over the shotgun and the boy was killed. It’s a clear case of self defense. There will be an appeal and hopefully justice will be served.

6
literallyhitler 6 points ago +27 / -21

They did not have the right to make a citizens arrest because they didn’t have probable cause, that was the whole issue.

Hence the false imprisonment charge.

5
Leeeashlee 5 points ago +13 / -8

No they aggressors he had nothing they didn’t see him do anything. I don’t want to be chased around on suspicion. Sorry but it’s was their fault

5
247MAGA 5 points ago +9 / -4

he in fact was wearing sneakers, not Timberland boots as was widely reported. Those sneakers however don't make him a "jogger", they were probably pristine Nikes or whatever.

3
radioactiverobot 3 points ago +11 / -8

No evidence of this. he was only seen on cameras trespassing. Nothing was stolen

1
Pepeflavorednoodles 1 point ago +8 / -7

They clearly did not know their rights. Or at least their lawyers didn’t.

11
deleted 11 points ago +20 / -9
11
Thrasymachus 11 points ago +12 / -1

Jesus, you're actually getting downvoted for this?

A lot of people here think they can The Law their way out of this, and may God have mercy on them when their ass is in a concrete hole in a secret prison with the key thrown away because they were so fucking stupid as to not see that there is no law; law is a collective agreement and collective agreements don't hold when half the citizens have been brainwashed and gaslit into wanting to kill the other half, and the state enforcement arm is a rogue occupational power representing foreign interests.

4
borntacticool 4 points ago +6 / -2

Agreed. If Rittenhouse was found guilty half these retards would be hammering "the law is the law" still. It's like they don't realize how close he got to being convicted. The very fact that he got off by the skin of his teeth is not a victory for the "rule of law".

HE SHOULDN'T HAVE BEEN CHARGED IN THE FIRST PLACE

THE RIOTERS SHOULD HAVE HAD THEIR HEADS CRACKED OPEN WITH BILLY CLUBS AS SOON AS THEY STARTED THE FIRST FIRE

The process was the punishment and he was denied his freedom for defending his own life.

This system is corrupt.

The government is corrupt.

The juries are corrupted.

The law is not the law.

Even when the correct verdict is arrived at, people are still being punished for exercising their rights and standing up for their communities.

So fuck off with your "law and order" cuckoldry. This system is dying and the sooner people realize it, the sooner we can put things back the way they are supposed to be.

3
SnowflakeJuice 3 points ago +12 / -9

Acually, it is consistent, this guy grabbed for the gun after being forcefully detained (kidnapped), therefore, they have no self defense claim

0
R-A-T-S- 0 points ago +3 / -3

We lose because we're inconsistent.

-13
aceshigh34 -13 points ago +4 / -17

dumb fucking clueless moron

-14
Leeeashlee -14 points ago +1 / -15

Yu0 scumbag and they aggressively went after him.

0
Veln74 0 points ago +2 / -2

No they didnt. Trying to stop and ask him to cooperate with an investigation because he fit a certain profile is not agression.

5
Druid_Con 5 points ago +7 / -2

Citizens arrest in this political climate is asking for prison. This was at the height of national joggery

5
TD_Covfefe_Crusader 5 points ago +5 / -0

Only because our justice system is completely corrupt. Law abiding citizens are now caught between criminal predators and malicious prosecution by the State.

2
Hattmall 2 points ago +2 / -0

The reality is that they failed by talking to police. If they hadn't given any statements they couldn't have been used against them. It's true that they never should have been charged, but it's not really something you can count on. They tried to be honest and open about it because they saw it as a tragedy while they were attempting to protect their neighborhood and follow the law.

1
notCIA 1 point ago +7 / -6

This was tresspassing, not theft. While they thought they recognized him, his current crime was simple tresspass.

2
MrCappuccino 2 points ago +4 / -2

Correct. In that state, presumably many others, you have to literally watch someone commit a felony. Then you make a citizens arrest. These guys also called the police and they said yeah, keep an eye on him or whatever. They also admitted, under oath or to the cops, they didn’t know if he was the guy stealing the other times. They didn’t watch him do this or have evidence of him committing the crimes. He heard them, then literally ran, they chased him down and he was unarmed. The video honestly probably got them convicted. In this case, the law was correct and they were wrong. Now it totally could have been him stealing, seemed like the jogger excuse was pretty weak. but again, they had no clue. Should’ve just told the cops we followed him and you guys should go talk to him. I don’t think they went out to kill him or it was racially motivated.

2
Hattmall 2 points ago +2 / -0

In Georgia, at the time, the citizens arrest law gave people the exact same power as police. So anything the police could have done a citizen could do. That means that a cop would be facing the same charges here. Except they wouldn't actually charge a cop with this stuff, but letter of the law at the time is citizens had the same power as police with regards to unwarranted citizens arrest and detaining someone.

It's very clear that a crime doesn't even have to happen, they just have to have a reasonable suspicion that it did, and probable cause to believe the person they are arresting would have done it.

0
TheCandorist 0 points ago +1 / -1

Misdemeanor is enough in Georgia. Fuck off

1
radioactiverobot 1 point ago +11 / -10

He didnt' have any stolen property on him

1
GoingCamaro 1 point ago +4 / -3

It was never confirmed he stole anything and the other men didn't see anything. Also as someone tried to argue, "keeping an eye on him" does not mean confront and apprehend.

-1
Hattmall -1 points ago +1 / -2

They didn't do that though. When he was shot he was running up from behind them after they were stopped waiting on police that they called.

33
spezisapedo2 33 points ago +40 / -7

They were calling law enforcement when Arbery tried to grab their shotgun. He was at a far distance and could have ran away from the gun, instead he ran at an idlling car at the person holding (but not shooting) his firearm.

-6
247MAGA -6 points ago +7 / -13

which the prosecution argued was justified because he was being "falsely imprisoned". compared it to a store clerk attacking a robber with a gun. I get what they're saying, but this case was just messy. these guys were dumb but I don't think they should get murder. I also don't want vigilante justice but I get why people are saying "hey, the police are failing us, what are we supposed to do?". I wouldn't want to be on that jury.

4
Thrasymachus 4 points ago +6 / -2

That's exactly the jury I would like to have been on.

-1
GoingCamaro -1 points ago +3 / -4

They were policing a construction site that had nothing to do with them. The excuses of failure of Law Enforcement is retarded unless you have a paper trail. If your city police fail to uphold the law, well, you should call the Sheriff in the first place, but they are your next up and if they fail then you call the state police and if they fail then you present this failure before a general assembly and bring attention to your local representatives.

THEN after all of that when you see someone trespassing a construction site you... call the police and leave it be. Unless someone is stealing YOUR shit, it's not your business to play cowboy. And if we want to change those laws then police academy course requirements in high school are needed first.

1
Necrovoter 1 point ago +1 / -0

THEN after all of that when you see someone trespassing a construction site you... call the police and leave it be. Unless someone is stealing YOUR shit, it's not your business to play cowboy.

Tell that to California merchants who are legally obligated to just stand by and let people steal things (so long as it is under a certain dollar amount).

Now go watch some videos of people (even kids) being hit by cars and everyone just walking on by, because it's not their business to play cowboy. With the mindset you are advocating, and the continuing degradation of police not enforcing the law, the law becoming more slack, and no penalties being applied, or criminals being held - we will end up with a LOT more violence and a LOT more vigilantism.

You are too shortsighted to see this. That's OK - you will see it happen anyway during your lifetime and you can deceive yourself into thinking that no one could have predicted it.

15
muslimporn 15 points ago +24 / -9

They don't actually arrest him in any meaningful way which makes most of the claims around that moot.

Arbery jumps one of them before there's any kind of meaningful exchange. There's a screw up in that they created a path to the guy with the gun behind the car allowing Arbery to easily get the jump on him.

You have some mess ups but nothing anywhere near murder. As usual, you have men put in jail for being white in this case.

-1
GoingCamaro -1 points ago +6 / -7

No. They wouldn't be in jail if they called the police and didn't play rent-a-cop

7
Truglow 7 points ago +9 / -2

You are wrong on the misdemeanor charge. Any one even entering a construction site without permission is a felony. These morons should have never aproached him but the video shows the jogger pulling the shotgun away from one of the individuals causing a discharge.
Should have called the cops and let them deal with it. Screwed up all the way around.

4
GoingCamaro 4 points ago +7 / -3

Unless you have a more clear source:

https://law.justia.com/codes/georgia/2010/title-16/chapter-7/article-2/part-1/16-7-21

And even if it is a felony, one, that is ridiculous and two, it's not a violent crime and not worth shooting or apprehending over without proper authority.

2
Truglow 2 points ago +2 / -0

It has nothing to do with with thief it's all about liability. If someone enters the property and injuries themselves it takes the responsibility off the builder.As I said they should have called LE instead. Dont quote code instead of G.S.S. and then remark " even if it's a felony " . Put your emotions aside and think logically.

3
TheMemeSpiceMustFlow 3 points ago +6 / -3

They testified they never saw him enter the house so they had no cause to make a citizens arrest is what it came down to.

Not sure what the law is there, but I agree that people will inevitably have to stand up if police can't or won't do their job. However, bad idea to go chasing someone while carrying a gun regardless of what citizens arrest laws are. If they resist and you kill them it can be argued they felt their life was in danger since they can't read your mind and had no idea you didn't intend to kill them. Unless you know for a fact they just committed a capital offensive and you know you'd win in court if you kill them, don't chase.

2
TrollHunter2021 2 points ago +2 / -0

If you don't Know about the case why the hell bother commenting?!?!? This sub is 🤡🌎💩

1
TheRougarou 1 point ago +1 / -0

As in I haven’t followed the court case and seen all the evidence. I do know about the jogger event as much as we got from posts here.

1
QLARP 1 point ago +1 / -0

If you think doing a citizens arrest with how the Justice system in this country is set up is a good idea you are nuts.

1
GoingCamaro 1 point ago +2 / -1

There's a reason citizen's arrests are typically for felonies.

0
Necrovoter 0 points ago +1 / -1

If you think doing a citizens arrest with how the Justice system in this country is set up is a good idea you are nuts.

There's a yuge difference between whether something is a good idea, and whether it is legal, justified or moral.

If a pack of thugs is raping your daughter in front of you, and you don't have a weapon, it might not "be a good idea" to try and stop the rape. It would be morally repugnant to stand by and do nothing.

1
QLARP 1 point ago +1 / -0

You are great at analogies.

1
Necrovoter 1 point ago +1 / -0

You are great at standing by and watching the world burn. I am especially amazed at how you can even stand without a backbone.

1
QLARP 1 point ago +1 / -0

Citizens arrest on a guy who looked like the guy who was casing your neighbors house for tools to steal.

And gang rape of your daughter and you have no weapons.

I dub you the master of analogies

0
notCIA 0 points ago +11 / -11

The problem is they had already accomplished their job. He was trespassing in their neighborhoods under construction home and they chased him off. I'm 179% with them until they took off down the street waving shotguns around. Once he's back on public property and actively fleeing, you can't claim self defense. For one, he didn't attack anyone until they had gotten to fisticuffs distance while brandishing firearms. This would be like if Rosenbaum had walked into the car lot and Kenosha Kyle had chased him away down the road and then blasted him when he turned around to face the armed dude running after him down a public roadway, once again, for simple tresspass.

2
FORMERCHILDSTAR 2 points ago +8 / -6

Right. Once Ahmaud begins to retreat or flee, from a legal perspective those chasing him become the aggressors. Even if the Mcmichaels are 100% correct in their reasonable suspicions or probable cause they share a responsibility for the tragic consequences of their aggressiveness. Unless they were eyewitnesses to a serious violent crime, I think the law requires people to cease perusing a fleeing or retreating suspect or perpetrator.

4
notCIA 4 points ago +7 / -3

I think that's the hang up for everyone here is we understand this guy was probably a thief. He probably did all the robberies they thought he did. They didn't go about their business well and left his legal self defense arguement wide open because they got hot heads. You cannot just chase someone down a road and hold them at gunpoint when they've displayed no tendency toward violence whatsoever.

2
Big_Sam_Handwich 2 points ago +2 / -0

Nope. According to apple news which popped up on my phone today, He was a black man who was murdered while jogging

2
FORMERCHILDSTAR 2 points ago +4 / -2

Right. There is an invisible fine line that can be crossed by law abiding citizens if they become too persistent in their physical perusal of a suspect, especially a fleeing suspect that seems to only want to escape and not fight. Ahmaud was probably a nuisance and thief, but once he's fleeing, game over, for the time being.

4
borntacticool 4 points ago +6 / -2

There's nothing "tragic" about a career criminal and burglar being killed.

Let's stop being morons and pretending we only know what the jury knew (they didn't know about his criminal history of stealing and fleeing the police).

He was running because he was caught in an attempted burglary and was trying to flee justice like he has a record of doing. When he saw they weren't going away and the police were going to catch him, he tried to kill the witnesses. You have to sit there and just flat out make up shit to convince yourself this isn't the case. He's a convicted thief and a criminal.

Let's stop pretending. His behavior is totally consistent with his prior convictions of stealing, running and fighting with police. The court system may try to shield the jury from that, but I'm under no obligation to deny myself common sense just because the jury was.

3
TD_Covfefe_Crusader 3 points ago +4 / -1

...I think the law requires people to cease perusing a fleeing or retreating suspect or perpetrator.

Why do you think that? Do you have a source? Georgia does have a citizen's arrest law and I found no mention of a requirement to cease pursuit. It would make no sense to prohibit pursuit because the inclination of most criminals is to flee the scene of the crime, which would negate the whole concept of "citizen's arrest".

3
borntacticool 3 points ago +4 / -1

He can't find it because there is no such law. The fact is their conduct was totally within the law. Just because the jury disagreed doesn't mean that they were right.

1
FORMERCHILDSTAR 1 point ago +1 / -0

I believe in most states once a perp or suspect is fleeing from a citizen they are deemed no longer a threat and you can't forceably detain them or hurt them. You can probably observe them from a distance until police arrive, but you can't interfere with their movement, unless they become an imminent threat again. Maybe Georgia is different, but then you have to ask yourself how long can a citizen legally follow or seek to detain another citizen, one hour? Two days? A week? 500 miles? A year? You obviously can't track another citizen indefinitely. That's why I say in most cases you must cease seeking to detain the suspect once they flee or no longer present a threat.

1
TD_Covfefe_Crusader 1 point ago +1 / -0

You seem to be conflating self defense with citizen's arrest. When it comes to self defense, you are correct that when someone is fleeing or is no longer a threat then you cannot use defensive force against them. There is no such restriction on pursuing someone to make a citizen's arrest. Citizen's arrests involve the same pursuit and detention that a law enforcement arrest does. Most states have citizen's arrest laws and there is normally stipulation in those laws regarding immediately contacting law enforcement to remand the arrestee into their custody.

If you can find a state that has laws precluding pursuit, please post the source. I doubt it.

1
Necrovoter 1 point ago +1 / -0

I believe in most states

This isn't about beliefs. It is about Georgia's law, which at the time allowed more than most other states.

You can probably observe them from a distance until police arrive, but you can't interfere with their movement

"Arrest" as in citizens' arrest, doesn't mean observe from a distance.
Arrest is: "a seizure or forcible restraint"

https://solutions-institute.org/tools/citizens-arrest-laws-by-state/

1
Necrovoter 1 point ago +1 / -0

Right. Once Ahmaud begins to retreat or flee,

He didn't choose to flee. He chose to close in and attack.

2
FORMERCHILDSTAR 2 points ago +2 / -0

He had fled for several minutes before he attacked. Yes, once he attacked and went for the gun then it's a case of self defense...maybe for both parties. I don't fully agree with the verdict, but I think the rationale behind it from the juries perspective is that a citizen can't persist in a pursuit of a suspect that is not an imminent threat. If an Avenue of escape was available for Ahmaud they were to allow him to flee and track him from a distance until police arrived. Yes. Ahmaud closed in on them and initiated the attack, but that was after it was obvious he had no intention of cooperating with a citizens arrest. I do not believe the punishment of the Mcmichaels fits the infraction of whatever Georgia laws were possibly violated.

2
TD_Covfefe_Crusader 2 points ago +4 / -2

When he's grabbing for the gun, he's not fleeing. The Rosenbaum situation is the same other than the party doing the pursuit. Kyle would be dead now if he allowed Rosenbaum to take his gun, and it's the same for these guys.

5
notCIA 5 points ago +6 / -1

Yes, except Kyle did not pursue Rosenbaum. Are you well? They were the aggressors that night. Kyle would be rotting in prison if he had chased Rosenbaum and Shot him when Rosenbaum turned to grab his gun as Kyle would have been the aggressor.

4
TD_Covfefe_Crusader 4 points ago +5 / -1

So when the police pursue a fleeing suspect and hold them at gunpoint, the suspect should be able to grab a gun from the police because they are the "aggressors"?

These guys had a reason to pursue the jogger, and the jogger would still be alive if he either kept running or just waited for the police to arrive. He chose instead to attempt to grab a gun, which will result in getting shot nearly 100% of the time.

0
notCIA 0 points ago +4 / -4

The police can't hold a fleeing suspect at gunpoint unless he has committed a violent act or poses a specific danger to others. You cannot shoot someone for shoplifting and running away, fucking kek. If arbory had done something, anything to indicate he intended to harm them for them catching him tresspassing, this would be a different story, but his only reaction was to run until they pursued him and brandished firearms.

1
Necrovoter 1 point ago +1 / -0

Yes, except Kyle did not pursue Rosenbaum.

If you watched the video, then you saw a LOT of people pursuing Kyle. If Kyle had shot and killed all of them, would the jury have found him not guilty?

Nope. Kyle shot the ones who closed in on him. The jogger closed in, and got shot. The jogger was in a position to get away, but the jogger chased down and attacked the guy who shot him.

Your name says you aren't CIA, but your logic on this is definitely CIA. Unless, you haven't seen the full video, and if you haven't, you should watch it.

1
QLARP 1 point ago +1 / -0

Why would you do a citizens arrest with how DAs are this day a d age.

2
TD_Covfefe_Crusader 2 points ago +2 / -0

I wouldn't, but that doesn't mean that these guys should have been convicted.

44
based_trekkie 44 points ago +54 / -10

True, if the may is scared ie. running from you there is no reasonable self defense, however when he turned and went to grab shot gun then there is issue of self defense, but it was "provoked" by chasing him.

This is usually WHY you cannot shoot people ( even if they assaulted you on your property ) if they are in the process of running away.

26
spezisapedo2 26 points ago +33 / -7

but he was NOT running away. McMichaels was parked idlling the car, and Arbury ran up TO HIM and grabbed his gun.

9
deleted 9 points ago +11 / -2
0
Crucial8GB 0 points ago +3 / -3

But they were chasing him, he just got tired of running.

0
Necrovoter 0 points ago +1 / -1

he just got tired of running.

He could have sat down and taken a break. Instead he chose to attack them.

-1
Ivleeeg -1 points ago +26 / -27

But they started the confrontation by chasing him down.

This is not a self defense case, this is easily premeditated murder. They chased him down and when he tried to defend himself from his aggressors, the aggressors shot him. Case closed.

10
45fan 10 points ago +13 / -3

Retarded take. If it was premeditated they wouldn't have hesitated in shooting him.

If I recall the video correctly the super jogger yanks several times on the barrel of a shotgun and funny enough barrel goes out, trigger pulls back.

At best it's manslaughter.

Another perspective. If they were wrong to have shot super jogger in that moment then what would have been the correct course of action? Drop the shotgun to the enraged man grasping for it?

-11
PraiseBeToScience -11 points ago +7 / -18

If they were wrong to have shot super jogger in that moment then what would have been the correct course of action? Drop the shotgun to the enraged man grasping for it?

This is like defending a guy who shoots a clerk in a liquor store robbery because "what else was he going to do? Let the clerk take his gun?"

4
TD_Covfefe_Crusader 4 points ago +5 / -1

This is a false equivalency.

1
deleted 1 point ago +6 / -5
1
Necrovoter 1 point ago +2 / -1

This is like defending a guy who shoots a clerk in a liquor store robbery because "what else was he going to do? Let the clerk take his gun?"

It is the exact opposite of that. It is like a clerk who draws a gun on a would be robber and tells him to stay there and wait for the police, but the robber tries to grab the gun and gets shot.

