WELCOME TO RIVER DAVES PLACE

Gotta Love The Media: Arbery Shooting

Carlson-jet

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 19, 2007
Messages
6,621
Reaction score
5,878
He can be charged with the same crimes, because like Texas, Georgia has a law that says all persons involved in the commission of a felony are legally responsible for the actions of all participants. This includes murders that occur during the commission of other crimes.

Because he was aware of the intentions of the two men to illegally detain Arbery, he can be found guilty of the same crimes they are charged with, including murder.

In Texas, there have been multiple executions of accomplices to murder over the years. Simply driving the getaway car can result in a death sentence.

It'll take a while to happen, but I fully expect the guy to be charged. He'll then get a plea bargain offer from the state to flip on the other two. That'll help secure their murder conviction.


Georgia Law on When a Person is a Party to a Crime
§16-2-20 state every person concerned in the commission of a crime is a party thereto and may be charged with and convicted of commission of the crime. ... Intentionally advises, encourages, hires, counsels, or procures another to commit the crime.
The D.A. better be very careful on that tight rope or his office will be burned to the ground when the situation flips.
Fuckin Whitey always killing the black man for no reason according to the MSM while ignoring actual stats.
 

ToMorrow44

27 Advantage TCM 800efi
Joined
Sep 2, 2008
Messages
1,926
Reaction score
1,548
So Arbery "attacked" the man holding the shotgun? That's ridiculous. It's too bad the beginning of the struggle isn't on the video, because there's no doubt in my mind that shotgun was stuck in his torso as he tried to avoid the man. It'll be interesting to see if the GBI can clean up the audio and determine what was said. It certainly wasn't "Stop, stop, we want to talk to you" as the two men claimed.

A shot was fired before the struggle came into view. Some posts above have attempted to rationalize the fact the two men killed an obviously unarmed man.

This happened 2½ months ago, and the older shooter was a retired cop and investigator with the county DA's office. That's one of the reasons the GBI took over the case, and both men were arrested within a week of the GBI's involvement.

There are several comments above about trespassing, theft, etc., which are lame to the nth degree. I've probably walked into fifty houses under construction in my life. Everyone does it.

The two vigilantes had no legal right to confront Arbery with guns. That was the first felony. He obviously was unarmed, and he obviously wasn't carrying stolen property. The shooters claimed they accosted him because some burglaries had occurred in the neighborhood, but there has been no corroboration by the police those burglaries occurred.

Most importantly, what danger did Arbery represent? What could he have done in the seven seconds he is out of view in the video that gave the vigilantes a reason to engage Arbery using deadly force?

Considering that question further, while Arbery struggled with the older man holding the shotgun, he never gained control of it, and had lost his grip on the gun and was four feet away from it when the other man fired two shots and killed him.

Again, what gave the men any legal authority to shoot him? They armed themselves and initiated the confrontation. They were not on their own property. Arbery posed no threat to the men.

If this scenario was presented on a concealed carry test, how many of you that are licensed and have commented above would agree their actions were proper and within the bounds of CC law? I doubt I'll get an honest answer.

This was murder, straight up. That they were not charged until months passed and the GBI had to take over the case to do it is disgusting.
You obviously didn’t watch any of the videos or read the documents posted in this thread, just continue to spew the narrative the MSM rolls out...
 

Sleek-Jet

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 20, 2007
Messages
9,249
Reaction score
8,447
You obviously didn’t watch any of the videos or read the documents posted in this thread, just continue to spew the narrative the MSM rolls out...
You can't chase someone down, brandish a firearm, get in a physical altercation, then shoot the other person and kill them and claim it as self defense.

Anywhere.

Video or not.
 

Mikes56

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 11, 2019
Messages
266
Reaction score
374
You can't chase someone down, brandish a firearm, get in a physical altercation, then shoot the other person and kill them and claim it as self defense.

Anywhere.

Video or not.
That's not anything close to what actually happened. I hope you're being sarcastic.
 

