Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It is rational to assume that people chasing you with guns are going to harm you. It is not knee jerk to try to defend yourself from those people with guns.
I am educated about weapons, and was taught to never pull out my firearm unless I intended to use it. I would assume that anyone that had a gun pointed at me was planning on using it on me. He tried to flee to get away from the threat, and they pursued, so he fought the people chasing him.
Exactly what I was taught as well. And yes, he did first try many times to flee. The men in the trucks would not be deterred.
You don't think self defense is justifiable? LOL How about you take some classes on rights. You're not the only one who doesn't understand rights either.
It’s a question of who was acting in self defense. Clearly, you think the defendants were while many think Arbery was. Let’s see how it plays out in court.
The shooter exercised his right to self defense by himself against an attack.
Understand yet?
The shooters (father & son) set into place a violent confrontation/situation against someone who was simply jogging and unarmed. When the guy defended himself in the life or death situation that these two men created themselves, they murdered him with the lame "hold your ground" excuse.
Don't get me wrong. I support "hold your ground", when it meets the criteria of such. But these morons first set up the situation that put the victim in a life or death situation and frame of mind, he fought back and at that point was murdered. Hold your ground means such as, for example, someone is sitting in their yard and someone else comes along and tries to kill them. "Hold your ground" isn't meant to be used in the way of "I/We threaten someone, set up, and initiated a violent confrontation and when the victim reacted by way of defending themselves, we shoot them dead. And that's exactly what they did.
These aholes in question are going to go to prison for murder, plain and simple. I expect nothing less.
Interesting about the video. It's said that it was leaked because the person who leaked it thought it would clear the two guys of murder and support their argument about self defense. Anyone with a brain in their heads can see the guy was defending himself. But most importantly, I can't prove it but I'm pretty sure there was other video shot leading up to the final video that was released, showing a lot more in way of the guy trying to avoid them and get away. This final video that was released only shows the very last moments of the assault and murder.
These 3 people that got into the truck with their guns: had no right to chase this guy down, get out of their truck with their guns, and confront him in their attempt to do a citizen's arrest, (that's what they are saying that they were doing). They did not witness any felony. So, again, because of THEM, because of their actions, this guy is dead. It's on them.
[quote=Three Wolves In Snow;58081192]Let's try this again:
Yes they do have the right to travel. Yes they did have the right to confront him. You don't understand rights so quit talking about them. Our country was founded on rights.
Let's try this again but this time think it through before making things up:
So those who chased Arbery down are wrong based on their actions but Arbery isn't wrong for his action of attacking the shooter even though there is no proof, none, that his life was threatened?
Stand your ground has a stipulation that you cannot be the instigator in the confrontation. But try telling some people that chasing a man and pointing guns at him is not confrontational.
When there has been multiple thefts and burglaries in the area neighborhoods often go on watch. This isn't new and is widely accepted around the country. The final trespass is the first video, where a neighbor was on the phone with dispatch. The men with the guns KNEW what was going on. They were defending their neighborhood.
No evidence this person was responsible for any previous break ins.
So far, all I read is there was one report this year about a break in, so it does not seem it was "multiple" break ins. If you have updated information, please share.
Even if he was responsible, they for one have no idea, and two, they did not witness any of them. The victim did not meet the standard for a citizen's arrest in Georgia, so quite plainly, these are two guys with guns who felt like chasing someone running on a public road.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CNCguy512
They didn't draw weopons, only exercised their second amendment rights and state consititutional rights by allowing open carry. The question is, if Ahmaud wasnt the person in the first video, which he clearly is, he wouldnt know why these people had guns and were yelling at him to stop. Which may make his reaction to attack the man and grab his gun self defense. However, HE DID KNOW because we now have video confirmation of him. HE KNEW WHY he was being yelled at, for trespassing, which makes his "defense" an assualt.
