How is it possible that literally every single time the left finds a new cause to get riled up about it blows up in their face spectacularly once the full story comes out.
have been fatally shot over delayed stimulus check By Kenneth Garger
April 30, 2020 | 10:43pm
So less than two weeks after she died.
As opposed to Arbaury who you never heard of until over two months after his death.
Strong point.
I think a USPS Mail carrier being gunned down while delivering mail is newsworthy as well. Sorry you don’t. Anybody running 2.23 miles for the postal worker?
have been fatally shot over delayed stimulus check By Kenneth Garger
April 30, 2020 | 10:43pm
So less than two weeks after she died.
As opposed to Arbaury who you never heard of until over two months after his death.
Strong point.
I think a USPS Mail carrier being gunned down while delivering mail is newsworthy as well. Sorry you don’t. Anybody running 2.23 miles for the postal worker?
I didn't say it wasn't newsworthy. Fuck off with the strawmen.
You are more than welcome to run as far as you like for her.
Bottom line: black yellow white or brown, you chase someone with a gun, the legal standard is not going to be the same as if you were standing your ground in your property. Call the cops and take the risk the guy gets away. It’s best for you and everyone else. Chasing someone who you think is a criminal is by itself a bad idea. Doing it with a gun adds to the risk bigly.
Right or wrong, when it involves black and white people, especially in the south, there’s going to be a shit storm because of a lot history. Most who read it that way didn’t get the memo that everything got worked out in the 60s. YMMV.
Without the release of the video do they get charged?
Nope.
Pretty amazing that it was video that their boy took that did them in.
You can't chase a dude down with a gun then act surprised and claim self defense when there's a struggle for the gun.
There was an attempt at self defense but it wasn't by the two who are still alive.
I can't see how running towards a loaded gun is self-defense. It might work in the movies, but Jason Bourne isn't real.
Real life is different, as this video shows.
The defense is going to argue that anyone who goes at a guy who's legally holding a loaded gun shows a dangerous intent on the part of the victim in this case. And, in all likelihood, it's going to stick with a couple jurors.
I'm not proud of it at all, but this is a very Trayvon type situation here. And to me, that case is a tragedy of epic proportions, but not surprising.
Without the release of the video do they get charged?
Nope.
Pretty amazing that it was video that their boy took that did them in.
You can't chase a dude down with a gun then act surprised and claim self defense when there's a struggle for the gun.
There was an attempt at self defense but it wasn't by the two who are still alive.
I can't see how running towards a loaded gun is self-defense. It might work in the movies, but Jason Bourne isn't real.
Real life is different, as this video shows.
The defense is going to argue that anyone who goes at a guy who's legally holding a loaded gun shows a dangerous intent on the part of the victim in this case. And, in all likelihood, it's going to stick with a couple jurors.
I'm not proud of it at all, but this is a very Trayvon type situation here. And to me, that case is a tragedy of epic proportions, but not surprising.
Pretty much this
I was hoping to rile up the Fremont's of the world but theyve pretty much all been taken by the vid
Bottom line: black yellow white or brown, you chase someone with a gun, the legal standard is not going to be the same as if you were standing your ground in your property. Call the cops and take the risk the guy gets away. It’s best for you and everyone else. Chasing someone who you think is a criminal is by itself a bad idea. Doing it with a gun adds to the risk bigly.
Right or wrong, when it involves black and white people, especially in the south, there’s going to be a shit storm because of a lot history. Most who read it that way didn’t get the memo that everything got worked out in the 60s. YMMV.
They should change all those laws that allow it then. Even Kali has private persons arrests and arming yourself to do so is legal. Shocker I know.
Sometimes those things are needed. I'm not saying this was one of them don't twist.
Bottom line: black yellow white or brown, you chase someone with a gun, the legal standard is not going to be the same as if you were standing your ground in your property. Call the cops and take the risk the guy gets away. It’s best for you and everyone else. Chasing someone who you think is a criminal is by itself a bad idea. Doing it with a gun adds to the risk bigly.
Right or wrong, when it involves black and white people, especially in the south, there’s going to be a shit storm because of a lot history. Most who read it that way didn’t get the memo that everything got worked out in the 60s. YMMV.
They should change all those laws that allow it then. Even Kali has private persons arrests and arming yourself to do so is legal. Shocker I know.
Sometimes those things are needed. I'm not saying this was one of them don't twist.
Agree 100%.
If it turns out what these dudes did was legal then the laws need to be changed. Yesterday.
have been fatally shot over delayed stimulus check By Kenneth Garger
April 30, 2020 | 10:43pm
So less than two weeks after she died.
As opposed to Arbaury who you never heard of until over two months after his death.
Strong point.