ToMorrow44

27 Advantage TCM 800efi
Joined
Sep 2, 2008
Messages
1,926
Reaction score
1,548
That's not anything close to what actually happened. I hope you're being sarcastic.
Agreed.

You can't chase someone down, brandish a firearm, get in a physical altercation, then shoot the other person and kill them and claim it as self defense.

Anywhere.

Video or not.
You must believe that George Zimmerman hunted down Treyvon Martin and killed that innocent unarmed boy too. It’s literally the same case
 

That Guy

Rack em'
Joined
Sep 24, 2007
Messages
2,952
Reaction score
724
you've never wandered through a construction site? I have, with my kids even. "ooh lets go look at this new house being built." That doesnt automatically make us thieves or better yet deserve to be shot and killed by two gun happy hippies in the back of a pickup truck. Or are you saying that because he was black? What he did/didnt do doesnt matter to them. They're not the police and they're not a judge.


Murder. period.
I have to agree to you....my wife and I walked through a house being built in our neighborhood a few months back. Not casing the joint, not stealing copper and not looking for tools. Just interested in the floor plan and any cool "new" things being done. Of course, you have to use good judgment but either way, I don't see why this confrontation had to occur.
 

WhatExit?

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2017
Messages
7,209
Reaction score
14,097
Some of the facts...


Arbery was killed on Feb. 23 after he was followed and confronted by Gregory and Travis McMichael, who told police they thought he was a burglary suspect. But, no charges were filed immediately after the shooting and no one was ever arrested.

Then, on Tuesday, a video of the incident was released online, causing immediate backlash over the fact that no arrests had been made.

The Georgia Bureau of Investigation was finally asked on May 5 to investigate the shooting after a special prosecutor appointed to the case formally requested the agency to. It officially launched it's investigation the next day.

Thirty-six hours after getting the case, agents arrested the McMichaels and charged them with murder and aggravated assault. This was 75 days after he was shot.

-----

...But on a Sunday afternoon in February, as Mr. Arbery ran through a suburban neighborhood of ranch houses and moss-draped oaks, he passed a man standing in his front yard, who later told the police that Mr. Arbery looked like the suspect in a string of break-ins.

According to a police report, the man, Gregory McMichael, 64, called out to his son, Travis McMichael, 34. They grabbed their weapons, a .357 magnum revolver and a shotgun, jumped into a truck and began following Mr. Arbery.

“Stop, stop,” they shouted at Mr. Arbery, “we want to talk to you.”

Moments later, after a struggle over the shotgun, Mr. Arbery was killed, shot at least twice.

According to documents obtained by The New York Times, a prosecutor who had the case for a few weeks told the police that the pursuers had acted within the scope of Georgia’s citizen’s arrest statute, and that Travis McMichael, who held the shotgun, had acted out of self-defense.

The police report does not mention whether Mr. Arbery was in possession of a weapon.

Attempts to reach Gregory McMichael, a retired investigator in the district attorney’s office, were unsuccessful. In a brief phone conversation, Travis McMichael, who runs a company that gives custom boat tours, declined to comment, citing the continuing investigation.

The prosecutor who wrote the letter, George E. Barnhill, the district attorney for Georgia’s Waycross Judicial Circuit, recused himself from the case this month, after Mr. Arbery’s family complained that he had a conflict of interest. A prosecutor from another county is now in charge and will determine whether the case should be presented to a grand jury.
 

Looking Glass

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2020
Messages
675
Reaction score
595
I have to agree to you....my wife and I walked through a house being built in our neighborhood a few months back. Not casing the joint, not stealing copper and not looking for tools. Just interested in the floor plan and any cool "new" things being done. Of course, you have to use good judgment but either way, I don't see why this confrontation had to occur.
Would this be considered trespassing= You and your Wife doing a walk-through a house and on property you do NOT own?
 

Sleek-Jet

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 20, 2007
Messages
9,249
Reaction score
8,447
Agreed.


