Ahmaud Arbery

[jerryskids 5,206]

1 hour ago, Herbivore said:

we should try not to disparage victims

I tried to say that there was plenty of stupid to go around on this one, but viewing Arbery as a victim with no culpability fits your worldview better, helps to avoid any cognitive dissonance that might make you uncomfortable.  Enjoy your safe space.   

[IGotWorms 3,315]

26 minutes ago, RLLD said:

This.  Does anyone honestly want rednecks rolling around in pickup trucks doling out justice?  I know I don't.

That being said, if someone.....anyone....decides to do dumb sh!t, just know...these rednecks are out there.... so steal if you want, but you might get shot, and I will laugh

 

 

Don’t call em rednecks, jerry gets triggered  

[TimHauck 1,800]

22 hours ago, tanatastic said:

People focus on the details that don’t matter. “They had no right to go after him...” “They falsely accused him...” “He wasn’t doing anything wrong...”  None of those things are relevant. There’s one and only one thing that is relevant. He attacked 2 men with guns. That’s it. I don’t care why or how he felt or what he did or didn’t do or what the men had a right to do or not do. He attacked 2 guys with guns, end of story. 
 

That was not his “last ditch effort to survive.” he had a countless number of smarter decisions to make that all result in him being alive today. He chose the only one that left him dead.

And if three guys with guns and a truck didn’t chase down 1 guy on foot, they wouldn’t be facing murder charges.   

Sure, the specific moment that he grabs the gun it was self defense, but it was their fault it got to that point.

[dogcows 1,029]

On 4/29/2021 at 10:01 PM, tanatastic said:

They had no intention of shooting him in broad daylight and only acted in self defense. If he takes that gun they are both dead if they don’t shoot. They were shocked that he charged right at them. 99.999% you use guns to control people and keep the peace, not expecting it to be a gunfight. 

You know what their intentions were? Interesting. We’ll make sure you attend the trial as a defense witness. Based on the track record of people here who defended Chauvin - who are now defending these guys, I’d say these guys are likely to be spending many years behind bars.

[Herbivore 905]

6 hours ago, jerryskids said:

I tried to say that there was plenty of stupid to go around on this one, but viewing Arbery as a victim with no culpability fits your worldview better, helps to avoid any cognitive dissonance that might make you uncomfortable.  Enjoy your safe space.   

you are the one trying to cope

[jerryskids 5,206]

2 minutes ago, Herbivore said:

you are the one trying to cope

Does Arbery have any culpability?

[Gladiators 1,904]

4 hours ago, TimHauck said:

And if three guys with guns and a truck didn’t chase down 1 guy on foot, they wouldn’t be facing murder charges.   

Sure, the specific moment that he grabs the gun it was self defense, but it was their fault it got to that point.

Three guys with guns were riding around in a truck looking for someone to chase down? That’s scary. Hopefully they fry.

[Gladiators 1,904]

2 minutes ago, jerryskids said:

Does Arbery have any culpability?

What color was his skin?

[Herbivore 905]

3 minutes ago, jerryskids said:

Does Arbery have any culpability?

Not really...maybe 5%.  

[jerryskids 5,206]

5 minutes ago, Herbivore said:

Not really...maybe 5%.  

Well then I stand by my statement:  cognitive dissonance can be painful, best you avoid it.   

[TimHauck 1,800]

14 minutes ago, Gladiators said:

Three guys with guns were riding around in a truck looking for someone to chase down? That’s scary. Hopefully they fry.

I don't think they were looking for someone to chase down.   Clearly Arbery wasn't "going for a run," but trespassing at a construction site isn't really worthy of being chased down with a gun.   If the McMichaels were so scared of breakins in the neighborhood, they probably should have actually locked their car doors.

[Herbivore 905]

50 minutes ago, jerryskids said:

Well then I stand by my statement:  cognitive dissonance can be painful, best you avoid it.   

if that makes you feel better

[Hardcore troubadour 12,647]

Well, Runners World Magazine just won a Pulitzer for a story on this guy.  Clown world.  

[peenie 1,690]

13 hours ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Well, Runners World Magazine just won a Pulitzer for a story on this guy.  Clown world.  

You know those black and white photos of men smiling underneath a lynched black woman and her child? That's the equivalent of you but today.

If you don't understand why it's not wrong for a person to walk inside of an empty house to look around, and why it's wrong for neighbors to chase that person down, a person who had stolen nothing by the way, why it was wrong to chase him and actually hit him with their truck, threaten him with their guns, then you are just as nuts as those men in the 1920's who saw nothing wrong with hanging a black woman and her child for god knows what silly offense had occurred. 

And that goes for all of you who are even thinking about responding. 

[TBayXXXVII 2,117]

28 minutes ago, peenie said:

If you don't understand why it's not wrong for a person to walk inside of an empty house to look around, and why it's wrong for neighbors to chase that person down, a person who had stolen nothing by the way, why it was wrong to chase him and actually hit him with their truck, threaten him with their guns, then you are just as nuts as those men in the 1920's who saw nothing wrong with hanging a black woman and her child for god knows what silly offense had occurred. 

And that goes for all of you who are even thinking about responding. 

