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.
That poster likes to sugar coat what the McMichaels and their helper did. 3 on one, 2 vehicles used and the McMichaels were the victims? LOL
First they argue that the McMichaels had a right tio chase Arbery for trespassing. Trespassing not on their own property, but on someone else's. Then they argue that Arbery should have trespassed some more if he wanted to get away. Why should he have been forced to try and escape? Then they argue that Arbery should have just stopped and allowed himself to be interrogated by 3 strangers, 2 of which were armed. Then they argue that Arbery actually had nothing to be afraid of. I mean its a normal day to be chased by 2 cars and armed men. Then they argue that although Travis might have pointed his gun at Arbery that Arbery still had no cause to be afraid for his life.
There isn't a thing the McMichaels did that wasn't threatening.
More strawman. I believe Arbery didn't want to be caught for trespassing and questioned and was trying to get away and was more angry than afraid. Even if someone is attempting a false citizen's arrest you are free to not cooperate but not free to attempt to kill the person. Attacking McMichaels is the only thing Arbery must not have done.
More strawman. I believe Arbery didn't want to be caught for trespassing and questioned and was trying to get away and was more angry than afraid. Even if someone is attempting a false citizen's arrest you are free to not cooperate but not free to attempt to kill the person. Attacking McMichaels is the only thing Arbery must not have done.
Anger would be an understandable response to being chased for 4 minutes by two vehicles, hit by one of them, and then having a gun raised at you.
Well just because you are angry at someone doesn't mean you are justified in attacking and attempting to kill them with their gun.
Isn't that the moral here don't make the black guy angry? Don't confront him. Call the police and let the police get prosecuted for self defense. Better yet don't call the police either and be a "Karen" and end up defamed in the national media and fired. Just look away and let him do as he pleases and do not make him angrier.
Well just because you are angry at someone doesn't mean you are justified in attacking and attempting to kill them with their gun.
Isn't that the moral here don't make the black guy angry? Don't confront him. Call the police and let the police get prosecuted for self defense. Better yet don't call the police either and be a "Karen" and end up defamed in the national media and fired. Just look away and let him do as he pleases and do not make him angrier.
Anger and self defense aren't mutually exclusive.
I'm not really interested in the racial aspect, but the two morals I would take from this,
1) Stay off building sites, just in case
2) If you're going to "ask a question" then understand that if someone doesn't want to answer, then you're done - no pursuits, hitting people with vehicles, or pointing guns at people.
I'm not really interested in the racial aspect, but the two morals I would take from this,
1) Stay off building sites, just in case
2) If you're going to "ask a question" then understand that if someone doesn't want to answer, then you're done - no pursuits, hitting people with vehicles, or pointing guns at people.
3) Don't assault someone with a gun "asking a question"
I don't believe the attempt to take the gun was related to asking a question - do you?
No law against asking questions - what about hitting people with vehicles, or pointing guns at someone?
What I'm saying is attacking and attempting to take the gun away was an act of anger and aggression not fear and self defense. If someone charges toward you of course you're going to raise or point your gun in their direction.
What I'm saying is attacking and attempting to take the gun away was an act of anger and aggression not fear and self defense. If someone charges toward you of course you're going to raise or point your gun in their direction.
Complicated by the fact the Arbery had already allegedly been hit by Bryan's vehicle, and at the point of McMichael raising his gun, was still being chased by Bryan's vehicle.
The McMichaels and Bryan failure to grasp that they were out of their depth, and only further provoking the situation, is what makes them criminally responsible imo.
There is no legal requirements to only act in fear for self defense. If you believe your life is threatened, anger and aggression can be useful qualities.
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.