4
deleted 4 points ago +10 / -6
5
Cdogger 5 points ago +14 / -9

The dad literally said to cops "we trapped him like a rat" they were chasing him down and blocking the road. They witnessed no crime other than the ones they themselves were committing

5
unable_afternoon 5 points ago +7 / -2

Yeah blocking the road, to a person on foot. They were in a truck on the road. Armehd was on foot, in the middle of the road. One of these is where it belongs and the other isn’t. Roberry could have been anywhere except the road, but for some reason he was in the road. Weird

4
Ponzo 4 points ago +14 / -10

They chased him down, stopped in front of him, one fat fuck got out with a shotgun while the other stood on the truck bed, tried to do a citizens arrest which under georgia law you can only do if you directly witness the crime, retard on the truck bed fired a warning shot, arbery tries to grab the shotgun and gets shot after a struggle.

Those fat fucks should have just called the cops and followed arbery until cops arrived. If they would have done that to someone with a concealed carry permit, the guy would have been in the right to shoot them in self defense.

8
victory2024 8 points ago +8 / -0

tried to do a citizens arrest which under georgia law you can only do if you directly witness the crime,

That's only the rule for misdemeanors, not felonies. The judge screwed up the jury instructions there.

8
unable_afternoon 8 points ago +9 / -1

How the fuck did they stop in front of him if they were parked on the road.

they should have just followed him until the cops arrived

That’s exactly what they were doing until armehd roberry attacked.

2
angryamerican1964 2 points ago +2 / -0

This 1000 times We dont need assholes like these 3 morons

You cant chase somedown for simple tresspass and threaten them with shotguns

People defending this stupid crap are playing into the hands of the lefts attempt to ban self defence and guns

-1
Logan3434 -1 points ago +3 / -4

If they followed him they could have kept a distance and not jumped out with their guns.

1
Hattmall 1 point ago +2 / -1

They did until he turned around. Then he ran back behind them. Then turned around again and ran at them. They didn't get out of the truck until t was clear he wasn't running by the truck he was running at it.

-7
PraiseBeToScience -7 points ago +8 / -15

Barely two weeks after Rittenhouse and now this sub of greasy rednecks is going with 'it doesn't matter what the law says' and 'he shouldn't have been there'.

They were convicted by their own video. They may have gotten away with it, except their buddy decided to capture the moment on his phone because he was so excited. That's how dumb they are.

They deserve to be in prison just for being that stupid, honestly.

7
AlexLucian 7 points ago +10 / -3

Really? I’m seeing a heated debate. Get your eyes checked, you CUNT.

-1
Veln74 -1 points ago +1 / -2

"It doesnt matter what the law is". That was never the main argument for his defense. It was that Rittenhouse was justified in shooting in self defense.

"He shouldnt have been there" yeah except the difference is that Rittenhouse was defending against rioters. Arbory had a past criminal record which they knew about and fit a profile.

Youre a dumbass.

2
TD_Covfefe_Crusader 2 points ago +2 / -0

When you attempt to grab a weapon from someone who has you at gunpoint, you are going to be shot almost every time, and it doesn't matter who is behind the trigger, law enforcement, military, or private citizen.

Do you consider the police to be the aggressors when they hold criminals at gunpoint? With no right to defend themselves if the criminal goes for their gun?

1
GodSaveTheWest 1 point ago +1 / -0

this is easily premeditated murder

no it isnt. For that there would need to be intent and a plan to kill. they also wouldnt have called the cops beforehand. He pulled the trigger in self defense, if he didnt the jogger very well could have taken the gun and shot him with it.

But yes they shouldnt have followed him.

8
WakingKnowledge 8 points ago +10 / -2

that is why you need automatic guns turrets like in Fallout.

3
SuperNards 3 points ago +3 / -0

Funnily enough I think that's actually illegal in most states as it qualifies as booby trapping. ie: setting up an unmanned trap with the intention to main or kill. I remember there was a case where a guy was arrested for making a home made turret for home defense. Might be mistaken on the specifics though

0
WakingKnowledge 0 points ago +1 / -1

Who's to say who owns them?

-4
PraiseBeToScience -4 points ago +1 / -5

What if it was a remote turret?

7
tluther01 7 points ago +9 / -2

so by your logic rosenbaum was justified in attacking kyle when he turned around?

-1
GoodCompanyInHell -1 points ago +7 / -8

Rosenbaum chased Kyle. The McMichael's chased AA. That's why both Kyle and AA have claims to self defense. AA's dead, Kyle was a badass.

3
tluther01 3 points ago +9 / -6

agree..aa is dead because the guys chasing him murdered him..he had every right to grab the gun to try and defend himself..moral of the story is to not play police officer

0
Veln74 0 points ago +1 / -1

They murdered him because aa launched at him and tried to attack him.

2
Veln74 2 points ago +2 / -0

False comparison. Rosenbaum threatened to kill him. The McMichaels did not. They were trying to question him and ask him to cooperate in an investigation. Big difference.

4
Basedblkman88 4 points ago +5 / -1

Got news for you.

You can legally shoot a fleeing felon.

-4
GoingCamaro -4 points ago +20 / -24

Exactly. They had no cause for playing cop in this situation. Theft is not typically a felony offense and therefore a citizen's arrest does not apply.

13
Basedblkman88 13 points ago +19 / -6

The world you think you're living in doesn't exist anymore.

-5
PraiseBeToScience -5 points ago +8 / -13

Do you camp at your local stop sign and chase people down in your truck, waving a gun at them, because they didn't come to a full and complete stop?

12
Basedblkman88 12 points ago +13 / -1

Are you lost because it sounds like I'm on reddit. Thats not what happened in any way nor an analogy thats even close.

If my neighbor was being robbed repeatedly and asked me to keep an eye out for a jogger who keeps stealing tools and materials, I would.

-2
Quest723 -2 points ago +3 / -5

and if that jogger came by while you were outside and flashed a pistol, you'd wonder how long it took before your family member gets shot in a B&E

-3
PraiseBeToScience -3 points ago +2 / -5

An utterly empty-ass house, like, doesn't even have walls up, is not "your neighbor".

9
MrWombatt 9 points ago +11 / -2

Burglary is a felony in GA.

1
PraiseBeToScience 1 point ago +12 / -11

Too bad he didn't burgle anything, the fact that he was carrying nothing, left the house with nothing, and had nothing in his possession kind of means they had zero reason to suspect 'burglary'.

1
Necrovoter 1 point ago +1 / -0

the fact that he was carrying nothing,

Not even a hammer?

0
Veln74 0 points ago +1 / -1

Thats a fucking stupid argument. Just because he didnt have anything on him doesnt mean they didnt have reason to suspect he did. Who knows. He mightve dropped it as he was running away because he didnt want to be caught.

3
PraiseBeToScience 3 points ago +3 / -0

If you're chasing down people because you merely suspect them of crime you're no fucking better than a mask Karen. Mind your own business you busybody lowlife.

1
Necrovoter 1 point ago +1 / -0

They had no cause for playing cop in this situation

Georgia law says they did. Go ahead, keep living in a delusional world. Pretend that if the law allows you to protect your own home with deadly force and someone breaks in, that you won't end up in jail for shooting them.

Someone like yourself will surely chime in with "Going Camaro had no cause for playing cop when the person broke into their home, they should have just called the police and waited."

No, I am not proposing a strawman. I am saying we are already living in a slippery slope clown world in which legal actions against criminals are being prosecuted, and people like yourself are helping to make this happen.

If Georgia law allowed a citizen's arrest (and it did), then what happened was entirely on Ahmed Robbery. If Georgia law didn't allow a citizen's arrest under the exact circumstances, then the people trying to stop him should have been charged with false arrest. Ahmed attacked THEM when he closed in.

1
deleted 1 point ago +5 / -4
7
247MAGA 7 points ago +8 / -1

the defense argued that they were making a citizen's arrest, then the judge said that's not how that law works. it blew up their entire defense- that matter should've been determined in pretrial.

42
deleted 42 points ago +46 / -4
34
DonJr2024 34 points ago +45 / -11

Won't be a popular answer here, but if a guy is nowhere near your property and is not attacking you, you really should just call the police and maybe follow him from a safe distance.

Did they intend to murder him? No. Was he a robber? Probably. Did he stupidly grab at the gun? Yes.

Doesn't matter. We saw how close Kyle's trial was and that thing shouldn't have ever gone to trial.

12
sorrytodisagree 12 points ago +16 / -4

Police are public servants hired to do the dirty job of dealing with criminals. This delegation doesn't deprive regular citizens from their right to lawful action including a citizen's arrest. It may be dangerous and foolish to risk being attacked by a burglar instead of letting the police gamble their lives on your behalf, but that doesn't make it wrong.

8
45fan 8 points ago +12 / -4

This. Police are civilians.

3
sorrytodisagree 3 points ago +4 / -1

And the libtards are the ones constantly arguing the police are our most racist, evil, and incompetent demographic. After watching the enforcement of unconstitutional mandates, and the recent lawlessness of the FBI, they might not be too far off.

-1
SirPokeSmottington -1 points ago +2 / -3

Police are civilians.

Actually they are not.

I'm not sticking up for them, I'm pointing out, that you cannot go after them legally as them being civilians, because they are not.

ex. Cops can own fully automatic weapons. Personally. You cannot.

0
sorrytodisagree 0 points ago +1 / -1

You can own fully automatic weapons, federal rules are the same for cops. Cops can possess full auto weapons on the job depending on policy, doesn't give them any ownership privileges. Cops are going to have an easier time getting the LEO sign off for FFA in blue areas though.

10
aceshigh34 10 points ago +17 / -7

he was attacking you dumb fuck. watch the video

10
Ivleeeg 10 points ago +21 / -11

Okay reverse the roles here.

Imagine being chased by some armed hooligans then turning around and shooting them while they're chasing you. Self defense. Easily. That's what arbury did but instead of shooting them he tried to disarm them.

7
Killroyomega 7 points ago +8 / -1

They weren't "some armed hooligans."

The hooligan was the jogger who was caught trespassing multiple times and all evidence pointed towards him being a thief.

Are you going to argue, on a conservative forum, that a community has no right to police itself? That it should just ignore the jogger and hope that eventually, at some point, maybe, the police might do something about him?

6
Thrasymachus 6 points ago +6 / -0

Are you going to argue, on a conservative forum, that a community has no right to police itself?

Literally half this thread is comprised of morons arguing exactly that, interspersed with almost unbelievably pathetic posts amounting to "Please, please, please don't call me racist, if I use the phrase "good ol' boys" maybe I'll get MSNBC to reapprove my BIPOC-Ally Not Racist pass for another week!" It's frankly unbelievable how pozzed this thread is.

6
AlcoholicRetard 6 points ago +17 / -11

Yeah these guys basically did the same thing as Gaige Grosskreutz

5
ScoonerTuna 5 points ago +6 / -1

He could have run left or right onto anyone’s front lawn and into their back yard. Change my mind.

2
Elfer 2 points ago +2 / -0

This is almost exactly the argument that Binger tried to use about Rittenhouse - he could have just kept running. Are you saying that Arbery had a duty to retreat? In Georgia?

3
SirPokeSmottington 3 points ago +3 / -0

Imagine being chased by some armed hooligans

I can do that! Do I ALSO imagine that I was illegally on someone else's property after being illegally on someone else's property many times?

1
FORMERCHILDSTAR 1 point ago +3 / -2

This is correct. And if it turned out Ahmaud was innocent of any theft, he would have been exonerated today. But if it was proven he had burglarized a home in the vicinity he would probably have been found guilty of murder.

-1
Leeeashlee -1 points ago +1 / -2

I’m k do if someone is chasing you down your not going to protect yourself

10
unable_afternoon 10 points ago +13 / -3

They did call the police and were following him from a safe distance. It only turned unsafe when the jogger decided to attack.

0
NickAtNight 0 points ago +4 / -4

Attempting to block the road while having another vehicle or chase him?

6
SirPokeSmottington 6 points ago +6 / -0

Attempting to block the road while having another vehicle or chase him?

You watch too much TV and movies.

MOVE OFF OF THE FUCKING ROAD BECAUSE YOU CAN DO THAT WITH LEGS.

You absolutely cannot "BLOCK" a human being with TWO CARS.

You people are stupid.

1
Necrovoter 1 point ago +1 / -0

The people making such comments didn't watch the full video.

1
NickAtNight 1 point ago +1 / -0

Well, we all know Arbery went onto the shoulder to go around the right side of the truck.

When the fat boy stepped round the front of the truck and pointed a shot gun at him !

0
UNITED_WE_STAND1776 0 points ago +8 / -8

I'm confused.

They were following him in a truck, the father is in the bed, the son was driving.

Aubry was unarmed yet you say he attacked them, if someone is attacking me in my vehicle I lock the door. yet we clearly see the son struggling outside the truck. How did he get out side the truck? Did Aubry rip him out with shotgun in hand?

I'm guessing no, I'm guessing the more plausible explanation is the son wanted to play tough guy Rent-a-Cop and got out of the truck gun in hand then the situation escalated from there.

They could have simply followed him until the cops took over.

Was Aubry a shitbag? Yes

But these dumbfucks deserve everything they got.

10
unable_afternoon 10 points ago +10 / -0

If somebody tries to grab your gun then you’re being attacked and have to assume that your attacker intends to take your gun and shoot you with it

-2
UNITED_WE_STAND1776 -2 points ago +4 / -6

Which is exactly what happened to Rittenhouse, BUT he he was not the pursuer he was being chased. If he had waived his gun at someone who then attempted to disarm him, he could have been convicted as well since he would have been the aggressor.

4
FORMERCHILDSTAR 4 points ago +5 / -1

The son testified he exited the truck because he lost sight of Ahmaud's hands and was afraid he might have a weapon. Which explanation makes sense.

2
Hattmall 2 points ago +2 / -0

They don't know he's unarmed... He turned around and ran at them when the truck is stopped. You sit in the truck and take a round to the face and dude gets a new truck for a few days until the cops get him. We don't have to pretend to be the jury, we know Arbery was a criminal with a violent history, on probation and a repeated thief. Videos of his previous police encounters seem to indicate he wasn't mentally competent at a normal level. This was the 3rd of 4th time he had been caught in this neighborhood trespassing and ran away. Things, including guns have gone missing recently. I feel bad for Arbery, I really do, society and people failed him in many ways, but destroying another family of law abiding citizens trying to protect their working class neighborhood is terrible.

7
Killroyomega 7 points ago +8 / -1

you really should just call the police

Let me repeat what I just said:

This was reported to the local police multiple times and they couldn't do anything about it.

At one point the police organized a manhunt with the local community to search for the jogger. They were told to presume that the jogger was armed.

This is a complete failure of the police who acknowledged their failure and pushed off their supposed duty to the community itself.

In the old days it was simply assumed that it was the responsibility of a community to solve its own issues.

Now, suddenly, you're being told to give up all power and authority to the police and to do absolutely nothing when the police inevitably prove themselves incompetent and/or corrupt.

Do you see where this is heading yet?

1
TD_Covfefe_Crusader 1 point ago +1 / -0

I agree with you, but only because our criminal justice system is completely corrupt. Intervening in any crime or even defending yourself almost guarantees a malicious prosecution by communist funded prosecutors and a trial under a communist appointed judge with a jury of useful idiots.

This is why criminals are brazenly stealing shit now, because they know they are protected. It won't end well for our society.

15
kornesque 15 points ago +19 / -4

From my understanding the jogger had been threatening the neighborhood for a while and no action was taken despite repeated calls for help. Methinks these guys finally got fed up.

0
NickAtNight 0 points ago +7 / -7

Your understanding is incorrect !

-3
PraiseBeToScience -3 points ago +7 / -10

Is there an actual source for this, because last I heard about it, this was the claim, but police logs showed there was almost no issues in the neighborhood, and nobody had reported anything stolen in a while.

4
Quest723 4 points ago +4 / -0

IIRC, it was one of the early police interviews, one of the nights previous he came through and flashed a handgun to Arbery Sr in a "mine yo bidness" kind of way.

2
kornesque 2 points ago +3 / -1

I can't recall the source, maybe neighbor interviews? I dug in back when it happened but haven't really followed much since. The above is just how I remember it.

1
borntacticool 1 point ago +1 / -0

They created a facebook group and neighborhood watch just to talk about crimes to BOLO, items being reported stolen, and lamenting that the police were not able to show up in time to stop it.

They even said they weren't reporting crimes because the criminals always got away.

14
RussianActual 14 points ago +15 / -1

Again the case where an acting party was protecting the community and acting on it's instructions but then bears the whole responsibility while others pretend they had nothing to do with it.

2
HeavyMetalPatriot 2 points ago +3 / -1

Here's what I learned. If you "back the blue", they will fuck you when the mob shows up.

-2
Sam0Mclone -2 points ago +3 / -5

Do you have a source for the police "recruiting" randos to some wild west posse to hunt down someone specific. I'm not sure that's cool.

4
unable_afternoon 4 points ago +6 / -2

Who said they were hunting him? They were following him while they waited for police to arrive, and then he attacked them because he was upset that he got caught

0
Sam0Mclone 0 points ago +1 / -1

Comment I was replying to is gone.

3
Killroyomega 3 points ago +3 / -0

It was testified to in the trial by multiple parties.

41
trainrekt 41 points ago +49 / -8

He around the rear of the passenger side and then made a 90 degree turn over to the driver side to engage in an altercation. He could have kept running in the straight line to evade. This is a political show trial.

17
RussianActual 17 points ago +19 / -2

Why did he just not ask guys why are you stopping me, if you want to call the police that's ok.

8
unable_afternoon 8 points ago +9 / -1

Because he knew what his intentions were all those times he had been trespassing and he knew he was caught.

5
TexanRattlesnake 5 points ago +9 / -4

True. But to be fair if two white, black or any other color men tried to stop me while jogging and accused me of a crime I would be pissed. This kind of sort of happened to me once. Guy thought my dog had eaten his chickens said he was armed I walked away and said shoot me in the back motherfucker.

10
unable_afternoon 10 points ago +10 / -0

They didn’t try to stop him at all. They were simply following him. He wasn’t “out jogging either”. He was wearing cargo shorts and work boots and was a known trespasser

1
MapleBaconWaffles 1 point ago +1 / -0

They pulled up in front of him, got out of their truck and told him they wanted to talk to him. It seemed obvious to me when watching it that they were trying to stop him.

I assume they wouldn't have shot him if he just kept running, but I can see why he reasonably might not have made that assumption.

8
deleted 8 points ago +11 / -3
6
RussianActual 6 points ago +8 / -2

Yeah I mean yeah, he also might have been scared thinking they were going to kill him or abduct him.

Imagine 3 Mexican cartel looking guys confront you with guns, they might have looked like that to him.

But first of all are the charges too stiff? There is nothing to indicate they planned on killing him

1
MapleBaconWaffles 1 point ago +1 / -0

The charge was "felony murder". I had to look it up. This definition is from Texas, but it's probably close enough:

committing or attempting to commit a felony, other than manslaughter, during the course of which a person commits (or attempts) an act that is clearly dangerous to human life and causes the death of an individual.

I believe the initial felony was probably trying to detain him. But yeah, I'm sure they didn't go out there planning to kill him.

2
247MAGA 2 points ago +2 / -0

i don't think he would have stopped even for the police! he had a guilty consciences, extensive criminal record- he knew why those guys were approaching him. It's retarded to claim he's just some "jogger".

11
spezisapedo2 11 points ago +15 / -4

100%. This is the key fact. Same in Kyles case. Kyle was running away. Rosenballs ran up TO HIM. In this case Arbuery was jogging, and McMichaels was by his idling car. The jogger turned sharply at him and tried to take his firearm. If travis had been shooting his gun at him, it would be different.

If someone is trying to murder you with a gun from 30 yards away.... you do NOT ever touch their gun. (unless they have a malfunction).

7
trainrekt 7 points ago +15 / -8

It shows the insane level hypocrisy of the left.

Kyle and Arbery were both in a situational "citizen's arrest".

The only reason those men are going to prison is because Arbery was black. Had that been Kyle Rittenhouse jogging down the street and wrestled residents of that neighborhood away from their weapons, the men would be declared innocent.

3
45fan 3 points ago +5 / -2

Yep that's why the standard is that a reasonable person would have to fear for their lives. Somebody has to take action against you. Charging you, pointing a firearm at you. You can't just say "Oooh I was scared".

-2
GoodCompanyInHell -2 points ago +3 / -5

Yea, but lets flesh this out. Say AA had stopped and waited for the police. What happens when they get there? What were the next steps? What did they try to detain him for? Was there evidence he robbed a house or stole anything? Would the police have arrested him or let him go?

Why were they justified in drawing their weapons while detaining him?