Actually yes they did draw their guns, that is in fact a gun I see from the shooter, a gun pointed at the victim, all after they were chasing him in a car. If he were to confront a cop in that manner, the cop would shoot him, if I would have been in place of the victim, well, I conceal carry, I would have shot that guy dead right there.
The victim has zero obligation to listen to the instructions from these two.
The two men were not owners of the house under construction, so they do not have standing for such action. Trespassing is a misdemeanor in Georgia, not a deadly force offense at all, and even walking on the property in that manner would not invoke a trespassing citation initially under Georgia law. Additionally, they have no idea if the victim has permission to be on the property.
The shooter exercised his right to self defense by himself against an attack.
Understand yet?
No I don’t understand why the shooters engaged in the first place.
Help me understand!
You pay taxes, your taxes provide a salary to local law enforcement, why not let them do there job?
Also to add, most home owners have insurance. Your insurance will replace what ever is stolen, so why put you life at risk? Even if they beat this case the financial and emotional impact it takes, will it be worth it?
I’ll also ask my fellow licensed gun owners to chime in on this?
The shooters (father & son) set into place a violent confrontation/situation against someone who was simply jogging and unarmed. When the guy defended himself in the life or death situation that these two men created themselves, they murdered him with the lame "hold your ground" excuse.
Don't get me wrong. I support "hold your ground", when it meets the criteria of such. But these morons first set up the situation that put the victim in a life or death situation and frame of mind, he fought back and at that point was murdered. Hold your ground means such as, for example, someone is sitting in their yard and someone else comes along and tries to kill them. "Hold your ground" isn't meant to be used in the way of "I/We threaten someone, set up, and initiated a violent confrontation and when the victim reacted by way of defending themselves, we shoot them dead. And that's exactly what they did.
These aholes in question are going to go to prison for murder, plain and simple. I expect nothing less.
Interesting about the video. It's said that it was leaked because the person who leaked it thought it would clear the two guys of murder and support their argument about self defense. Anyone with a brain in their heads can see the guy was defending himself. But most importantly, I can't prove it but I'm pretty sure there was other video shot leading up to the final video that was released, showing a lot more in way of the guy trying to avoid them and get away. This final video that was released only shows the very last moments of the assault and murder.
It wasn't a life or death situation. That's just something you made and have no proof.
Arbery was responsible for his decision to attack the shooter and it cost him his life. No one forced him. The smart move was to wait for police.
Anyone with a brain in their heads can see the shooter was defending himself. This final video that was released only shows the very last moments of the shooter defending himself against an attacker.
True and no one would have been hurt if Arbery was never born.
Arberys action caused his death. When you actually attack someone they will defend themselves. We have no proof that the shooter threatened to attack Arbery. If Arbery just waited and didn't act foolishly he very well could have a winning lawsuit. And more importantly he would have been alive.
Just to be clear his criminal record, the shoes, the hammer are all interesting and can lead people but the fact remains, none of that matters in the scheme of things. Whether one thinks those n the truck were aggressors doesn't matter. Not saying you are saying it does.
What matters is Arbery choose to attack someone with a gun instead of waiting for police to arrive. And I'm betting they would have arrived. That person defended themselves and it cost Arbery his life.
Under Georgia law the people chasing Arbery were assaulting him. He was within his rights to defend himself.
Quote:
(a) A person commits the offense of simple assault when he or she either:
(1) Attempts to commit a violent injury to the person of another; or
(2) Commits an act which places another in reasonable apprehension of immediately receiving a violent injury.
Yes they do have the right to travel. Yes they did have the right to confront him. You don't understand rights so quit talking about them. Our country was founded on rights.
Let's try this again but this time think it through before making things up:
So those who chased Arbery down are wrong based on their actions but Arbery isn't wrong for his action of attacking the shooter even though there is no proof, none, that his life was threatened?
One must reasonably believe, not prove, their life was in danger. If Arbery was alive, he could def make that case.
Cops reasonably believe their life is in danger when suspects have a cell phone in their hand. Hello.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
