You is all a bunch of poofs!

Old subthreads
Service Dog
.
.
Posts: 8652
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2013 2:52 pm

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#10621

Post by Service Dog »

free thoughtpolice wrote: It is a good thing to be versatile. Maybe there are other opportunities?
In the short run, I've been offered $50 cash per 4-to-6 hour shift... to stand outside a bar which serves to-go drinks-- & keep the line social-distanced.
Plus make sure the girl bartender doesn't get robbed. Wheee... I'm grey-economy 'Essential'. And back at my 1989 pay rate.

Matt Cavanaugh
.
.
Posts: 15449
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2013 12:38 pm
Contact:

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#10622

Post by Matt Cavanaugh »

Most of the covid cases in the US can be traced back to NYC and Seattle:

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/07/us/n ... break.html

free thoughtpolice
.
.
Posts: 11165
Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2012 4:27 pm

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#10623

Post by free thoughtpolice »

Service Dog wrote:
free thoughtpolice wrote: It is a good thing to be versatile. Maybe there are other opportunities?
In the short run, I've been offered $50 cash per 4-to-6 hour shift... to stand outside a bar which serves to-go drinks-- & keep the line social-distanced.
Plus make sure the girl bartender doesn't get robbed. Wheee... I'm grey-economy 'Essential'. And back at my 1989 pay rate.
I guess if there are new job opportunities everywhere it's for social distancing police persons and antiseptic wipe down technicians, at least I'm seeing that sort of thing here. I would hope for that sort of money there would be some tips.

AndrewV69
.
.
Posts: 8146
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 7:52 pm

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#10624

Post by AndrewV69 »

In other news:

When Virtue-Signalling Collides:


Brive1987
.
.
Posts: 17791
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 4:16 am

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#10625

Post by Brive1987 »

Matt Cavanaugh wrote: Most of the covid cases in the US can be traced back to NYC and Seattle:

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/07/us/n ... break.html
How very illiberal. And they say there’s no God.

The obesity belt looks like it’s dodged a bullet.

Service Dog
.
.
Posts: 8652
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2013 2:52 pm

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#10626

Post by Service Dog »



NY Post openly reports this story with an "Atlanta needs to stay in lockdown" hook.

https://nypost.com/2020/05/07/atlanta-m ... -lockdown/

I've been seeing a lot of 'Unemployment highest since Great Depression' headlines.

Howabout:

'Unemployment highest since Slavery Abolished'


Lockdowns aren't stopping crime in my neighborhood. Lots of smashed business windows here.

Matt Cavanaugh
.
.
Posts: 15449
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2013 12:38 pm
Contact:

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#10627

Post by Matt Cavanaugh »

That's just your run-of-the-mill chimpout.

jugheadnaut
.
.
Posts: 1495
Joined: Tue May 20, 2014 9:09 pm

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#10628

Post by jugheadnaut »

Matt Cavanaugh wrote:
The question, 'did you have sex with your intern?' should be answered:
'No, I did not have sex with my intern', not variously:

'She's not even my type'
'I'm not that kind of a person'
'Why would you even think I'd be capable of that?'
'That* never happened'
[* with 'that' denoting a narrowly-defined act that can be prima facie denied]
Content analysis would have a field day with this interview:


Background: Paul Bernardo is Canada's most notorious serial killer and rapist, active between 1987 and 1991. Elizabeth Bain was a University of Toronto student who disappeared in 1990 within the location range of Bernardo's crimes and is presumed murder. In one of the most thoroughly botched investigations in Canadian history, Toronto Police decided the boyfriend did it within hours of opening the investigation, creating favorable evidence via hypnosis and disregarding exculpatory evidence. He spent 7 years in jail before the conviction was overturned and the case was dropped because there was no real evidence against him. There is evidence Bernardo did it beyond massively fitting the profile, but it's highly circumstantial.

Brive1987
.
.
Posts: 17791
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 4:16 am

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#10629

Post by Brive1987 »



:burn:

jugheadnaut
.
.
Posts: 1495
Joined: Tue May 20, 2014 9:09 pm

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#10630

Post by jugheadnaut »

So with the latest Trayvon Martin/Michael Brown style rabble rousing narrative construction underway, Tim Pool has a really good take here:


From the video evidence, I don't see how a murder charge can possibly stand, so it looks like the usual suspects are just setting this up to create riots at some point. The video makes it clear the victim ran around the truck in order to ambush one of his pursuers and was trying to take the gun and was shot in the scuffle. Even if the shooting was intentional at this point, and it's impossible to say from the video, it's clear self defense since it would be reasonable to assume someone enraged and irrational enough to attack you when you're armed is a severe threat to shoot you should he gain control of the weapon. Given that the media deserves no charity in their coverage of cases like this, I'll preliminarily assume the absence of descriptors like "he was a shy honor student" means there will be unflattering things in his background, like a mile long rap sheet.

It's safe to say things aren't going to turn out well for the McMichaels though, because it seems certain they're going to get the Federal denial of civil rights bulldozer on them even if the grand jury fails to indict. That, however, they may deserve.

katamari Damassi
.
.
Posts: 5429
Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 10:32 am

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#10631

Post by katamari Damassi »

jugheadnaut wrote: So with the latest Trayvon Martin/Michael Brown style rabble rousing narrative construction underway, Tim Pool has a really good take here:


From the video evidence, I don't see how a murder charge can possibly stand, so it looks like the usual suspects are just setting this up to create riots at some point. The video makes it clear the victim ran around the truck in order to ambush one of his pursuers and was trying to take the gun and was shot in the scuffle. Even if the shooting was intentional at this point, and it's impossible to say from the video, it's clear self defense since it would be reasonable to assume someone enraged and irrational enough to attack you when you're armed is a severe threat to shoot you should he gain control of the weapon. Given that the media deserves no charity in their coverage of cases like this, I'll preliminarily assume the absence of descriptors like "he was a shy honor student" means there will be unflattering things in his background, like a mile long rap sheet.

It's safe to say things aren't going to turn out well for the McMichaels though, because it seems certain they're going to get the Federal denial of civil rights bulldozer on them even if the grand jury fails to indict. That, however, they may deserve.

Oh when will the oppression of white people in the southern US stop? Join me in song:
We shall overcome...

Keating
.
.
Posts: 2421
Joined: Fri Apr 10, 2015 3:18 pm
Location: South of anteater guy

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#10632

Post by Keating »

In a discussion with, I think Majid Nawaz, Sam Harris talks about listening to a Persian or Pakistani piece of music while working out at the gym. Does this sound familiar to anyone? Does anyone know what it is? I remember looking it up when I first heard Harris talking about it a few years ago, but I can't remember what it's called now, and I want to look it up again.

jugheadnaut
.
.
Posts: 1495
Joined: Tue May 20, 2014 9:09 pm

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#10633

Post by jugheadnaut »

katamari Damassi wrote: Oh when will the oppression of white people in the southern US stop? Join me in song:
We shall overcome...
To be clear, I have little sympathy for the McMichaels, and the Denial of Civil Rights conviction that seems their best case scenario may be wholly deserved. My concern is for the riots and further loss of life that the 'lynching' and 'hunting' narrative seem destined to provoke.

But did you have a point beyond tendentious, passive-aggressive posturing?

ConcentratedH2O, OM
.
.
Posts: 6555
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2012 8:51 pm

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#10634

Post by ConcentratedH2O, OM »

ACAB

I have no doubt that these fat, red-faced southern pieces of shit thought they were saving their community from great danger when they ran this black boy down and shot him in the street, like he was a rabid dog terrorizing whatever little government-funded hunters' outpost of a town they call home.

