Father and son charged in Ahmaud Arbery’s murder.

Ifallalot

Duke status
Dec 17, 2008
78,996
11,411
113
Seriously, fook off liar. My comment in the thread that got deleted was about Trayvon Martin and George Zimmerman, not this cases.

Someone brought TM/GZ and I responded to that. In that case, GZ was able to make a compelling self defense case. If that story was true, then it was incredibly poor judgement on TMs part to attack him. Which is why I said something along the lines of “maybe you should run away from someone pursuing you with a gun”.
Yup

My comment in the thread that got deleted was something like "I'm with Hal on this one, this is murder"

FOAD Fecal
 

hammies

Tom Curren status
Apr 8, 2006
10,038
6,825
113
Fuccking Georgia crackers probably terrified they're gonna go to prison where there's a lot of black dudes..
 

Sharkbiscuit

Duke status
Aug 6, 2003
20,182
11,844
113
Jacksonville Beach
My guess is they were chasing him and they cut him off at the pass.

It's just a bad idea to shoot people.
Double envelopment. Maneuver warfare 101.

It was more an ambush killing than a chase.

Chasing is typically done from behind the person being chased. These guys intercepted him. The police report also states that they went into their house, grabbed firearms, then got in the truck to pursue Ahmaud.

The way I read that is that they had intent to use deadly force. Against an unarmed man who had committed no crime.
Do you think people out during Covid-19 lockdown in Southeastern Georgia just randomly video every black person they see running, trailing behind at a jogging pace, and happen to get a shooting on film?

I saw the shooting in Indianapolis video and some comment that "we're being hunted". This is accurate. They're being hunted.

The Glynn County shooting is push-post hunting. You set up posts, then some people sweep through the woods, and the deer flee towards the ambush. The person videoing was "push"ing the "deer", and since it wasn't in the woods with the hunters on foot, it was easy to get the truck in front to the "post", and drop the deer.
 

hal9000

Duke status
Jan 30, 2016
45,990
10,403
113
Urbana, Illinois
Do you think people out during Covid-19 lockdown in Southeastern Georgia just randomly video every black person they see running, trailing behind at a jogging pace, and happen to get a shooting on film?

Yes. I mean, the odds favor catching an attack or shooting like this one.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: GWS_2

GDaddy

Duke status
Jan 17, 2006
29,239
2,049
113
Carlsbad
There is additional relevant information about this event which has been known to the cops and the DA since the outset but which are not in the public eye at this point.

For example
Just look at an aerial of the area. Notice the distance between the city limits vs this neighborhood (6.5 miles). Zoom down and look at the highway between town and that big-ass industrial park to the east of the scene of the crime. Zoom in and look at the bridge - that's a 2-mile span with a 50mph speed limit, 2 lanes of travel and a shoulder (no sidewalk). Does that look like a primo running route to anyone here?

Where does the victim live, and if it isn't within the running distance of a recreational runner than how did he end up in that neighborhood? I mean, if he actually lives in town then that would have made for a run of *at least* 13 miles, and forgive me for saying so, but the vid doesn't seem to depict a guy with the build of a long distance runner.

Other *obvious* questions besides those. These are questions which have answers which were already known to the investigators and the DA no later than the day after this shooting. The answers to those questions might very well support the "they hunted him down like a dog" narrative. Or not. We have no way of knowing at the moment unless/until these facts come out.
 

Autoprax

Duke status
Jan 24, 2011
59,119
16,042
113
61
Vagina Point
There is additional relevant information about this event which has been known to the cops and the DA since the outset but which are not in the public eye at this point.

For example
Just look at an aerial of the area. Notice the distance between the city limits vs this neighborhood (6.5 miles). Zoom down and look at the highway between town and that big-ass industrial park to the east of the scene of the crime. Zoom in and look at the bridge - that's a 2-mile span with a 50mph speed limit, 2 lanes of travel and a shoulder (no sidewalk). Does that look like a primo running route to anyone here?

Where does the victim live, and if it isn't within the running distance of a recreational runner than how did he end up in that neighborhood? I mean, if he actually lives in town then that would have made for a run of *at least* 13 miles, and forgive me for saying so, but the vid doesn't seem to depict a guy with the build of a long distance runner.

Other *obvious* questions besides those. These are questions which have answers which were already known to the investigators and the DA no later than the day after this shooting. The answers to those questions might very well support the "they hunted him down like a dog" narrative. Or not. We have no way of knowing at the moment unless/until these facts come out.
If if he was stealing sh!t, how does that justify engaging and shoot him?
 
