ChiefsPlanet Mobile
Page 45 of 45
« First < 354142434445
Patteeu Memorial Political Forum>Video Shows Fatal Shooting of Ahmaud Arbery
BigRichard 05:38 AM 05-06-2020
I suspect these idiots are going to hang at this point... no pun intended.

Someone have a quick way to embed that video at the link?

#AhmaudArbery This is the full video footage of this awful murder. No words to describe this awful, horrible thing they did to this innocent young man who was just jogging. pic.twitter.com/tXlu174PeP

— thatboy (@thatbator) May 6, 2020


Originally Posted by :
The fatal shooting of Ahmaud Arbery -- a 25-year-old black man out for a jog when he was chased and killed -- was caught on video, prompting a call for a grand jury to review the case.

Arbery's death is being referred to as a modern-day lynching, as he was unarmed when he was gunned down in Brunswick, GA on February 23 by a white citizen named Travis McMichael ... who has not been arrested or charged. He also happens to be the son of a former district attorney investigator.

As you can see in the video, Arbery was jogging when he was stopped by McMichael and his father in a white pickup truck. McMichael was armed with a shotgun. Arbery appears to attempt to run around the truck before he and McMichael start grappling.

After at least 2 shots, the men continued struggling over the gun ... until Arbery stumbles away, shot in the mid-section, and then collapses to the ground. He was later pronounced dead.

https://www.tmz.com/2020/05/05/shoot...orgia-jogging/
On a side note here, this is what pisses me off the most about a lot of media sources. When i searched for this video I got several named media sites and every last one of the ****ers were cutting up the video and not showing the entire thing and also adding there own color commentary(still no pun intended). Just show me the ****ing video and let me make up my own decision. TMZ was about the only one who just showed the video clip from start to end. :-) Sorry, I am off my pedestal now.
[Reply]
Marcellus 02:00 PM 11-25-2021
Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501:
He conveniently left this part out.

"One of the problems of individual group vigilante action is that it’s not done at a larger stage, or national, or even city level, so it has that potential of simply solving the problem for one group at the expense of neighboring groups, and while it’s hard to deny that this is moral vigilante action, from a larger societal point of view it’s not a good solution.

Better that the government do that, extend more resources if need be, undertake the policy that we are better at reducing crime and apply that policy to all communities in the area. So it’s not a matter of just pushing the crime next door, but rather preventing it. That’s just an example of how, even if on its own terms moral vigilantism seems morally justifiable, it doesn’t necessarily mean it’s good for society."
LOL the fact you think that makes it any less ridiculous is hilarious dude. I didn't conveniently leave it out, it doesn't change anything as for how stupid that entire premise is.

What's really amazing is a person such as yourself who cries about the militarization of police also cries for more government intervention in law enforcement. Do you even think about the shit you post?

In the end you want more government control while crying about how the government does things.
[Reply]
chiefzilla1501 03:30 PM 11-25-2021
Originally Posted by Marcellus:
LOL the fact you think that makes it any less ridiculous is hilarious dude. I didn't conveniently leave it out, it doesn't change anything as for how stupid that entire premise is.

What's really amazing is a person such as yourself who cries about the militarization of police also cries for more government intervention in law enforcement. Do you even think about the shit you post?

In the end you want more government control while crying about how the government does things.
lol, so you're just cherry picking buzzwords. The neighborhood watch was an afterthought in the article. It wasn't critiquing them. Its saying if they exist because citizens want to fill the gap of government failure on public safety then solving issues in pockets doesn't stop the government failure. It just pushes it out like squeezing a balloon. Neighborhood watch doesn't work in marginalized neigborhoods if it suffers from the same foundational issues with unfairness in the criminal justice system. Since they are essentially an extension of police. V

Im not the one arguing for more govt control bozo. What do you think the war on drugs and crime and militarized police is? If you had actually read the article you'd have seen that it argues the opposite. That it's the hidden vigilantism creating problems where those who demand justice create unfair rules in the justice system to give them peace of mind. It's the same dumb argument that leads to exponentially adding to police budgets year after year after year and government overreaxh on things like sentencing laws which create way more problems than they solve. These are instruments of government control. You're the one who wants them, not me. The comment was that government needs to do their job so citizens don't have to. It isnt a commentary about adding police resources.

I mean seriously...He goes out of his way to see that racism and guns and moral vigilantes are not the big problem. You literally took that 5% and chose to be outraged by it.
[Reply]
El Lobo Gordo 11:50 PM 11-25-2021
Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501:
Travis McMichaels, the shooter, was not a former cop. The driver who trapped Arbery in wasnt a cop either. 2 out of 3 not qualified to handle this.

McMichael himself said he never witnessed a break in. They saw Arbery running and assumed guilt. Just because footage later showed he was in a construction site doesn't mean you can assume the vigilantes had any knowledge of this. Even if he was a cop thats a pretty dubious suspicion to react that aggressively to a crime you never saw. Not sure how you expect an non armed man to respond to three plain clothes people in a truck drawing guns and threatening to blow his ****ing head off.

Retired cops get some leeway. But not entirely. They are there to respond to an emergency which this was not. They have way less leeway to use lethal force. Mcmichael even admitted on the stand Arbery was not a threat to them let alone to the community. And yes, doctors have considerably less protection if they practice medicine in a non emergency once they stop practicing
Arbery was never trapped. That is just false. Arbery was killed at an intersection and had multiple avenues in which to retreat. Now we can debate if retreating was tactically optimal at a given point but that won't make your false claim true.

Some neighborhoods are close nit; all the neighbors know and socialize with each other. If there is a cop or retired cop in that social group, its not uncommon for that person to be called upon by his neighbors when something suspicious is going down in the hood. When someone called the retired cop, that was not unreasonable.

