- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Body cam footage of police interactions with Ahmaud Aubrey
Posted on 5/20/20 at 11:08 am to LNCHBOX
Posted on 5/20/20 at 11:08 am to LNCHBOX
quote:
These have nothing to do with the shooting.
This. It's like trying to dig through Gregory McMichael's police IA file for any excessive force claim.
What really matters is what happened the day Arbery was shot and killed, and what happened that day is pretty stark.
If you're searching for incidents from years past to interpret a shooting on video, you've got an agenda.
1
Posted on 5/20/20 at 11:08 am to Pettifogger
quote:
Few people dispute that these guys are stupid, reckless and a disgrace to everyone who wants the liberty to use firearms to defend themselves and their property. So applying reasonable standards of firearm use to them is a misapplication IMO.
My issue with this reasoning is one of them is a former, long-time law enforcement officer. Who was actually trained how to use a firearm beyond your typical concealed carry classes. I think it's completely reasonable to expect at least one of them to understand reasonable standards of firearm use.
It's kind of like the argument that there's no way for them to know they can't make a citizen's arrest without proof of a felony (it has to be a felony to give chase in Georgia). One of them has intimate knowledge of what is legal and what isn't. That argument just doesn't hold up knowing that.
Posted on 5/20/20 at 11:09 am to Kujo
I can't wait til the guy from "Active Self Protection" does a youtube vid on the A.A. shooting...
Posted on 5/20/20 at 11:16 am to CaptainPanic
quote:
The hoops you rednecks are jumping through to try & justify hunting down an innocent black man is truly remarkable.
Posted on 5/20/20 at 11:18 am to Rep520
quote:
If you're searching for incidents from years past to interpret a shooting on video, you've got an agenda.
Kind of like calling him an avid jogger, ex-football star, or using his high school photo from about 8 years ago.
Posted on 5/20/20 at 11:18 am to dukke v
quote:
Agreed. IMO this is a hate crime.
Posted on 5/20/20 at 11:18 am to Pettifogger
quote:
this was the product of misguided and reckless vigilantism.
Yes, like lynchings in the 40's and 50's.
Posted on 5/20/20 at 11:22 am to 3nOut
Yeah I understand the argument that it may be difficult to convince a jury on felony murder. I personally think it's the right charge, but you have to convince 12 people who couldn't get out of jury duty of that. So I can totally entertain the argument that felony murder may be too steep of a charge to convince a jury.
However, that's a loooong shot from the 2 or 3 guys on the Poli board who "don't give a frick how many blacks die until white people kill black people at the same rate that blacks kill whites"
However, that's a loooong shot from the 2 or 3 guys on the Poli board who "don't give a frick how many blacks die until white people kill black people at the same rate that blacks kill whites"
Posted on 5/20/20 at 11:25 am to Kujo
I was sure hoping the cop would have tazed him.
Posted on 5/20/20 at 11:26 am to BluegrassBelle
quote:
My issue with this reasoning is one of them is a former, long-time law enforcement officer. Who was actually trained how to use a firearm beyond your typical concealed carry classes. I think it's completely reasonable to expect at least one of them to understand reasonable standards of firearm use.
Well, to me this is less about technical proficiency or safety than general decision making. In other words, I think this is less about the 4 rules and more about the decision to pursue Arbery and pursue him with firearms. So I agree that you'd hope an LEO would make better decisions all around, but I don't really think gun safety/gun owner considerations are indicative of much.
If the senior McMichael shot Arbery and claimed it was an accident, then I'd find this type of discussion more pertinent ("McMichael, as a former LEO, wasn't likely to break trigger discipline and it makes it more likely the shooting was intentional")
quote:
It's kind of like the argument that there's no way for them to know they can't make a citizen's arrest without proof of a felony (it has to be a felony to give chase in Georgia). One of them has intimate knowledge of what is legal and what isn't. That argument just doesn't hold up knowing that.