My money says they will each serve 4-6 monts inside on some sort of manslughter deal, with the camera guy getting a week and a fine. (Please quote me when I am proven seriously wrong lol)

It may well also be that their actions were absolutely 100% within the law of Georgia. And that's the problem: that there is the slightest doubt in our minds that it might be legal for 2 men in a truck, armed with shotguns, to pull up in front of another man who is running away from them on a street, stop, and get out with their weapons seemingly ready to go, and confront that man. That is so fucked up. This might be how they do things in Iran, or Afghanistan, or Pakistan. But this was the US. Absolutely amazing to me that this is up for the slightest debate.

ACAB

Matt Cavanaugh
.
.
Posts: 15449
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2013 12:38 pm
Contact:

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#10635

Post by Matt Cavanaugh »

jugheadnaut wrote: So with the latest Trayvon Martin/Michael Brown style rabble rousing narrative construction underway, Tim Pool has a really good take here:


From the video evidence, I don't see how a murder charge can possibly stand, so it looks like the usual suspects are just setting this up to create riots at some point. The video makes it clear the victim ran around the truck in order to ambush one of his pursuers and was trying to take the gun and was shot in the scuffle. Even if the shooting was intentional at this point, and it's impossible to say from the video, it's clear self defense since it would be reasonable to assume someone enraged and irrational enough to attack you when you're armed is a severe threat to shoot you should he gain control of the weapon. Given that the media deserves no charity in their coverage of cases like this, I'll preliminarily assume the absence of descriptors like "he was a shy honor student" means there will be unflattering things in his background, like a mile long rap sheet.

It's safe to say things aren't going to turn out well for the McMichaels though, because it seems certain they're going to get the Federal denial of civil rights bulldozer on them even if the grand jury fails to indict. That, however, they may deserve.
I'm not gonna waste 23 minutes of my life watching Tim Pool, so maybe somebody could summarize his argument for me.

I did spend a few minutes watching the witness video of the shooting a few times.

It was murder.

-- No reasonable person could reasonably believe someone jogging down the road posed to them a threat of serious bodily harm or death;
-- Brandishing a weapon at someone in public when not so threatened is a felony;
-- Firing at someone running away from you, even when they'd previously posed a threat, is a felony.

Arbery ran around the truck to avoid an ambush set for him. Then the fat fucktard standing in the bed of the truck fires at him. Missing twice, btw. At that point -- actually, when the guns are first drawn on him -- Arbery has a legal right to defend himself from what is clearly the threat of serious bodily harm or death. Grab the other fat fucktard's shotgun? Hell yeah, and if possible turn it on him then shoot the other fat fucktard in the truck.

I hope these fat fucktards get the chair, thus cutting down on the inbreeding that creates fat fucktards.

jugheadnaut
.
.
Posts: 1495
Joined: Tue May 20, 2014 9:09 pm

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#10636

Post by jugheadnaut »

Matt Cavanaugh wrote:

I did spend a few minutes watching the witness video of the shooting a few times.

It was murder.

-- No reasonable person could reasonably believe someone jogging down the road posed to them a threat of serious bodily harm or death;
-- Brandishing a weapon at someone in public when not so threatened is a felony;
-- Firing at someone running away from you, even when they'd previously posed a threat, is a felony.
Look a little more closely. You don't have the facts right. Especially with the well poisoning most media is doing on this video it's easy to misinterpret at first. When I first saw it, I thought the father was shooting from the cover of the pickup bed. But no, he was definitely shot by the son during the scuffle, apparently a couple of times. The report Pool cites says the first was through his hand, the second in the upper body, which is what killed him. At first, after the fatal shot, Arbery appears ready to resume the attack. Then, he probably realizes he's badly hurt and starts running away, but collapses after a couple of steps.

They weren't armed to protect themselves. At least according to their story, they believed he was sighted on a property under construction and ran away, and wanted to detain him and possibly make a citizens arrest. In support, there was a 911 call at the time of the initial sighting reporting the suspect was running away, and the father was on the phone with 911 when the fight occurred. Pool says there's a report the DA's office has video that's identifiable as Arbery on private property, but we'll need to see if that's true.

While they definitely had the weapons to initimidate Arbery into stopping, but they weren't brandishing it at him. The rifle or shotgun was pointed up the entire time until Arbery attacked.

Service Dog
.
.
Posts: 8652
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2013 2:52 pm

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#10637

Post by Service Dog »

I've been looking into this Shaun King fellow who shared the video on social media-- and he seems to have a partisan agenda.

And why didn't the video emerge sooner? This shooting took place a long time ago.

The two white men have never shot a jogger before.

And Donald Trump said he could shoot someone on fifth avenue and get away with it. Which would be worse than this.

The black guy was clearly "rushin" and "interferin" in the video.

Basically, from now on, I'm just taking statements of support of Joe Biden and substituting-in the names of anyone accused of anything.

Turns out nobody did anything.

Matt Cavanaugh
.
.
Posts: 15449
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2013 12:38 pm
Contact:

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#10638

Post by Matt Cavanaugh »

jugheadnaut wrote:
Look a little more closely. You don't have the facts right. Especially with the well poisoning most media is doing on this video it's easy to misinterpret at first. When I first saw it, I thought the father was shooting from the cover of the pickup bed. But no, he was definitely shot by the son during the scuffle, apparently a couple of times. The report Pool cites says the first was through his hand, the second in the upper body, which is what killed him. At first, after the fatal shot, Arbery appears ready to resume the attack. Then, he probably realizes he's badly hurt and starts running away, but collapses after a couple of steps.

They weren't armed to protect themselves. At least according to their story, they believed he was sighted on a property under construction and ran away, and wanted to detain him and possibly make a citizens arrest. In support, there was a 911 call at the time of the initial sighting reporting the suspect was running away, and the father was on the phone with 911 when the fight occurred. Pool says there's a report the DA's office has video that's identifiable as Arbery on private property, but we'll need to see if that's true.

While they definitely had the weapons to initimidate Arbery into stopping, but they weren't brandishing it at him. The rifle or shotgun was pointed up the entire time until Arbery attacked.
That still legally counts as 'brandishing'.

Nothing in the video will persuade me, but if I'm ignorant of certain facts, then I may well be wrong.

Georgia State Code: ARREST BY PRIVATE PERSONS - Grounds for arrest
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.
If the father and son actually spotted Arbery committing a crime, then encountered him again on the street, then their actions meet the first condition cited above. If they were not the ones who'd spotted him, then their fate rests on whether they had "reasonable and probable" suspicion.

Actually, no. They're already fucked no matter what.

Matt Cavanaugh
.
.
Posts: 15449
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2013 12:38 pm
Contact:

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#10639

Post by Matt Cavanaugh »

AFAICT, no offense was committed in the presence of, or within the immediate knowledge of, McMichael pere et fils. Rather, they spotted Arbery running by their house and believed he was a physical match for some nigger caught on CCTV trespassing a few days earlier. And it really doesn't matter if Arbery turns out to have been that trespassing nigger.

So I'm back to my fat inbred fucktard theory.

cf. The responding officer's report:
McMichael stated there have been several Break - ins in the neighborhood and further the suspect was caught on surveillance video. McMichael stated he was in his front yard and saw the suspect from the break-ins "hauling ass" down Satilla Drive toward Burford Drive. McMichael stated he then ran inside his house and called to Travis (McMichael) and said "Travis the guy is running down the street lets go". McMichael stated he went to his bedroom and grabbed his .357 Magnum and Travis grabbed his shotgun because they " didn ' t know if the male was armed or not" . Michael stated " the other night" they saw the same male and he stuck his hand down his pants which lead them to believe the male was armed.

