Patriot Mobile

Ahmaud Arbery - The Trial

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Texas

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • candcallen

    Crotchety, Snarky, Truthful. You'll get over it.
    Emeritus - "Texas Proud"
    Rating - 100%
    2   0   0
    Jul 23, 2011
    21,358
    96
    Little Elm
    Here is a pretty good report on "the rest of the story".

    WTF dude? You read that shit? You agree with the feces passing as an analysis that you linked to?

    Its conclusion are completely wrong. Shit to try and compare the 2 incidents in the manner it did is.....I will just stop there.
     
    Last edited:

    candcallen

    Crotchety, Snarky, Truthful. You'll get over it.
    Emeritus - "Texas Proud"
    Rating - 100%
    2   0   0
    Jul 23, 2011
    21,358
    96
    Little Elm
    Thank you very much for helping me find yet another web site I can ignore. After reading that entire article while holding out hope for some rational analysis and being completely disappointed, I now know to never to waste any time there again.
    Actual racist and xenophobic that bullshit is.

    Not my site, meaning TGT, but here is an unsolicited opinion. I would consider not allowing it, vdare.cm to be linked to or its material posted on the site.
     
    Last edited:

    nickgibson72

    Member
    BANNED!!!
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Sep 28, 2021
    163
    26
    Houston
    WTF dude? You read that shit?

    Its conclusion are completely wrong.
    It also gets a ton of facts wrong. The article states that the man in the pickup truck recording did not know the other two men, which we know from the trial, is false. It states that two weeks prior there was a separate incident in which the cops were called and the cops and fellow armed citizens cleared the houses together. That never happened.
     

    candcallen

    Crotchety, Snarky, Truthful. You'll get over it.
    Emeritus - "Texas Proud"
    Rating - 100%
    2   0   0
    Jul 23, 2011
    21,358
    96
    Little Elm
    It also gets a ton of facts wrong. The article states that the man in the pickup truck recording did not know the other two men, which we know from the trial, is false. It states that two weeks prior there was a separate incident in which the cops were called and the cops and fellow armed citizens cleared the houses together. That never happened.
    Propaganda bullshit site. I'll stop there.
     

    AR1911

    Active Member
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Apr 26, 2009
    201
    26
    If you guys want to stick to the MSM narrative, more power to you. That is your choice. Personally, I like to read and watch the usual sources, but I also like to seek other views on controversial subject matter. This particular site has some content I don't agree with, but I did not see any big red flags in this article. It was no more biased than any article in The Atlantic, or Vox for example. I have shared this article with others who saw it in the same light as I did - food for thought.
    Seems to me these guys did a lot wrong, and I would have been a lot more cautious. For one thing, I don't go looking for trouble. Second, with three guys vs one, a firearm should not have been presented unless there was reason to believe Arbery had a weapon.
    Based on the applicable statute, I believe they would be within the law to detain him until police arrived. The real trouble started when Arbery charged the guy and tried to disarm him. The guy with the shotgun was likely not prepared for that and reacted badly. He was untrained and out of his element.
    Still there are some real questions about how the trial was handled. Many facts were not allowed in evidence, such as Arbery's violent tendencies due to Schizophrenia. There was also juror intimidation, a biased judge, a hyper-racial atmosphere, and other issues mentioned that, if true, should cause us to wonder if justice was served here. There may be solid grounds for an appeal in a different venue. If so, I we should wait to see how that plays out.
    I'm not going to rush to judgement. I wasn't there and I don't know these people. They don't appear to be people I would care to be around. I do know that all Americans deserve a fair trial, to the extent possible.
     
    Last edited:

    jrbfishn

    TGT Addict
    Lifetime Member
    Rating - 100%
    3   0   0
    Aug 9, 2013
    28,316
    96
    south of killeen
    Thank you very much for helping me find yet another web site I can ignore. After reading that entire article while holding out hope for some rational analysis and being completely disappointed, I now know to never to waste any time there again.
    Ain't that the truth. I might need to rewatch the videos, but that ain't what I remember watching.

    Sent by an idjit coffeeholic from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk
     

    toddnjoyce

    TGT Addict
    Rating - 100%
    4   0   0
    Sep 27, 2017
    19,285
    96
    Boerne
    Based on the applicable statute, I believe they would be within the law to detain him until police arrived.