6
trainrekt 6 points ago +6 / -0

Gladly friend, I like thinking beyond the superficial.
This is pure conjecture but I think Arbery saw red because they wouldn’t leave him alone. I don’t think he thought they were going to shoot him. I think he was so pissed that these white men wouldn’t leave him alone, that he went into a suicidal/homicidal rage and he tried to disarm the guy.

Had he just stopped, they would have just waited for the cops.

I think deep down, below all this political posturing, people know Arbery was motivation by rage because of his perception of systemic racism.

Since they believe in systemic racism, they believe this is just guerrilla warfare against that system.

The left believes psychotic rage is justifiable defense when a person is a potentially racially motivated situation.

It’s why they think Kyle Rittenhouse should be in prison even though it’s almost the same situation of citizens arrest but Kyle shot the men trying detain him.

1
TD_Covfefe_Crusader 1 point ago +1 / -0

It's another in a long line of malicious prosecutions of those who would defend themselves from criminals.

1
Elfer 1 point ago +1 / -0

He could have kept running in the straight line to evade

Binger made a very similar argument to paint Rittenhouse as the aggressor - that he could have made a better attempt to escape. Arbery was chased down by two trucks, struck by one of the trucks during the chase, then one truck pulled ahead and two armed man confronted him while another truck approached from behind. Does he have a duty to retreat in that situation?

Consider that Rittenhouse was being pursued by an unarmed attacker and had a potential escape route between the two parked cars - did he have a duty to keep running, or was he justified in turning to confront his attacker?

1
trainrekt 1 point ago +1 / -0

“Attacker”. He wasn’t being attacked.

Kyle stopped evading when he was trapped in between parked cars. Arbery was not anywhere near trapped. He turned 90 degrees and ran 20ft to his “attacker” to engage in combat.

The issue at stake is that it’s not the fault of a person with the gun if they shoot you for trying to disarm them in an open public space. Once you start to wrestle them for their gun, you in effect also have the gun and are expressing the intent to fire it. The left is seeking the ability to engage in combat for a weapon without fear of being shot. That’s the cardinal underpinning of self defense.

Show trial.

1
Elfer 1 point ago +1 / -0

Do you not see the mental gymnastics you're getting into here?

Kyle was being pursued by one unarmed person on foot, and was, according to you, trapped between two parked cars and therefore could not have kept running. Keep in mind that after he shot Rosenbaum in self defense, he exited on the opposite side of the parked cars from the side he entered on. Is Rittenhouse the attacker because he turned to face Rosenbaum rather than continuing to run through the parked cars?

Arbery was being chased by multiple armed people in two pickup trucks. They repeatedly tried to box him in, hitting him with the truck on one occasion. Greg McMichael had shouted at him, by his own admission, "I'll blow your fuckin head off". At the time the Bryan video starts, one truck has pulled in front of him, with one armed man in the bed and one armed man exiting the truck and pointing a shotgun at him, while the truck that has already hit him is still approaching from behind. Greg McMichael, again in his own words, described Arbery as being "trapped like a rat".

You consider the first scenario to be an attack, but the second scenario isn't?

The fact that he grappled for the gun doesn't mean that it automatically becomes self-defense, because they were the aggressors that instigated the situation, just as Rosenbaum was the aggressor who initiated the chase with Rittenhouse. If you chase someone down in a truck, threaten to shoot them, hit them with the truck, then get out and point your gun at them, you don't then magically gain the right to self defense if they try to wrestle the gun away from you to stop you from shooting them, just as you don't gain the right to try to wrestle a gun away from an armed person that you were chasing after you had threatened to kill them, just because they turn to face you.

-6
BeerAndCope -6 points ago +24 / -30

Dude shut up. You’re arguing that he should have evaded harder before trying to defend himself against people that rolled up on him with guns out. These guys were fucking stupid and anyone with common sense can see they were in the wrong. You arguing this is injustice is equally ridiculous as lefties arguing rittenhouse.

25
BloodDe 25 points ago +31 / -6

Attacking a guy with a gun is a fight for the gun. The stupid man in this case wound up dead

3
DickTick 3 points ago +8 / -5

All true points, but just like in the Rittenhouse case, you can't just look at one snippet of it and decide the whole case, you have to take the entire thing with all of the details into account......

6
ButtItDo 6 points ago +6 / -0

Like how he burglarized the house and fled when confronted?

3
borntacticool 3 points ago +3 / -0

OK, if you want all of the details look at his fucking prior convictions. We have information the jury didn't that indicate a consistent pattern of behavior

  • Steal shit

  • Run when caught

  • Resist arrest when cornered

He did all of those things before. Anything else is insane levels of rationalization.

Stacking up a bunch of "maybes" on top of another makes your case weaker, not stronger.

Maybe he was jogging.

Maybe he was jogging at night too.

Maybe he was hiding in the bushes cuz racism.

Maybe he was running cuz rednecks? (sounds more like he's the racist, but whatever)

Maybe he wasn't talking because he was afraid.

None of that shit has any evidence in support of it yet we're expected to believe it's all true. The truth has very straightforward explantions.

He was in the house looking to steal shit. He got caught, he ran to evade his impending arrest. He knew the police were coming so he attacked the McMichaels hoping he could kill any witnesses and be armed against the police. No maybes or excuses are needed here - it's all predictable, common behavior.

-1
Cdogger -1 points ago +4 / -5

Thats too hard for most people

-4
BeerAndCope -4 points ago +2 / -6

And the rest of the stupid men wound up spending the rest of their lives in prison.

0
BloodDe 0 points ago +1 / -1

I agree. There was plenty of stupidity going around

-11
PraiseBeToScience -11 points ago +5 / -16

It's almost as if everybody was wrong! So why are we instinctively defending these stupid rednecks, again?

7
AlexLucian 7 points ago +10 / -3

Why do instinctively defend joggers?

-6
PraiseBeToScience -6 points ago +6 / -12

I've said multiple times that everybody involved was trash and everyone deserves to be dead or in prison.

Rednecks are literally exactly as awful as joggers.

Additionally,

  • One redneck was a former cop, so he's shit.

  • One redneck was a 35 year old obese ginger living with his parents, so he's shit.

  • One redneck was so excited he actually recorded their crime on his phone because he's an absolute fucking dumbass, so he's shit.

  • Arbery had a large history of being a piece of shit, so he's shit.

Like I said, they're all utterly unlikable, garbage people, and every one of them disappearing from society is a net improvement for everyone.

No more faggot busybody powertripping ex-cops still pretending they have a badge and 'authority'.

No more loser gingers who was probably a pedophile.

No more idiots.

No more criminals.

No more rednecks.

No more ghetto trash.

It's a fucking four-way win.

15
Graceunderfire 15 points ago +18 / -3

You are arguing that attacking people who approach you makes sense. Do you attack people immediately when they approach you, armed or otherwise?

They never even touched him before he attacked them, he was obviously feeling guilty as fuck.

-6
BeerAndCope -6 points ago +3 / -9

I carry a gun. If this happened to me I would have been shooting and been justified in doing so.

8
unable_afternoon 8 points ago +9 / -1

So if you’ve been known to trespass on construction sites and police eventually pull you over, do you immediately start shooting? I mean those police are armed and trying to chase you down, right?

Jogger logic

0
BeerAndCope 0 points ago +1 / -1

These people weren’t police pulling someone over. They were dumb asses chasing someone down with shotguns from the bed of a pickup based on a suspicion that he may have possibly stolen something from a construction site.

You really believe I wouldn’t be justified in using deadly force to defend myself against these people? Use your fucking head dude.

10
Nothingeverhappens 10 points ago +17 / -7

Yes he should have evaded harder instead of grabbing homeboys gun or just stop running. But joggers gonna jog🤷‍♀️

-4
FookinIdiots -4 points ago +9 / -13

Let me tell you... If this happened to my son and I saw a video just like this... I would kill every single person I saw on that street.

6
Nothingeverhappens 6 points ago +12 / -6

If you saw your son walk up and grab the business end of A shotgun, losing that battle, you would act just as dumb, and go get some yourself?

That’s okay with me, I am not one to judge.

I would never try to take a shotgun away from someone who is being aggressive. Seems dumb and like one could get shot doing that

2
BeerAndCope 2 points ago +2 / -0

I would never try to take a shotgun away from someone who is being aggressive.

That’s because you are a pussy.

-1
Pepeflavorednoodles -1 points ago +5 / -6

Only if you think you won’t get shot if you do nothing. If you think you will get shot anyway, you’re going out at least trying to survive. You run my ass down in trucks screaming about police when you clearly aren’t, I might be inclined to do the same. Yeah my odds are pretty fucking bad but I like .00001 percent odds over “stand there frozen in fear and die a pathetic death.”

-2
PraiseBeToScience -2 points ago +10 / -12

Rednecks waving guns chasing you down in trucks is reasonable fear of death. These guys literally did was what Gaige Grosskreutz tried to do: "someone else told me this guy did something, so I'm gonna chase him with my gun and stop him".

5
unable_afternoon 5 points ago +8 / -3

You sound like a violent jogger. Could treyvon have also been your son?

8
trainrekt 8 points ago +9 / -1

No. He made a 90 degree turn in the open air to engage a man with a gun in combat.

He ran from the rear driver side around the back of the vehicle, up the passenger side, then ran across the front of the vehicle directly at the man to engage in combat.

WATCH-THE-VIDEO: https://www.wsbtv.com/video/raw-video/ahmaud-arbery-shooting-see-video-that-started-case/2BB3HRY33YBC6MPOXORJ2WVUKM/

Now watch this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0hOPi63mJDI

Doesn't this look a someone that would do something aggressively insane like unnecessarily wrestle a man for his gun?

0
PraiseBeToScience 0 points ago +9 / -9

It's funny how you're leaving out the part where:

  1. They chased him up and down the street,

  2. Someone fired a 'warning shot' like Ziminski.

The McMichaels had already tried to head off Arbery once when Bryan joined the pursuit, the GBI agent said. Bryan tried to block in Arbery as Travis McMichael drove around the block with his father in the bed of the truck, he said.

Bryan "made several statements about trying to block him in and using his vehicle to try to stop him," Dial said. "His statement was that Mr. Arbery kept jumping out of the way and moving around the bumper and actually running down into the ditch in an attempt to avoid his truck."

At one point, Arbery was heading out of the Satilla Shores neighborhood where the defendants live, but the McMichaels forced him to turn back into the neighborhood and run past Bryan, the agent said. That is when he struck Arbery, Dial said, and Arbery kept running with the McMichaels in pursuit.

Bryan turned around, and that is when the widely disseminated video of Arbery's killing begins, he said.

When police arrived after the shooting, Dial said, Gregory McMichael said in remarks caught on police body camera footage that he didn't know for certain if Arbery had stolen anything.

"He had a gut feeling that Mr. Arbery may have been responsible for thefts that were in the neighborhood previously. He actually says gut. His instinct told him that," the GBI agent said.

Like, they literally hit him with their truck and evidence on the truck was found to collaborate that, and you're lying that they had just parked in the road for some fresh air.

5
SirPokeSmottington 5 points ago +6 / -1

It's funny how you're leaving out the part where:

It's funny how you're leaving out the part where: he could have left the street. It's Georgia. Go in the woods.

-2
PraiseBeToScience -2 points ago +3 / -5

According to the GBI he ran into a ditch and they drove down to get him, additionally a dent, his handprint, and shirt fibers were found on the truck meaning they literally hit him with it.

6
deleted 6 points ago +8 / -2
5
SirPokeSmottington 5 points ago +5 / -0

They certainly didn't commit MURDER

It's manslaughter at best, and everyone involved was an asshole out where they should not have been.

*to clarify... rednecks were out because jogger was out.

5
FreeFlorida 5 points ago +17 / -12

if there was evidence on the contrary such as a video showing him trying to get at the gun they could get an appeal but if not then you really need to be smart pedes do not forget the chain of command, Rittenhouse went where the cops would not go the Auberry trial was about a man and his son chasing down a guy where cops could have been called, why not follow the guy and call 911? I don't know enough about the case I guess

15
ThoughtCrimeConvict 15 points ago +20 / -5

No you don't. Because that is exactly what they were trying to do. Defense attorneys were dogshit.

1
Pepeflavorednoodles 1 point ago +3 / -2

Then why were they out of the vechike at all?

-1
FreeFlorida -1 points ago +5 / -6

I like evidence call me a faggot I guess, Kyle had evidence these two people did not. link me to a video that explains what happened. I want to understand but i need evidence

10
SigAR 10 points ago +12 / -2

I thought he grabbed the gun

10
aceshigh34 10 points ago +12 / -2

he did and the video clearly shows it

9
glow-operator-2-0 9 points ago +10 / -1

Supposedly, the defendants initiated pursuit after suspicious activity.

The situation wasn't chaotic like that night in Kenosha, so I'm not sure why pursuit followed by closing up was done.

My best guess would be to do a citizens arrest, but it went awry.

14
WiseOldOwl 14 points ago +17 / -3

That. The guy was a known burglar scoping out places to rob, they went after him instead of being good little victims and sitting on hold with 911 for an hour until the state decides not to send anyone because stealing doesn't matter.

So, they tried to catch the burglar themselves, and it turns out he was just jogging through other people's private property with a criminal record a long way from where he lives.

Oh, imagine how surprised everyone was.

Yeah, these guys were stupid, it wasn't going to work out any positive way, and you should have some awareness that what you are doing is the legal version of the "Charge of the light Brigade" and you're going to eat grapeshot.........

................but telling people to just sit back and be a victim and let the state handle it, and accept it meekly when the state doesn't handle it, is still retarded. .

15
deleted 15 points ago +16 / -1
8
sorrytodisagree 8 points ago +9 / -1

McMichaels Sr is a retired cop and local police requested he help and told the burgled homeowner to alert him to any further incidents. Police were also called immediately of too, and police were literally circling the block while Arbery evaded them.

5
WiseOldOwl 5 points ago +5 / -0

Well that makes it a thousand times worse.

Kid of knew these poor bastards were going to get crushed, so I didn't follow it as close. Deeply sad. I hope something can be done for them.

2
sorrytodisagree 2 points ago +2 / -0

Maybe BLM and the Libtard lynch mob will have moved on during appeals and a new jury finds the brains or courage to do the right thing.

-1
PraiseBeToScience -1 points ago +7 / -8

and police were literally circling the block while Arbery evaded them.

That really doesn't help, you know that, right?

Citizens arrest was not going to stop any crime in progress, nor did they actually know if he actually committed any actual crime. They were chasing someone they were told by someone else had committed a crime.

Literally exactly like Gaige Grosskreutz.

And if the cops were right fucking there, what exactly necessitated chasing him down with trucks waving guns? What, was he going to turn into Sonic the Hedgehog? Fucking phone the cops and slowly follow him in a truck. Hell you could probably just tell him what you were doing.

Instead they literally fired a gun before he tried to grab the shotgun.

2
SpaceForceMAGA 2 points ago +3 / -1

I agree completely with your sentiment, but I doubt he would have kept running along the road, he would probably have dipped off into someone's yard and down another path.

4
Dereliction 4 points ago +4 / -0

It wasn't the first time that properties were burgled in the area and Aubrey was already suspected as the perp. They pursued to initiate a citizens' arrest (which is legal in GA under whatever guidelines). I could be mistaken but one of the men may have been deputized for this purpose on a prior occasion.

2
muslimporn 2 points ago +4 / -2

I suspect they wanted to ask him what he was up to first. They tell him they want to talk to him and that's as far as the conversation goes.

It's quite likely they wanted their stuff back, without necessarily involving the police. That said, apparently they called the cops so throw that out of the window.

-1
NickAtNight -1 points ago +3 / -4

Exactly what ‘stuff’ back. Nothing was taken. It was noteven their property.

7
muslimporn 7 points ago +7 / -0

There were a number of items stolen in earlier incidents, some of which are the kind you would want back.

0
NickAtNight 0 points ago +1 / -1

Name ONE.

-3
Doritalos -3 points ago +1 / -4

You are assuming he was the one stealing in those incidents.

-1
BidenLikesMiners -1 points ago +2 / -3

they are the shitlib habit of getting offended for someone else.

9
HockeyMom4Trump 9 points ago +10 / -1

Yes. I am confused why the third guy (the one filming it) was found guilty?

5
vaxxtherich 5 points ago +6 / -1

guilty by associations. We need that to convict joggers who commit group crimes.

3
NickAtNight 3 points ago +3 / -0

Go look at the evidence and the witness statements.

That was why he was not convicted of the first two counts…. But was on the others.

2
WiseOldOwl 2 points ago +6 / -4

Prob all black jury.

5
DogAteMyPassword 5 points ago +5 / -0

11 white, 1 black

-3
GoingCamaro -3 points ago +9 / -12

Either they were stupid or in fact racist assholes. But considering they weren't charged with a hate crime, that tells me there wasn't enough evidence to prove intent.

But they did provoke by chasing him. Unless we're going to educate citizens to all be police and know their local laws at all times, I don't want a bunch of armed vigilantes shooting people over petty bullshit.

2
Shit___taco 2 points ago +2 / -0

The feds are absolutely going after them for a hate crime. However, I am not sure this really had any racist intentions to murder a black man. Now the parade attack yesterday, that should be investigated as a hate crime.

46
Hinterland 46 points ago +46 / -0

Does anyone have a clean link to a video of the shooting that isn't a 3 second out of context clip with 10 minutes of some fat fuck giving me his thoughts on it?

15
12
glitch_so_hard 12 points ago +14 / -2

I guess I'm confused here. A lot of people are saying that they chased him down, but it looks like the truck was parked and he ran up behind them. Was there some backstory given at the trial as to what happened before he jogged up on them?

6
Basilone 6 points ago +8 / -2

I haven't followed the case very closely but the TLDR version is Arbery did attack them but they weren't legally justified to make a citizens arrest under the circumstances, so effectively Arbery was lawfully resisting false imprisonment.

4
randomuser9193 4 points ago +12 / -8

Cars can usually go faster than people. My guess is that they were demanding he stop, he kept running, they stopped to try and intercept him, he wanted to avoid them, when he saw them get out of the car, he went to defend himself because they had been following him for X minutes.

Alternatively, he is so fast he ran around the world and ended up behind them.

2
NickAtNight 2 points ago +5 / -3

Or you could go read the evidence and know the. Answers!

-2
randomuser9193 -2 points ago +2 / -4

Is there something in the evidence that counters what I said?

2
NickAtNight 2 points ago +2 / -0

Yep. All of it.

0
PraiseBeToScience 0 points ago +2 / -2

The GBI investigation and witness reports, as well as from McMichael himself, the chase was going on for quite a while, up and down various streets.

-3
NickAtNight -3 points ago +3 / -6

Go look at the evidence. They chased him down (two vehicles involved).

The video is just the end of the chase.

5
deleted 5 points ago +5 / -0
4
deleted 4 points ago +4 / -0
3
Retardloserimsogay 3 points ago +3 / -0

This video was helpful. Thanks fren

0
Shit___taco 0 points ago +3 / -3

I am not sure what it did for me. The guy was seen entering the house at various dates, yet he is not seen once stealing anything from the construction site? That makes me think he was just watching the progress of the building going up. Any source for him actually robbing houses in the neighborhood?

Also, I was told the guy was wearing Timberlands, but that article has a video they say is moments before the shooting, and that guy clearly has running shoes on.

1
Retardloserimsogay 1 point ago +1 / -0

Did I reply to the wrong video? I might have, it was an interview of the guy driving the dark chevy pickup with police. His description of events.

0
PraiseBeToScience 0 points ago +3 / -3

He also was on foot.

You don't fucking steal tools and construction equipment and then carry it the fuck home in your bare goddamn hands five fucking miles back to your house. Like this bitch is gonna throw a table saw over his shoulder and run home with it.

1
Shit___taco 1 point ago +1 / -0

Yeh, that is another thing.

43
XxxRDTPRNxxX 43 points ago +49 / -6

The case hinged on whether or not they had a right to go confront the jogger with guns in the first place. I guess the prosecution argued they didn't have the legal authority or evidence that he was in the process of committing a crime.

30
PraiseBeToScience 30 points ago +54 / -24

And it's true, they didn't.

30
CentralAmericanPede 30 points ago +41 / -11

Dont attack people with guns.

13
Pepeflavorednoodles 13 points ago +21 / -8

He tried to run from the people with guns. They chased him and blocked him off with trucks. You can’t make a citizens arrest unless you have reason to believe it’s an active crime. Like, if he was running with a purse and some lady was screaming “thief thief he took my purse” suddenly these aren’t idiots, there heroes and I’d be at the front to defend them. As it is they thought he might have committed a crime? I don’t know what the fuck he was doing at that house under construction but neither did they. This is shit you call the cops for instead. They didn’t, and here we are.

