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.
Anytime an unarmed black person is shot to death by white civilians or a white police officer, the first thing racist white people and conservative news outlets usually do is look for a way to demonize the the dead black person.
As opposed to the first and ONLY thing liberals do is paint the person shooting them as racist.
He had taken some classes a few years earlier. At the time of his death, he was working two jobs, one washing trucks and I can't remember the other, but I do not think it was electric-related.
Status:
"I don't understand. But I don't care, so it works out."
(set 5 days ago)
35,620 posts, read 17,948,343 times
Reputation: 50641
Quote:
Originally Posted by MetroWord
Not trying to prove his worth. But it makes sense that his interest was something to do with construction.
When I was working as a professional engineer while trying to start up my investment company, I was absorbing all things related to the subject. I was learning everything from everywhere I could.
People who have nothing to do with construction are already curious enough about it to visit construction sites. There is even a channel HGTV dedicated to the subject. And you're pretendomg that no one ever check out a construction site, so Ahmaud must be up to no good.
I think you've mistaken me for another poster.
I go in houses under construction myself (maybe not one that was nearly enclosed like this one was, but houses that are more open). I understand curiosity for the sake of curiosity.
Maybe moving forward in this thread, posters can make sure someone says something before they disagree with it?
What happened to the video claiming he was there at night on film?
Did anyone verify that was him?
There is a very dark and grainy video of someone checking out the place at night. But again, nothing was taken from the property. At worst, it was tresspassing.
Conservatives are calling him a burglar even though there has never been anything stolen. It is like calling a 12 year old backseat passenger in a car a "drunk driver" even though he was sitting in the back. Makes no sense, but that is what they are pushing.
Memo to conservatives: in order to even have a burglary something must have been stolen. The homeowner of the house under construction has said nothing was EVER stolen from that property.
again, several mass shootings, YOU KNOW WHERE PEOPLE ARE LITERALLY SHOOTING AT PEOPLE, have been stopped by a person FEARING FOR THEIR LIFE AND CHARGING THE SHOOTER. YOU MENTIONED THAT YOU THOUGHT IT WAS ILLOGICAL FOR A PERSON TO CHARGE SOMEONE WITH A FIREARM. It's not illogical, because there is an assumption that a person with a gun in the ready position, a roadblock, and armed backup is ready kill you. And what's funny is you said the victim should have chosen flight....1) you make decisions on the fly with a gun in your face, 2) where was he going to run? the had the roadblocked and the road behind him was blocked. He was supposed trespass again?....3)you don't have to run, you can choose to fight an attacker.
and ironically you said the victim should have waited for the police, that's exactly what the armed posse should have done. smh....move the goalposts again.
You must being playing games at this point.
I don't care who you are ( a young Chuck Norris even ), you do not charge toward an armed person in that type of a situation, especially if the firearm is a shotgun.
Yes the fools had the road blocked, but if need be, you can just start jogging in the opposite direction rather than continue toward them.
I cannot put myself in another mans mind, but if I see two people armed with guns up ahead on the road, I am not going to get near them if I can avoid it.
As to #3, yes you can choose to fight, but as the old saying goes, he brought a pair of hands to a gun fight, so it was inevitable he was going to lose.
Make no mistake, I am empathizing with the victim here, as even if he were a potential burglar, there is no law in our country that allows citizens to shoot an unarmed man.
My only critique of his actions was the obviously poor choice he made which resulted in his death. Had he took off in another direction or just waited for the police to arrive, he most likely would still be alive today.
The issue here is that by chasing him down with guns automatically make the McMichael's the aggressor in this situation. Even if Arbery did fight them, that's the self defense. Not the shooting.
And I was a professional design engineer before I quit that and started my own investment company. You could say the two has nothing to do with each other. And yet here we are with me an owner of an investment company. Makes absolutely no use of my MS or PE.
Anytime an unarmed black person is shot to death by white civilians or a white police officer, the first thing racist white people and conservative news outlets usually do is look for a way to demonize the the dead black person.
Exactly! That is how you know that it is racism. They create justification for the death of a black person when there is no justification. A person trespassing is worthy of death.....because the committed crimes in the past.....none of which the penalty, in court, is death.
They demonize to rationalize that they are not racist in order to avoid moral injury to themselves and to avoid being seen as the racist they are.
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.