Further, it is was not unreasonable for the retired cop to decide to look into the matter and assess what is going on. He might rightly feel his neighbors expect him to do it. It was not unreasonable for the retired cop to ask his son to go with him. It was not unreasonable for the retired cop and his son to arm themselves. It was not unreasonable for the retired cop and his son to ask suspect to stop and talk.

It would be unreasonable for the retired cop and his son to lay their hands on this suspect and try to forcibly detain him if they hadn't witnessed him committing a crime.....but that did not happen. Was it reasonable for the retired cop and his son to set up a road block when Arbery wouldn't stop? Was it reasonable for the retired cop's son who was openly wielding a shot gun to move to intercept Arbery when Arbery tried to avoid the road block? Could the retired cop and his son forsee that their actions might cause Arbery to defend himself? How many moves ahead do you think this retired cop and his son think?

This is a situation that ended shitty. Was Arbery lawfully killed? I've gone back and forth on this....right now I don't think so....so I think there is murder here. I certainly do not think Arbery was killed because he was a black man jogging in white neighborhood as the left and the left winged media wants you to believe. The left and the left winged media wants whites to hate blacks and blacks to hate whites. That is 100% obvious and that is the most egregious crime here.
[Reply]
El Lobo Gordo 11:57 PM 11-25-2021
Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501:
The case made it to court because one of the dudes was stupid enough to leak a video. Prior to that it was covered up by the prosecutor and swept under the rug from the police investigation. So the narrative still applies. It almost never even made it to court.
This is a more egregious crime in my opinion than Arbery's murder.....which is really more of accident because everyone involved acted stupidly.

Regarding the murder conviction: Sometimes the law should punish stupidity and this situation is a good example of when it should.
[Reply]
|Zach| 01:15 AM Yesterday
Originally Posted by rabblerouser:
They might get convicted for that, just to appease the media and howling unwashed masses.

Probation and home for dinner.
Or not.
[Reply]
ta900 05:26 AM Yesterday
Originally Posted by |Zach|:
Or not.
Oh look the piece of shit with the epically horrible thread on rittenhouse pops its head up in the arbery thread.
[Reply]
chiefzilla1501 08:19 AM Yesterday
Originally Posted by El Lobo Gordo:
Arbery was never trapped. That is just false. Arbery was killed at an intersection and had multiple avenues in which to retreat. Now we can debate if retreating was tactically optimal at a given point but that won't make your false claim true.

Some neighborhoods are close nit; all the neighbors know and socialize with each other. If there is a cop or retired cop in that social group, its not uncommon for that person to be called upon by his neighbors when something suspicious is going down in the hood. When someone called the retired cop, that was not unreasonable.

Further, it is was not unreasonable for the retired cop to decide to look into the matter and assess what is going on. He might rightly feel his neighbors expect him to do it. It was not unreasonable for the retired cop to ask his son to go with him. It was not unreasonable for the retired cop and his son to arm themselves. It was not unreasonable for the retired cop and his son to ask suspect to stop and talk.

It would be unreasonable for the retired cop and his son to lay their hands on this suspect and try to forcibly detain him if they hadn't witnessed him committing a crime.....but that did not happen. Was it reasonable for the retired cop and his son to set up a road block when Arbery wouldn't stop? Was it reasonable for the retired cop's son who was openly wielding a shot gun to move to intercept Arbery when Arbery tried to avoid the road block? Could the retired cop and his son forsee that their actions might cause Arbery to defend himself? How many moves ahead do you think this retired cop and his son think?

This is a situation that ended shitty. Was Arbery lawfully killed? I've gone back and forth on this....right now I don't think so....so I think there is murder here. I certainly do not think Arbery was killed because he was a black man jogging in white neighborhood as the left and the left winged media wants you to believe. The left and the left winged media wants whites to hate blacks and blacks to hate whites. That is 100% obvious and that is the most egregious crime here.
Based on what McMichaels knew at the time they pursued then tried to arrest at gunpoint a man based on suspicion and neighborhood chatter. They did not witness an actual crime.

There is no reason they couldn't just report the suspicion. Follow at a distance. They admitted they didn't see him as a threat so why was it necessary to trap him in and risk false imprisonment? And yeah, it is certainly trapping a man in if you block him then draw guns. No matter which direction he goes he would get shot. What makes these vigilante cases all the more disturbing is we are talking about an experienced cop who should know better. You don't want to empower every neighborhood Karen, hot head, or hell the neighborhood thug or racist the power to play cops and robbers based on their flawed perception of justice. Best leave that to the police.

Arbery may not have been out on a jog. But from McMichaels vantage point they assumed he was running away from something. That's one hell of a vague suspicion. A similar vague suspicion. It seems to me McMichaels knew Arberys history and the chatter about him and wanted to catch him redhanded and got overeager. They used a flimsy excuse of seeing him running to confirm their suspicion that he was guilty of something.
[Reply]
BucEyedPea 08:22 AM Yesterday
Zilla is the new Donger—not with endless questions that dubious charge belongs to GinaDoug, but with the constant use of misreporting of the facts and misunderstandings of the law that as in existence at that time.
[Reply]
chiefzilla1501 10:43 AM Yesterday
Originally Posted by BucEyedPea:
Zilla is the new Dongerónot with endless questions that dubious charge belongs to GinaDoug, but with the constant use of misreporting of the facts and misunderstandings of the law that as in existence at that time.
Dude, you are almost the only one defending these guys.
[Reply]
staylor26 11:38 AM Yesterday
Originally Posted by |Zach|:
Or not.
Look at this coward :-)
[Reply]
Page 45 of 45
« First < 354142434445
Up