-1
NickAtNight -1 points ago +3 / -4

Most probably taking a drink and a breather.

If you look at the likely jogging route, it was something like

  1. 2 miles to the construction site.
  2. 1 mile around the loop.
  3. 2 miles home

A nice 5 mile jog.

7
DeplorableCentipede 7 points ago +7 / -0

With no socks and long dirty toenails?

-4
PraiseBeToScience -4 points ago +2 / -6

Meanwhile you think he was going to steal 200 pounds of lumber by throwing it over his shoulder and running three miles back home with it.

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
-7
deleted -7 points ago +6 / -13
3
Pepeflavorednoodles 3 points ago +8 / -5

Source? Cause I didn’t see that video anywhere.

7
BobSux 7 points ago +23 / -16

Don't take your gun and chase a running suspect who is guilty of property crimes at worst. When you chase somebody with a gun, you never know how they are going to react especially when they are close.

10
spezisapedo2 10 points ago +12 / -2

I always have my gun though.... I cant follow a criminal to tell police where they ran to?

Having a gun is NOT the same as shooting or even pointing that gun.

4
deleted 4 points ago +13 / -9
3
aceshigh34 3 points ago +8 / -5

go back to sleep moron

-1
PraiseBeToScience -1 points ago +2 / -3

Forensic evidence suggested they even hit him with the truck at one point.

-1
deleted -1 points ago +4 / -5
3
libertyforall69 3 points ago +3 / -0

Just let them take whatever they want?

4
Beef_Vegan 4 points ago +14 / -10

Stay home if the big igloo ever kicks off. We don’t need you.

-3
deleted -3 points ago +1 / -4
-1
PraiseBeToScience -1 points ago +2 / -3

I'd also say there's a significant difference between:

  • Property crimes against your own property.
  • Property crimes against your neighbor's property.
  • Property crimes against a totally unoccupied, unowned, empty pile of unfinished lumber.

Again, everybody involved was a turd so I don't care about any of them.

3
PraiseBeToScience 3 points ago +10 / -7

Maybe not but if Rosenbaum had a rifle and Kyle didn't, and Rosenbaum chased him down and shot him, should he go free?

7
spezisapedo2 7 points ago +11 / -4

lol no. Completely different. The equivalent case would be if Rosenballs chased Kyle down with an AR-15, but then was standing still by his truck NOT shooting his gun, and then Kyle ran up on him from 30 yards away and tried to take his gun. Would he be justified to defend himself then... and yeah.

Also there is a middle ground between going free and first degree murder with malice.

0
NickAtNight 0 points ago +3 / -3

Not even close.

For a comparable scenario, try:

Rosenbaum, Huber and Grosskreutz are chasing Kyle with their guns (hmmm, that is what happened)

Rosen and Huber then set up a blocking position and wait.

While Grosskreutz, (the skateboarder and the flying kicker) chase Kyle towards the blocking position.

Kyle has the choice of turning and trying to escape past the chasers…

Or continue on and trying to get past the blocking position.

1
spezisapedo2 1 point ago +1 / -0

They had never fired a shot, and Kyle would have had to just committed a crime. Their "blocking position" was hardly walled off. Arbery could have easily just went to one side or the other. Again, the mcmichaels nor brian were shooting any guns.

Kyle did not have the choice. 1. He got slowed down by several blocked cars, but the proscutions STILL argued he could have ran better. This is completely different than Arbery who ran directly towards the car, and then made an abrupt turn to take the gun/ fight McMichaels. 2. Kyle was knocked to the ground, and was hit over the head with a skateboard. That is a direct assault.

Its just not the same.

1
PraiseBeToScience 1 point ago +4 / -3

Honestly I don't think you have to make it that complicated. Stick to exactly what happened.

A) McMichaels gets a phone call, someone tells him someone is committing a crime.

B) Gaige Grosskreutz hears someone yell, they tell him someone is committing a crime.

A) McMichaels grabs his inbred ginger son and guns and chases down the guy running away.

B) Gaige Grosskreutz grabs his bicep and gun and chases down the guy running away.

A) Guy fears for his life, thinks he's about to be murdered by some fat rednecks, takes the chance to try to disarm and fight back. Dies.

B) Guy fears for his life, thinks he's about to be murdered by some dead-eyed neckbeard, but has a rifle and blows away Grosskreutz.

-1
PraiseBeToScience -1 points ago +9 / -10

So now you're just misrepresenting what happened.

Arbery got rightfully shot for grabbing a gun. And those guys are rightfully going to prison for being busybody rednecks. Like I said, everyone was retarded and got what they deserved.

3
AVeryNakedMan 3 points ago +6 / -3

I agree the black guy got himself killed like a dumbass. But the white guys were apparently breaking the law while confronting him with guns drawn, which means they are guilty even if the actual physical attack was the black guy's fault. The logic is that the black guy wouldn't have been in a position to do that at all if the white guys hadn't broken the law first.

-1
PraiseBeToScience -1 points ago +3 / -4

This. Everyone is mad because I keep saying that everyone was a dumbass and that this outcome is great, because 4 trashy people are now removed from society.

6
spezisapedo2 6 points ago +6 / -0

But an honest mistake shouldnt invalidate your right to defend your life. Same with if Kyle chased rosembaum or not.

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
16
behemoth887 16 points ago +17 / -1

afaik one of them said in testimony that they weren't aware that armed robbery had committed a crime, thereby fucking themselves over badly.

1
PraiseBeToScience 1 point ago +5 / -4

They also recorded a video of their own bullshit. These were incredibly stupid people, and George McMichael's cop history showed he was a fucking slimewad, he used his personal connections to get out of charges the first time, too.

1 black guy with a history of being trash is removed from society.

1 obese inbred ginger neckbeard loser is removed from society.

1 power-tripping dickbag god-complex ex-cop is removed from society.

1 busybody dumbfuck who records his own crime is removed from society.

How is anyone mad about this outcome? Everyone involved was utter trash.

11
bidensmissingbrain 11 points ago +11 / -0

Didn't help they both said, on the stand, they had no idea/suspicion if Arbery had actually done anything.

Honestly there were no winners in this case regardless of verdict.

4
slowmotrin 4 points ago +15 / -11

This is the right answer. The video made it nearly impossible for the McMichaels to get off, even if arbury was committing burglary. It's almost the exact opposite of Kyle Rittenhouse, Kyle Rittenhouse was being chased and he attempted to flee, the McMichaels approached Aubrey with a gun and shot him because they thought that they were the arbiters of the law, it's a very bad look.

5
aceshigh34 5 points ago +9 / -4

not even close to what happened moron

-1
slowmotrin -1 points ago +7 / -8

Compelling argument. Mods, why do you keep letting 14-year-olds on this website?

3
deleted 3 points ago +4 / -1
-3
deleted -3 points ago +1 / -4
2
deleted 2 points ago +4 / -2
-1
BidenLikesMiners -1 points ago +1 / -2

all his commments are shittalk

0
PraiseBeToScience 0 points ago +3 / -3

The funniest part is the guy who recorded the video got sentenced to almost everything alongside them. What a fucking dumbass.

-1
NickAtNight -1 points ago +2 / -3

Both Kyle and Arbery were being chased !

1
slowmotrin 1 point ago +1 / -0

Yes, and the armed people chasing them were the aggressors and therefore in the wrong.

1
glow-operator-2-0 1 point ago +1 / -0

Spotters and scouts activity are hard to prove in court.

3
deleted 3 points ago +5 / -2
28
CentralAmericanPede 28 points ago +49 / -21

This was an obvious “makeup call” for the Rittenhouse acquittal. White people need to learn to stay away from blacks from now on. The Deep State has declared war on whites, and whites gain nothing in a confrontation with blacks.

23
anon291 23 points ago +25 / -2

Rittenhouse didn't shoot blacks....

15
borntacticool 15 points ago +20 / -5

That's why there wasn't a guilty verdict. If Rosenbaum had been black, Kyle would have fried. Black privilege.

3
anon291 3 points ago +3 / -0

100% agree. Honestly, unless I really know them, I try to avoid any random black person. Too much trouble. And I'm not even white. Any other race is fine. They'll behave like normal people almost universally, but a large enough proportion of blacks believe they can get away with anything.

11
CentralAmericanPede 11 points ago +13 / -2

No, but since those people were supposed allies of the BLM movement, that makes them “honorary blacks” in the eyes of the left. That they were not actually black does not matter to them.

4
SteelBallRun1890 4 points ago +4 / -0

Yet the media continues to call Kyle a white supremacist terrorist as if he did. It doesn't matter to the narrative

17
MolochHunter 17 points ago +19 / -2

how do you stay away from blacks when blacks break & enter your property?

5
deleted 5 points ago +5 / -0
1
AnadroJ 1 point ago +1 / -0

But removing them from the levi factory

-3
BidenLikesMiners -3 points ago +3 / -6

it wasnt their property... youre getting offended on other people's behalf.

3
MolochHunter 3 points ago +4 / -1

how do you know each of those 3 men hadnt had burglars steal shit from their garages ?

-1
PraiseBeToScience -1 points ago +3 / -4

Maybe it was the lack of any evidence anyone had been burgled with any regularity, according to the police reports for the area?

How do you know it wasn't the ginger pedophile-looking inbred fuck stealing everything and blaming Some Puerto Rican Guy?

Do you think Ahmaud Arbery was committing thefts of power tools by literally running on foot 3 miles to wrap 250 pounds of Romex around himself and then run 3 miles back with it?

1
MolochHunter 1 point ago +1 / -0

is trespass still a crime? is trespass still a violation of probation? asking for a cuckservative friend

11
bg4u 11 points ago +13 / -2

If you are forced to defend yourself against a black aggressor, you are almost certainly going to prison. At that point then, is any reason at all to stop?

7
unicornpoop 7 points ago +7 / -0

If you're a white woman I think you still get a pass.

6
deleted 6 points ago +9 / -3
4
CentralAmericanPede 4 points ago +5 / -1

I should have rephrased that differently. What do white people actually gain from associating with black people?

3
deleted 3 points ago +5 / -2
5
AnadroJ 5 points ago +5 / -0

Yes they would

4
deleted 4 points ago +6 / -2
4
deleted 4 points ago +5 / -1
17
3-10 17 points ago +21 / -4

Here is the video frame by frame:

https://youtu.be/iGf7JIlG3oc

And yes, the property was broken into and burglarized before:

https://youtu.be/d-CFQno9Ggo

This doesn't even include the crazy near violent reaction on video previously when he had a cop checking him for being somewhere he shouldn't be. Nor does it address the firearms charge that they got him on (Couldn't prove he shot at a school), nor the theft that the DA let him slide on.

Arbery was a human piece of shit and the only time he did anything good for society was when he stopped breathing and was buried.

Fuck him and fuck his family for raising him like the way too many of the 13% that cause about 52% of the violent crime in the US.

6
Meddlesom 6 points ago +9 / -3

At least he's dead. Small consolation.

0
PraiseBeToScience 0 points ago +2 / -2

https://youtu.be/d-CFQno9Ggo

He later said the stuff that was possibly stolen off the boat may have never been at the house to begin with. This is the reason for "nothing was ever stolen from the property": because as far as we know, nothing ever was...though it's possible some stuff was... once.

And he's saying that the people he thinks might have stolen stuff, if anybody did (which he's not sure about, he says now), are "people" not a "person", with a car and at one point "toting a toolbag". His only description of any "people" (as opposed to one individual) in the house is a white male and female.

Additionally based on the timeline this happened several months prior. So that's your idea of a crime spree? A guy who is confused about whether or not he actually had anything stolen, three-plus months prior?

But sure, that sounds like a dude running on foot without a vehicle who they never had any evidence of stealing anything and never was found with stolen shit in his house.

Fucking Trayvon Martin at least had bags of jewelry and shit in his bedroom.

155
Groundpounder 155 points ago +192 / -37

I guess the people there were worried about another “accidental” parade massacre. Terrorism wins

92
Tiquortoo 92 points ago +176 / -84

These guy's actions were idiotic and they were guilty. Defending them is as stupid as demonizing Rittenhouse.

101
johnbillaby 101 points ago +119 / -18

They called 911 before they went out to try to stop him. They told him they just wanted to keep him there until the cops came to sort it out. Then for some insane reason he decided to attack one of the two men holding guns. Then he got shot. Seems like a shit verdict to me, but maybe I have some part of this wrong.

30
deleted 30 points ago +58 / -28
49
covfefe-time 49 points ago +54 / -5

I can't wait to use this excuse the next time I'm in the hood, prowling thru property that I don't own or belong on.

Then, when someone confronts me with a gun, I'll just attack them, because I have the right.

I wonder what will happen to me????

-18
PraiseBeToScience -18 points ago +11 / -29

Would you pull a gun on someone rolling a stop sign?

23
covfefe-time 23 points ago +23 / -0

No. But If the role was reversed, and I repeatedly went where I clearly have no business, my life would end as yet another statistic as 'some crazy white guy who attacked an armed resident.'

Might even get a 15 second spot on the evening news about how some lunatic trespasser chose to attack someone holding them for questioning.

11
deleted 11 points ago +12 / -1
2
Elfer 2 points ago +2 / -0

Technically, in Georgia, trespass is not a crime unless the property is damaged or notice has been given not to enter the property, neither of which happened here. The property owner had asked the police to talk to Arbery but he was killed before they contacted him.

The other relevant thing is that the McMichaels didn't actually see Arbery trespassing on the property, they just saw him running and immediately gave chase. If you look at all the details of the case objectively, it's actually pretty damning.

1
penguinjay1212 1 point ago +1 / -0

HE WAS THE NEIGHBORHOOD THEIF.

It sucks people can't blast people with criminal reputations while they commit crimes.

In this case, them knowing too much about the jogger jogging all over the place, and them wanting to end his crime reign is what screwed them over.

Sad, bc the law when applied isn't always morally correct. Seems like a bunk verdict, but I wasn't expecting much to go differently.

-7
deleted -7 points ago +10 / -17
10
deleted 10 points ago +14 / -4
4
MAGAlifeChoseMe 4 points ago +4 / -0

Ignorant people often lash out in anger. u/PraiseBeToScience is peak dunning kruger.

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
7
borntacticool 7 points ago +10 / -3

I'm old school. If you catch someone in your house, finished or not, you have the right to hold and shoot them if they don't explain what they're doing and turn out their pockets.Shoot anyone who fucks with your property. People are not worth more than property, people and property are inseparable. When you steal from someone you're retroactively taking away the time they worked to earn what was stolen and essentially enslaving them to having had worked for someone else for nothing.

This was how we used to do things.

This is how we should still do things.

I realize modern law doesn't agree with me, but modern law is bullshit. If you disagree, I'd note that none of the incidents of riots in that entire year would have been successful, nor a trial been brought against Rittenhouse, had all of the men gotten on the rooftops and started shooting rioters as soon as they started smashing shit, looting and burning buildings. (and I don't care if they're shot in the back while they're running away either)

-3
PraiseBeToScience -3 points ago +6 / -9

your property

Yeah and lol and behold he did nothing to "your property" of any of the rednecks.

How the fuck did they know he didn't have a right to be there? Maybe he was on the building crew and went to grab his lighter that he left there the day before.

4
SteelBallRun1890 4 points ago +6 / -2

Did you follow this case at all? Even a year ago video surfaced of the same guy inside the same building multiple times at night while conviently thousands of dollars of equipment were reported missing. I agree the story gets interesting when they pursue but they were told to by the police and any idiot that goes straight for someone else's gun is begging to be killed. The killing part was clear self defense

1
Boom2cannon 1 point ago +2 / -1

Haven’t heard about police encouraging that they engage. Sauce?

3
borntacticool 3 points ago +5 / -2

Yeah and lol and behold he did nothing

It doesn't matter if it's not their property, it's not his property either.

of any of the rednecks.

Fuck off with that faggotry.

How the fuck did they know he didn't have a right to be there?

  1. Prior knowledge. 2) He brandished and he hid when confronted in the middle of the night the first time then 3) ran the second time.

Maybe he was on the building crew and went to grab his lighter that he left there the day before.

You're seriously rationalizing here. They were on a facebook page talking about this shit, they had cameras up everywhere, he was not permitted to be there. This was known. Watch the trial. No one argued he wasn't trespassing.

-6
PraiseBeToScience -6 points ago +5 / -11

Fuck off with that faggotry.

lmao look at the fucking people arrested and tell me they aren't the genetic degenerative backwash of White people.

Rednecks are awful, and if you're a redneck, you're awful. They literally represent the worst of White people. They're fuckignorant and take pride in being dumb, they're typically angry about everything and want to fight everybody who looks at them funny, they do trashy shit like talk about shooting neighborhood pets or having their pit bulls rip apart the neighbor's cat "because it shit my flowers", they're rude as all ever fucking shit and intentionally do things like 'rolling coal' just to be antisocial garbage, and on top of it, I've literally never seen a redneck who wasn't fat, bald, or ugly.

2
deleted 2 points ago +6 / -4
1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
26
Auroraalpha 26 points ago +30 / -4

Well, theres the part where:

  1. homes have been burglarized before
  2. homes under construction are someone's dream home
  3. police responded a few days prior to incident to a home owner catching arbery on camera in their house, scoping it out
  4. police told neighbors to grab guns and go search. Even primed the public by saying Arbery was potentially armed
  5. police admitted they had no knowledge of arbery being a jogger
  6. defendents had multiple chances to kill Arbery if they were hunting him for murder. Why wait till he lunges?
  7. arbery had hands near the trigger. Prosecution cant even discount the fact that arbery may have pulled the trigger
  8. GA law does not require you to witness or have immediate knowledge of a felony to conduct citizens arrest. When you look into the history of said statute, you understand why.
3
spezisapedo2 3 points ago +3 / -0

thank you. this sums it up nicely. Though I am not sure I agree on point 8 but IANAL.

3
DogAteMyPassword 3 points ago +5 / -2

You are wrong on 8. You do have to have immediate knowledge of a felony to attempt a citizen's arrest. All 3 defendants said on the stand that they had no such knowledge.

4
Auroraalpha 4 points ago +4 / -0

You dont. Judge tried to argue that last Friday, then backed down when it came to jury instructions. Why would you need to have the second sentence in place if you are already covered for immediate knowledge in the first part of the statute?

Note, go read up how this statute came into law in GA in the first place. I dont agree with it, still the law as it was is what they are judged on, not the law as I think it ought to be.

2
BobSux 2 points ago +15 / -13

You can't decide to chase somebody with a gun because you think they are a burglar and then claim self defense when you place somebody in a fight or flight decision. The jury just confirmed that. I would have convicted too if I were on the jury and I think Aubrey is a piece of shit thief. But he had no clue what the intentions of these fat rednecks with guns chasing him were.

7
ceremony_ 7 points ago +9 / -2

I agree.

Three guys against Aubery.

Why did they even need a drawn weapon?

Was there any evidence Aubery was armed during the chase?

5
BobSux 5 points ago +7 / -2

Even if he drew his weapon and stayed at a distance like George Zimmerman it would be different. These rednecks were trying to be cowboys and chase this guy down. Aubrey doesn't know what their intentions are. I can't say what I would do if I saw these three big rednecks chasing me with a truck and brandishing weapons.

0
PraiseBeToScience 0 points ago +2 / -2

I can't say what I would do if I saw these three big rednecks chasing me with a truck and brandishing weapons.

Literally the only way this situation could get more stereotypical is if their names were literally Bubba, Cletus, and Skeeter.

5
humble_kekistani 5 points ago +5 / -0

You can't run towards a stationary party and pretend you're being chased. This take is as fake and gay as "hands up don't shoot"

1
BobSux 1 point ago +3 / -2

There was somebody behind him too.

3
humble_kekistani 3 points ago +5 / -2

and instead of taking a turn and running away he charged at the man with a gun

0
PraiseBeToScience 0 points ago +2 / -2

He wasn't stationary, the chase was going on for like five minutes according to McMichael himself. The camera only recorded the very last thirty seconds of the chase.

Also how do you think the truck got in front of him?

4
Graceunderfire 4 points ago +6 / -2

They didn't even touch him, how is that a legitimate reason to attack them?

They even convicted the guy who was just there and happened to film the fucking thing of murder! If you think this is a good judgement you are insane.

1
BobSux 1 point ago +1 / -0

They hit him with their truck. That's the evidence.

They hit him with the truck and then brandished a weapon. Because they suspected he was trespassing in an unoccupied lot. They were retarded and got what they deserved.

1
Graceunderfire 1 point ago +1 / -0

Ok this guy is an obvious shill, hes getting paid by the replies guys so stop engaging with him.