McMichael stated he and Travis got in the truck and drove down Satilla Drive toward Burford Drive McMichael stated when they arrived at the intersection of Satilla Drive and Holmes Drive, they saw the unidentified male running down Burford drive. McMichael then stated Travis drive down Burford and attempted to cut off the male. stated the unidentified male turned around and began running back the direction from which he came and " Roddy " attempted to block him which was unsuccessful Michael stated he then jumped into the bed of the truck and he and Travis continued to Holmes in an attempt to intercept him.

McMichael stated they saw the unidentified male and shouted " stop stop , we want to talk to you" . Michael stated they pulled up beside the male and shouted stop again at which time Travis exited the truck with the shotgun. McMichael stated the unidentified male began to violently attack Travis and the two men then started fighting over the shotgun at which point Travis fired a shot and then a second later there was a second shot. Michael stated the male fell face down on the pavement with his hand under his body. McMichael stated he rolled the man over to see if the male had a weapon.

This local article is an atrocious piece of writing, but it does contain excerpts from the 911 call:
“There’s a guy in the house right now; it’s under construction,” the man told the dispatcher.
The man then gave her an address.
“And you said someone’s breaking into it right now?” the dispatcher asked.
“No,” the man replied, “it’s all open. It’s under construction … “
The man interrupted to say Arbery was leaving. “And there he goes right now.”

“Ok,” the dispatcher said, “What is he doing?”
“He’s running down the street,” the man said. The next sentence is garbled.
“That’s fine,” the dispatcher said. “I’ll get (police) out there. I just need to know what he was doing wrong. Was he just on the premises and not supposed to be?”
The next sentence is garbled. “And he’s been caught on camera a bunch at night. It’s kind of an ongoing thing. The man building the house has got heart issues. I think he’s not going to finish it.”
“Ok, that’s fine,” the dispatcher said. “And you said he was a male in a black T-shirt?”
“White T-shirt,” the man said. “Black guy, white T-shirt. He’s done run into the neighborhood again.”
The next 911 call from Satilla Shores came in at 1:14 p.m.
“I’m out here at Satilla Shores,” the man said. “There’s a black male running down the street.”
“Where at Satilla Shores?” the dispatcher asked.
“I don’t know what street we’re on,” the man replied.
“Stop!” he can be heard shouting. “Watch that. Stop, damn it! Stop!”

ConcentratedH2O, OM
.
.
Posts: 6555
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2012 8:51 pm

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#10640

Post by ConcentratedH2O, OM »

Turns out the defendants' own attorney - who by the way looks as much of a tawdry little piggy-eyed southern POS as his clients - approved the video's release and thought it exonerated the ex-cop murderer.
'I really thought releasing the video would put the truth out to the public,' Tucker stated.

'If he [Arbery] had just froze and hadn't done anything, then he wouldn't have been shot.'
So remember, the next time two men skid their pickup to a halt in front of you and jump out with shotguns, please stand still, turn slowly around, dig a hole about sixt feet long and three feet deep with your bare hands, kneel next to it and wait for heaven, boy.

Seriously, scratch the surface and the US is no different to India, Afghanistan, Brazil. Bunch of stupid fucking small-minded low-IQ selfish ignorant cunts. Give em guns and it's no wonder shit like this happens.



AndrewV69
.
.
Posts: 8146
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 7:52 pm

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#10641

Post by AndrewV69 »

After what the media did with the Travone Martin case I am pretty sure that once more the media is lying their asses off regardless of the facts. We know what the framing is.

I will wait for the transcript(s) from the trial.

Driftless
.
.
Posts: 533
Joined: Fri Mar 23, 2018 8:13 am

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#10642

Post by Driftless »

Matt Cavanaugh wrote:
jugheadnaut wrote:
Look a little more closely. You don't have the facts right. Especially with the well poisoning most media is doing on this video it's easy to misinterpret at first. When I first saw it, I thought the father was shooting from the cover of the pickup bed. But no, he was definitely shot by the son during the scuffle, apparently a couple of times. The report Pool cites says the first was through his hand, the second in the upper body, which is what killed him. At first, after the fatal shot, Arbery appears ready to resume the attack. Then, he probably realizes he's badly hurt and starts running away, but collapses after a couple of steps.

They weren't armed to protect themselves. At least according to their story, they believed he was sighted on a property under construction and ran away, and wanted to detain him and possibly make a citizens arrest. In support, there was a 911 call at the time of the initial sighting reporting the suspect was running away, and the father was on the phone with 911 when the fight occurred. Pool says there's a report the DA's office has video that's identifiable as Arbery on private property, but we'll need to see if that's true.

While they definitely had the weapons to initimidate Arbery into stopping, but they weren't brandishing it at him. The rifle or shotgun was pointed up the entire time until Arbery attacked.
That still legally counts as 'brandishing'.

Nothing in the video will persuade me, but if I'm ignorant of certain facts, then I may well be wrong.

Georgia State Code: ARREST BY PRIVATE PERSONS - Grounds for arrest
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.
If the father and son actually spotted Arbery committing a crime, then encountered him again on the street, then their actions meet the first condition cited above. If they were not the ones who'd spotted him, then their fate rests on whether they had "reasonable and probable" suspicion.

Actually, no. They're already fucked no matter what.
Think what would happen if you could just detain anyone you thought might have committed a crime at some point in the past or possibly at some point in the future. That is why the law is written the way it is.

Also think about being out running after not committing a crime and with no knowledge of the recent burglaries. What would you think if these two cut you off and jumped out armed? That they are fine upstanding citizens? Or that they finally found their excuse to shoot someone? Especially if you are black and you are in Georgia.

The two guys look like they just came from this meeting:

https://www.theonion.com/south-postpone ... 1819565548

Service Dog
.
.
Posts: 8652
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2013 2:52 pm

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#10643

Post by Service Dog »

Matt Cavanaugh wrote:
Georgia State Code: ARREST BY PRIVATE PERSONS - Grounds for arrest
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.
If the father and son actually spotted Arbery committing a crime, then encountered him again on the street, then their actions meet the first condition cited above. If they were not the ones who'd spotted him, then their fate rests on whether they had "reasonable and probable" suspicion.
....
For what it's worth-- here in NYC-- I was taught that-- to perform a citizen's arrest-- the arrestee has to have 'in fact' committed a crime.
Reasonable suspicion and probable cause aren't good-enough. You must gotta-be absolutely-correct that the guy actually broke the law.

I was an Auxiliary cop. We were legally Peace Officers, but we had only citizen's arrest powers. Then there was a case-- where an auxiliary was on duty and heard a call on the police radio-- then spotted & detained the correct criminal. The criminal's defense argued that the auxiliary hadn't seen the crime with his own eyes/ so he wasn't authorized to perform the arrrest. The court ruled that auxiliaries count as 'fellow officers' & the arrest was deemed valid.

Obviously, Georgia isn't NY. But the shooters' defense will be looking for something like the 'fellow officer' status, to justify the attempt to detain.

Otherwise, "Stop we want to talk to you" wasn't a legit demand.

ConcentratedH2O, OM
.
.
Posts: 6555
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2012 8:51 pm

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#10644

Post by ConcentratedH2O, OM »

The British police have really been earning that "force" part of their name during COVID. Utter cunts every last man, woman, and xir of them. ACAB. Check out the cunts here:



Why did all three of the cunts need to walk along this deserted beach together to get in this lone fisherman's face and tell him that he should stop having a nice relaxing time miles from anyone and fuck off back to his hovel?

Turned out to be some pranksters, just showing how incredibly small-minded and counter-productive these cunts have been acting.