    How so? Which of the elements in the code were met:

    2019 Georgia Code
    Title 17 - Criminal Procedure
    Chapter 4 - Arrest of Persons
    Article 4 - Arrest by Private Persons
    § 17-4-60. Grounds for arrest
    Universal Citation: GA Code § 17-4-60 (2019)
    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.
     

    deemus

    my mama says I'm special
    Lifetime Member
    Rating - 100%
    30   0   0
    Feb 1, 2010
    15,590
    96
    DFW
    If you guys want to stick to the MSM narrative, more power to you. That is your choice. Personally, I like to read and watch the usual sources, but I also like to seek other views on controversial subject matter. This particular site has some content I don't agree with, but I did not see any big red flags in this article. It was no more biased than any article in The Atlantic, or Vox for example. I have shared this article with others who saw it in the same light as I did - food for thought.
    Seems to me these guys did a lot wrong, and I would have been a lot more cautious. For one thing, I don't go looking for trouble. Second, with three guys vs one, a firearm should not have been presented unless there was reason to believe Arbery had a weapon.
    Based on the applicable statute, I believe they would be within the law to detain him until police arrived. The real trouble started when Arbery charged the guy and tried to disarm him. The guy with the shotgun was likely not prepared for that and reacted badly. He was untrained and out of his element.
    Still there are some real questions about how the trial was handled. Many facts were not allowed in evidence, such as Arbery's violent tendencies due to Schizophrenia. There was also juror intimidation, a biased judge, a hyper-racial atmosphere, and other issues mentioned that, if true, should cause us to wonder if justice was served here. There may be solid grounds for an appeal in a different venue. If so, I we should wait to see how that plays out.
    I'm not going to rush to judgement. I wasn't there and I don't know these people. I do know that all Americans deserve a fair trial, to the extent possible.


    Before you got to those things listed above, which I don't doubt. You needed to get to the root of the issue. They didn't see him commit a crime. If a person commits a crime you could detain that person. Perhaps not wise to, but its legal. But Arbery didn't commit a crime that we know of, THAT day. While a person could speculate that he was casing it out for a later outing to boost items in the house, they didn't see him commit a crime.
     

    AR1911

    Active Member
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Apr 26, 2009
    201
    26
    That statute is the new law, enacted after the incident.
    The old "1863 Georgia law allowed any resident to arrest someone they suspected of committing a crime". This is the statute in effect at the time of the killing.
     

    rotor

    TGT Addict
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Nov 1, 2015
    4,239
    96
    Texas
    That statute is the new law, enacted after the incident.
    The old "1863 Georgia law allowed any resident to arrest someone they suspected of committing a crime". This is the statute in effect at the time of the killing.
    Actually the law was….
    § 17-4-60 - 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.

    The issue was that the jury did not believe that there was a reason to arrest Arbery on those grounds.
     

    Sasquatch

    TGT Addict
    Rating - 100%
    3   0   0
    Apr 20, 2020
    6,590
    96
    Magnolia
    That statute is the new law, enacted after the incident.
    The old "1863 Georgia law allowed any resident to arrest someone they suspected of committing a crime". This is the statute in effect at the time of the killing.

    That wasn't the statute applicable at the time. The statute the jury was given WAS the statute applicable at the time of the incident. The law was since changed limiting citizens arrest authority.

    I don't think there is a single state in the Union that allows or has allowed in modern times, a citizen's arrest to be effected based solely on suspicion. Citizens arrests are always held to higher standards than that of certified LE - the crime has to be committed in your presence or you must have immediate knowledge of the crime and suspect, like loss prevention at a store being directed by the camera operator to a shoplifting suspect. You cannot stop and detain or arrest someone based solely on suspicion. When you engage in such actions you're engaging in unlawful arrest / false imprisonment or kidnapping.

    The McMichael defense said they were "just trying to talk to him" - they can talk, he is under no obligation to respond, or stop. They tried multiple times to stop him - you do *not* have a right to stop anyone on public property or in the public right of way if you don't know for sure they committed a crime. You certainly don't have the right to engage them with a firearm if they refuse to comply with your unlawful attempt to detain them.

    Police officers cannot arrest for misdemeanor crimes in many jurisdictions unless the crime happened in their presence, those officers can only make probable-cause arrests for felonies not committed in their presence in those places. It would be absurd if citizens had greater authority to detain or arrest than the police.

    The elder McMichael was a retired cop. He knew better, or should have. He was acting like he was still a cop, which he wasn't. His son was US Coast Guard and testified he'd received federal law enforcement training. Again, should've known better, was acting like a cop, when he wasn't. The other guy, "Roddy" - he should've kept his distance and just filmed for evidence purposes, instead he injected himself into the situation and became party to any and all crimes committed during his time with the party - similar to a get away driver taking the rap for murder when his partner kills someone during a robbery.

    When he attempted to block Arbery's path - he engaged in assault, and attempt to unlawfully restrain him.

    All three of these men were idiots, and it isn't a stretch to say race didn't play a component. Arbery didn't fit the look of the neighborhood, so they're gonna stop him and see what he's up to, and we wanna keep people like him out.

    Every time I hear or read someone say "he had no right to be there" "he had no reason to be there" or "he had no business being there" - this is *still* the United States of America, last I checked. Any free person has a right to be in any public space - that means on any public road, street, park, or where-ever - without any other reason than that they want to be. Was he casing the joint? Maybe, probably even. Or maybe he actually just liked the scenery, it was probably a prettier neighborhood than his own. We'll never know because he's dead, so he cannot speak to his reasoning.