I'm a lawyer and I still know very little about the legality of citizens arrests in GA. I agree that a former LEO may be more likely than me to know that, but it's a pretty obscure area of law and I'm not surprised if he didn't.
Are you arguing that they couldn't have been legitimately trying to undertake a (illegitimate) citizen's arrest, and thus this was a racial/targeted killing? Because otherwise I don't really understand the rebuttal.
Posted on 5/20/20 at 11:27 am to Aristo
quote:
Kind of like calling him an avid jogger, ex-football star, or using his high school photo from about 8 years ago.
Who in this thread is doing this? Who in ANY thread is doing this? It is a complete straw man.
Posted on 5/20/20 at 11:27 am to The Spleen
quote:
Yes, like lynchings in the 40's and 50's.
Little weak.
I seriously doubt the theft narrative was a mere pretext for the desire to kill a black man, and so do you.
Posted on 5/20/20 at 11:27 am to Kujo
Doesn't matter. His past doesn't mean that he didn't do anything wrong and deserved to be killed.
Posted on 5/20/20 at 11:29 am to Hot Carl
quote:
Who in this thread is doing this? Who in ANY thread is doing this? It is a complete straw man.
The entirety of American media?
I'll go a step further and acknowledge that "beating back the media narrative" can be provide cover for not wanting to convict white guys of killing a black guy. But it's also a legitimate social discussion.
Posted on 5/20/20 at 11:33 am to LNCHBOX
who cares losers like him get murdered everyday.
Posted on 5/20/20 at 11:33 am to Pettifogger
quote:
I seriously doubt the theft narrative was a mere pretext for the desire to kill a black man, and so do you.
I have read a great deal in recent years on lynchings in the 40's and 50's, which is specifically why I only listed those 2 decades. In many of those cases, there was no pretext to killing the presumed guilty black man or woman. In many they simply ran him or her down, apprehended him or her, and turned them over to law enforcement. Now in many of those cases, law enforcement ended up killing them.
So no, I don't think they set out to kill him. I do think they were comfortable enough with the prospect of having to kill him(why else would they pursue him with loaded weapons?), but their presumed guilty mindset and the fact that they did shoot and kill him makes it a lynching in my eyes.
Posted on 5/20/20 at 11:34 am to Pettifogger
quote:
Pettifogger
quote:
I'm a lawyer
Do you think they go to trial with these guys together or separately.
Posted on 5/20/20 at 11:34 am to CP3LSU25
quote:I commend you for being a piece of shite so consistently. Not everyone has that much determination.
who cares losers like him get murdered everyday.
Posted on 5/20/20 at 11:34 am to Hot Carl
quote:
Who in this thread is doing this? Who in ANY thread is doing this?
Have you read any news articles or any threads?
Posted on 5/20/20 at 11:36 am to kengel2
quote:
I really havent seen anyone here say that he was completely innocent. Its just that you cant gun someone down in the street because you believe they may or may have not stolen some nails from a construction site.
I think the guys who chased Aubrey down and ended up shooting and killing him were wrong for what they did. They need to be held accountable criminally and/or civilly.
However, it seems inaccurate and inappropriate to simply describe the situation as them “gunning someone down for stealing nails”. I’m not just calling you out, kengel2. Your response is just indicative of the normative response.
I’m sure the father and son were spurred into action by their desire to protect the neighborhood, not to shoot some black guy. As people with law enforcement backgrounds, carrying weapons for protection in such circumstances is just common sense.
They should have understood that their appearance with guns and their actions would be perceived as aggressive and threatening and not an authorized legal action. That was a huge mistake.
I’m sure it was a complete surprise to them, as it was to us who watched the video in horror, as the young man chose to engage in a fight for the gun instead of stopping or running the other way. I don’t think they wanted to shoot Aubrey until there was a direct confrontation over the weapon, but it was a confrontation that THEY caused.
Page 4 of 13
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News