1
apvwvhk29q8s 1 point ago +1 / -0

Do you have a link to any of this? Specifically 4

1
Auroraalpha 1 point ago +1 / -0

https://youtu.be/9JVFEdiOr-o

Its through on one of the earlier days of trial, while going through the State's witnesses. Nate talks a bit about it on the 2h 15min mark on this video, through about 2:25.

0
BeerAndCope 0 points ago +3 / -3

Stop. You sound like the rittenhouse nut jobs.

6
Pepeflavorednoodles 6 points ago +7 / -1

If you were just going down the street and two joggers blocked you off with trucks and told you they were making a citizens arrest, I’m pretty sure you’d at least be considering fighting for your life. Hell, that’s a pretty suspicious situaton. You might want to do more than just consider. But we don’t even get there. The problem isn’t if he was fighting hard enough that shooting him was in self defense, the argument made was that they never should have had him cornered thinking he needed to fight in the first place.

0
johnbillaby 0 points ago +2 / -2

It was the middle of the day in the middle of the street, I'd keep my hands visible and wait for the cops. It seems like Arbury really desperately wanted to get out of there for some reason though.

6
publius1788 6 points ago +16 / -10

Then for some insane reason he decided to attack one of the two men holding guns.

If some guy comes at me with a gun, I am not just going to sit there, I am going to defend myself.

18
johnbillaby 18 points ago +22 / -4

There were 2 guys with guns, one up in the back of a truck. He attacked one of them. You'd have to be incredibly stupid to think that attacking one of them is going to be helpful in that situation at all.

4
OK_Citizen 4 points ago +4 / -0

Let me start by saying that I don’t think that Arbery was some innocent victim, it seems likely he was doing exactly what they thought he was doing.

But objectively, if someone is chased and cornered by guys with guns, and may be thinking they are going to be killed, why wouldn’t they go for one? They may not fire near their bro while you do, and if you can disarm one, suddenly you have a gun to bring to the gunfight.

Didn’t turn out so well, and the whole situation was fucked up for a lot of reasons, but it’s not surprising someone would chose fight over flight in that situation. Running away at that point would seem like a good way to get shot in the back to me.

2
FFDTW 2 points ago +2 / -0

He had originally tried to run but they chased him up and down the street in their trucks for about four minutes before finally trapping him. Last act of a desperate man who thought these guys were going to kill him.

2
jubyeonin 2 points ago +2 / -0

Does charging at someone with a gun not seem like a good way to get shot in the front to you?

1
OK_Citizen 1 point ago +1 / -0

Oh it’s risky, obviously, a last resort play. But at least your life is in your own hands at that point.

3
BobSux 3 points ago +6 / -3

It's almost as if he had only seconds to react to somebody brandishing a gun after chasing him. Fight or flight instincts are real. It is easy for you in hindsight to criticize how he reacted when you have watched a video and seen how it turned out.

2
publius1788 2 points ago +14 / -12

I don't give a fuck if it's stupid, you still have the right to defend yourself from men with guns. If 2 guys came up to me with guns I would try and defend myself. I don't know if they are going to kidnap me or something worse. May as well try and take out one with me.

11
johnbillaby 11 points ago +16 / -5

No, when the people stopping you say "Hey we just want to talk and wait for the police", if you're not mentally ill or extraordinarily stupid you'd just stand there and keep your hands visible and wait.

4
Pepeflavorednoodles 4 points ago +8 / -4

Why the fuck should I believe some shitheads who ran me down with trucks and are brandishing firearms should be trusted? I can’t trust the last things I hear with my hands out and to the sides are “he’s got a gun!” Then a boom.

Do you really want to say any assholes who stop you with guns should be able to do so? Cause I promise you some blms are going to start detaining white men for suspicion of hate crimes.

3
BeerAndCope 3 points ago +9 / -6

If a group of black dudes came hauling ass up on you in a suv with long guns out and said “Hey, we just want to talk” you would just comply and trust that they mean you no harm? Use your head.

2
Avenatti2020 2 points ago +5 / -3

That requires trusting the people with the guns that it is indeed the police coming. I’d ask to make the call to the police as well to confirm they are coming and not some randos. That is, if I was innocent, which Joggerbaury wasn’t.

-1
PraiseBeToScience -1 points ago +2 / -3

"Hey we just want to talk and wait for the police"

lol I bet you give money to people who 'need bus fare' too.

3
spezisapedo2 3 points ago +4 / -1

I always have a gun on me. OPen carry islegal here. I dont give up my rights just because I carry. You have no right to steal someones gun if youwere just trespassing and they are calling the cops.

-1
PraiseBeToScience -1 points ago +3 / -4

If you saw someone jogging down the street and someone yelled 'he just trespassed on my property!' would you immediatley draw your gun and chase him down?

Or would you be like 'that's not a real problem, shut up, I'm not going to get involved'?

Are you really going to risk imprisonment over a fucking non-crime like "he stood in a half-built house for ten seconds"? Nobody even goddamn lived there.

3
deleted 3 points ago +8 / -5
12
ADAM_SCHITT 12 points ago +12 / -0

If 2 guys are pointing guns at me and I'm unarmed, I'm gonna back off because I have no chance. Arbery was stupid for not running away through the woods or people's yards since he was being chased by a car, but I guess I can't really blame him for trying to defend himself in a panic. There was no reason to try to stop him with a gun. They could have just followed him and called the cops.

0
spezisapedo2 0 points ago +2 / -2

he didnt try to stop him with the gun though. He was stupid for getting in an unnecessary gun fight. They were following and they were on the phone with the cops.

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
6
rudi_reifenstecher 6 points ago +8 / -2

very clever to close in on a shotgun

3
Axiom502 3 points ago +3 / -0

And he would have been justified if he killed him too. See that works?

1
publius1788 1 point ago +1 / -0

Could you clarify your comment please, I don't get what you are saying.

4
Axiom502 4 points ago +6 / -2

If Arbery grabbed the shotgun and killed McMichael he could be found not guilty as well

2
spezisapedo2 2 points ago +2 / -0

Exactly! You can have a situation where it isn't just one party innocent one party guilty.

0
Pepeflavorednoodles 0 points ago +2 / -2

Honestly he’d have a better case.

1
spezisapedo2 1 point ago +1 / -0

If they arent pointing / shooting at you then you have no right to steal their gun. Just run away or find a safe spot and call poice.

4
TheGreenDutchman 4 points ago +4 / -0

Rittenhouse had to retreat first, which he did at any point he could. Had he ran up to the kiddie diddler before the latter tried to disarm him he wouldn't have been found innocent either. Instead Kyle got chased and couldn't get away, so he was right to shoot. This is one of those cases where I find the behavior good, they were trying to do good and got fucked over for it, but they didn't adhere to the law to do it. Everyone kept calling Kyle a vigilante but this is a lot more fitting of that description. Same way killing your kid's rapist is illegal, even if most of us cheer it on.

1
zuccherina 1 point ago +1 / -0

Can you clarify for me if grabbing someone's rifle changes your status to armed? I kept hearing that on the Rittenhouse trial and I'm curious about that here.

2
ExpressMess 2 points ago +2 / -0

Good point. I would like to hear this.

28
CoryInTheHouse1776 28 points ago +37 / -9

People have a right to defend themselves from thugs that don't belong there.

12
AlcoholicRetard 12 points ago +26 / -14

Chasing someone down the street isn’t defending yourself.

3
MolochHunter 3 points ago +10 / -7

citizens arrests are a thing, yo

well, they used to be, until cultural marxists fucked up everyones system of ethics

6
cyberwar 6 points ago +10 / -4

For a citizens arrest you have to witness the crime being committed and immediately arrest. You are not allowed to chase anyone. They didn't witness anything and they chased him down.

3
deleted 3 points ago +6 / -3
0
cyberwar 0 points ago +1 / -1

another doofus who didn't listen to the judge's instructions

1
MolochHunter 1 point ago +2 / -1

true. This was a very flawed attempt at community policing. But arent the Left telling people to defund the police and engage in community policing?

does community policing mean you have no right to self defense when someone tries to pry your gun out of your hand?

why is all the onus on the community policers to do everything right, and Ahmoud Arbery is entitled to act with reckless endangerment ?

1
PraiseBeToScience 1 point ago +3 / -2

Let me flip this 'but don't they say...' around.

Conservatives: "We just want to be left alone."

Also conservatives: "If my friend calls me up and he said he thinks he heard someone say that their aunt once saw some black guy stand in an unoccupied half-built house for thirty seconds and then walk away empty handed, I feel I should immediately saddle up my F-150, jump in the back with a gun like I'm riding a fucking ISIS Technical, chase this guy down for five minutes, and put a stop to this incredible lawlessness!"

There are some crimes where it's moral to intervene.

A fucking crime that literally wouldn't even warrant a ticket is not one of those crimes.

Dude was on foot. Even if you wanted to call the cops so he couldn't get away, just tail him in your fucking truck. What, was he going to teleport aboard the mothership?

0
cyberwar 0 points ago +2 / -2

hey buddy you're not supposed to "community police" with a weapon. use a pink dildo instead

0
AlcoholicRetard 0 points ago +3 / -3

If they had chased him down and beaten the shit out of him and held him there until the police came I would have no problem with that. They didn’t really need a shotgun to do that. They escalated the situation needlessly.

1
MolochHunter 1 point ago +3 / -2

the 'escalation' that resulted in unnecessary tragedy was the kid trying to grab the gun, which put its owner in a kill or potentially be killed situation

Ahmoud was not in a kill or be killed situation prior to that

he was in a flee or be detained situation

1
AlcoholicRetard 1 point ago +4 / -3

Should Kyle have let Gaige detain him or was he right for disarming him? Did Gaige escalate the situation by chasing him down with a gun in his hand? I would definitely consider being chased down the street by guys with guns to be a kill or be killed situation.

1
jubyeonin 1 point ago +1 / -0

the kid

Did you fall for that lie? He was a grown ass man of 25. They picked his graduation pic to fool you.

0
deleted 0 points ago +2 / -2
0
deleted 0 points ago +2 / -2
2
BeerAndCope 2 points ago +2 / -0

You’ll be killed and the people that kill you should then go to prison.

1
dadmda123 1 point ago +2 / -1

Yes but you can’t arrest someone if you don’t see them commit a crime, which they didn’t, hence the false incarceration, which means it can’t be self defense

2
PraiseBeToScience 2 points ago +3 / -1

Also it was barely even a real crime. No cop in the world would've issued him a citation, much less arrested him, for walking into a construction site for less than a minute and leaving empty handed.

Going 30 in a school zone is more likely to get you a stiffer penalty than that.

1
dadmda123 1 point ago +1 / -0

No a cop would’ve stopped him, called the owner so the owner could tell him he was trespassing so the next time he’s there he would be arrested by the cop

1
CoryInTheHouse1776 1 point ago +1 / -0

Jogger was a career criminal and went for their gun hence a crime

0
dadmda123 0 points ago +1 / -1

While they were committing a crime, if you go for a bank robber’s weapon and he shoots it isn’t self defense either

23
Jeb4HOABoard 23 points ago +24 / -1

Agreed. They were idiots for calling the police.

4
Dialectic 4 points ago +4 / -0

Kek

13
Malmortus 13 points ago +22 / -9

If you're a realistic person you'd say this was the right verdict, just as the Rittenhouse case.

9
HeavyVetting 9 points ago +13 / -4

Yup. You better have a damn good reason to fuck around by chasing someone down with lethal force. If not, they have the right to defend themselves and you might find out. Or if you kill them, you'll end up in prison.

2
spezisapedo2 2 points ago +4 / -2

they werent using lethal force though. No shots were fired until arbery was directly going for the gun.

0
HeavyVetting 0 points ago +4 / -4

They used cars to run him off the road and then chased him with guns and said "I'll blow your fucking head off."

0
PraiseBeToScience 0 points ago +1 / -1

GBI investigation found they hit him with their truck at one point.

1
spezisapedo2 1 point ago +1 / -0

and yet it isnt in the video, and if you are hit by a car, that doesnt mean you go up and steal the drivers gun. Im not saying what they did was right or legal, but they did NOT just decide to murder him.

4
spezisapedo2 4 points ago +4 / -0

I dont think someone deserves life in prison and a murder charge for just filming a jogger on their phone while driving at a distance. ...

2
jubyeonin 2 points ago +2 / -0

You're wasting your time arguing with that fed.

1
randomuser9193 1 point ago +1 / -0

I agree with that , but he was pretty much an accessory. What did he get convicted of?

1
spezisapedo2 1 point ago +1 / -0

Murder. Minumum life in prison.

1
randomuser9193 1 point ago +1 / -0

That doesn't sound right..

1
spezisapedo2 1 point ago +1 / -0

yup. And yet it is what happened.

0
HockeyMom4Trump 0 points ago +0 / -0

Do you know why the third guy was found guilty? I am confused what he did...I am not super familiar with this case, but I thought the third man was just chasing them and filming it? So was he also found guilty of murder? were all three guilty of murder, even if only one man pulled the trigger?

Just curious how the law works and a little confused why the guy filming would be on trial too.

2
randomuser9193 2 points ago +2 / -0

Not a pro, but if you drive away someone to/after a murder you are an accessory. Same thing here.

10
BumpForTrump 10 points ago +10 / -0

I didn't see the details but watched some of the cam footage and they seemed off.

Didn't he go for the gun?

2
Pepeflavorednoodles 2 points ago +3 / -1

Yeah but he ran first and they cornered him with their trucks. They are acting like cops and they are not. You step in when something is going to happen because you didn’t. Some dude jogging isn’t that and that’s why the law says not to do this shit.

2
PraiseBeToScience 2 points ago +3 / -1

Also George McMichael was an ex-cop with a departmental history of being a sleazy scumbag and overall a very incompetent, terrible cop. There's also an open investigation into corruption that he used personal connections to get away with it the first time.

He was on the cop powertrip god-complex thing. You know what the difference is between an ex-cop and someone who has never been a cop? Literally nothing, they have zero authority or power to do fuck-all.

3
Auroraalpha 3 points ago +3 / -0

Dont forget having to come back after Thanksgiving!

3
deleted 3 points ago +5 / -2
3
Atlantapede 3 points ago +4 / -1

Nah the judge ruled last week that the self-defense claim was no good since they were conducting an unlawful citizens arrest. Fucker waited to the day before closing arguments to rule on the issue.

0
Groundpounder 0 points ago +1 / -1

It’s a murky case, for sure. I thought the convictions were excessively harsh. They could have gotten their hands slapped in criminal court and gotten slammed in civil court instead

125
Weallseethetruth 125 points ago +141 / -16

While I TOTALLY agree with them pulling the gun on him when they thought he was robbing them they shouldn't have chased him down the road ... When he ran they should have called the cops

67
randomuser9193 67 points ago +97 / -30

Exactly. We don't need an army of low IQ vigilantes running around.

24
Weallseethetruth 24 points ago +28 / -4

That's not my point... I believe in people protecting their property and in a just world I wouldn't have minded them running him down and holding him till the cops got there.... I'm speaking in a sense of what will get you arrested or not!! .... Fuck the jogger it's too bad he didn't try to fight then right then so they could blast his thieving ass!!

20
NoFakeNewsCommies 20 points ago +25 / -5

Protect your property, don't keep chasing after people when they're off of it. Its no longer your problem

15
deleted 15 points ago +18 / -3
-1
randomuser9193 -1 points ago +3 / -4

They just want the right to shoot black guys, is that too much to ask?!!!

Sorry, I mean joggers.

1
penguinjay1212 1 point ago +1 / -0

yeah IF everyone could deport this reddit homo trying to make this community look bad, that'd be GReeeeaat

4
Miztivin 4 points ago +4 / -0

100%

Pretty sure the law clearly states that shooting someone with their back turned is not self defense.

1
Weallseethetruth 1 point ago +2 / -1

Agree with this

-7
deleted -7 points ago +2 / -9
7
Pepeflavorednoodles 7 points ago +13 / -6

But they didn’t actually see him stealing shit. These idiots are guilty for the same reasons Rittenhouse is innocent. If you chase somebody down, keeping a conflict going, they are the ones defending themselves and the chasers never had the right to force them to in the first place.

-1
Weallseethetruth -1 points ago +4 / -5

There had been a string of robberies in the area.. if it quacks like a duck... ... Look I originally said after they chased them off the property they should have stopped chasing him... Was he trying to steal shit? I don't know... Was there a possibility he was? Yes .. was he someplace he wasn't supposed to be? Yes... Was he wearing boots for jogging.. yes ... It's all adds up to the fact he was looking for something to steal... They should have confronted him and when he ran let the cops handle it .... A lot of y'all are starting to sound like LeBron!!

2
Pepeflavorednoodles 2 points ago +3 / -1

No see I 100% agree with all of that. And if they did that instead of what they did then we wouldn’t be here, talking about this.

1
Weallseethetruth 1 point ago +2 / -1

👍🏻

-4
deleted -4 points ago +2 / -6
7
3-10 7 points ago +9 / -2

Why, it encourages criminals fleeing.

1
CoyoteandBadger 1 point ago +1 / -0

And this is the key failure in this nations legal system that conservatives refused to acknowledge. 10 years ago, hell even 5 years ago this incident would've never gone to court. People snooping around in other peoples houses should expect to get shot and die. But conservatives have, per usual, conceded their "morals" to leftist creep and are delighted to throw people in prison who defend their community just to save face.

6
MolochHunter 6 points ago +7 / -1

if police refrain from policing blacks bc 'diversity' and 'muh whiteness' , then who exactly is left to apprehend black criminals turning your neighborhood into compton?

What IQ threshold should i hold you to before you are allowed to defend your neighborhood?

3
Captainlizard 3 points ago +3 / -0

This is the missing point in all of this. People don't feel safe because most police aren't doing their job, and the ones that are get put on trial for it.

2
CoyoteandBadger 2 points ago +2 / -0

It is key to understanding just how fucked this nations legal system is. And sadly a lot of people even here don't get it. If you play by Their rules, sure, all three belong in prison. But in the world of liberty nobody would have to deal with the concept of joggers in the first place. They'd be taken care of before it would even create a problem.

2
Wordlife187 2 points ago +2 / -0

That's right. Trust the government. They're here to help, right?

1
TrannyClausSliceDice 1 point ago +1 / -0

Really? So even putting morality aside you’d be dumb enough… in this day and age to chase down a random black dude you suspected of stealing…. Chase him down with shotguns and kill him? You know damn good and well you wouldn’t because that is fucking retarded.

0
randomuser9193 0 points ago +1 / -1

Surprisingly, I don't trust lawless vigilantes.

2
CoyoteandBadger 2 points ago +2 / -0

You deserve everything coming to you kek

1
randomuser9193 1 point ago +1 / -0

Are you a lawless vigilante?

1
horus_falke 1 point ago +5 / -4

Who are you to call them low IQ? You don't know them, you're just basing that statement on your jewish-formed ideology of whites that are faggot city dwellers. Open your stupid eyes.

1
TrannyClausSliceDice 1 point ago +1 / -0

Well. Now they’re going to jail forEVER. As they should. Doing what they did is pretty fucking stupid and LOW IQ.

Take the morality out of it… chasing down, even a thief, and shooting him is fucking retarded.

Jail: forever. Dumb fuckking idiots.

1
randomuser9193 1 point ago +2 / -1

Their sequence of decision making ending with them in prison leads me to think they are low IQ.

2
CoyoteandBadger 2 points ago +2 / -0

Defending your community is low IQ cool faggot

1
randomuser9193 1 point ago +1 / -0

Sounds like you've got a bone to pick.

21
PraiseBeToScience 21 points ago +29 / -8

Dude wasn't even carrying anything, do they couldn't even claim he was a thief. It's not like he was running with a Makita tool bag or something.

8
Weallseethetruth 8 points ago +13 / -5

And shit had been robbed from that area multiple times it's why they were on the look out

0
deleted 0 points ago +6 / -6
4
spezisapedo2 4 points ago +4 / -0

they knew because the cops/ neighbor told them.

2
PraiseBeToScience 2 points ago +7 / -5

Literally only one report of theft had happened in the area and it was a gun stolen from someone's car, more than a full month prior. Three months prior, one guy said he thinks some stuff went missing, but wasn't sure, and he said it was a white and a black person with a car.

This was all bogus nonsense.

3
weme06 3 points ago +6 / -3

He was on video stealing in the area before, just to clarify

1
PraiseBeToScience 1 point ago +7 / -6

Unless you're about to show me something I didn't see the only video was him standing in a construction site, looking around, then walking away empty handed.