Matt Cavanaugh
.
.
Posts: 15449
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2013 12:38 pm
Contact:

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#10645

Post by Matt Cavanaugh »

ConcentratedH2O, OM wrote: Seriously, scratch the surface and the US is no different to India, Afghanistan, Brazil. Bunch of stupid fucking small-minded low-IQ selfish ignorant cunts. Give em guns and it's no wonder shit like this happens.
Not sure of the practicality of an IQ test for gun ownership. Take these morons guns, and all sorts of other shit would still happen. As Charlton Heston used to remind us, "guns don't kill jogging negroes, fat inbred fucktards with guns do."

Matt Cavanaugh
.
.
Posts: 15449
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2013 12:38 pm
Contact:

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#10646

Post by Matt Cavanaugh »

Driftless wrote: Think what would happen if you could just detain anyone you thought might have committed a crime at some point in the past or possibly at some point in the future. That is why the law is written the way it is.
As Dog observes, citizen's arrests are highly tricky. And legal experts strongly advise against them. You hear lots of folks talking about the right to make a citizen's arrest, but almost nobody has read the actual law, including these two idiots.

Georgia is an open carry state, but in concealed carry only states, the required CCW training program includes a section on that state's self-defense laws. Anyone carrying for home defense should also familiarize themselves well with those statutes. But many don't.

Also think about being out running after not committing a crime and with no knowledge of the recent burglaries. What would you think if these two cut you off and jumped out armed? That they are fine upstanding citizens?
Having guns drawn on you by strangers is the epitome of a credible and imminent threat to your safety and life. In that situation, you have the right to do whatever is necessary to defend yourself.

Any citizen may challenge another and ask to speak. But the other citizen has no obligation to stop or respond. The McMichaels wrongly believed they had the right to issue orders as they were conducting a citizen's arrest. But they were used to getting their way, as father was an ex-cop and the son is a past competitive vienna-sausage-eating champion.

John D
.
.
Posts: 5966
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2012 4:23 am
Location: Detroit, MI. USA

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#10647

Post by John D »

Matt Cavanaugh wrote:
ConcentratedH2O, OM wrote: Seriously, scratch the surface and the US is no different to India, Afghanistan, Brazil. Bunch of stupid fucking small-minded low-IQ selfish ignorant cunts. Give em guns and it's no wonder shit like this happens.
Not sure of the practicality of an IQ test for gun ownership. Take these morons guns, and all sorts of other shit would still happen. As Charlton Heston used to remind us, "guns don't kill jogging negroes, fat inbred fucktards with guns do."
If these good ole boys get any time it will be short. I look forward to the spectacle. These guys are murderers according to all main media sources including Fox. When they either get off or get a slap on the wrist all hell will break loose. My wife watched the report of this on Fox's "Special Report" and she has decided they are obviously guilty. Riots and shit are coming. I will enjoy watching stuff burn. I am developing a strange hatered of most people so I don't give a shit. This lockdown has really served to make me happy being alone.

When we start to get back to normal I am going to get my concealed carry permit.

jugheadnaut
.
.
Posts: 1495
Joined: Tue May 20, 2014 9:09 pm

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#10648

Post by jugheadnaut »

Matt Cavanaugh wrote:
Nothing in the video will persuade me, but if I'm ignorant of certain facts, then I may well be wrong.
Way too early to go into 'don't confuse me with the facts. I know what I know' mode. You thought the video showed Arbery was shot while running away, and that the father was shooting at him, which definitely aren't true. Don't you think your initial conclusion that it was murder deserves a review?
Matt Cavanaugh wrote: Georgia State Code: ARREST BY PRIVATE PERSONS - Grounds for arrest
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.
If the father and son actually spotted Arbery committing a crime, then encountered him again on the street, then their actions meet the first condition cited above. If they were not the ones who'd spotted him, then their fate rests on whether they had "reasonable and probable" suspicion.

Actually, no. They're already fucked no matter what.
As I think I've been clear, I found their actions to be very sketchy, and based on current information it seems unlikely it was a legitimate citizens arrest scenario. But that doesn't mean they have legal culpability for whatever the outcome was. The facts matter. I recall the same argument being made in the Trayvon Martin case. Because Zimmerman irresponsibly injected a gun into a Neighborhood Watch situation, any adverse outcome involving the gun was on him. But it was specious then and it's specious now.

jugheadnaut
.
.
Posts: 1495
Joined: Tue May 20, 2014 9:09 pm

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#10649

Post by jugheadnaut »

In an unwitting metaphor for what the site has turned into, Slate runs a detailed analysis into the perpetrator and nature of the Supreme Court toilet flush.

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/202 ... tream.html

TL;DR It was Breyer and it was poo.

Matt Cavanaugh
.
.
Posts: 15449
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2013 12:38 pm
Contact:

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#10650

Post by Matt Cavanaugh »

jugheadnaut wrote: Way too early to go into 'don't confuse me with the facts. I know what I know' mode. You thought the video showed Arbery was shot while running away, and that the father was shooting at him, which definitely aren't true. Don't you think your initial conclusion that it was murder deserves a review?
I seriously took under advisement what you wrote, which is why I investigated further.

I didn't think Arbery was shot while running away. I said you can't shoot even a definite perp, who's just assaulted you, once they start to run away.

I see Arbery running down the street, then dodging the truck to the right, then turning sharp left after the son? shot at him from the truck bed, to wrestle with the dad? wielding the shotgun. In hindsight, it may have been wiser for him to run off the road and seek cover. But the instant the McMichael's confronted him with firearms, Arbery had the right to do whatever was necessary to defend himself. And to re-emphasize, the McMichael's had no right whatsoever to demand that Arbery stop.

So if you're saying the McMichael's were justified in shooting Arbery because he ran past them, or again because he veered towards the dad after being shot by the son, you are mistaken.

Matt Cavanaugh wrote: I found their actions to be very sketchy, and based on current information it seems unlikely it was a legitimate citizens arrest scenario. But that doesn't mean they have legal culpability for whatever the outcome was.
If it wasn't a legitimate citizen's arrest, then it's they who are the felons. So yeah, they are culpable for murder: but for the McMichael's illegally drawing guns on Arbery in their attempt to illegally detain Arbery, Arbery would not be dead.
I recall the same argument being made in the Trayvon Martin case. Because Zimmerman irresponsibly injected a gun into a Neighborhood Watch situation, any adverse outcome involving the gun was on him. But it was specious then and it's specious now.
That is not what Zimmerman did. Zimmerman verbally challenged Martin, as was his right. Martin could have told Zimmerman to fuck off and proceeded on his way, as would have been his right. Instead, Martin chose to double back and viciously assault Zimmerman. Only then, and reasonably fearing for his life, did Zimmerman draw his gun.

free thoughtpolice
.
.
Posts: 11165
Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2012 4:27 pm

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#10651

Post by free thoughtpolice »

Tara Reade had/has a crush on Putin:
https://web.archive.org/web/20190404043 ... 4ca2a3a405
Through my lens, President Putin brought a chaotic and failed nation to become a vibrant, creative, economic force within a decade. I don’t care what your politics; just admit that his sheer, calculated vision and willful energy brought Russia back to be a world power. Now, I said this to a friend recently, she waved her glass of Merlot at me and began the “anti-Russia” lecture we all have come in America to memorize, a tale of spies, oligarchs, rigged elections and murders. I start to drift. I listen to the Sade song playing in the background “The Sweetest Taboo” as she speaks. When she finishes, I say, “Well, he is very good to women, holds them in high regard.”
President Putin’s genius is his judo ability to conserve his own energy and let the opponents flail, using up their energy, while he gains position. Currently, President Putin has a higher approval rating in America then the American President, particularly with women. President Putin has an alluring combination of strength with gentleness. His sensuous image projects his love for life, the embodiment of grace while facing adversity. It is evident that he loves his country, his people and his job. Although his job may seem like in the words of writer, Elizabeth Gilbert on genius, “ trying to swallow the sun.” This is a whole lot to deal with for one mere mortal… President Putin’s obvious reverence for women, children and animals, and his ability with sports is intoxicating to American women.

jugheadnaut
.
.
Posts: 1495
Joined: Tue May 20, 2014 9:09 pm

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#10652

Post by jugheadnaut »

Matt Cavanaugh wrote:
I didn't think Arbery was shot while running away. I said you can't shoot even a definite perp, who's just assaulted you, once they start to run away.