You lost me right here and why the rest of your statement goes ignored.  It IS WRONG to walk around inside SOMEONE ELSE'S property (house - empty or not), and look around.

[Hardcore troubadour 12,647]

38 minutes ago, peenie said:

You know those black and white photos of men smiling underneath a lynched black woman and her child? That's the equivalent of you but today.

If you don't understand why it's not wrong for a person to walk inside of an empty house to look around, and why it's wrong for neighbors to chase that person down, a person who had stolen nothing by the way, why it was wrong to chase him and actually hit him with their truck, threaten him with their guns, then you are just as nuts as those men in the 1920's who saw nothing wrong with hanging a black woman and her child for god knows what silly offense had occurred. 

And that goes for all of you who are even thinking about responding. 

You ought to look back and see what I had to say about this case before your over the top, typical black woman hysterical rant. Sometimes we do live up to our stereotypes. You just did. Many times you don’t.  The part I am showing derision about is them focusing on his jogging , as if that’s what he was doing. He wasn’t. Just tell the truth, usually it’s enough. To reiterate: the guys that killed him should go to prison. Aubrey probably had some mental health issues that were never properly addressed.  Said it then, say it now. 

[Big Guy 1,400]

On 5/6/2020 at 6:41 PM, KSB2424 said:

Ahmaud Arbery

 

is that ebonics for Armed Robbery?

[Herbivore 905]

7 minutes ago, Big Guy said:

is that ebonics for Armed Robbery?

that is clever

[IGotWorms 3,315]

28 minutes ago, peenie said:

You know those black and white photos of men smiling underneath a lynched black woman and her child? That's the equivalent of you but today.

If you don't understand why it's not wrong for a person to walk inside of an empty house to look around, and why it's wrong for neighbors to chase that person down, a person who had stolen nothing by the way, why it was wrong to chase him and actually hit him with their truck, threaten him with their guns, then you are just as nuts as those men in the 1920's who saw nothing wrong with hanging a black woman and her child for god knows what silly offense had occurred. 

And that goes for all of you who are even thinking about responding. 

It’s trespassing and maybe worse. I agree with your main point but I don’t think you’ll get very far if you don’t admit this. Of course it’s absolutely no reason to hunt down and kill a man.

[peenie 1,690]

It's not trespassing IF there are no signs that says it's trespassing or that it's private property. You all need to look it up!!!!

How do I know? Because when I was trying to buy a home we walked through many homes being built. It was not a crime. However, there were homes that had signs that said, "Private Property" to prevent home buyers from just walking in. 

 

[TBayXXXVII 2,117]

3 minutes ago, peenie said:

It's not trespassing IF there are signs that says it's trespassing. You all need to look it up!!!!

Georgia Trespassing 101

C.  A person commits the offense of criminal trespass when he or she knowingly and without authority enters upon the land or premises of another person or into any part of any vehicle, railroad car, aircraft, or watercraft of another person for an unlawful purpose.

 

[peenie 1,690]

3 minutes ago, TBayXXXVII said:

Georgia Trespassing 101

C.  A person commits the offense of criminal trespass when he or she knowingly and without authority enters upon the land or premises of another person or into any part of any vehicle, railroad car, aircraft, or watercraft of another person for an unlawful purpose.

 

and the key word there is...

Oh, you know, I edited my comment. I realized I left out the word NO signs.

[Herbivore 905]

3 minutes ago, TBayXXXVII said:

Georgia Trespassing 101

C.  A person commits the offense of criminal trespass when he or she knowingly and without authority enters upon the land or premises of another person or into any part of any vehicle, railroad car, aircraft, or watercraft of another person for an unlawful purpose.

 

so AA was not trespassing

[Utilit99 4,099]

1 minute ago, Herbivore said:

so AA was not trespassing

So someone can just walk into your house and take a seat and nap for a while. That's not unlawful?

[Hardcore troubadour 12,647]

Just now, Utilit99 said:

So someone can just walk into your house and take a seat and nap for a while. That's not unlawful?

Only if you put a sign up would it be against the law. 

[peenie 1,690]

Just now, Herbivore said:

so AA was not trespassing

That's not really the point here you guys. Even if he was knowingly trespassing, do you really feel it was okay to chase him down like that and confront him with guns. Why is this even a discussion. It's like discussing if it was wrong for Emmet Till to whistle at that white woman. 

[bostonlager 2,463]

11 minutes ago, Utilit99 said:

So someone can just walk into your house and take a seat and nap for a while. That's not unlawful?

That nap last a little longer then they originally anticipated. 

[Hardcore troubadour 12,647]

Just now, peenie said:

That's not really the point here you guys. Even if he was knowingly trespassing, do you really feel it was okay to chase him down like that and confront him with guns. Why is this even a discussion. It's like discussing if it was wrong for Emmet Till to whistle at that white woman. 

It was wrong to chase after him. Really wrong to point a gun at him once he left the area and wasn’t a threat.  But he was not jogging. 

[Utilit99 4,099]

1 minute ago, peenie said:

That's not really the point here you guys. Even if he was knowingly trespassing, do you really feel it was okay to chase him down like that and confront him with guns. Why is this even a discussion. It's like discussing if it was wrong for Emmet Till to whistle at that white woman. 

