- 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: Just watched that video of the man being shot in GA
Posted on 5/8/20 at 3:18 am to Manzielathon
Posted on 5/8/20 at 3:18 am to Manzielathon
quote:These guys had the road blocked off and were armed. He ran around the right side of the truck, and the fricker with the gun crossed over in front of the truck to cut him off. He only "charged" the guy because there was no other option at that point. I would have done the same thing.
I’m saying he charged at someone who had a gun. Which is a pretty dumb move in general
quote:Yeah I don't think that's how this is going to go down. You might be able to stand your ground or whatever the frick, but you can't go around blocking roads, confronting people with guns, and then shoot them during the conflict that you created. That's called murder.
also because the person with the gun is now legally justified in shooting him.
1
Posted on 5/8/20 at 3:23 am to Pesticide
quote:
Not to mention a 911 call from another person saying they guy was in a house under construction
You've never walked into a house under construction out of curiosity? I've done it plenty of times.
Posted on 5/8/20 at 3:27 am to Korkstand
quote:
Yeah I don't think that's how this is going to go down. You might be able to stand your ground or whatever the frick, but you can't go around blocking roads, confronting people with guns, and then shoot them during the conflict that you created. That's called murder.
Not according to Georgia state law it isn’t.
If they can prove they had legitimate reason to believe this individual was involved in the commission of crimes in the area, then attempting to stop him was legal.
He could have simply kept running away, but he chose to lunge at the guy with the gun. Now it becomes a self-defense issue, and shooting him was legal.
I’m not arguing that any of this is right. I’m saying it’s all legal depending on what evidence they are able to provide regarding their suspicion that the individual was involved in crime.
This entire media narrative is bullshite, regardless of whether or not the two men were “right”.
No one goes jogging in a neighborhood that isn’t theirs, on the opposite side of the interstate from where they live, wearing cargo shorts and high top shoes, with a hammer.
This post was edited on 5/8/20 at 3:30 am
Posted on 5/8/20 at 3:35 am to Manzielathon
Both of these guys should get the death penalty
Period
Period
Posted on 5/8/20 at 3:42 am to Manzielathon
quote:
If they can prove they had legitimate reason to believe this individual was involved in the commission of crimes in the area, then attempting to stop him was legal.
After they already called the police?
Posted on 5/8/20 at 3:44 am to Powerman
Yes.
Office of the District Attorney - Waycross Judicial Court
“OCGA17-4-60 - 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”
So, if they can prove they had reasonable suspicion of a felony being committed, then they were justified. I’m not saying whether or not this law is right or makes sense, and I’m not saying they actually have the evidence to back it up. But if they do - then they will get off.
Office of the District Attorney - Waycross Judicial Court
“OCGA17-4-60 - 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”
So, if they can prove they had reasonable suspicion of a felony being committed, then they were justified. I’m not saying whether or not this law is right or makes sense, and I’m not saying they actually have the evidence to back it up. But if they do - then they will get off.
This post was edited on 5/8/20 at 3:49 am
Posted on 5/8/20 at 3:46 am to Manzielathon
DA has a conflict of interest and should also be investigated
Posted on 5/8/20 at 3:48 am to Manzielathon
quote:
A private person may arrest an offender if the offense is committed in his presence or within his immediate knowledge
They don't have any evidence of him committing a crime
quote:
So, if they can prove they had reasonable suspicion of a felony being committed, then they were justified.
Clearly they didn't
This post was edited on 5/8/20 at 3:50 am
Posted on 5/8/20 at 3:50 am to Powerman
They don’t need hard evidence according to the statute. They will need hard evidence or a sympathetic jury who believes them to get out of this though.
The DA already recused himself so quit crying
The DA already recused himself so quit crying
This post was edited on 5/8/20 at 3:52 am
Posted on 5/8/20 at 3:51 am to Manzielathon
quote:
They will need hard evidence or a sympathetic jury who believes them to get out of this though.
What type of psychopaths do you think would be sympathetic to this?
quote:
They don’t need hard evidence according to the statute.
To ambush and shoot someone?
Posted on 5/8/20 at 3:52 am to Manzielathon
quote:
The DA already recused himself so quit crying
My point is the DA's interpretations of the event are completely voided at this point
Posted on 5/8/20 at 3:53 am to Powerman
I’m sorry you don’t understand Georgia state law. That’s your problem not mine.
They shot a criminal, so I really do not care. Have you ever gone jogging in high top shoes and a hammer in a neighborhood you don’t live in?
They shot a criminal, so I really do not care. Have you ever gone jogging in high top shoes and a hammer in a neighborhood you don’t live in?
Posted on 5/8/20 at 3:53 am to Manzielathon
quote:He tried to run away. The guy with the gun came over to cut him off.