You said
-- Firing at someone running away from you, even when they'd previously posed a threat, is a felony.
It couldn't be clearer that he was not shot because he was running away. He was shot in the scuffle over the gun, either accidentally because he was pulling the gun barrel, or intentional self-defense. There's not a shred of evidence they were going to shoot him regardless. The guns were never pointed at Arbery, and no shots took place until he was initiating the physical confrontation.
Matt Cavanaugh wrote:
I see Arbery running down the street, then dodging the truck to the right, then turning sharp left after the son? shot at him from the truck bed, to wrestle with the dad? wielding the shotgun. In hindsight, it may have been wiser for him to run off the road and seek cover. But the instant the McMichael's confronted him with firearms, Arbery had the right to do whatever was necessary to defend himself. And to re-emphasize, the McMichael's had no right whatsoever to demand that Arbery stop.
Nope, it was the father that was on the truck bed, and he didn't shoot at all. The first shot, which seems like a warning shot with the gun slanted down came from the son well after Arbery rounded the truck to go after him. Whether Arbery had legally classifiable reasonable fear for his life is an open question. IANAL, but my best guess is under Georgia's stand your ground law, he had a legal right to physically confront them if he did not wish to be detained. If McMichael had been killed in the scuffle in the same manner as Arbery, I don't think Arbery would be legally responsible. But it has little bearing on the legal position of the McMichaels.
Matt Cavanaugh wrote:
I recall the same argument being made in the Trayvon Martin case. Because Zimmerman irresponsibly injected a gun into a Neighborhood Watch situation, any adverse outcome involving the gun was on him. But it was specious then and it's specious now.
That is not what Zimmerman did. Zimmerman verbally challenged Martin, as was his right. Martin could have told Zimmerman to fuck off and proceeded on his way, as would have been his right. Instead, Martin chose to double back and viciously assault Zimmerman. Only then, and reasonably fearing for his life, did Zimmerman draw his gun.
Of course. My point was that some, including here, were making that argument after the facts came out in order to preserve Zimmerman's legal culpability.

Matt Cavanaugh
.
.
Posts: 15449
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2013 12:38 pm
Contact:

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#10653

Post by Matt Cavanaugh »

jugheadnaut wrote:
Matt Cavanaugh wrote:
I didn't think Arbery was shot while running away. I said you can't shoot even a definite perp, who's just assaulted you, once they start to run away.

You said
-- Firing at someone running away from you, even when they'd previously posed a threat, is a felony.
It couldn't be clearer that he was not shot because he was running away. He was shot in the scuffle over the gun, either accidentally because he was pulling the gun barrel, or intentional self-defense.
I was making a general side observation. I do not believe Arbery was shot while running away.



There's not a shred of evidence they were going to shoot him regardless. The guns were never pointed at Arbery, and no shots took place until he was initiating the physical confrontation.
Arbery had a reasonable fear he would be harmed. Irrelevant whether the guns were being pointed.


Working off this video:


A = Aubery
Msr = McMichael father
Mjr = McMichael son

0:03 A running left side of road
0:07 Msr standing next to LF wheel of truck, shotgun in hand
0:14 A at LR wheel of truck
0:16 Shouting
0:18 A swerves to the right around truck
0:19 Mjr fires gunshot from bed of truck as A crosses in front of truck
0:20 A grapples with Msr, apparently attempting to grab shotgun
0:21 Mjr looks to have cellphone to his ear
0:23 Mjr fires second gunshot, apparently into bed of truck [gun is pointed down, ejected brass or possibly ricochet bullet can be seen flying over driver’s side of hood]
0:27 Msr fires shotgun pointblank into A’s abdomen. Discharge can be seen exiting A’s back. A's hands are on the muzzle end of the barrel; Msr's finger is on the trigger
0:29 -
0:33 A staggers and falls


Arbery did not initiate the confrontation, the McMichael's did. Arbery had a right to defend himself by any means.

The McMichael's cannot claim both that they 'just wanted to talk to him' and also that they were attempting to detain him with force of arms.
Of course. My point was that some, including here, were making that argument after the facts came out in order to preserve Zimmerman's legal culpability.
I follow ya now.

MarcusAu
.
.
Posts: 7903
Joined: Sun Jan 31, 2016 11:49 am
Location: Llareggub

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#10654

Post by MarcusAu »

Good Gxxxy* - but it looks we have lost Little Richard.


*censored for the sensitive

jugheadnaut
.
.
Posts: 1495
Joined: Tue May 20, 2014 9:09 pm

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#10655

Post by jugheadnaut »

Matt Cavanaugh wrote:
Working off this video:
youtube.com/watch?v=n-pg0Cy_kgU

A = Aubery
Msr = McMichael father
Mjr = McMichael son

0:03 A running left side of road
0:07 Msr standing next to LF wheel of truck, shotgun in hand
0:14 A at LR wheel of truck
0:16 Shouting
0:18 A swerves to the right around truck
0:19 Mjr fires gunshot from bed of truck as A crosses in front of truck
0:20 A grapples with Msr, apparently attempting to grab shotgun
0:21 Mjr looks to have cellphone to his ear
0:23 Mjr fires second gunshot, apparently into bed of truck [gun is pointed down, ejected brass or possibly ricochet bullet can be seen flying over driver’s side of hood]
0:27 Msr fires shotgun pointblank into A’s abdomen. Discharge can be seen exiting A’s back. A's hands are on the muzzle end of the barrel; Msr's finger is on the trigger
0:29 -
0:33 A staggers and falls
For some reason, the quality of the video of the event on Twitter is much better than YouTube.


For instance, it's much easier to see that the guy in the truck bed is the father, and the guy on the ground is the son. Here's a screenshot from just after Arbery disappeared in front of the truck.


He's got the phone to his ear with his left hand, and his right hand is below the roof of the cab. But the clincher evidence that he didn't make any of the shots is the 911 recording, which you posted the transcript of earlier.


You can't hear the first shot because he's yelling over it, but you can hear the other two shots as slight pops. If he were shooting, it would definitely be much louder, but at 20 or more feet, the near field mic on the phone plus the background noise cancelling will all but eliminate it.

Although it's obscured by the truck, the first shot appears to take place just before or just after Arbery reached Mjr. Arbery already has his hand on the gun when they emerge from the front.

As you pointed out, at 27 seconds the gun muzzle is under the control of Arbery so where it was aiming is of little consequence to Mjr's case. Whether the shot was accidental, due to Arbery pulling on the muzzle, or Mjr consciously pulling on the trigger we don't know and it probably doesn't matter because at this point it's clear self defense.
Matt Cavanaugh wrote: Arbery did not initiate the confrontation, the McMichael's did. Arbery had a right to defend himself by any means.
I assume you're defining 'confrontation' broadly here, in that the repeated attempts to detain via arms was the beginning of the confrontation. But I'm pretty sure the legal definitions are only concerned with the starting of the physical confrontations. Stereotypes about armed Southern white guys chasing young black men in pickups have no probative value here. Only the facts matter, and the fact is they never did anything inconsistent with their story about wanting to do a citizens arrest. The physical altercation, which is what led to Arbery's death, was started by him when he did a first base turn around the truck to fight with Mjr over the gun.