If someone came into your home, and just started looking around, using the bathroom, lounging on your couch, you would not feel threatened?

[peenie 1,690]

1 minute ago, Utilit99 said:

So someone can just walk into your house and take a seat and nap for a while. That's not unlawful?

It is a common practice that some people walk through homes that are partially built. People are curious and some are home buyers. The tape footage showed that white men and women and children and a couple of black guys walked through that property. It wasn't like AA was the only person who had walked through there. It was not an inhabited dwelling. 

[DonS 3,067]

1 minute ago, peenie said:

It is a common practice that some people walk through homes that are partially built. People are curious and some are home buyers. The tape footage showed that white men and women and children and a couple of black guys walked through that property. It wasn't like AA was the only person who had walked through there. It was not an inhabited dwelling. 

I can't remember the details.  Was he poking around the property at night or during the day?

[Utilit99 4,099]

7 minutes ago, peenie said:

It is a common practice that some people walk through homes that are partially built. People are curious and some are home buyers. The tape footage showed that white men and women and children and a couple of black guys walked through that property. It wasn't like AA was the only person who had walked through there. It was not an inhabited dwelling. 

Common practice? What's the difference? It's personal property. And also, there is liability involved when something is under construction. Was Bery thinking about that? Did he care what the owners thought about it? Why didn't he ask for permission? Or is that too logical for this type of person?

How about a little respect for the home owners.

For God's sake, if I were roaming around on someone else's property, I would expect to be confronted if not shot. Bery would be alive today if hadn't attacked the guy with the gun. 

[TBayXXXVII 2,117]

17 minutes ago, peenie said:

and the key word there is...

Oh, you know, I edited my comment. I realized I left out the word NO signs.

 

16 minutes ago, Herbivore said:

so AA was not trespassing

...knowingly and without authority.  Who gave him the authority to enter the property?

[Utilit99 4,099]

Just now, TBayXXXVII said:

 

...knowingly and without authority.  Who gave him the authority to enter the property?

Why would anything think, that if you go and even sit on a stranger's front porch, or even hang out in their front or back yards, that you wouldn't be approached with some sort of major concern from the owner? This dude went into a construction area of the property. Fock that. 

[TBayXXXVII 2,117]

18 minutes ago, DonS said:

I can't remember the details.  Was he poking around the property at night or during the day?

The details aren't important.  Everyone involved in the incident was wrong and stupid.  Because they were all wrong and stupid, one person died and the other's will probably die in prison.  If any one person does something smart, the black kid is alive.  I don't know enough about gun laws in GA to know if anything would happen to the rednecks.

[TBayXXXVII 2,117]

6 minutes ago, Utilit99 said:

Why would anything think, that if you go and even sit on a stranger's front porch, or even hang out in their front or back yards, that you wouldn't be approached with some sort of major concern from the owner? This dude went into a construction area of the property. Fock that. 

Apparently it's ok for Liberals.  

[DonS 3,067]

4 minutes ago, TBayXXXVII said:

The details aren't important.  Everyone involved in the incident was wrong and stupid.  Because they were all wrong and stupid, one person died and the other's will probably die in prison.  If any one person does something smart, the black kid is alive.  I don't know enough about gun laws in GA to know if anything would happen to the rednecks.

I was trying to reply to peenie's statement regarding prospective home buyers checking out a house during construction.  I would guess that activity would occur during the daytime. 

"investigating" a house in the middle of the night, to me at least, seems suspicious regardless of the race of people involved.

If he did this in broad daylight then peenie has a point.  My wife and I checked out a neighbor's house that was largely complete but still under construction.  We were having a similar floorplan built so we looked thru his back window to see some of the finishing touches he decided on. 

[tanatastic 2,061]

He attacked men with guns. That’s the only relevant part of this story. Why they were after him, what he was doing, both irrelevent. Don’t attack men with guns. 

[peenie 1,690]

17 minutes ago, tanatastic said:

He attacked men with guns. That’s the only relevant part of this story. Why they were after him, what he was doing, both irrelevent. Don’t attack men with guns. 

They hit him with their trucks first. He was running away from them for 7 minutes and he even ran into a ditch and they still followed him with their cars in broad daylight. Two trucks when he stole nothing!! 

Are you all nuts? You think this is normal? To chase someone down with guns? They weren’t police officers. 

Hee haw!! Git em’ Pa!!

[tanatastic 2,061]

2 minutes ago, peenie said:

They hit him with their trucks first. He was running away from them for 7 minutes and he even ran into a ditch and they still followed him with their cars in broad daylight. Two trucks when he stole nothing!! 

Are you all nuts? You think this is normal? To chase someone down with guns? They weren’t police officers. 

Hee haw!! Git em’ Pa!!

None of that is relevant. You still don’t attack men with guns. In the list of 100 options he had, he chose the only one that resulted in his death. Attack them is the only option that gets him killed. They were not planning to gun down a man in broad daylight, he left them no choice. If he takes that gun he kills both guys. They had the guns to control him and make him comply. Their reasoning on that is irrelevent.