You must believe that George Zimmerman hunted down Treyvon Martin and killed that innocent unarmed boy too. It’s literally the same case
George Zimmerman was found not guilty, these two haven't been to to trial. So it isn't literally the same, at least not yet.

But I defy you to find any self defense firearm instructor that would condone what these two did.

It is like the old court room joke of the man found guilty of killing his parents asking for leniency because he is an orphan.

I've read the prosecutors letter. He lays out that taken individually, the father and son did not violate any statutes. I wonder though, if the son saw the victim at the property and was the neighbor that called the cops initially as seen in the one surveillance tape, did they not attempt a citizens arrest right there? When a reasonable person could conclude a felony had occured. Citizen arrest laws are intended to give people the power to stop a crime in progress and hold a suspect till police arrive.

Finally, back to Zimmerman, he was arrested almost immediately. This guy, being an ex-cop who knew the prosecuter and had a nice get-out-of-jail card. It gives the appearance of a lot of political cover for a bad shooting.

I am arguing this from a self defense shooting standpoint. If there is more clear evidence that all of this was justified I would honestly like to see it.
 

Tooms22

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 25, 2015
Messages
807
Reaction score
1,086
So Arbery "attacked" the man holding the shotgun? That's ridiculous. It's too bad the beginning of the struggle isn't on the video, because there's no doubt in my mind that shotgun was stuck in his torso as he tried to avoid the man. It'll be interesting to see if the GBI can clean up the audio and determine what was said. It certainly wasn't "Stop, stop, we want to talk to you" as the two men claimed.

A shot was fired before the struggle came into view. Some posts above have attempted to rationalize the fact the two men killed an obviously unarmed man.

This happened 2½ months ago, and the older shooter was a retired cop and investigator with the county DA's office. That's one of the reasons the GBI took over the case, and both men were arrested within a week of the GBI's involvement.

There are several comments above about trespassing, theft, etc., which are lame to the nth degree. I've probably walked into fifty houses under construction in my life. Everyone does it.

The two vigilantes had no legal right to confront Arbery with guns. That was the first felony. He obviously was unarmed, and he obviously wasn't carrying stolen property. The shooters claimed they accosted him because some burglaries had occurred in the neighborhood, but there has been no corroboration by the police those burglaries occurred.

Most importantly, what danger did Arbery represent? What could he have done in the seven seconds he is out of view in the video that gave the vigilantes a reason to engage Arbery using deadly force?

Considering that question further, while Arbery struggled with the older man holding the shotgun, he never gained control of it, and had lost his grip on the gun and was four feet away from it when the other man fired two shots and killed him.

Again, what gave the men any legal authority to shoot him? They armed themselves and initiated the confrontation. They were not on their own property. Arbery posed no threat to the men.

If this scenario was presented on a concealed carry test, how many of you that are licensed and have commented above would agree their actions were proper and within the bounds of CC law? I doubt I'll get an honest answer.

This was murder, straight up. That they were not charged until months passed and the GBI had to take over the case to do it is disgusting.
Do you have an inside line on evidence that the rest of us don’t have? Or are you just making a bunch of assumptions?

There are plenty of interesting opinions/assumptions paraded as fact in that post.
 

Baja 252

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 18, 2009
Messages
194
Reaction score
314
Every time I see this story on TV or hear it on the radio, they always seem to push white man kills black man angle.
I understand why the media pushes that narrative, but is there anything factual that indicates race had anything to do with the shooting?
 

EBT531

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 31, 2018
Messages
349
Reaction score
284
Except there wasn't a burglary...

These two fuck sticks deserve to be tried for their actions.
I didn't say they were in the right,but they didn't head out to "lynch a black man" like the media is saying. Or if that was their plan, they at least tried to have a cover story. You have to admit its shady the guy enters a home under construction multiple times, in daylight and night. You could also argue that proves he didn't plan to steal anything if he was in there on all of those dates and didn't steal anything. A good attorney can take any information and spin it how they want.
 