As I mentioned, I agree he likely had the legal right to do this, as terrible a decision as it was. But that does not obviate Mjr's right to self defense, especially as he had done nothing to indicate he was going to shoot the gun at Arbery. Unfortunately, with Georgia's laws, it was the Wild West at that point.
Matt Cavanaugh wrote: The McMichael's cannot claim both that they 'just wanted to talk to him' and also that they were attempting to detain him with force of arms.
Unless you're going to focus on the word 'just', there's nothing contradictory about those claims. They wanted to detain him and talk to him with a view to a citizen's arrest. Sure, most likely they had already decided on the citizen's arrest and the guns were there to ensure compliance. I certainly understand and sympathize with the case that they were morally responsible for his death, but legally, no way it was murder. As things look now, the McMichaels made some bad choices and Arbery made some worse ones and tragedy resulted. If the citizen's arrest was as unfounded as it now appears, they'll minimally get a civil rights conviction, which has some pretty sharp teeth.

jugheadnaut
.
.
Posts: 1495
Joined: Tue May 20, 2014 9:09 pm

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#10656

Post by jugheadnaut »

MarcusAu wrote: Good Gxxxy* - but it looks we have lost Little Richard.

*censored for the sensitive
Going full Mandela Effect here, as I thought he died years ago. I must have either mixed him up with Chuck Berry or heard about severe health issues and counted him dead. True story, when the Gong Show was on in the '70s, hosted by Chuck Barris, I had recently read about Chuck Berry being an original Rock & Roll great. Of course, I confused the 2 names and had to watch the Gong Show wondering how this curly haired schlub had been a Rock & Roll god 20 years earlier. I think I was in my late teens before I figured it out.

Driftless
.
.
Posts: 533
Joined: Fri Mar 23, 2018 8:13 am

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#10657

Post by Driftless »

Daily Mail says there is video of the burglary:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... lling.html

I still think there is a problem if the McMichaels did not witness the burglary.

ConcentratedH2O, OM
.
.
Posts: 6555
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2012 8:51 pm

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#10658

Post by ConcentratedH2O, OM »

jugheadnaut wrote:
For some reason, the quality of the video of the event on Twitter is much better than YouTube.



The more I read - for example that twitter thread - the more I think this could well turn out to have been legal in Georgia, and that is exactly what I have been saying: it is obscene that anything approaching what happened on that video could be legal in a developed country. I think Afghani mullahs would find this a touch OTT. Running a guy down in your truck, then hopping out with a shotgun and just flat out shooting the shit out of him when he fights back and you find your flabby ass getting whipped.

Brive1987
.
.
Posts: 17791
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 4:16 am

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#10659

Post by Brive1987 »

Humiliated by every variant since the PzIII, the Sherman faces yet another contender


ConcentratedH2O, OM
.
.
Posts: 6555
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2012 8:51 pm

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#10660

Post by ConcentratedH2O, OM »

Driftless wrote: Daily Mail says there is video of the burglary:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... lling.html

I still think there is a problem if the McMichaels did not witness the burglary.
See my above. There's a fucking big problem here even if these pricks witnessed him kick a door down, snaffle an old lady's life savings and walk out the door laughing.

And BTW, I am all for executing burglars - the filth - but not by retarded rednecks on a whim.

AndrewV69
.
.
Posts: 8146
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 7:52 pm

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#10661

Post by AndrewV69 »

jugheadnaut wrote:
Sat May 09, 2020 2:48 pm
Matt Cavanaugh wrote:
<chop>
Matt Cavanaugh wrote: The McMichael's cannot claim both that they 'just wanted to talk to him' and also that they were attempting to detain him with force of arms.
Unless you're going to focus on the word 'just', there's nothing contradictory about those claims. They wanted to detain him and talk to him with a view to a citizen's arrest. Sure, most likely they had already decided on the citizen's arrest and the guns were there to ensure compliance. I certainly understand and sympathize with the case that they were morally responsible for his death, but legally, no way it was murder. As things look now, the McMichaels made some bad choices and Arbery made some worse ones and tragedy resulted. If the citizen's arrest was as unfounded as it now appears, they'll minimally get a civil rights conviction, which has some pretty sharp teeth.
Welp,

I was going to go with my original position and wait for the outcome of the trial but now all of this has been shoved in my face all I can say it looks bad for those good old boys.

Whatever the outcome of the trial, guilty or innocent ... they are going to get crucified. What they did was seriously stupid and at least one of them was old enough to know better.

They had time to think about what they were doing.

(Unlike me who was taken by surprise by a black mama bear and promptly attacked her)

Brive1987
.
.
Posts: 17791
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 4:16 am

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#10662

Post by Brive1987 »

I feel like any situation where you arm yourself in public and someone ends up dead - who isn’t a random attacker - is kinda on you.

You have a civic obligation to ensure the escalation of producing a firearm doesn’t critically change situational dynamics. The difficulty of which is why I’m not keen on punters wandering the streets with shotguns. Let alone erection provoking fetish guns.

Brive1987
.
.
Posts: 17791
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 4:16 am

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#10663

Post by Brive1987 »

Not creepy at all.


KiwiInOz
.
.
Posts: 5425
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 3:28 pm
Location: Brisbane

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#10664

Post by KiwiInOz »

ConcentratedH2O, OM wrote:
Driftless wrote: Daily Mail says there is video of the burglary:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... lling.html

I still think there is a problem if the McMichaels did not witness the burglary.
See my above. There's a fucking big problem here even if these pricks witnessed him kick a door down, snaffle an old lady's life savings and walk out the door laughing.

And BTW, I am all for executing burglars - the filth - but not by retarded rednecks on a whim.
It's second degree murder at the very least. They may not have premeditated killing him, but they were armed for bear and they did. It was not manslaughter.

ConcentratedH2O, OM
.
.
Posts: 6555
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2012 8:51 pm

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#10665

Post by ConcentratedH2O, OM »


screwtape
.
.
Posts: 2713
Joined: Sun Aug 18, 2013 7:15 am

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#10666

Post by screwtape »

jugheadnaut wrote: In an unwitting metaphor for what the site has turned into, Slate runs a detailed analysis into the perpetrator and nature of the Supreme Court toilet flush.

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/202 ... tream.html

TL;DR It was Breyer and it was poo.
Perhaps that is how Breyer makes his decisions: looks for auguries in the stool. There is precedent, after all, and what was good enough for the pontifex maximus is good enough for him. Personally, I don't want any augur, maximus or minimus anywhere near my decision-making apparatus.

Matt Cavanaugh
.
.
Posts: 15449
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2013 12:38 pm
Contact:

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#10667

Post by Matt Cavanaugh »

First off, I appreciate how everyone here is seeking out information and evidence on the Arbery shooting. The MSM certainly aren’t interested in that job.

Jug:
He's got the phone to his ear with his left hand, and his right hand is below the roof of the cab. But the clincher evidence that he didn't make any of the shots is the 911 recording, which you posted the transcript of earlier.
Clincher? From the enhanced video — thanks for tracking that down — I see two casings ejected in conjunction with two audible gunshots. The first shot is over the roof of the cab, and presumably strikes Arbery. The second appears to pass through the cab and strike the pavement. The third shot is from the shotgun.

I don't believe this general sequence of events is in dispute, and in any case is not determinative; which party was within their legal rights, is.