  • Like
Reactions: afoaf

GDaddy

Duke status
Jan 17, 2006
29,239
2,049
113
Carlsbad
If if he was stealing sh!t, you don't track him down and shoot him.
Do you assume they started off or intended to shoot him at any point prior to him turning into the shotgun?

Because other than that there are lots of people out there who might choose to follow/cut him off in order to (lawfully) detain him while waiting for the cops to arrive. At gunpoint, even. A former cop would be well aware of the lawfulness of that.

Once the fight breaks out all bets are off. If they have the wrong guy then they're instantly farked. And to be sure, the 20/20 on this guy is that he didn't have a significant criminal history or a pattern for burglary so at this point "wrong guy" is more likely than not. OTOH, there's apparently a home security video out there of one of the burglaries in progress as well as an eyewitness who saw someone at that construction site and made the phone call, so these can absolutely be compared for their similarities or their differences to the victim.

Moreover, the facts about whether or not these guys actually picked an innocent man are already known and have been known from the outset. But have not yet been released by the cops/DA or reported in the press. I don't think it's unreasonable to wonder why this is.
 
Last edited:

afoaf

Duke status
Jun 25, 2008
42,273
15,118
113
I'd love to see the Breitchan article that provides this `joggable` analysis

I'm sure it's riveting
 
  • Haha
Reactions: grapedrink

$kully

Duke status
Feb 27, 2009
54,809
10,685
113
They didn't have the video before right?

Crazy that they chased him down.

They really thought he was a thief and that allowed them to do what they did,

Framing effects effect on the framer.

But how did they think they could chase him down and shoot him?

I guess they weren't thinking

Crazy
the problem is that there are ignorant people out there who think all black people are criminals. And even if he was a thief that does not give you the right to pursue him and kill him.
 

Autoprax

Duke status
Jan 24, 2011
59,119
16,042
113
61
Vagina Point
If if he was stealing sh!t, you don't track him down and shoot him.
Do you assume they initially intended to shoot him? Because other than that there are lots of people out there who might choose to follow/cut him off in order to (lawfully) detain him while waiting for the cops to arrive. At gunpoint, even.

Once the fight breaks out all bets are off.
I don't think they intended to shoot him. I don't think they were thinking.

And yes once the fight breaks out all bets are off.

The error didn't occur during the shooting.

It occurred when they chose armed pursuit.

Actually, they made a bet and lost.
 

$kully

Duke status
Feb 27, 2009
54,809
10,685
113
I don't think they intended to shoot him. I don't think they were thinking.

And yes once the fight breaks out all bets are off.

The error didn't occur during the shooting.

It occurred when they chose armed pursuit.

Actually, they made a bet and lost.
That’ll be the defense. They never intended to shoot him. Then he fought back and those pussies feared for their lives. The guys with the guns always fear for their lives. It’s incredible what pussies they are once they’re talking to a judge.
 

Autoprax

Duke status
Jan 24, 2011
59,119
16,042
113
61
Vagina Point
the problem is that there are ignorant people out there who think all black people are criminals. And even if he was a thief that does not give you the right to pursue him and kill him.
I don't even think it's about right or wrong.

It's about what happens when you engage in asocial behavior.

I was at a fight training back when I did that stuff and the trainer said, you only engage in asocial behavior when it's a life and death situation. You need to be aware the death is on the table when you engage in asocial behavior and be okay with that.

That is such a great rule to follow. There have been situations I have been in and chose not to engage by following that rule.

If these dummies followed that rule they will not be in jail and the black kid would be alive.

Black People Have Feeling Too!
 

GDaddy

Duke status
Jan 17, 2006
29,239
2,049
113
Carlsbad
No link and I've seen no comments about it anywhere. I just looked for myself. You could, too.

It may be that the victim didn't live in town, but in one of the residential neighborhoods a mile or so to the west of this location and well within a recreational runner's AO. We don't know at this point because nobody has asked.

I did see a comment that appeared in one of the articles saying that people had known him to run in town, and that he had been hassled a bit for running-while-black there, too. So maybe he was in the habit of riding a bus or driving into town in order to run there instead of his own neighborhood.

I doubt there's any criminal atty who wouldn't ask these types of questions and more and then proceed to make hay out of any of them which might be spun in favor of their clients. It would be malpractice if they didn't. So there is no "you're an asshole for even considering these questions" to be had here. One way or another, it's all eventually going to come out and it's all going to end up being used by either one side or the other at trial or however else these allegations are resolved.
 
Last edited: