- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- 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: Ahmaud Arbery had a history of claiming to be a jogger to cover for criminal activities.
Posted on 5/6/21 at 8:57 am to the808bass
Posted on 5/6/21 at 8:57 am to the808bass
quote:
Who is “they”?
Criminals, nice try race baiter.
Put a sign in your front yard and tell them you love them and understand them, and they can commit a crime against your family and you will forgive them.
1
Posted on 5/6/21 at 8:59 am to 93and99
Bass is far from a race baiter and is way closer to many of your positions than you may think.
In this case, he’s right that the people responsible for arberys death were in the wrong.
I’m all for stand your ground. This wasn’t that.
In this case, he’s right that the people responsible for arberys death were in the wrong.
I’m all for stand your ground. This wasn’t that.
Posted on 5/6/21 at 8:59 am to roadGator
I can't believe you have empathy or sympathy for criminals. 
Posted on 5/6/21 at 9:04 am to 93and99
Link to that for me.
Posted on 5/6/21 at 9:14 am to roadGator
quote:
I get your sentiment but in this case they didn’t have a right to chase him and ultimately kill him.
It’s really 2 questions, isn’t it.
Did they have a right to chase him?
Take the racial issue out of it for a moment (which may not be possible or even appropriate). Suppose the person was observed to be trespassing and suspected of being a previous burglar of the site. (This may or may not be the actual situation in this case, but assume it for argument sake.) Whether or not it’s “advisable”, is it legal for civilians to chase and confront that person while armed?
It certainly clouds things immensely that the experience of being chased by armed men changes the scenario for the fleeing suspect, and the pursuers.
It’s a similar question to many other scenarios, where we haven’t really figured out the non-standard legal ramifications of the way our laws are applied.
Second question:
If (Big If) the good ole boys had a right to chase and stop/detain a suspect of a crime, under what circumstances of self-defense would you be justified to shoot an unarmed person who is trying to take your firearm?
My personal thoughts are that it was unlawful for the civilians to chase a trespassing suspect while armed because their actions immediately created an unwarranted danger to the community and the person they were chasing, who at any rate was only suspected of non-violent actions.
They were not trained to know the complexity of police chases and therefore assumed too much authority in trying to handle the matter in their own.
However, the laws of that jurisdiction regarding citizen arrest powers are a major element to be considered, and this area of the law will be put to the test.
Posted on 5/6/21 at 9:15 am to L.A.
No shite, still shouldn't have been shot.
Posted on 5/6/21 at 9:16 am to Jimbeaux
quote:
Did they have a right to chase him?
No. Case closed.
Posted on 5/6/21 at 9:18 am to 93and99
That’s not supporting a criminal.
Posted on 5/6/21 at 9:21 am to Jimbeaux
I’m with you.
But because they were likely breaking the law when he was killed I don’t think they are going to be able to justify killing him even if he was going for the gun.
Totally fricked up situation either way.
Will be interesting to watch to see how the jury and court treats going for the gun.
But because they were likely breaking the law when he was killed I don’t think they are going to be able to justify killing him even if he was going for the gun.
Totally fricked up situation either way.
Will be interesting to watch to see how the jury and court treats going for the gun.
Posted on 5/6/21 at 9:25 am to roadGator
quote:
That’s not supporting a criminal.
I didn't say you supported criminals.
I said you have empathy and/or sympathy for them.
Until something bad happens to a family member of yours (hopefully that won't happen) by a criminal with an arrest record longer than your arm you won't fully understand.
We have soft prosecutors and judges who allow criminals back out on the street instead of throwing the book at them.
You are one of the few posters on here that I like and don't want to argue with.
Let's just agree to disagree.
Posted on 5/6/21 at 9:27 am to 93and99
I dont have the same experience you do so I can understand a bit.
However, we still have to be better than them.
Don’t misconstrue my feelings though.
People die every day. I don’t know Arbury or his family. Nor do I know the young father killed by a drunk driver somewhere across the country last week.
Empathy for people you don’t know is not real.