3
DoritoBlizzardPence 3 points ago +3 / -0

Your missing the part where he stole their weapon

2
CoyoteandBadger 2 points ago +2 / -0

What is canvassing faggot

3
PraiseBeToScience 3 points ago +4 / -1

So if I walk into a store, look at some stuff, and walk out empty handed, you're allowed to chase me down with guns because you imagine I might come back to shoplift it later?

1
CoyoteandBadger 1 point ago +1 / -0

You do if you enter when it's closed, several times over the course of a week, and run every time the cops get called and can't find you. You deserve nothing less than death faggot.

2
PraiseBeToScience 2 points ago +3 / -1

lmao

How about if I walk on someone's land to admire some classic car a guy is slowly restoring that's parked in the driveway, and I do it every few days when I walk by? When do I get to get murdered for the crime of stealing that car in your imagination?

1
Hatefullynch 1 point ago +2 / -1

He was known as the jogger in the area before all this

He has a long list of crimes blah blah

They are guilty of killing him, but we're talking low tier murder. Should they have been there? No, but jogger shouldn't have lunged for the gun and became a better citizen either. Was it self defense? Also no but they even charged the cameraman, thats how you know it wasn't a fair trial and our peers are pretty fucking stupid

-1
PraiseBeToScience -1 points ago +2 / -3

For me, we had lots of evidence for Kyle that people could share. Here's a link to this video, here's a link to this one.

I keep hearing about all these stories about how McMichaels was told by the cops to be the neighborhood sheriff, but I see zero substantiation for that, only what McMichael himself claims.

And all these stories about how everybody was getting robbed, but whenever I try to find the police reports, I keep coming back with stories claiming that there weren't reports of thefts, only a stolen gun that happened two months prior.

I'm happy to entertain evidence but it appears that there's absolutely zero and it's just people sharing anecdotes.

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
3
Weallseethetruth 3 points ago +11 / -8

He was in the building looking for shit to steal dude

14
DomTullipso 14 points ago +17 / -3

But he didn't. He trespassed, was chased down and shot for it. Should he have been there? No. But these guys were not acting legally. It wasn't like he was breaking into an occupied dwelling

3
DoritoBlizzardPence 3 points ago +4 / -1

The thug tried to steal their gun

0
DomTullipso 0 points ago +1 / -1

He got out the truck with the gun after chasing someone down. Want couldn't he follow him until the cops arrived? Serious injury or death wasn't a possibility for McMichael until he got out of the truck. After chasing someone for trespassing on a construction site that he didn't own. Can we at least agree it was handled in a completely idiotic way?

0
DoritoBlizzardPence 0 points ago +1 / -1

I bet you supported grosswitz and rosumbum cinsidering arbery acted the same as them

0
DomTullipso 0 points ago +1 / -1

If you honestly don't realize the cases aren't anything alike, then there's no reason to discuss it further. Happy Thanksgiving.

6
PunishedSnek 6 points ago +8 / -2

And he is innocent of that until proven guilty. Well, try proving he is guilty. When nothing stolen was ever found on his body or ditched during his getaway.

0
DoritoBlizzardPence 0 points ago +2 / -2

Hes not innocent, he tried to steal their wrapons

0
PraiseBeToScience 0 points ago +2 / -2

Or even found in his house. Trayvon Martin at least had a backpack full of stolen jewelry.

Also I'm not inclined to believe anyone is going to fucking steal lumber, copper tubing, and table saws on foot, five miles away from his house. You use a goddamn vehicle for that.

4
cjcivicx 4 points ago +7 / -3

So now we're killing people for thinking about stealing?

2
DoritoBlizzardPence 2 points ago +3 / -1

No he was shot after he tried to steal their guns

-2
deleted -2 points ago +1 / -3
2
DoritoBlizzardPence 2 points ago +3 / -1

They stood still while arbery charged THEM and tried to steal their weapons a(rbery did the same thing rosunbum did). Had the black supremacist vermin not charged and tried to steal theri weapons arbery woudl still live to loot anothdr day.

I hope blm tries to loot you and then you are the one punished

-1
BidenLikesMiners -1 points ago +1 / -2

thats what the libs wanted for 1 6

3
PraiseBeToScience 3 points ago +13 / -10

And yet he stole nothing.

3
spezisapedo2 3 points ago +3 / -0

because it had already been stolen. he was likely scoping it out

2
PraiseBeToScience 2 points ago +7 / -5

because it had already been stolen

Do you have the police reports to substantiate that? Surely if all this stuff had been stolen, there's a log of it, right?

A construction company isn't going to just not report their shit being robbed, so where were all these reports of theft?

2
deleted 2 points ago +10 / -8
-3
deleted -3 points ago +4 / -7
1
deleted 1 point ago +5 / -4
1
Im_sorry_im_jewish4 1 point ago +1 / -0

muh blacks

3
MakeFreedomRing 3 points ago +4 / -1

We've built lots of houses and people are always coming in to look around. Several ended up buying the place. Its not uncommon for looky loos to check things out. No reason to chase someone down with guns. Call the cops and get a no tresspassing charge against them. Was there no treaspassing signs on the building property?

0
PraiseBeToScience 0 points ago +2 / -2

People wander into open construction sites all the time. It's technically trespassing but people's idea is that because it's not built, it's not a "real" property.

And you know, I might buy that he was looking for stuff to steal, if he was there with his vehicle. But he wasn't. Are people here seriously trying to argue that he was going to throw 150 pounds of copper tubing on his shoulder and run five miles with it?

2
deleted 2 points ago +3 / -1
1
MolochHunter 1 point ago +4 / -3

he could have dumped some shit in the bushes seeing he was being scoped

he could have been scouting for large equipment to come back in the night and steal

3
PraiseBeToScience 3 points ago +8 / -5

So barely two weeks after Kyle's trial we're going with "he crossed municipal lines; he didn't belong there; he went to a place he didn't need to be to cause trouble"?

None if these fat retards witnessed shit. Are you going to tell me Arbery was going to WALK five miles back home with a fucking table saw and three rolls of Romex?

0
MolochHunter 0 points ago +3 / -3

no, im telling you he was scoping for table saws which he intended to return in the dark of night in a vehicle to steal

0
PraiseBeToScience 0 points ago +2 / -2

Just to be clear, you're accusing him of a crime that only happened in your imagination, right?

2
MolochHunter 2 points ago +2 / -0

his trespass was a crime

his trespass while under probation was a serious crime

that gives an argument to probable cause.

0
CoyoteandBadger 0 points ago +1 / -1

"Rosenbaum wasn't carrying a weapon, so they couldn't even claim he would kill Kyle. It's not like Rosenbaum was running with an AR15 or something"

Incredible.

3
PraiseBeToScience 3 points ago +4 / -1

In order you to be a thief you have to have stolen something, my fuck, are you as stupid as Travis McMichael?

1
CoyoteandBadger 1 point ago +1 / -0

YWNBARW FAGGOT

1
PraiseBeToScience 1 point ago +2 / -1

REEEEEEEEEEE

10
johnbillaby 10 points ago +10 / -0

They called the cops before they went out to confront him, I believe, apparently it was in an area that it takes the cops awhile to respond to.

7
alloffoglesfootlong 7 points ago +7 / -0

Defendant stated they didn't call the cops until well after they began chasing him around.

5
johnbillaby 5 points ago +5 / -0

But awhile before they shot him, I assume.

2
alloffoglesfootlong 2 points ago +3 / -1

Not as long as you'd think, by Travis' testimony, maybe 1-2 minutes.

1
spezisapedo2 1 point ago +1 / -0

they were on the phone with the cops at the time.perhaps before.

2
Mintap 2 points ago +2 / -0

He was under the impression the cops were called, and immediately called them when he found out that wasn't the case.

2
MolochHunter 2 points ago +2 / -0

apparently it was in an area that it takes the cops awhile to respond to.

thus the necessity for citizens to police and conduct citizen arrests

3
TrumpAndGodWin 3 points ago +3 / -0

He ran towards them... then he switched sides of the truck to use it as cover for a sneak attack.

2
Pillage 2 points ago +2 / -0

Anyone who has ever watched the ASP channel knows you never chase a fleeing felon.

1
CoyoteandBadger 1 point ago +1 / -0

In this day and age you don't, does that make it right?

84
PraiseBeToScience 84 points ago +109 / -25

Unsurprising.

Literally everybody involved with this was a retard, including Arbery.

They tried to do to Arbery exactly what Grosskreutz tried to do: they witnessed absolutely nothing, were no part of the original incident, but then because someone told them to, they pulled out guns and confronted him.

And despite all the rhetoric I do agree that the morons were Good Ol Boy rednecks out playing cop. If you ever find yourself a shirtless obese retard in the bed of a pickup with a gun, hooting and hollering, chasing someone down, time to reevaluate your shitty life.

Literally the only way these idiots could be trashier is if their names were seriously Bubba, Cletus, and Skeeter.

31
MolochHunter 31 points ago +40 / -9

when the cops no longer play cop, who steps into the vacuum?

what IQ threshold is necessary to defend your neighborhood?

there's a lot of snobbery going on here. You may as well go ahead and call them deplorables

1
oldhankdonald 1 point ago +3 / -2

Then become a cop or help your police force at a local level? Elect a good sheriff? Idk. But you have to operate within the laws yourself regardless if cops should have been doing something… which in this case, not sure what you expect cops to do. They certainly wouldn’t have shot the guy and there wasn’t a crime other than maybe trespassing.

6
MolochHunter 6 points ago +6 / -0

cops also would have shot the guy, if the guy tried to wrest a gun out of the cops hands, as this idiot did

3
CoyoteandBadger 3 points ago +3 / -0

Jesus Christ its like you faggots ignored the last two years WHAT IMAGINARY GOOD POLICE ARE COMING TO SAVE YOU?

1
oldhankdonald 1 point ago +1 / -0

You’re extrapolating a little too much. I agree with you that there is a lot of rot and the top of law enforcement is nothing more than deep state tools and evil politicians- but there are still some decent sheriffs out there. There in the same boat we are- I don’t expect them to “save me” and more than I expect you to save me.

-3
deleted -3 points ago +16 / -19
10
MolochHunter 10 points ago +12 / -2

cops can be hours away for this kind of crime. then decline to lay charges or, if charges are laid, some marxist asshole D.A. will drop the charges.

You dont know these men. You dont know their stories. You dont know what level of criminality they and their neigbors endure with complete indifference from the 'Law'

2
fusreedah 2 points ago +2 / -0

Pretty sure the cops did arrive not long after, though?

2
MolochHunter 2 points ago +2 / -0

well yea but was that only because the call out code had changed from suspected burglary to suspected homicide?

how long would they have waited had it not escalated?

-2
PraiseBeToScience -2 points ago +8 / -10

Put on your thinking cap and tell me even if a cop was there what you actually believe the cop would do?

Do you think they would actually arrest Arbery? Because "he walked into that timber framed unfinished house then walked out 30 seconds later"? Arrest him for not being in possession of anything stolen? A cop is going to be more pissed that they're wasting his time.

Maybe we can talk about all the laws the rednecks broke. Funny how that's okay. Pretty sure driving your truck across people's property is just as bad, if not worse, than standing in a pile of lumber.

7
MolochHunter 7 points ago +8 / -1

last i hear trespass was a crime

on top of which, police, doing their jobs, could have assessed for a match of fingerprints from local crime scenes

-2
PraiseBeToScience -2 points ago +2 / -4

Other things that are crimes:

  • Smoking within 100 feet of the entrance of a building.

  • Going 26 in a 25.

  • Rolling a stopsign.

Which of these crimes do you think necessitates fat rednecks chasing you down with guns in the back of their pickup like they're ISIS in a Toyota Hilux?

-4
PraiseBeToScience -4 points ago +5 / -9

Lol they're rednecks. Their story is a saga of natty lite and bragging about shooting the neighborhood cats.

2
penguinjay1212 2 points ago +2 / -0

I hope you are a northerner who thinks they "won the Civil war" lol. Bc thats the vibes you throw. Talking about rednecks. Youre a fucking moron.

5
MeinDonald 5 points ago +5 / -0

you sound like a liberal or an ex-liberal by all the white fragility you're spewing

-4
deleted -4 points ago +6 / -10
1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
6
ottomanboyscout 6 points ago +8 / -2

Maybe do research. Gregory McMichael was a former cop and an active P.I. who asked by the police department to monitor te neighborhood in which he lived because of a rash of burglaries. The entire neighborhood was instructed by the police to call HIM not the police if they saw something do to the police being short hand after a successful Defund the Police campaign.

4
PraiseBeToScience 4 points ago +10 / -6

"Contact us" and "chase down every black guy you see with your truck and wave guns at him".

McMichael was probably a huge piece of shit cop himself if this was his 'solution'.

You know what another name for a 'retired cop' is? NOT A COP. They hold ZERO authority.

Are we seriously back to this 'BAK DUH BLOO' shit?

3
ottomanboyscout 3 points ago +4 / -1

So the cops tell a retired cop they don't have time to help a neighborhood experience a rash of burglaries (that included a handgun by the way) and you have a problem with the citizens trying to defend it themselves?

-1
PraiseBeToScience -1 points ago +5 / -6

So Gaige Grosskreutz was right to shoot Kyle, correct? After all, he was told he committed a crime, so he was just making a citizen's arrest!

4
ottomanboyscout 4 points ago +5 / -1

He was chasing Kyle because he put out a dumpster fire he was wheeling towards a gas station! In what fucking world are those two things even close to similar!?

0
deleted 0 points ago +5 / -5
3
ottomanboyscout 3 points ago +4 / -1

And now three men that just didn't want a dangerous piece of shit crawling around there neighborhood get to spend life behind bars along with a guy who was just trying to capture the whole thing on camera. Fuck this entire world.

4
DoritoBlizzardPence 4 points ago +4 / -0

Why you ignoring that the blm vermin tried to steal their gun? I hope a blmer loots you and the tries to assilt you. Perhaps then youll stop sucking blacl supremacist scum off

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
3
Duck_man 3 points ago +3 / -0

You’re running (who cares from what or to what). Dudes screaming yelling running behind you shoot a shotgun blast into the air. What are YOU gonna do? Probably think they’re about to kill your and try to grab the shotgun.

1
CoyoteandBadger 1 point ago +1 / -0

Incredible how people defending their community thanks to lack of policing are going to be throw in prison because you are an utter faggot. Since when did this site get muddled up with absolute low quality retards?

2
PraiseBeToScience 2 points ago +3 / -1

By all means, feel free to gun people down over rolling stop signs, you busybody narc.

You sound like the bitchy faggot who lives down the street from me who sits in a chair and screams at anybody driving by too fast because he has nothing better to do. We're all hoping he dies.

1
CoyoteandBadger 1 point ago +1 / -0

Incredible false equivalent faggot

47
VarusSPQR 47 points ago +82 / -35

So what have we learned? Self defense sometimes okay but not if you’re white and defending yourself against a violent jogger.

58
Tiquortoo 58 points ago +106 / -48

And not after you were the aggressor and chased the jogger down the road. These guys were morons and they deserve no defense. What they did was stupid.

45
SCP0073 45 points ago +64 / -19

Yeah, they weren’t defending anything, they sought him out.

9
clownworld30330 9 points ago +10 / -1

Zimmerman surreptitiously sought out Martin, and it got messy, and he's free because it was clearly self-defense, but also because he was ambushed by Martin.

These guys weren't surreptitious, and we don't know what they said to Arbery. So it's less clearly self-defense. Maybe they threatened him?

3
SCP0073 3 points ago +7 / -4

Idk, when you approach someone with a gun, I can see where the jury thought they were being aggressive. Tough case

7
redpillthenormies 7 points ago +8 / -1

Fuck this. You're allowed to carry a gun. You're allowed to talk to someone. You're allowed to talk to someone while holding a gun (not pointed at them). Charging at a person holding a gun who just wants to talk to you, hitting them, kicking them, trying to steal their gun, refusing to stop assualting them and stealing their gun after you're already shot in the hand, and then getting shot is just Darwin Award material.

4
MAGAlifeChoseMe 4 points ago +4 / -0

Agreed which is why we have a standard of reasonable doubt and not "do you think they were dumb?"

2
clownworld30330 2 points ago +3 / -1

Yes, tough case.

4
Somefucktard 4 points ago +5 / -1

The jogger went straight on the attack.

0
SCP0073 0 points ago +1 / -1

I saw it that way, too

4
spezisapedo2 4 points ago +6 / -2

he ran up to the travis from like 40 feet away

16
Muffinman 16 points ago +31 / -15

Agreed... they were idiots

-3
deleted -3 points ago +3 / -6
13
MikeWhoCheeseHairy 13 points ago +15 / -2

yeah pretty obvious from the start this would be the result, not sure why so many posters on here thought otherwise

3
redpillthenormies 3 points ago +4 / -1

We knew it would be the result because these guys are White and Armed Robbery is black. We're just saying if the races were reversed no one would question it was self defense.

-5
deleted -5 points ago +2 / -7
3
AOCDickPics 3 points ago +9 / -6

TLDR: If someone robs your local 7-11 you can't go chase them down a week later and try to hold them at gunpoint. They weren't defending their own property nor did they see a crime.

Felony murder seems a bit heavy-handed since Arbery actually was guilty of said crime and "he shouldn't have been there" is actually apt.

-1
redpillthenormies -1 points ago +2 / -3

They didn't chase him down. That's what liberals say, even though it's on video that they did not chase him.

-3
deleted -3 points ago +2 / -5
0
DoritoBlizzardPence 0 points ago +1 / -1

Why are you black supremacist scum ignoring how the jogger tried to steal their weapons? Its no different then what rosumbum and grosswitz did. Like rosenbum and grosswitz whk tried to steal kyles gun, the blm terrorist tried to steal the weapons

29
RonPaulWasRight 29 points ago +50 / -21

Rittenhouse was chased, chasers were guilty. Arbery was chased, chasers were guilty. It's a consistent ruling.

8
HeavyVetting 8 points ago +14 / -6

Correct. Now, if only Rittenhouse's chasers were actually found guilty, there might be real justice.

6
RonPaulWasRight 6 points ago +7 / -1

Gaige should definitely have some charges pressed, and jump kick man should be identified by the state so that he can face charges as well. The rest Kyle handled himself.

4
HeavyVetting 4 points ago +4 / -0

We know who jump kick man is. He would have testified but he demanded immunity. Interestingly, Binger refused. Maybe covering his ass? Maybe charges are coming? Won't hold my breath though.

2
Hiw-lir-sirith 2 points ago +2 / -0

Jump kick man is Maurice Freeland.

3
HansMann 3 points ago +3 / -0

Kyle shot them dead

5
HeavyVetting 5 points ago +5 / -0

Not Gaige. And not Jump Kick Man, who the prosecutors have identified.

0
cjcivicx 0 points ago +1 / -1

This 1000000x.

4
muslimporn 4 points ago +5 / -1

No it's not. Not all chases are the same.

In this case when Kyle was pursued it was motivated with explicit malice, intent and threats.

In this case Arbery is not being pursued by people showing any violent intent nor with malice or making threats.

Arbery is actually the one in a sense who runs around and jumps the guy with the guy much the same as Joseph Rosenbaum did.

That said, the actions of the men in this case were somewhat haphazard. I might consider some liability but in this case I would just say innocent.

It's not worth throwing people in jail for a mistake on a sentence that's bound to be ten times more than they should get.

I bet you if I look up the charges they were over charged and are now facing prison time for something they didn't do.

3
spezisapedo2 3 points ago +4 / -1

except arbery reached for their gun when they werent shooting. Travis was standing still NOT shooting

1
MAGA_Centurion 1 point ago +7 / -6

Rittenhouse was attacked. Not even consistent scenarios smooth brain.

-4
deleted -4 points ago +2 / -6
-1
MAGA_Centurion -1 points ago +2 / -3

Yeah.....no shit. That's how this case is different. The dude chasing someone down was attacked in this case. In Kyle's case, the dude being chased down was attacked. Dumbfuck.

1
redpillthenormies 1 point ago +2 / -1

When will we finally stop pretending Robbery was chased? Robbery was jogging towards them.

0
DoritoBlizzardPence 0 points ago +2 / -2

Arbery ttied to steal their weapons before getting rittenhoused. Its a shame you werent the one beaten by arbery you black supremacisy sucm

1
RonPaulWasRight 1 point ago +1 / -0

Dude get out of the public education system.

21
FuckPlebbit 21 points ago +27 / -6

They chased him down the road, that’s really what got them. It turned them into the aggressor and GAs stand your ground isn’t like Texas.

Honestly if they’d just shot him from their own property they’d probably have been let go.

4
Somefucktard 4 points ago +8 / -4

Stationary truck...