    This was the same bullshit spewed about Kyle Rittenhouse - he had no right to be there, not his town, he's from Illinois, he's only 17, blah blah blah blahfuckingblah. Still an American, still has a God given right to be there.

    A police officer couldn't even actually stop and detain Arbery if he'd just happened by, and saw him walking or jogging down the road. He could engage in a consensual conversation, but unless he had reason to believe Arbery had committed a crime - and the reason for that has to be more than "he's a black guy in a white neighborhood" - he too would be making an unlawful detention without reasonable articulable suspicion to stop him. If the cop says he "fit the description" - there better be a dispatch log to back that up. Without RS or PC - if Arbery says "am I free to go" the only legal answer from the cop would be "yes"

    I understand wanting to protect your neighbors, your neighborhood, and people being suspicious or not fitting the look. Out of 250+ homes in our little rural subdivision, there is *one* black family (one of whom was killed in a dispute with a neighbor a few years ago) and two or three mix-race couples, and maybe half a dozen hispanic families. The rest are a bunch of white folk.

    I helped run some trespassers off not long ago - but note I said trespassers. They weren't hanging out on the public roads - they were hanging out on private property that didn't belong to them, and they had no permission to be on. I also didn't detain them, or try to. Just explained that they were trespassing and if they didn't leave immediately, the police would be getting called and trespassing charges would be pursued. McMichael's didn't even have that going for them, because Arbery to their immediate knowledge, never left the public right of way.

    Those trespassers I mentioned also happened to be white. They were tweakers who decided to take up residence along the shore of one of our neighborhood lakes, and in the private park attached to it, and I accompanied my friend who is on the HOA board to tell them to get lost.

    If two guys who weren't cops didn't try to play cops - they'd not be awaiting sentencing right now, along with their neighbor, and Arbery might still be alive and *might* have wound up committing some crime he actually got arrested for. Or maybe he would've committed a crime and gotten killed righteously in the act. Who knows. He might've also enrolled in doctor school and been the next Ben Carson.
     

    toddnjoyce

    TGT Addict
    Rating - 100%
    4   0   0
    Sep 27, 2017
    19,285
    96
    Boerne
    That statute is the new law, enacted after the incident.
    The old "1863 Georgia law allowed any resident to arrest someone they suspected of committing a crime". This is the statute in effect at the time of the killing.

    How certain are you about that? I provided the 2019 version of the code.

    The “new” law, ushered in as part of GA HB479 this year repealed citizen’s arrest in it’s entirety. Here’s the specific text:


    HB 479
    BE IT ENACTED BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF GEORGIA:

    21 Title 17 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated, relating to criminal procedure, is
    22 amended by revising subsection (a) of Code Section 17-4-20, relating to authorization of
    23 arrests with and without warrants generally, use of deadly force, adoption or promulgation
    24 of conflicting regulations, policies, ordinances, and resolutions, and authority of nuclear
    25 power facility security officer, as follows:….

    58 SECTION 2

    59Said title is further amended by repealing in its entirety Article 4 of Chapter 4, relating to
    60 arrest by private persons, and designating it as reserved.

     

    toddnjoyce

    TGT Addict
    Rating - 100%
    4   0   0
    Sep 27, 2017
    19,285
    96
    Boerne
    if you cant make a CA, it is basically a shoplifting free for all.

    GA addressed that in HB 479

    .. amend Article 4 of Chapter 7 of Title 51 of the Official Code of Georgia
    14 Annotated, relating to detention or arrest on suspicion of shoplifting or film piracy, so as to
    15 provide for certain immunity from liability for certain owners and operators of retail
    16 establishments and food service establishments and their agents and employees for the
    17 detention of certain individuals;

     

    Renegade

    SuperOwner
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Mar 5, 2008
    11,749
    96
    Texas
    GA addressed that in HB 479

    .. amend Article 4 of Chapter 7 of Title 51 of the Official Code of Georgia
    14 Annotated, relating to detention or arrest on suspicion of shoplifting or film piracy, so as to
    15 provide for certain immunity from liability for certain owners and operators of retail
    16 establishments and food service establishments and their agents and employees for the
    17 detention of certain individuals;


    OK walking out of a restaurant was my next one.

    Film piracy - always look out for Hollywood
     

    Sasquatch

    TGT Addict
    Rating - 100%
    3   0   0
    Apr 20, 2020
    6,590
    96
    Magnolia
    OK walking out of a restaurant was my next one.

    Film piracy - always look out for Hollywood

    Welps, Georgia is becoming the new California - its going bluer, and they do a lot of hollyweird filming there. Gotta feed the beast. Did you hear Stacy Abrams is running for Governor of Georgia again? She's probably got the Biden voter fraud unit on standby. She'll win with 111% of the vote!
     
    Top Bottom