Outdrive1

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 19, 2007
Messages
27,702
Reaction score
14,688
Couple of thoughts. I’m surprised at the amount of people here that think walking a construction site is grounds for someone to try and make an armed citizens arrest. That’s just stupid. None have you have ever bought a new house in a housing tract where they building houses all around you? And you never walked any of them to see what they look like?

Hell I’ve walked a house under construction in the Keys with River Dave, Stacy and the kids.

There’s one being built on Apache right now that myself and two other neighbors walked through a couple months ago.

These guys had no business stopping him. He didn’t steal anything. They should have reported him to the police. Let the police follow up and see if was even worth investigating.

Here’s another thought. Did the guy have permission to check the site out? How do we know he didn’t? Did the two pretend police officers work for the construction site? Do they know who’s allowed on the property and who isn’t? Do they have the knowledge to enforce that?

At the end of the day, they have no right to stop him and make a citizens arrest and absolutely no right to kill him.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Outdrive1

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 19, 2007
Messages
27,702
Reaction score
14,688
If this was 1950, it would be sop for two white guys with shotguns in a pickup truck to roll up on that “boy” and tell him we need to have a talk.

This ain’t the 1950’s. Call the cops. Make a report. Let them watch the video. Let them decide if he committed a crime. These guys are 100 percent going to jail for murder as they should imo. Stupid fucks.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:

PlanB

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 25, 2018
Messages
1,112
Reaction score
1,432
A lot of assumptions being made in this thread. We will see how this all plays out, because there is no doubt that more information will be revealed during the trial. With the information that's currently out there, especially the video evidence of Arbery attacking someone with a shotgun, good luck convicting anyone involved with premeditated murder.

They should of let LE handle the situation. I have a CCW good in all 50 states. I won't get involved in a situation with a firearm unless my life or my families life is in imminent danger. All that said, I believe this case will play out similar to the Zimmerman case. Time will tell though...
 

ssc

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 21, 2013
Messages
259
Reaction score
320
It sure is great to have trial by media. :rolleyes: I see we have had trial by RDS. I would note that various other cases have been tried by the media and have been wrong most times. However, we have an interesting concept that says one is innocent until PROVEN guilty. Videos are just one piece of the puzzle. I sure am glad we extend due process to those who are charged with a crime.

So, a judge will preside over the trial. Both sides will have attorneys who will present their case. It will be up to the DA to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that they committed a crime. It will be up to the jury to decide if the DA proves their case, or if there is some reasonable doubt. They will deliberate with certain instructions from the judge. The evidence will be looked at; ALL the evidence, not just the video.

I'm not saying that all jury verdicts are always correct, but it is our justice system and I for one am glad we have it. Trials require evidence and it will be interesting to see what all the evidence tells the jury.

Carry on, Steve
 

530RL

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 18, 2012
Messages
13,607
Reaction score
11,120
It sure is great to have trial by media. :rolleyes: I see we have had trial by RDS. I would note that various other cases have been tried by the media and have been wrong most times. However, we have an interesting concept that says one is innocent until PROVEN guilty. Videos are just one piece of the puzzle. I sure am glad we extend due process to those who are charged with a crime.

So, a judge will preside over the trial. Both sides will have attorneys who will present their case. It will be up to the DA to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that they committed a crime. It will be up to the jury to decide if the DA proves their case, or if there is some reasonable doubt. They will deliberate with certain instructions from the judge. The evidence will be looked at; ALL the evidence, not just the video.

I'm not saying that all jury verdicts are always correct, but it is our justice system and I for one am glad we have it. Trials require evidence and it will be interesting to see what all the evidence tells the jury.

Carry on, Steve

Interesting and valid points.

But innocent until proven guilty should have also applied to Mr. Arbery prior to him being shot by two armed individuals who ignored his presumption of innocence, assumed he was guilty, and took justice into their own hands.
 