Chasing...

2
deleted 2 points ago +5 / -3
1
PraiseBeToScience 1 point ago +3 / -2

You realize there was more to it than the single 30 second clip, right?

-1
Somefucktard -1 points ago +1 / -2

I suppose I could ignore the most pertinent part of the case that proves a man ran toward a confrontation with another man who was standing still to attack him.

We could gloss over the fact that he remained in the road the whole time closing the distance to danger, while some defenders of the guy will attempt to assert he was trying to get away.

We could do that.

Or we could come to grips with reality and understand that people don't ordinarily jog in the road. People wouldn't use streets to escape vehicles, especially someone who is fond of trespassing, and come to the conclusion that his intent was a premeditated assault from a very long ways away. A far cry from being captured, cornered, or imprisoned.

1
DoritoBlizzardPence 1 point ago +3 / -2

Did you miss the part where arbery tried to steal their gun like rosunbum tried to do with kyle?

0
Liquid_Hot_MAGA 0 points ago +1 / -1

Because they chased him, they are in the wrong

-1
redpillthenormies -1 points ago +1 / -2

They did not chase him. You can just watch the video...

-1
deleted -1 points ago +2 / -3
-1
trainrekt -1 points ago +3 / -4

In a way, they're the same trial. What's on trial is can you run up to someone in the open air and wrestle their gun away from them and still be considered the victim of that person shooting you?

3
cjcivicx 3 points ago +7 / -4

Yes, because in this case, there was no threat to the three dumbasses until THEY chase him down.

Arbery was shit, but they had ZERO reasons to do what they did.

2
trainrekt 2 points ago +4 / -2

No. He was in the open air.

The most irrational thing you could do is make a 90 degree turn directly toward a man to wrestle him for his gun. Further, while your back is turned to another man in the truck bed with a gun.

Arbery was offended at the dynamic of situation and went nuts. You can see it in this video that he had an issue with the power dynamics:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0hOPi63mJDI

3
cjcivicx 3 points ago +5 / -2

And the video doesn't help their case... they could have just continued to follow until the cops got there.

They CHOSE to escalate.

If Arbery had killed one or all he'd have been justified, just like Kyle.

0
MeinDonald 0 points ago +3 / -3

thats some of the dumbest logic I've ever read.

Rosenbaum ran and reached for Kyle's gun and got shot. Arbery ran and reached for the guy's gun and got shot. Tell me how those cases are any different ya liberal faggot

"but... but... the 3 of them were slowly driving behind him in a truck"

1
cjcivicx 1 point ago +4 / -3

Again, obvious troll, and for the inbred flipper kids in the back, you don't get to chase someone with guns and then claim self defense when they finally attack.

0
Somefucktard 0 points ago +2 / -2

Chasing. In a truck with no driver. Standing still well over a minute in the video.

Chasing.

-2
trainrekt -2 points ago +2 / -4

Escalate implies they had an intent to kill him. Therefore Arbery determined this when he chose to change direction 90 degrees from 20ft away and wrestle the man for his gun.

Because they did not have intent to kill, it stands to reason Arbery going out of his way to engage him in combat was the escalation that caused the man to rationally defend himself.

Had that been Kyle Rittenhouse jogging and those neighbors black, those men would be free.

3
cjcivicx 3 points ago +4 / -1

They did. They wouldn't have guns drawn on an OBVIOUSLY unarmed man if they didn't.

Sorry. No one is buying what you're selling.

0
PraiseBeToScience 0 points ago +3 / -3

Arbery was shit, but they had ZERO reasons to do what they did.

Things make a lot more sense when you realize George McMichael was a dirty ex-cop.

0
cjcivicx 0 points ago +2 / -2

Yeah, but if you point that out, you're apparently a BLM sympathizer now.

People on here send a lot of mixed messages about justice. You can't simultaneously be for Kyle killing those chasing him, then get mad about the men that chased Arbery down being found guilty of murder after he attacked them.

You either want justice applied equally or you don't.

42
RuleoVicus 42 points ago +83 / -41

Retaliation verdict for Rittenhouse

34
IvIA6A 34 points ago +49 / -15

Nah they were retarded. Everyone involved.

-9
deleted -9 points ago +7 / -16
-1
MAGADutchPEDE -1 points ago +4 / -5

And you're a retard

1
_Eric_Ciaramella_ 1 point ago +1 / -0

better retarded than faggot

-5
deleted -5 points ago +4 / -9
-10
deleted -10 points ago +5 / -15
3
deleted 3 points ago +5 / -2
1
Axiom502 1 point ago +18 / -17

And cuckservatives are plum about it

8
deleted 8 points ago +23 / -15
2
redpillthenormies 2 points ago +4 / -2

It's dumb to do something like this is an anti-White system where you know they will screw you over for it. But legally, they did nothing wrong. Holding a gun and trying to talk to someone is not a crime. Armed Robbery was hitting, kicking, and trying to steal their gun. Robbery was shot in the hand and still would not stop trying to steal the gun. They would have been dead if they didn't defend themselves, making this self defense. They only shot him once he attacked them.

-1
Axiom502 -1 points ago +12 / -13

I'm sure your wife's boyfriend appreciates the sentiment

4
deleted 4 points ago +14 / -10
3
MeinDonald 3 points ago +8 / -5

but by your own retard logic, he has every right to punch you in the face and grab for your gun, but you can't shoot him.

sounds like your logic isn't sound

-1
deleted -1 points ago +6 / -7
-1
deleted -1 points ago +6 / -7
2
redpillthenormies 2 points ago +4 / -2

They didn't chase down the street. They were standing there and Robbery jogged towards them.

They didn't hold him at gunpoint. They didn't have the gun pointed at all until Robbery charged, hit, kicked, and tried to steal it.

Robbery was a criminal, while you're admitting you want to randomly and falsely accuse the person you're commenting at of a crime.

You know how stupid your comment is.

-1
MAGADutchPEDE -1 points ago +2 / -3

They were trying to "arrest" him and fired a warning shot before he tried to take the gun...

0
redpillthenormies 0 points ago +2 / -2

That makes Robbery even more stupid.

-3
deleted -3 points ago +2 / -5
-6
deleted -6 points ago +2 / -8
38
TheNotSoEvilEngineer 38 points ago +42 / -4

So... lessons learned. Don't call cops, Don't record anything.

40
Mathelm 40 points ago +42 / -2

Lesson is, DON'T EVER TALK TO THE POLICE, If you're ever in a bad situation, First call is try 911.
Second call is to your attorney.
Never TALK to the Police, They will hang you just to watch you die.
The Police are not, and never will be, your friend.

11
Trythisagain 11 points ago +11 / -0

“Any thing you say can and will be held against you”

5
HeavyVetting 5 points ago +5 / -0

Yeah, not calling the police could have gotten them in trouble, but they would have been in a lot less trouble had they not said so much to the police right away.

16
based_trekkie 16 points ago +18 / -2

Shut up and shovel

8
AlcoholicRetard 8 points ago +10 / -2

Based and shovel pilled

3
MAGAlifeChoseMe 3 points ago +4 / -1

Just like Grandpa said.

2
Maga2020Maga2020 2 points ago +2 / -0

Finally the right answer.

2
deleted 2 points ago +3 / -1
-1
TickleTh1sElmo -1 points ago +1 / -2

Or don't get in your truck and chase after a guy and confront him yourself.

1
DoritoBlizzardPence 1 point ago +1 / -0

Or dont try to steal their weapons.arbery deserves death penalty

30
FrankWisner 30 points ago +37 / -7

"Mr. Arbery shod be here today, digging around construction sites looking for shit to steal or burn down, while everyone is off for Thanksgiving."

----Most Popular Vegetable in Presidential History (China)

8
HeavyVetting 8 points ago +8 / -0

If I had a black son, he would look like Mr. Arbery, and be a night time home construction site conoisseur just like him.

2
FrankWisner 2 points ago +2 / -0

don't get me wrong, i done it once or twice ma damnself

28
Salt_Cartoonist 28 points ago +38 / -10

Expected verdict. They didn't know the law, and did something stupid as fuck. If you don't know the law don't do shit like this.

17
PunishedSnek 17 points ago +22 / -5

Yes. Don't take the law into your own hands unless you know the law and are willing to stop well short of the line and let the guilty person get away. In our justice system, guilty people get away all the time. A citizens arrest should be no different. Hands off approach.

13
Judicator 13 points ago +13 / -0

Our justice system was constructed under the premise that it is better that some guilty people should go free than some innocent people mistakenly found guilty.

Obviously modern clown world is screwing this up pretty bad, but that is still the ideal we should shoot for, often best summarized as "Innocent until proven guilty".

1
BidenLikesMiners 1 point ago +1 / -0

True, when a shitlib accuses a pede of a hate crime, we know its true, so let them attack u dumbass

11
MolochHunter 11 points ago +12 / -1

you people talk as if the Rule Of Law still exists in your neighborhood

it doest. You have a vacuum of Order which these men were trying to fill

4
deleted 4 points ago +4 / -0
3
DoritoBlizzardPence 3 points ago +3 / -0

Til its legal for arbery to loot and then try to assualt someone and steal their weapon. You sure you didnt root for grosswitz/rosumbum who djd the same thimg arbery did

1
deleted 1 point ago +3 / -2
-6
deleted -6 points ago +2 / -8
28
deleted 28 points ago +63 / -35
15
scrubking 15 points ago +19 / -4

or better yet use your phone to record him breaking the law and give it to police.

6
HeavyVetting 6 points ago +6 / -0

They had him on security cameras multiple times, but only trespassing, so even if the police caught him all they could have done was officially trespass him.

9
PraiseBeToScience 9 points ago +18 / -9

I can hate both joggers and rednecks, you know.

7
Congo 7 points ago +13 / -6

Totally agree. Stupid action.

1
SigAR 1 point ago +1 / -0

O my science

6
IllUseAnchorBaby 6 points ago +6 / -0

Agree… but the world is probably a better place with arbery gone too, seemed like a horrible person… the video where he snaps at that police officer was telling, no decent human being acts like that

2
HeavyVetting 2 points ago +2 / -0

An armed society is a polite society... the assholes fuck around and find out.

4
D4M1ANU5 4 points ago +10 / -6

Exactly. The escalated.

26
UKnowTheThing 26 points ago +33 / -7

I saw user schiffblower with an explanation that sounded reasonable. I don’t know the law so I can’t speak to its accuracy.

“No. The law was clear. They didn’t catch the guy committing a crime. They were actually in the wrong here. Self-defense doesn’t apply because that is the law. Had they caught him actually committing a crime and not just running, it would be a totally different story.”

That being said I don’t understand the murder convictions for anyone who didn’t pull the trigger.

18
Recken 18 points ago +19 / -1

If you rob a store with a friend of your and that friend shoots and kills someone, you are just as liable as if you pulled the trigger. I would think the same applies here.

5
HeavyVetting 5 points ago +5 / -0

The Malice Murder was the only real murder conviction. The others were Felony Murder, which is just acknowledging that their felonies (like false imprisonment) led to a murder.

3
DomTullipso 3 points ago +3 / -0

If someone is killed while you are coming a felony, you're charged for their death

1
DoritoBlizzardPence 1 point ago +1 / -0

Its not accurate as arbury charged them abd tried ti steal their gun

0
Axiom502 0 points ago +4 / -4

He doesn't know what the fuck he's talking about

25
Brucesky420 25 points ago +35 / -10

THINK OF THE PRECEDENT THIS SETS! NOW PEOPLE WILL THINK THEY CAN GO AROUND STEALING SHIT WITH NO REPRECUSSIONS

oh wait, they already do

10
based_trekkie 10 points ago +13 / -3

IF you find someone stealing shit on your property....

SHOOT THEM ON YOUR PROPERTY!

6
peterstrzoked 6 points ago +9 / -3

And if you find someone stealing shit on someone else’s property, feel free to record them with your phone, but save the firearm until they attack you first.

Once our society has completely collapsed there will be a place for vigilantes, but we aren’t quite there yet, give it a couple more years/months/days

3
deleted 3 points ago +4 / -1
2
pyre2001 2 points ago +2 / -0

Depends on the state.

0
redpillthenormies 0 points ago +1 / -1

They didn't shoot Armed Robbery because he was stealing. They shot Robbery because Robbery attacked them and was trying to steal their gun. Why would you let someone steal your gun? They will turn it on you and kill you. This was self defense. I'm not praising them, but I can admit this was self defense.

7
PunishedSnek 7 points ago +11 / -4

Don't do a citizens arrest on someone you only merely suspect of a crime. And don't say to that person you are going to blow their head off thinking that will make them docile. It will put them in fear for the life and give them the right to attack you. There goes your right to self defense.

7
HeavyVetting 7 points ago +7 / -0

And if you do, don't just fucking tell the police all of that!

2
Mintap 2 points ago +4 / -2

They weren't trying to do a citizen's arrest. They were trying to keep track of where the suspect was for when the police arrived. That is why they stopped the truck at the intersection and waited. That was when Arbery charged and attacked them.

The defense was wrong to frame it as attempted citizen's arrest.

-1
PraiseBeToScience -1 points ago +2 / -3

Honestly there's a reason people don't do citizen's arrests. The idea of undertaking that liability for a fucking non-crime like walking into a construction site is imbecilic.

If the guy was fucking running down the street covered in goddamn blood carrying a severed head or some shit, fine, but they pulled this stunt over the equivalent of going 30 in a school zone. In fact, I'll bet you that would be more likely to cop you a charge than the 'trespassing' would.

19
IAmDisappoint 19 points ago +23 / -4

Fuck Ahmaud Arbery

17
publius1788 17 points ago +37 / -20

I don't feel bad for these morons. Kyle is a hero, these three are just retards.

2
4coresmoresmores 2 points ago +5 / -3

Doesn't mean they deserve life in prison.

-1
DoritoBlizzardPence -1 points ago +2 / -3

I bet you support rosumbum as wrll? Just like rosumbum, arbery charged at them and tried to steal their gun before getting offed you blacksupremacist vermin. I hope blm assualt you and then you get life in prison for defending yojrself

-3
deleted -3 points ago +9 / -12
5
deleted 5 points ago +7 / -2
-1
Litterboxer1 -1 points ago +3 / -4

Rent free

-4
deleted -4 points ago +4 / -8
16
me-no-likely3 16 points ago +16 / -0

Oh shit Ben Crump was involved in this case. That faggot is corrupt as fuck and put a fake witness on the stand in the Zimmerman/Trayvon Martin case. Fuck Benjamin Crump, retarded faggot extraordinaire.

14
borntacticool 14 points ago +19 / -5

Anyone who buys into this idea that "life is more valuable than property" is a fucking commie and you're undercutting your own argument because you could justify being disarmed because "life is more valuable than your shotgun".

Life is not more valuable than property. See how well you "live" when everything you own is taken away from you. Life and property are inseperable conditions of life.

6
Casswick 6 points ago +6 / -0

Well said

4
AmericanMonarchist 4 points ago +5 / -1

Property is a form of life. You spend irreplaceable years of your life working to own something. If someone steals it from you they are in a sense stealing your years from you as well.

-1
PraiseBeToScience -1 points ago +2 / -3

Can you tell me what property was threatened by a guy who stole nothing who walked onto fucking land?

2
borntacticool 2 points ago +2 / -0

This is why I hate you motherfuckers. You have to make up lies about what happened to make your arguments work and it's all incredibly stupid.

If you leave your door open and I walk into your house while you are in bed, no property was harmed so you have no right to inquire about what the fuck I'm doing there?

walked onto fucking land?

And here's where the lie is. He didn't walk into "land", he entered a dwelling multiple times and at night. When confronted for prowling, he tried to hide and reach for his waistband, essentially brandishing. Things went missing. FFS when he tried to hide in the home the first time he was caught and the police were called, their own first impulse was to draw their firearms and search the house for him. If you're telling me none of this would make you suspicious he's a burglar, you're too dumb to breathe and I won't care if you get robbed.

If knowing he's a career criminal who steals, runs from and resists police is not enough to convince you that he was following the same pattern casing those places for burglary (and was probably actively burglarizing the neighborhood), you're hopeless.

Tell me what you think he was doing there at night. I gotta hear the excuse factory.

1
PraiseBeToScience 1 point ago +4 / -3

he entered a dwelling multiple times and at night.

An unbuilt house nobody is living in is not a 'dwelling'. It could not even legally be considered one. If anyone was trying to claim that was a house it'd be declared uninhabitable.

1
borntacticool 1 point ago +1 / -0

Wrong, it is the actual text of the law. A dwelling according to the text of the law is anything "designed or intended" for habitation.

And you apparently haven't seen the house, it was very much habitable. It had multiple complete rooms, locked doors for equipment, a foundation, a slab, a roof, plumbing, electrical wiring. Someone could have occupied one of the finished rooms at the very least even if the outer doors weren't yet completed.

I've lived in a home like that while I completed its interior. You'd be surprised how fast the rest of that home could be completed. Most of what was left looks like insulation and drywall.

There was also a posted NO TRESPASSING sign.

-1
BidenLikesMiners -1 points ago +1 / -2

ok give your life over a property you edgy teenager faghot

2
borntacticool 2 points ago +2 / -0

Anyone who robs you obviously thinks your property is worth more than your life so they deserve the same exact treatment in return, you dippy tard.

-5
crypticusername -5 points ago +1 / -6

It wasn't their property he was (allegedly) stealing from. Defend your own shit, otherwise that's what insurance is for.

4
Maga2020Maga2020 4 points ago +5 / -1

I can't wait for you to defend people not helping your grandma when she gets mugged in broad daylight.

The public should mind their own business and let your grandma be robbed, I guess your grandma has insurance for that.

You sound like a commie.

-1
crypticusername -1 points ago +0 / -1

You could be given a little leeway for a family members property, but that wasnt the case here.

1
Maga2020Maga2020 1 point ago +2 / -1

I don't want you on any jury.

1
crypticusername 1 point ago +1 / -0

Sounds good Judge Fudge

-2
PraiseBeToScience -2 points ago +2 / -4

You realize he didn't steal anything, right?

1
Maga2020Maga2020 1 point ago +1 / -0

Hey can you call my uber and make me a sandwich?

3
borntacticool 3 points ago +4 / -1

So what? If a dindu steals from your wife, mother or sister it's none of your business? Don't get brazen with me. You can't have a community if you let people fall on their own. FFS Rittenhouse had tons of people come to his legal defense with donations. Not our business? Nah, we need community and part of being a community is protecting one another from outside threats.

that's what insurance is for.

Why should the victims have to pay a bunch of insurance adjuster/usurers for what criminals do? Let the criminals pay.

13
Beef_Vegan 13 points ago +18 / -5

Judging by comments I can see exactly why there will never be a revolution.

11
TrumpAndGodWin 11 points ago +14 / -3

Too many cuckservatives. They can't see the truth because they know they're too cowardly to do anything about it. And even worse they are going along with the evil injustice and creating more support for it. Maybe they'll learn when they're jogged next.

6
Maga2020Maga2020 6 points ago +8 / -2

An ex cop, his son and a neighbor all knew the career criminal was up to no good, they finally had the chance to do a valid citizens arrest on the scumbag and the scumbag attacks them.

The local police even asked the neighbors to call the ex-cop if they spotted the criminal again...

Scumbag dies and this site cucks out.

If the jogger was white these citizens would have done the exact same thing and if that scumbag attacked and got shot it would be fine as well.

In clown world we put the good citizens protecting their neighbors from criminals in prison for life.

3
deleted 3 points ago +5 / -2
4
DoritoBlizzardPence 4 points ago +4 / -0

We are fucked and already partway into becoming south africa

7
deleted 7 points ago +11 / -4
0
BidenLikesMiners 0 points ago +4 / -4

How many revolutions have you fought in faggot?

4
Beef_Vegan 4 points ago +4 / -0

Shit question retard. Make sure you stay home if it happens so you wouldn’t be caught fighting for community.

0
Grapeshot 0 points ago +3 / -3

I’ve made peace with the blackpill. It seems like we’re stuck on the road to book of Revelations stuff. I’m just along for the ride at this point.

3
deleted 3 points ago +5 / -2
0
PraiseBeToScience 0 points ago +5 / -5

Judging by comments I can see exactly why there will never be a revolution.

Yeah you know, let's talk about this in the context of revolution.

Chasing down Arbery for a fucking non-crime that they only believe someone else told them he was guilty of is strategically retarded. That is enormous risk for absolutely no payoff.