--
I assume you're defining 'confrontation' broadly here, in that the repeated attempts to detain via arms was the beginning of the confrontation. But I'm pretty sure the legal definitions are only concerned with the starting of the physical confrontations…. The physical altercation, which is what led to Arbery's death, was started by him when he did a first base turn around the truck to fight with Mjr over the gun.
I’m imprecise in using “confrontation”. I understand the legal term is “altercation”, specifically a physical altercation:
A physical altercation is generally a confrontation, tussle or physical aggression that may or may not result in injury. Physical altercations are distinguished from verbal altercations by the use of physical force or contact. It may also be referred to as bullying, fighting, or battery. Physical altercations are governed by federal and state laws, which vary by stte, as well as rules of conduct of various entities. For example, in a sports league, physical altercation may be defined as any physical contact not associated with the normal playing of any athletic contest.
https://definitions.uslegal.com/p/physical-altercation/


Everything rests on who initiates, or if it begins as a verbal altercation, who injects physical violence or the imminent threat thereof. The initiator of the violence has no right to self-defense. <>

The McMichael’s admit they initiated a verbal altercation, but claim the right to self-defense once Arbery initiated physical violence. A good question, one I don’t have a definitive answer to wrt GA law, is whether the mere open carrying of firearms constitutes a threat of physical violence.

The McMichael’s also claim they were conducting a citizen’s arrest — incompatible with their above claim — ergo, their preemptive application of the threat of physical force was legally justified.

They really need to pick one argument, but let’s run again with the latter.

From the extended 911 call and the video surveillance footage, it now seems likely that the:
1) perp is indeed Arbery;
2) offense was committed just minutes prior to the shooting;
3) McMichaels either witnessed the offense or had “immediate knowledge” of it.

If all three are true, then this was indeed a legal citizen’s arrest.

--
Andrew:
What they did was seriously stupid and at least one of them was old enough to know better.

They had time to think about what they were doing.
Even if the McMichael’s were within their legal rights, did the nature of the offense merit the risk posed just to themselves? Was it trespassing? What had been stolen? In California, encountering a burglar is considered inherently life-threatening. But even if Arbery had been burglarizing, no one came in close contact with him. For all we know, he was going into the house everyday to take a dump on his jog.

---
<>
cf. the case of Michael Drejka, convicted of manslaughter. Drejka had initiated a verbal altercation with the soon-to-be-dead guy’s girlfriend in a convenience store parking lot. STBDG exits the store, strides over to Drejka and shoves him to the ground. Drejka draws his CCW and shoots the guy.

Drejka was convicted because the jury was confused by the Florida's self-defense statute, which states the defendant cannot have instigated the [not specified as verbal or physical] altercation.


https://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/fl ... story.html

Service Dog
.
.
Posts: 8652
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2013 2:52 pm

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#10668

Post by Service Dog »

free thoughtpolice wrote: Tara Reade had/has a crush on Putin:
In all fairness, getting raped by Biden might spin your compass, too-- about who the good guys & bad guys are.

Matt Cavanaugh
.
.
Posts: 15449
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2013 12:38 pm
Contact:

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#10669

Post by Matt Cavanaugh »

One more caveat: when making a citizen's arrest, aren't you obliged to state, "I'm making a citizen's arrest"?

Service Dog
.
.
Posts: 8652
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2013 2:52 pm

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#10670

Post by Service Dog »

jugheadnaut wrote:
MarcusAu wrote: Good Gxxxy* - but it looks we have lost Little Richard.

*censored for the sensitive
Going full Mandela Effect here, as I thought he died years ago. I must have either mixed him up with Chuck Berry or heard about severe health issues and counted him dead. True story, when the Gong Show was on in the '70s, hosted by Chuck Barris, I had recently read about Chuck Berry being an original Rock & Roll great. Of course, I confused the 2 names and had to watch the Gong Show wondering how this curly haired schlub had been a Rock & Roll god 20 years earlier. I think I was in my late teens before I figured it out.
https://www.carmagazine.co.uk/features/ ... ge-barris/

Service Dog
.
.
Posts: 8652
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2013 2:52 pm

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#10671

Post by Service Dog »

Matt Cavanaugh wrote: One more caveat: when making a citizen's arrest, aren't you obliged to state, "I'm making a citizen's arrest"?
Absolutely! The first three pickups full of rednecks were just lynch mobs out hunting blacks.
How-else was Arbmaudery supposed to know these guys were the good-kind of posse?!

jugheadnaut
.
.
Posts: 1495
Joined: Tue May 20, 2014 9:09 pm

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#10672

Post by jugheadnaut »

Matt Cavanaugh wrote: First off, I appreciate how everyone here is seeking out information and evidence on the Arbery shooting. The MSM certainly aren’t interested in that job.
Yes, the concern I expressed in my initial post on the topic wasn't any kind of sympathy for the McMichaels, or contrarianism, it was that the same kind of pernicious, evidence-free narrative building that occurred in the Trayvon Martin and Michael Brown cases was happening again, orchestrated by the usual race hustlers and complicit media. What's disturbing to me about this case is that there is video, unlike the others, and it's like The Emperor's New Clothes. A video is introduced claiming that it shows two armed white guys gunning down an unarmed black man in cold blood. Everyone's supposed to overlook that it shows no such thing. A virtue signalling competition ensues for who is the most outraged by it. There's just supposed to be unanimous agreement with no argument for the sake of racial justice, and if you don't go along, you must be a racist. At this point it seems like we're either going to get mob justice or riots that will likely cause further bloodshed.
Matt Cavanaugh wrote:
Clincher? From the enhanced video — thanks for tracking that down — I see two casings ejected in conjunction with two audible gunshots. The first shot is over the roof of the cab, and presumably strikes Arbery. The second appears to pass through the cab and strike the pavement. The third shot is from the shotgun.

I don't believe this general sequence of events is in dispute, and in any case is not determinative; which party was within their legal rights, is.
On the contrary, I've yet to see a single report claim that McMichael Sr. took any shots. The current Wikipedia article says Sr. had his gun out but didn't shoot. Not dispositive, of course, but if the general consensus was that Sr. was shooting, wouldn't an openly editable source like Wikipedia represent that? While the Twitter video is better, it's still a low resolution, high compression video full of artifacts, and not much weight should be given to tiny bits of apparent movement or glints of light. You didn't address the 2 pieces of evidence I mentioned:

- The screen grab, which I did myself from the video, is the first frame after Arbery disappears in front of the truck, and a fraction of a second before the gunshot is heard. One hand is holding his phone by his ear, which we would expect because he was talking with 911 at the time. The other is well below the roofline of the cab. Your claim is that he shot over the roof of the cab at Arbery fractions of a second later, which seems entirely incompatible with this frame.

- The 'clincher' I mentioned was the 911 audio, not anything to do with the video. The latter 2 shots are dimly heard, and he was yelling over when the first shot occurred. While modern noise cancelling technology in smartphones is good, it's nowhere near good enough to almost completely obscure a gunshot happening no more than 3 feet from the phone.

If Sr. did take the first shot, it would put him in increased legal jeopardy because he would have to make the argument that it was defense of his son when he saw Arbery attacking, which would not necessarily be persuasive. But on the whole, I agree it's not that important.

Matt Cavanaugh wrote:
The McMichael’s admit they initiated a verbal altercation, but claim the right to self-defense once Arbery initiated physical violence. A good question, one I don’t have a definitive answer to wrt GA law, is whether the mere open carrying of firearms constitutes a threat of physical violence.

The McMichael’s also claim they were conducting a citizen’s arrest — incompatible with their above claim — ergo, their preemptive application of the threat of physical force was legally justified.

They really need to pick one argument, but let’s run again with the latter.
This is not a contradiction if the initiation of the verbal altercation is the attempt to initiate the citizen's arrest. They claim they were just yelling at him stop and they wanted to talk to him, and I've seen nothing inconsistent with that, or inconsistent with anything to do with their story about wanting to effect a citizen's arrest.
Matt Cavanaugh wrote: From the extended 911 call and the video surveillance footage, it now seems likely that the:
1) perp is indeed Arbery;
2) offense was committed just minutes prior to the shooting;
3) McMichaels either witnessed the offense or had “immediate knowledge” of it.