Dirty Daytona

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 8, 2019
Messages
443
Reaction score
570
Citizens arrest for what? A possible burglar? How about following the guy until the cops show up? What would you do if a guy with a shotgun approached you? Fight or flight right? I know nothing about Georgia law but I am very familiar with California law and it seems these guys fucked up. I have no idea if the guy was a burglar or a trespasser but it sounds like papa hillbilly and his son just "thought" this guy was guilty of something. These guys were not cops and had no legal right to attempt a "citizens arrest", with a firearm especially, on a person who was in no way a threat to their safety or anyone else's. When they tried to detain this person illegally they created the situation that cost a man his life.
 

Dirty Daytona

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 8, 2019
Messages
443
Reaction score
570
What bothers me the most is that the media is portraying him as a "black jogger." I think we can all agree that he was not just a jogger.
Whether he was a jogger or not and whether he was white, black or pink I feel has nothing to do with this situation. The person was not breaking into a home or committing any type of crime when they approached him. The guy may have been a total shitbag and may well have been a burglar and that is irrelevant. These guys apparently just "thought" this "jogger" was possibly involved in burglaries in the area. The bottom line is the dead guy was not endangering anyone at the time at there were absolutely no exigent circumstances that necessitated him being stopped by private citizens with a firearm. I am as pro gun as anyone could be and I agree 100 percent with all citizens using deadly force if a life is in danger. A person simply suspected of a property crime (thin at best in this situation) should not be subject to the death penalty.
 

Cole 392

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 11, 2018
Messages
108
Reaction score
434
33CF5F66-FCE5-4F2F-8EFC-C146CAFDB251.jpeg
W
87EF17E5-6688-4963-900A-36E93F9E46EC.jpeg
4CBB0A46-1CA8-4725-B011-0A9393CD6B4B.jpeg

couldn’t link the story for some reason so here’s the screenshots.. look it up for yourselves..

This shit right here is a direct result of the media and their rhetoric.. calling this a “lynching” , “jogging while black” and “racist hate crime” got two innocent people killed... this story will disappear cause it doesn’t fit the evil white man narrative ..

Where’s the National Outrage? Where’s the Mayor calling out this obvious hate crime? Where’s the race hustlers Sharpton and Jackson? Where’s Orca Pigfrey?

What’s hilarious is, a bunch a virtue signaling RDP’ers missed the point of this thread altogether..

I honestly can’t think of a lower form of life than a left wing “journalist” in current year..


Welcome to Clown World
 
Last edited:

Dirty Daytona

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 8, 2019
Messages
443
Reaction score
570
View attachment 875900 W
View attachment 875902 View attachment 875903
couldn’t link the story for some reason so here’s the screenshots.. look it up for yourselves..

This shit right here is a direct result of the media and their rhetoric.. calling this a “lynching” , “jogging while black” and “racist hate crime” got two innocent people killed... this story will disappear cause it doesn’t fit the evil white man narrative ..

Where’s the National Outrage? Where’s the Mayor calling out this obvious hate crime? Where’s the race hustlers Sharpton and Jackson? Where’s Orca Pigfrey?

What’s hilarious is, a bunch a virtue signaling RDP’ers missed the point of this thread altogether..

Welcome to Clown World
Sir, calling the actions of a lunatic a "direct result of the media and their rhetoric" in the article you posted is comparable to the same media blaming the actions of lunatics on guns.
 

Dirty Daytona

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 8, 2019
Messages
443
Reaction score
570
Sir, calling the actions of a lunatic a "direct result of the media and their rhetoric" in the article you posted is comparable to the same media blaming the actions of lunatics on guns.
What caused the death of two innocent people is the actions of a murderer.
 

RiverDave

In it to win it
Joined
Sep 13, 2007
Messages
98,853
Reaction score
70,190
You can't chase someone down, brandish a firearm, get in a physical altercation, then shoot the other person and kill them and claim it as self defense.

Anywhere.

Video or not.
Well apparently in Georgia ya can if you read the DA report of the person that recused himself
 

ToMorrow44

27 Advantage TCM 800efi
Joined
Sep 2, 2008
Messages
1,926
Reaction score
1,548
Citizens arrest for what? A possible burglar? How about following the guy until the cops show up? What would you do if a guy with a shotgun approached you? Fight or flight right? I know nothing about Georgia law but I am very familiar with California law and it seems these guys fucked up. I have no idea if the guy was a burglar or a trespasser but it sounds like papa hillbilly and his son just "thought" this guy was guilty of something. These guys were not cops and had no legal right to attempt a "citizens arrest", with a firearm especially, on a person who was in no way a threat to their safety or anyone else's. When they tried to detain this person illegally they created the situation that cost a man his life.
If you know a lot about California law, you’d know that a citizens arrest is 100% legal in CA too. More specifically, it’s designed so citizens can detain a person who committed a misdemeanor (IE Trespassing). And they didn’t “just think” it was the guy, they were on the phone with 911 and watched this guy run out of the front door of the house.

Whether he was a jogger or not and whether he was white, black or pink I feel has nothing to do with this situation. The person was not breaking into a home or committing any type of crime when they approached him. The guy may have been a total shitbag and may well have been a burglar and that is irrelevant. These guys apparently just "thought" this "jogger" was possibly involved in burglaries in the area. The bottom line is the dead guy was not endangering anyone at the time at there were absolutely no exigent circumstances that necessitated him being stopped by private citizens with a firearm. I am as pro gun as anyone could be and I agree 100 percent with all citizens using deadly force if a life is in danger. A person simply suspected of a property crime (thin at best in this situation) should not be subject to the death penalty.
You’re right, it doesn’t matter his color or even if he burglarized the place. All irrelevant. The fact is that he picked a fight with someone legally carrying a gun, and got shot (not even clear who pulled the trigger). He could have stopped, turned around and ran the other direction, made a left/right, hopped some fences thru some backyards and those fat asses wouldn’t have caught him. But no, he ran directly toward them and picked a fight.

You tell me that if you’re getting your face smashed in and the guy is trying to take your gun, you’re not fearful for your life..?
 

rrrr

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 19, 2007
Messages
8,775
Reaction score
12,965
You obviously didn’t watch any of the videos or read the documents posted in this thread, just continue to spew the narrative the MSM rolls out...
:rolleyes:

Of course. Everyone on RDP knows I'm a card carrying liberal.
 

rrrr

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 19, 2007
Messages
8,775
Reaction score
12,965
Do you have an inside line on evidence that the rest of us don’t have? Or are you just making a bunch of assumptions?

There are plenty of interesting opinions/assumptions paraded as fact in that post.
Seriously?

This entire thread is nothing but "interesting opinions/assumptions paraded as fact".

Sorry you don't like mine, but that doesn't make them false.
 

Dirty Daytona

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 8, 2019
Messages
443
Reaction score
570
If you know a lot about California law, you’d know that a citizens arrest is 100% legal in CA too. More specifically, it’s designed so citizens can detain a person who committed a misdemeanor (IE Trespassing). And they didn’t “just think” it was the guy, they were on the phone with 911 and watched this guy run out of the front door of the house.


You’re right, it doesn’t matter his color or even if he burglarized the place. All irrelevant. The fact is that he picked a fight with someone legally carrying a gun, and got shot (not even clear who pulled the trigger). He could have stopped, turned around and ran the other direction, made a left/right, hopped some fences thru some backyards and those fat asses wouldn’t have caught him. But no, he ran directly toward them and picked a fight.

You tell me that if you’re getting your face smashed in and the guy is trying to take your gun, you’re not fearful for your life..?
So now a guy who is presumably innocent of doing anything has the responsibility to run from someone with a gun chasing him down in a truck? So basically if he would have just ran away he would be alive today? Is that kind of what you’re saying?
 