Cops were not going to do fuck-all to him. They'd ask him what he was doing, he'd say 'going for a jog, I run through here all the time'. They'd ask him if he went into the construction site, he'd say 'yeah I was looking around, it's cool to see it being built'. They'd ask 'Did you take anything?' and he'd say 'Does it LOOK like I took anything?' They'd say 'Don't go in there again, it's trespassing and you could get hurt' and he fucking leaves.

So your "revolution" would involve apparently taking absolutely psychotic risks for absolutely zero gain, based not on any actual intelligence or knowledge, but apparently just 'your gut'.

And then you get slaughtered.

No thanks I'll stay on the side of people with enough brains to realize a tactical error when they see one.

2
Beef_Vegan 2 points ago +2 / -0

The point was there's too many cucks on this site that are scared to fight for their community. You can stay home so you can stay out of trouble while the rest of us can protect our friends, families, and community. Multiple videos of him on property on other days. You go ahead and let a suspect get away only to come back the next day and rape your wife and kill your children during the night, the rest of us will keep them in site until cops come. Video quite literally shows him running several hundred feet towards them, never aiming the gun, literally allowing him to run around the vehicle, and then him abruptly turning 90 degrees towards the man attempting to take his gun. If that weren't true then he would have been shot before contact but instead gun was perpendicular to body and they fought for it.

Stay on your side of the "people" and let your community get torn to shreds and your liberty removed. Make sure to leave your guns at home and always call the police if there's trouble.

12
concealedaces 12 points ago +14 / -2

This case is a message to everyone. If you are involved in a situation, DO NOT TALK TO THE POLICE!!

3
MAGAlifeChoseMe 3 points ago +4 / -1

I like that the left and right have come together on "fuck the police". They aren't there to serve and protect YOU, they are there to serve and protect their masters. There's a reason they are openly called dogs among occult circles.

11
conservativefrank 11 points ago +15 / -4

This case is 100% race based. This is injustice.

1
Hiw-lir-sirith 1 point ago +2 / -1

Being in a culture war and tensions being constantly high doesn't automatically make every event a black and white case. This case wasn't 100% of anything. It's complicated because both sides had legitimate claims that the other was the aggressor. Just look at the scores on these comments. This community is usually on the same page with one another, but in this thread it's about 50/50 on what the outcome should have been.

1
conservativefrank 1 point ago +1 / -0

The only reason for the conviction was light skin vs black skin.

0
redpillthenormies 0 points ago +4 / -4

Finally a level-headed comment in this thread.

10
brundlefly777 10 points ago +13 / -3

Wow, I feel sad and ashamed... I never even knew there was a video of this; I just believed the story when it came out. This habit the left has of describing things exactly the opposite of how they happen ON A FUCKING VIDEO just baffles me, and it baffles me even more that people go along with it.

The truck was clearly stopped. Arbery clearly ran towards the back of it. Arbery clearly tried to grab the guy's gun. What the fuck else are we looking at, here?

I understand cases like these are 100% political and meant to erode our rights to guns and self-defense in general (wow).

The left just continues to horrify me with their BRAZEN disregard for actual, provable events in favor of...nothing. Abstractions? Feelings? Feelings about abstractions? There's no way to deal with these people in a "civilized" manner because they clearly WANT TO KILL US and, upon questioning, will cite some sort of high-brow-sounding theory that's actually complete garbage--which they will conveniently weasel themselves away from by redefining the word garbage.

Edit: I'm seeing lots of comments saying Arbery had a right to defend himself against men with guns, as he wasn't threatening them at first. I'll accept that. But, why then was this guy running towards the back of a stopped truck? This makes Arbery seem like the aggressor here, despite his lack of a weapon. Am I completely missing something important?

8
Mintap 8 points ago +8 / -0

Travis McMichael told Arbery the police were coming, and then Arbery was trying to flee.

1
brundlefly777 1 point ago +1 / -0

Is that the official story, or is that actually what happened (before the video clip, presumably)? Pardon my ignorance. It seems like if that's actually what happened, why the heck was the guy running towards the truck? Seems like that's the opposite of fleeing.

1
Mintap 1 point ago +1 / -0

There was another truck. He ran to grab the gun.

2
DoritoBlizzardPence 2 points ago +3 / -1

And look at all the cuckservstive scum defending arbery here

2
Splitcart 2 points ago +5 / -3

They had been chasing him for an extended period of time before the part you saw. Everyone in this whole event was an idiot.

0
brundlefly777 0 points ago +2 / -2

Okay, thanks for the info.

-5
deleted -5 points ago +3 / -8
1
DoritoBlizzardPence 1 point ago +2 / -1

Arbery rushed them abd tried ti steal their gun before getting rittenhoused you reyard

1
brundlefly777 1 point ago +1 / -0

Okay, I appreciate that. I still don't get why he was chasing them, but maybe there's more info about that around, too.

-5
deleted -5 points ago +2 / -7
10
ModelMinority 10 points ago +18 / -8

Horrible. Arbery was the criminal and the one who tried to grab a shotgun from the wrong end.

2
redpillthenormies 2 points ago +4 / -2

What makes it even worse was Armed Robbery was shot in the hand before he was fatally shot. He was shot in the hand because he had his hand right on the gun trying to steal it.

Robbery could have stopped attacking them, but he was so vicious he kept going. Then was fatally shot. This was absolutely self defense. What do you want people to do? Let themselves get disarmed by angry criminals who will turn the gun on you and shoot YOU dead?

10
CentralAmericanPede 10 points ago +15 / -5

All these ignorant people lauding this verdict are ignoring the fact that if the races were reversed, this case would not only not have gotten national attention, but the blacks guys would have gotten off, most likely.

3
Pepeflavorednoodles 3 points ago +5 / -2

That injustice exists does not mean it should be ignored when you have the chance to be just. Now if you want to do something about the reverse-case should it exist, I’m there with you, but that’s because this case went the way it should have and that one should as well.

1
PraiseBeToScience 1 point ago +4 / -3

So we're doing liberal Imaginationland arguments now?

1
Bozwat 1 point ago +2 / -1

Ashli Babbitt was murdered in cold blood and the black wasn't even charged.

-1
TickleTh1sElmo -1 points ago +4 / -5

The race doesn't matter. The circumstances are different in every single case. If some black guys decided to take their shotguns and chase after a white guy in their truck, and confronted him, they should go to jail as well. White or black doesn't matter. You can't be against the correct verdict on the grounds of, "Well, if the races were reversed." That's the same shit that leftists are trying to pull with Rittenhouse.

2
redpillthenormies 2 points ago +3 / -1

THEY DIDN'T CHASE HIM.

WATCH THE VIDEO.

-3
PraiseBeToScience -3 points ago +2 / -5

Oh right, literally nothing happened before that video. In fact, all of reality has ceased to exist, because it wasn't in that video. That video is the alpha and the omega. This post is not real. The universe actually completely ended when that video stopped.

1
redpillthenormies 1 point ago +2 / -1

I can tell you didn't even watch the trial.

1
DoritoBlizzardPence 1 point ago +2 / -1

Arbery rushed them and tried to steal their weapon. Its a shame blm didnt assualt you

10
n00tch 10 points ago +11 / -1

Fuck this two tiered justice, Animal Farm bullshit! He ran towards them and attacked an armed man! Never mind the armed black supremacists standing outside the courthouse! Flip the script and watch the commie media lose their shit!

9
MocksFordComma 9 points ago +11 / -2

Ahmaud Arbery was a thief and a general piece of shit. He was NOT a jogger, ten miles from home in work boots and jeans. He was not a jogger, having been caught on security camera where he should not have been. While undesirable, this is not a death penalty level existence.

This is a failure of the criminal justice system. At the cop and county prosecutor level for having info on the thief and doing … nothing.

It’s also a legislative failure, for not providing citizens protection from theft of property. If you are not secure in your property, then you don’t have much of a country, state, county, city or anything to rely on.

Just a bunch of shitty people failed by a shitty system. No one should be happy about this, it’s all a dumb tragedy.

9
breddit2020 9 points ago +10 / -1

I'm sure this has been pointed out but Mr Arbery was not fucking jogging.

-2
deleted -2 points ago +3 / -5
9
Thlayli 9 points ago +10 / -1

I didn't follow this one like I did Rittenhouse, but from what I understand they chased the guy down and tried to conduct a "Citizen's Arrest" and they were after the wrong guy.

So I put myself in the dead guy's shoes. If a couple of strangers, obviously not cops, chased me down and tried to detain me - I'd blow a fucking gasket and might end up killing one or both of them, or it would end the same way as it did here - and I'd be dead.

In my book, if you kill someone as a result of mistaken identity, it's your fault and you should be locked up. Being a dipshit isn't a valid defense for taking someone else's life.

6
Splitcart 6 points ago +6 / -0

It’s not that it was the ‘wrong guy’, it’s that they had no direct knowledge that he had actually done anything. According to their poorly written citizens arrest law, they apparently needed a higher level of knowledge than what they had.

3
PraiseBeToScience 3 points ago +6 / -3

Honestly, even if they did, his "crime" was walking onto land that didn't belong to him. Give me a fucking break, this is like if they chose to chase someone down because they rolled a stop sign.

3
Thlayli 3 points ago +3 / -0

Is there evidence that Arbery committed a crime? All I can find are left wing sources on this, theyball unanimously claim that there isn't any evidence.

If they're right, then that does mean what those three men did was wrong.

2
GuerillaYourDreams 2 points ago +4 / -2

Once again I will reiterate that the father in the case is a former law-enforcement officer from the community who knew that Arbery was a repeat felon and up to no good.

3
Splitcart 3 points ago +3 / -0

The way the court was interpreting the law, that doesn’t matter. They had no knowledge of a crime in progress.

I think Arbery was a shady dude who was most likely up to no good too, but (apparently) according to the letter of the law that wouldn’t be enough for me to detain him.

0
brotatofarmer 0 points ago +3 / -3

So another bully.

Fuck the cops.

2
BidenLikesMiners 2 points ago +3 / -1

if he was actually an ex cop, then thats pitiful.

-2
deleted -2 points ago +1 / -3
9
Fuck_commies_2024 9 points ago +14 / -5

Fuck joggers

8
AmericanKulak 8 points ago +11 / -3

NEVER chase anyone in a defensive situation. Period.

Know your states laws and get CCW/CHL Insurance like USCCA, CCW Safe, ACLDN etc.

These guys were really fucking stupid. I’m ready for the downvotes.

4
6969 4 points ago +5 / -1

kyle- running away. these doofuses driving towards and trying to arrest.

8
Pinochet_Was_Right 8 points ago +14 / -6

So what was the make-up of the jury?

14
RonPaulWasRight 14 points ago +14 / -0

11 white, 1 black.

-1
DoritoBlizzardPence -1 points ago +2 / -3

12 democrsts

8
current_horror 8 points ago +9 / -1

That's only important if they find white people innocent or black people guilty.

6
PraiseBeToScience 6 points ago +11 / -5

Who cares? I hide my power level even around here and I'd have put these fat retards in prison too.

4
Auroraalpha 4 points ago +4 / -0

Its from Brunswick, a deep blue city that went almost 20 points to Biden IIRC.

1
3-10 1 point ago +4 / -3

Mostly women. Remember, white women repeatedly suck the cock of BLM.

7
XxxRDTPRNxxX 7 points ago +12 / -5

I guess he was officially just a jogger now right? Joggers gon jog.

7
UncleDaddyZ 7 points ago +8 / -1

Let the police do their jobs. Film everything. Only use force to protect clear and PRESENT dangers.

6
mikethemarine 6 points ago +6 / -0

They should have just confronted him with a camera and they had the video from the house, But one of the people was in law and retired and may have thought he had the same authority as someone on the job, It would have been justified if he was in a cruiser. The Guy went for my GUN, bang bang, in this case they chased him down, , so without seeing the evidence, I would have to agree with the verdict.

If they would have only shot once, they might have gotten off, but I heard there were 3 shots fired and they chased him down, That was the stake in their heart

2
CoyoteandBadger 2 points ago +4 / -2

How did that work out the first several times Aubrey trespassed? At this point just admit you wanted them to politely hand over their tools to Aubrey you massive faggot.

2
UncleDaddyZ 2 points ago +2 / -0

Silence cuck. They admitted to not seeing him commit a crime that day. There are reasonable limits to vigilantism. They went too far. You’re a lunatic.

7
deleted 7 points ago +9 / -2
1
dissapointedokie 1 point ago +2 / -1

Say the word you want to say or shut the fuck up, cowardly faggot.

0
MadRussian 0 points ago +1 / -1

Aw, ya feeling butthurt for your brothas in da hood, faggot?

0
dissapointedokie 0 points ago +1 / -1

Still don’t have the nerve, eh? What a pussy.

-2
deleted -2 points ago +3 / -5
4
CoyoteandBadger 4 points ago +6 / -2

You have to play cop when cops don't do jack shit the first 5 times faggot. This is the definitive problem with conservatives when you play by the marxist rules leftists have warped this country's judicial system into. If the police weren't stood down by their Democrat overlords, joggers wouldn't be an issue to begin with.

-2
deleted -2 points ago +1 / -3
1
CoyoteandBadger 1 point ago +4 / -3

No I just see massive faggots like you cowtowing to the Left per usual and felt the need to lash you for running your mutt mouth.

2
Dirkstruan313 2 points ago +6 / -4

>chased

Shut the fuck up. Just shut the fuck up. They were parked. The (((jogger))) could of kept on jogging, but he didn't. He was a violent felon who attacked a man with a shotgun and found the fuck out. You're literally a liar or don't know Jack shit about what you're talking about.

-1
deleted -1 points ago +3 / -4
3
Dirkstruan313 3 points ago +3 / -0

Faggot. How's the weather in Tel Aviv?

-1
MadRussian -1 points ago +1 / -2

Fuck outta here

7
ravioli_king 7 points ago +8 / -1

I watched closers. I went in feeling the father and son defendants were guilty, because it would be tough to reasonably believe self defense, but after watching closers, prosecution didn't do that good of a job, and defense really made me believe oh yeah they're innocent and overcharged to a point it's tough to argue they're guilty of the charges.

It also helps that the defense had 3 different attorneys vs 1 prosecutor to close.

With that said, I'm interested to see how the jury and I won't be upset with their verdict since they paid more attention to the trial than I did.

6
Gayfrogman 6 points ago +11 / -5

Good they were guilty justice served.

6
Muffinman 6 points ago +9 / -3

I watched a good part of the trial, I'd agree that they were guilty... the neighbor probably has an appeal... but the son will be in jail for life...

6
RandallSavage 6 points ago +6 / -0

I don’t care about this verdict but fuck the Congressional Black Caucus and fuck anything “Black ________.” Don’t misread this as fuck black people, I’m just sick of the acceptance of having segregated shit for them. We’re all American.

4
Unapologist 4 points ago +4 / -0

No, we're not. About half are commies.

6
TequilaWizard 6 points ago +11 / -5

It's really embarrassing to be associated to some of the people on this forum today. Do better, guys. The justice system worked a few times this week.

You don't get to chase someone down in the street with guns, and if you do, they're free to tell you to go fuck off and take having a weapon pointed at them as "fear for their life" legally.

2
PraiseBeToScience 2 points ago +4 / -2

I'd be a lot more sympathetic if Arbery was suspected of committing a real crime and not something that would net you less of a sentence than if you rolled a fucking stop sign.

"Trespassing", LMAO, I just picture the rednecks on this site jumping into their trucks and shooting at people who walked onto their lawn.

0
Maga2020Maga2020 0 points ago +3 / -3

Weapon was not pointed at the guy he attacked and tried to get the gun.

Nice little handshake commie.

5
pushbackv2 5 points ago +7 / -2

In celebration of the verdict, Lugz will be releasing a limited edition jogging boot.

5
KungPaoMcChicken 5 points ago +10 / -5

Look, whatever. Both parties got what they deserved. The jogger is rightfully dead. And the morons who performed the dumbest citizen's arrest in history are guilty. Done and done. Why do we even care about this case?

2
TalionAD 2 points ago +2 / -0

Because the media told you it was important and all about racist white supremacists and a poor upstanding young man jogging in Timberlands.

Yawn.

Wake me up when it's commies vs. Patriots instead of divide and conquer Marxist playbook bullshit. This same old sad tune of racially charged courtroom "justice" drama has been played over and over for decades. Arbery appeared to be exactly the crook he was accused of being, and these three dudes did the exact opposite of what you should do in this situation. Manslaughter probably the better charge but it wasn't "self defense" the moment they pursued with guns out and verbally threatened.

It also doesn't help when you tell the cops everything going through your head including how you trapped someone like a rat etc.

1
redpillthenormies 1 point ago +2 / -1

I agree they were dumb, but legally they were innocent. It's dumb because you know you're going to get screwed in a "racial justice" case like this.

3
KungPaoMcChicken 3 points ago +3 / -0

You know what, sometimes with a gun you have to shoot first and deal with the consequences later. We all know that dude needed one in the chest. Their mistake was creating the situation. Just follow him at a distance and watch where he goes. Mistakes were made.

1
redpillthenormies 1 point ago +2 / -1

Mistakes were made due to the fact that we live in an anti-White system that will of course jail them for touching a precious poc. Legally, they didn't do anything wrong. You have the right to self defense even if you started the conflict if the other person escalated it to a deadly scenario and you are just trying to end it.

-2
TehAgent -2 points ago +2 / -4

Pretty much sums up my feeling on the matter. Or rather, lack of.

5
Christopian 5 points ago +5 / -0

It doesn't help that they look like they walked off the set of Mississippi burning.

5
OrcLivesMatter 5 points ago +7 / -2

Good verdict. Sorry, you can't chase down a civ with guns when he's not fleeing from a crime. Yes, Ahmad attacked Travis, which was fucking retarded, however they were aggressive first by trailing him for five minutes and brandishing guns.

-2
deleted -2 points ago +1 / -3
1
PraiseBeToScience 1 point ago +3 / -2

"Low IQ retards" who are not in prison for playing hero cop because a dude stepped on a piece of land that belonged to functionally nobody.

1
OrcLivesMatter 1 point ago +1 / -0

Dude, they brandished guns you fucking moron. They had the guns in their hands, and they weren't chasing down a criminal, they were chasing down a free man. They had not right to do what they did, and hooray, they're in prison for life now.

You're the problem. Too many low IQ retards ready to acquit people of the same race because you don't know the first thing about reality.

0
deleted 0 points ago +1 / -1
1
OrcLivesMatter 1 point ago +1 / -0

Brandishing is revealing your gun at someone in a manner implying possible intimidation or intent to use. What's there's multiple meanings? Okay, fine. That's one definition of brandishing.

5
trumpwoncolorado 5 points ago +7 / -2

Seems right call to me.

0
deleted 0 points ago +3 / -3
1
MAGADutchPEDE 1 point ago +2 / -1

Lmao shut up retard

5
DoritoBlizzardPence 5 points ago +7 / -2

Shit like blm and blacks being able to commit crimes without punishment whike Whites are punished for defending themselves and dehumanized by crt makes me begin to hate blacks. This is going ti make actual White supremes otherwise we reached south africa under biden

3
CoyoteandBadger 3 points ago +5 / -2

I know its incredible how many cuckservatives on this site cheer this shit on without realizing it's one step closer to SA or that approaching race war.

5
Strongocho 5 points ago +5 / -0

I guess the lesson of the day is, if you see someone robbing your neighbors, mind your business

4
BobSux 4 points ago +4 / -0

Wait, I thought USA was guilty of the racisms?

4
American-Patriot 4 points ago +5 / -1

I don't understand why the guy filming, and the son, where charged with murder??

3
vaxxtherich 3 points ago +3 / -0

If we took that rule away, we couldn't convict other joggers when they were around a jogger that committed a crime. They just have to suffer for it.

Joggers are more likely to commit crime in packs.

1
cjcivicx 1 point ago +3 / -2

The same reason a getaway driver is charged with murder if the assailants kill someone in the process of committing a theft at a gas station.

1
zooty 1 point ago +2 / -1

Apologies for the wikipedia link. Hoperfully an alternative will arise.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Felony_murder_rule

4
RussianActual 4 points ago +4 / -0

I think in principle you should be able to defend property with deadly force but:

  1. Would it apply to small property?
  2. How to prevent an abuse where people would just murder and claim he was stealing?
4
grenades_and_ham 4 points ago +4 / -0

Best course was to call the cops and keep the “suspect” under surveillance. Not surprised at the verdict.

4
SHazaaam 4 points ago +4 / -0

Reverse the races is the trial outcome the same? That's how you know if it's fair or not.

3
johnqpublic864 3 points ago +4 / -1

The libtards say Defund/Abolish/Dismantle the police. I couldn't agree more. We're not the ones the cops protect. They are.