He could have simply kept running away, but he chose to lunge at the guy with the gun.
quote:It is very clear that the unarmed guy was acting in self defense. When someone confronts you with a gun, it's fight or flight. You can't outrun a bullet, your best bet is to fight. I would have done the exact same thing.
Now it becomes a self-defense issue, and shooting him was legal.
quote:Sure sounds like you are. You keep saying the guy "charged" or "lunged" at him, when it is clear that he tried to avoid him by running around the opposite side of the truck. The guy with the gun initiated the contact.
I’m not arguing that any of this is right.
quote:And yet, none of that shite is illegal. Pretty sure he didn't hurt anybody, and I don't think he was planning to steal too much stuff being on foot. He might have stolen the hammer.
No one goes jogging in a neighborhood that isn’t theirs, on the opposite side of the interstate from where they live, wearing cargo shorts and high top shoes, with a hammer.
Posted on 5/8/20 at 3:54 am to Manzielathon
quote:
They shot a criminal, so I really do not care. Have you ever gone jogging in high top shoes and a hammer in a neighborhood you don’t live in?
No but doing so isn’t a crime or proof of a crime.
Posted on 5/8/20 at 3:55 am to Manzielathon
quote:
They shot a criminal,
What was his crime that was so grave that it couldn't wait for the authorities?
Posted on 5/8/20 at 3:57 am to Korkstand
quote:
when it is clear that he tried to avoid him by running around the opposite side of the truck.
He could have easily moved around him and continued to run. He chose to fight a guy with a gun with his bare hands, despite knowing there’s a second guy with a gun.
quote:
Pretty sure he didn't hurt anybody
Property is an extension of a person.
quote:
You can't outrun a bullet, your best bet is to fight.
This only makes sense if you’re operating under the assumption they were going to shoot him anyway. They only shot him because he lunged at him. Otherwise they would have shot him earlier.
Posted on 5/8/20 at 3:59 am to Manzielathon
You’re a stupid individual. A crime against your property doesn’t give you carte blanche to take the life of another person
This post was edited on 5/8/20 at 4:01 am
Posted on 5/8/20 at 4:00 am to MileHighDraw
It’s pretty clear that this is a case of a Barney Fife wannabe ex-cop who, with his son, thinks he found the guy snooping around a vacant house, allegedly stealing things, and for some stupid fricking reason decided to arm up and do a citizens arrest instead of just calling the real cops. Whether this “jogger” guy was really up to no good or it was a case of mistaken identity, who knows...
What these two dummies didn’t expect was for the jogger guy to charge after the guy with the gun and attempt to wrestle away the weapon. I actually don’t think these two goons ever had any intention of killing this man because they expected him to comply with their orders. Why did he charge after someone holding a shotgun? Apparently he feared for his life in that moment, which is very understandable. Sad situation all around and completely avoidable if not for the horrible decisions by the father and son.
Also what is equally sad is the frenzy this story will no doubt create in perpetuating the narrative that black people are being routinely hunted and killed by white people. It’s bullshite and it’s dangerous. And innocent people will end up getting hurt or killed because of it.
What these two dummies didn’t expect was for the jogger guy to charge after the guy with the gun and attempt to wrestle away the weapon. I actually don’t think these two goons ever had any intention of killing this man because they expected him to comply with their orders. Why did he charge after someone holding a shotgun? Apparently he feared for his life in that moment, which is very understandable. Sad situation all around and completely avoidable if not for the horrible decisions by the father and son.
Also what is equally sad is the frenzy this story will no doubt create in perpetuating the narrative that black people are being routinely hunted and killed by white people. It’s bullshite and it’s dangerous. And innocent people will end up getting hurt or killed because of it.
Posted on 5/8/20 at 4:00 am to Manzielathon
quote:
This only makes sense if you’re operating under the assumption they were going to shoot him anyway
When two guys with guns confront you, what’s your assumption?
Posted on 5/8/20 at 4:04 am to Manzielathon
quote:You are still arguing that they were in the right.
He could have easily moved around him and continued to run. He chose to fight a guy with a gun with his bare hands, despite knowing there’s a second guy with a gun.
quote:No, frick that. No rational person is going to say these guys were justified in their actions over a fricking hammer.
Property is an extension of a person.
quote:The assumption is they weren't going to just let him get away. They had the road blockaded. He tried to evade, but the guy cut him off. They had a truck and guns. What on earth makes you think he could have just ran away and that would have been the end of it? They weren't going to let him go without a fight, so he had no choice but to give them one.
This only makes sense if you’re operating under the assumption they were going to shoot him anyway. They only shot him because he lunged at him. Otherwise they would have shot him earlier.
Page 3 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News