Dirty Daytona

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 8, 2019
Messages
443
Reaction score
570
If you know a lot about California law, you’d know that a citizens arrest is 100% legal in CA too. More specifically, it’s designed so citizens can detain a person who committed a misdemeanor (IE Trespassing). And they didn’t “just think” it was the guy, they were on the phone with 911 and watched this guy run out of the front door of the house.


You’re right, it doesn’t matter his color or even if he burglarized the place. All irrelevant. The fact is that he picked a fight with someone legally carrying a gun, and got shot (not even clear who pulled the trigger). He could have stopped, turned around and ran the other direction, made a left/right, hopped some fences thru some backyards and those fat asses wouldn’t have caught him. But no, he ran directly toward them and picked a fight.

You tell me that if you’re getting your face smashed in and the guy is trying to take your gun, you’re not fearful for your life..?
And I 100% agree that citizens arrests are legal in California and probably in Georgia. I also know that private citizens making citizens arrests in California aren’t subject to the laws of arrests that peace officers are. Private citizens are, however, subject to civil liability for their actions. My question would be to the dad and son, “What penal code section did Mr. dead guy violate that you were trying to arrest him for?” It sounds like the answer would be, “Well we thought he might be a burglar.” I’m pretty sure Georgia doesn’t have a penal code section to charge the section of “Well we thought he might be a burglar.” Like I said in my posts this dude may or may not have been a shitbag but he didn’t need to die.
 

ToMorrow44

27 Advantage TCM 800efi
Joined
Sep 2, 2008
Messages
1,926
Reaction score
1,548
So now a guy who is presumably innocent of doing anything has the responsibility to run from someone with a gun chasing him down in a truck? So basically if he would have just ran away he would be alive today? Is that kind of what you’re saying?
Yes! Wouldn’t you!?
 

Dirty Daytona

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 8, 2019
Messages
443
Reaction score
570
Yes! Wouldn’t you!?
What you or I would do is irrelevant. Everybody reacts differently to fear and like my earlier post said, “fight or flight” are the 2 most common reactions to fear. Just because this guy chose “fight” doesn’t mean he caused his own death. What caused his death was 2 citizens bringing guns into a situation that didn’t even need to happen. From the looks of the video he did some “fight and flight”.
 

Outdrive1

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 19, 2007
Messages
27,702
Reaction score
14,688
Yes! Wouldn’t you!?
If I’m carrying and some fucktard points a shotgun at me he’s probably gonna get shot. It would be easier to shoot them then to run and jump fences.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Dirty Daytona

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 8, 2019
Messages
443
Reaction score
570
Well apparently in Georgia ya can if you read the DA report of the person that recused himself
Dave you are right, apparently you can because that appears to be what happened. However just because you can doesn’t mean you should. In this situation I just don’t see the need for that kind of force for a “possible” property crime.
 

Tooms22

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 25, 2015
Messages
807
Reaction score
1,086
Seriously?

This entire thread is nothing but "interesting opinions/assumptions paraded as fact".

Sorry you don't like mine, but that doesn't make them false.
I guess I was confused... I thought we were talking about the law and what will likely happen to these two guys in court.

I stand corrected... we are talking about our feeling on the subject.
 

ToMorrow44

27 Advantage TCM 800efi
Joined
Sep 2, 2008
Messages
1,926
Reaction score
1,548
If I’m carrying and some fucktard points a shotgun at me he’s probably gonna get shot. It would be easier to shoot them then to run and jump fences.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
You and I both. 💯 But you would stop and shoot right? You’re not gonna run up to them and wrestle with them first..?

What you or I would do is irrelevant. Everybody reacts differently to fear and like my earlier post said, “fight or flight” are the 2 most common reactions to fear. Just because this guy chose “fight” doesn’t mean he caused his own death. What caused his death was 2 citizens bringing guns into a situation that didn’t even need to happen. From the looks of the video he did some “fight and flight”.
What caused his death is he decided to fight over a shotgun.
 