If all three are true, then this was indeed a legal citizen’s arrest.
...
Even if the McMichael’s were within their legal rights, did the nature of the offense merit the risk posed just to themselves? Was it trespassing? What had been stolen? In California, encountering a burglar is considered inherently life-threatening. But even if Arbery had been burglarizing, no one came in close contact with him. For all we know, he was going into the house everyday to take a dump on his jog.
The Citizen's Arrest validity seems like it won't hold up under close scrutiny. He didn't actually commit a felony or serious crime at the time. Very likely, he was casing the property with a view to bringing a vehicle back later if he saw something interesting, but that's speculation and irrelevant. Of course, casing a property would greatly alarm the residents, especially if there was a history of breakins by a similar looking individual. It would provide ample reason why the McMichaels would, in good faith, think they had the right to the citizen's arrest, even if erroneous. Not sure how much standing this would have legally. I'm hoping one of the YouTube vlawgers does something on Citizen's Arrest in relation to this case soon, although I would certainly understand if they think it's too hot to handle.

Driftless
.
.
Posts: 533
Joined: Fri Mar 23, 2018 8:13 am

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#10673

Post by Driftless »

jugheadnaut wrote:
[...]

The Citizen's Arrest validity seems like it won't hold up under close scrutiny. He didn't actually commit a felony or serious crime at the time. Very likely, he was casing the property with a view to bringing a vehicle back later if he saw something interesting, but that's speculation and irrelevant. Of course, casing a property would greatly alarm the residents, especially if there was a history of breakins by a similar looking individual. It would provide ample reason why the McMichaels would, in good faith, think they had the right to the citizen's arrest, even if erroneous. Not sure how much standing this would have legally. I'm hoping one of the YouTube vlawgers does something on Citizen's Arrest in relation to this case soon, although I would certainly understand if they think it's too hot to handle.
Also "break-in" is not quite accurate, the house is under construction so I don't think he had to break anything to enter the house. And as you said he does not appear to be taking anything out. It is still trespassing, but I don't know how that affects citizen's arrest. Can you make a citizen's arrest for trespassing in Georgia? I don't know.

The other problem with this is the problem with stand your ground laws. If you provoke an altercation (or even if you don't) and then shoot someone, if they are dead then your story is the only evidence unless there are witnesses. And here we have a similar case. There is bad video, but we can't get testimony from Arbery.

ConcentratedH2O, OM
.
.
Posts: 6555
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2012 8:51 pm

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#10674

Post by ConcentratedH2O, OM »

jugheadnaut wrote: A video is introduced claiming that it shows two armed white guys gunning down an unarmed black man in cold blood. Everyone's supposed to overlook that it shows no such thing.
I've watched it, and I saw exactly that. What am I overlooking?

Brive1987
.
.
Posts: 17791
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 4:16 am

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#10675

Post by Brive1987 »

It shows an unarmed guy running wide around a truck which has an armed dude in the tray before he wrestles with another armed man who unexpectedly engages with him in some manner.

So. Some missing evidence. But ...

Generally an unarmed man won’t pick a fight with a shotgun wielding interventionist (covered by another with height advantage) unless he believes himself in dire straights,

If he feels so compelled then the armed men most likely fucked up - they can take responsibility for the dinner plate sized hole in the chest.

That said. I’m loath for this to add fuel to the Young Turk style woke racial fires. Until at least the Chicago black-on-black problem is resolved. Do that bullshit circus and you risk society discounting incidents like this out of political exhaustion and overall cynicism.

jugheadnaut
.
.
Posts: 1495
Joined: Tue May 20, 2014 9:09 pm

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#10676

Post by jugheadnaut »

Brive1987 wrote: It shows an unarmed guy running wide around a truck which has an armed dude in the tray before he wrestles with another armed man who unexpectedly engages with him in some manner.
I'm sure the McMichaels had zero expectations the guy would physically attack them when they were armed. They probably thought, worst case scenario, is he'll just run through or past us. I do wonder if they had a plan for that. Were they ready to escalate by pointing their weapons and threatening to shoot, or just try to follow him and see if he came to the area by car and grab a license plate number, or at least see what direction he's leaving the area in. The former would be trouble for them, but unless they would be stupid enough to admit to it, we'll never know and it's irrelevant.
Brive1987 wrote:
Generally an unarmed man won’t pick a fight with a shotgun wielding interventionist (covered by another with height advantage) unless he believes himself in dire straights,

If he feels so compelled then the armed men most likely fucked up - they can take responsibility for the dinner plate sized hole in the chest.
Possibly. Also possible that a combination of rage, terrible risk evaluation, and overconfidence in his athletic skills led him to do it. Also possible he was responsible for the reported but unconfirmed string of burglaries in the neighborhood and was worried that if held for the police, he would be arrested, and fear took over. All speculation which means basically nothing in a court of law.

The facts which would be admissible in court, as far as i can see, are that there's nothing in evidence that's inconsistent with their story about attempted citizen's arrest. The citizen's arrest may very well be invalid, and they would have to suffer the consequences of that, but I would assume if there is no evidence they had plans to initiate actual physical force on Arbery and were relying on the guns only for intimidation, once he attacked them it was just a run-of-the-mill fight and they maintained their full legal right to self-defense and no culpability for an accidental killing.
I don't have any firm conclusions other than the case for murder based on the current evidence being laughable. I'm open to whatever further evidence we might get. Perhaps, regardless of good faith, their ignorance of civil arrest law could be categorized as reckless and open the doors to manslaughter.

jugheadnaut
.
.
Posts: 1495
Joined: Tue May 20, 2014 9:09 pm

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#10677

Post by jugheadnaut »

ConcentratedH2O, OM wrote:
jugheadnaut wrote: A video is introduced claiming that it shows two armed white guys gunning down an unarmed black man in cold blood. Everyone's supposed to overlook that it shows no such thing.
I've watched it, and I saw exactly that. What am I overlooking?
The low hanging fruit answer is that the shooting occurred in the course of a fight, which by definition is not a cold-blooded killing. As for the broader case against murder, I've detailed my thoughts both on the facts and law over many posts. Feel free to elaborate on what you disagree with and I'll expand.

jugheadnaut
.
.
Posts: 1495
Joined: Tue May 20, 2014 9:09 pm

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#10678

Post by jugheadnaut »

Driftless wrote:
The other problem with this is the problem with stand your ground laws. If you provoke an altercation (or even if you don't) and then shoot someone, if they are dead then your story is the only evidence unless there are witnesses. And here we have a similar case. There is bad video, but we can't get testimony from Arbery.
In everything I've read in the media about stand your ground in this case, they seem not to understand it's applicability. I doesn't really apply to the McMichaels here. Even in a non-stand your ground jurisdiction, he would have every right to fight to keep control of his gun. It's Arbery it would apply to, but only if it's a reasonable fear that they were going to force him to stop even if he didn't want to. As I've stated, as stupid as it was, he probably did have the right to try to fight his way out of it, and had McMichael been killed in a similar fashion in the fight, this defense would have been available. The combination of Citizen's Arrest and Stand Your Ground laws is crazy right now, and I assume the states that have it will address it.

Brive1987
.
.
Posts: 17791
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 4:16 am

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#10679

Post by Brive1987 »

Nb . Comfy is an authoritative source.


AndrewV69
.
.
Posts: 8146
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 7:52 pm

Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!

#10680

Post by AndrewV69 »

Brive1987 wrote:
Sun May 10, 2020 4:06 pm

Generally an unarmed man won’t pick a fight with a shotgun wielding interventionist (covered by another with height advantage) unless he believes himself in dire straights,
Before the incident where I attacked a black bear, I would have agreed with you. Nowadays my position is that you really do not know how you are going to react in the moment, till it actually happens to you.

Locked