However, we still have to be better than them.
Don’t misconstrue my feelings though.
People die every day. I don’t know Arbury or his family. Nor do I know the young father killed by a drunk driver somewhere across the country last week.
Empathy for people you don’t know is not real.
This post was edited on 5/6/21 at 9:34 am
Posted on 5/6/21 at 9:30 am to Jimbeaux
The McMichaels were/are dumb asses, that’s all I’m convinced of. From what little I’ve delved into the evidence it seems like a decent argument can be made both ways, for guilt or innocence. I don’t really care because their level of stupidity almost arises to deserving jail time in and of itself.
Posted on 5/6/21 at 9:35 am to Jimbeaux
quote:
Did they have a right to chase him?
These are the crux of this debate.
Take the racial issue out of it for a moment (which may not be possible or even appropriate). Suppose the person was observed to be trespassing and suspected of being a previous burglar of the site. (This may or may not be the actual situation in this case, but assume it for argument sake.) Whether or not it’s “advisable”, is it legal for civilians to chase and confront that person while armed?
quote:
It’s really 2 questions, isn’t it.
How can it be illegal to follow someone suspected of committing a crime? Put aside their reasons for suspecting this particular person. If you see someone leaving a neighbor’s property and have reason to believe they weren’t there with the knowledge of the neighbor, isn’t it reasonable to follow them until the cops arrive? Furthermore, under what law would I be arrested if I followed someone suspected of a crime and broke no laws in doing so?
Additionally, isn’t it reasonable that anyone following a suspect should 1) do so while in communication with police and 2) following all laws while doing so.
quote:
Second question: If (Big If) the good ole boys had a right to chase and stop/detain a suspect of a crime, under what circumstances of self-defense would you be justified to shoot an unarmed person who is trying to take your firearm?
This is actually 2 questions. 1st, did they have a right to stop/detain a suspect of a crime with a weapon? 2nd, if they detain a suspect with a weapon, at what point is it considered self defense if the suspect attempts to take your weapon?
If a person is being followed by strangers with weapons, is it reasonable to try to disarm them in your own self defense? If I’m in that situation, what other option do I have if I’m unarmed and chased by people with weapons?
Posted on 5/6/21 at 9:37 am to Jimbeaux
(no message)
This post was edited on 5/6/21 at 9:40 am
Posted on 5/6/21 at 9:38 am to Jimbeaux
.
Yes they did.
quote:
I don’t feel like clicking your link. Did the court grant the motion by the defense to include Arbery’s arrest history?
Yes they did.
Posted on 5/6/21 at 9:46 am to LSUGrrrl
LINK 2010 Georgia Code TITLE 17 - CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CHAPTER 4 - ARREST OF PERSONS ARTICLE 4 - ARREST BY PRIVATE PERSONS § 17-4-60 - Grounds for arrest
Maybe this will help answer one of your questions.
Maybe this will help answer one of your questions.
Posted on 5/6/21 at 11:20 am to LSUGrrrl
quote:
This is actually 2 questions. 1st, did they have a right to stop/detain a suspect of a crime with a weapon?
In this case, no, they did not.
Posted on 5/6/21 at 11:22 am to LSUGrrrl
quote:It isn't.
How can it be illegal to follow someone suspected of committing a crime?
That's not where the crime originated.
Posted on 5/6/21 at 11:42 am to IKKAY
quote:
LINK 2010 Georgia Code TITLE 17 - CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CHAPTER 4 - ARREST OF PERSONS ARTICLE 4 - ARREST BY PRIVATE PERSONS § 17-4-60 - Grounds for arrest
Maybe this will help answer one of your questions.
quote:
A private person may arrest an offender if the offense is committed in his presence or within his immediate knowledge. If the offense is a felony and the offender is escaping or attempting to escape, a private person may arrest him upon reasonable and probable grounds of suspicion.
Here’s the relevant language of the statute.
I don’t think the chasers had seen Arbery commit a suspected felony.
This post was edited on 5/6/21 at 11:45 am
Page 29 of 30
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News