Outdrive1

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 19, 2007
Messages
27,702
Reaction score
14,688
You and I both. But you would stop and shoot right? You’re not gonna run up to them and wrestle with them first..?


What caused his death is he decided to fight over a shotgun.
Fuck no I’m not wrestling with a guy with a shotgun.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Dirty Daytona

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 8, 2019
Messages
443
Reaction score
570
You and I both. 💯 But you would stop and shoot right? You’re not gonna run up to them and wrestle with them first..?


What caused his death is he decided to fight over a shotgun.
I respectfully disagree sir. I believe what caused his death was someone bringing a shotgun into a situation where it wasn’t needed. But oh well, we all have our opinions.
 

Tooms22

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 25, 2015
Messages
807
Reaction score
1,086
I respectfully disagree sir. I believe what caused his death was someone bringing a shotgun into a situation where it wasn’t needed. But oh well, we all have our opinions.
If someone violently assaults you with a crowbar while you're carrying concealed and you shoot him, we will conclude that he died because you brought a handgun to a situation where it wasn't needed. We all know for sure he wasn't going to kill you with that crowbar.
 

RiverDave

In it to win it
Joined
Sep 13, 2007
Messages
98,853
Reaction score
70,190
So now a guy who is presumably innocent of doing anything has the responsibility to run from someone with a gun chasing him down in a truck? So basically if he would have just ran away he would be alive today? Is that kind of what you’re saying?
Uh... yes?

(by the way I have been patiently waiting for you numerous comment that is going to take this thread to the next level... disappointed thus far. Lol).
 

WhatExit?

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2017
Messages
7,209
Reaction score
14,097
I respectfully disagree sir. I believe what caused his death was someone bringing a shotgun into a situation where it wasn’t needed. But oh well, we all have our opinions.

Thanks for bringing multiple views of clarity to this shit show of a thread
 

Dirty Daytona

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 8, 2019
Messages
443
Reaction score
570
Uh... yes?

(by the way I have been patiently waiting for you numerous comment that is going to take this thread to the next level... disappointed thus far. Lol).
I have been behaving lately......you noticed? Lol
 

SKIDMARC

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 30, 2011
Messages
1,648
Reaction score
858
I'm surprised by a number of the posts here. But this is the internet and this is a forum so there's that.

When I see 2 armed guys in a pickup truck with one standing in the back, that's bound to lead to something very bad which is what happened.

And the DA recused herself too after not taking action.

This is a shit show.

While going into a home under construction is trespassing at the least, was it their business to go after this guy?

How do they justify carrying guns in a truck like hunters shooting wildlife on the range?

I agree with you. Re the DA I think she recused herself because one of the guys worked for her at one point.
 

Dirty Daytona

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 8, 2019
Messages
443
Reaction score
570
If someone violently assaults you with a crowbar while you're carrying concealed and you shoot him, we will conclude that he died because you brought a handgun to a situation where it wasn't needed. We all know for sure he wasn't going to kill you with that crowbar.
I’m not sure how your scenario equates to this situation. Unarmed dude was running down the street and Roscoe and Scooter chased him down with a shotgun and a pistol and during the “citizens arrest” he was killed.
 

JDKRXW

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2008
Messages
1,586
Reaction score
1,426
From what I've seen and read, the senior McMichael knew the jogger from previous a previous 'investigation'.
I think he (senior) decided to play cop, called junior for help, armed up, and set off on a chase to confront a guy he already knew.

2 guys who (a) didn't know what they were doing and (b) had no business at all doing what they were doing eneded up killing a guy.
 

Outdrive1

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 19, 2007
Messages
27,702
Reaction score
14,688
I’m not sure how your scenario equates to this situation. Unarmed dude was running down the street and Roscoe and Scooter chased him down with a shotgun and a pistol and during the “citizens arrest” he was killed.
What’s your point? He might have trespassed while being a negro.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Top