I think a USPS Mail carrier being gunned down while delivering mail is newsworthy as well. Sorry you don’t. Anybody running 2.23 miles for the postal worker?
That story was leading news the day it happened and the perp was arrested in a week's time. I have no idea what the fuck you think this is an example of.
Bottom line: black yellow white or brown, you chase someone with a gun, the legal standard is not going to be the same as if you were standing your ground in your property. Call the cops and take the risk the guy gets away. It’s best for you and everyone else. Chasing someone who you think is a criminal is by itself a bad idea. Doing it with a gun adds to the risk bigly.
Right or wrong, when it involves black and white people, especially in the south, there’s going to be a shit storm because of a lot history. Most who read it that way didn’t get the memo that everything got worked out in the 60s. YMMV.
They should change all those laws that allow it then. Even Kali has private persons arrests and arming yourself to do so is legal. Shocker I know.
Sometimes those things are needed. I'm not saying this was one of them don't twist.
Good post. I’m of the mind that we leave arresting people to the professionals. People who know what they’re doing.
Bottom line: black yellow white or brown, you chase someone with a gun, the legal standard is not going to be the same as if you were standing your ground in your property. Call the cops and take the risk the guy gets away. It’s best for you and everyone else. Chasing someone who you think is a criminal is by itself a bad idea. Doing it with a gun adds to the risk bigly.
Right or wrong, when it involves black and white people, especially in the south, there’s going to be a shit storm because of a lot history. Most who read it that way didn’t get the memo that everything got worked out in the 60s. YMMV.
They should change all those laws that allow it then. Even Kali has private persons arrests and arming yourself to do so is legal. Shocker I know.
Sometimes those things are needed. I'm not saying this was one of them don't twist.
Good post. I’m of the mind that we leave arresting people to the professionals. People who know what they’re doing.
The problem is they aren't always around especially in rural areas. It's not that common anymore except for misdemeanors. It's usually required since a policed officer must witness a misdemeanor to make an arrest.
Bottom line: black yellow white or brown, you chase someone with a gun, the legal standard is not going to be the same as if you were standing your ground in your property. Call the cops and take the risk the guy gets away. It’s best for you and everyone else. Chasing someone who you think is a criminal is by itself a bad idea. Doing it with a gun adds to the risk bigly.
Right or wrong, when it involves black and white people, especially in the south, there’s going to be a shit storm because of a lot history. Most who read it that way didn’t get the memo that everything got worked out in the 60s. YMMV.
They should change all those laws that allow it then. Even Kali has private persons arrests and arming yourself to do so is legal. Shocker I know.
Sometimes those things are needed. I'm not saying this was one of them don't twist.
Good post. I’m of the mind that we leave arresting people to the professionals. People who know what they’re doing.
The problem is they aren't always around especially in rural areas. It's not that common anymore except for misdemeanors. It's usually required since a policed officer must witness a misdemeanor to make an arrest.
I know. But we accept that sort of thing in a free society. Cops can't be around to catch every speeder on the freeway, and yet we resist technology that can. Our criminal justice system works the same way: we put the burden on the state to prove its case, as you are aware, knowing full well it's going to let some bad guys beat the rap, but make it less likely that an innocent person will get jobbed. It's not perfect, but we purposefully angled our system to work that way.
Same thing here. Maybe there will be some cases where the citizen's arrest might have been helpful. But it seems to me that having people who are not trained to apprehend and are not trained to manage situational escalation and deescalation with deadly firearms, not to mention all the good judgment that comes with experience from doing it day in and day out ... those are the people - cops - who should be doing this. Yeah, some guys are going to get away, but I'd rather take that chance than more of this.
Like I said in my earlier post: I was taught to keep it put away unless I found myself in a situation where firing it was an entirely real option. Waiving it around to scare people when you clearly don't know what the fuck you're doing is a "what can go wrong" scenario.
Without the release of the video do they get charged?
Nope.
Pretty amazing that it was video that their boy took that did them in.
You can't chase a dude down with a gun then act surprised and claim self defense when there's a struggle for the gun.
There was an attempt at self defense but it wasn't by the two who are still alive.
I can't see how running towards a loaded gun is self-defense. It might work in the movies, but Jason Bourne isn't real.
Real life is different, as this video shows.
The defense is going to argue that anyone who goes at a guy who's legally holding a loaded gun shows a dangerous intent on the part of the victim in this case. And, in all likelihood, it's going to stick with a couple jurors.
I'm not proud of it at all, but this is a very Trayvon type situation here. And to me, that case is a tragedy of epic proportions, but not surprising.
It'll be an interesting legal strategy to say the least. When you're in apprehension of imminent physical harm, what you're legally allowed to do to other human beings changes drastically. At least as I recall from Crim Law. Not my area, but if someone pulls a gun on you in a situation that you did not initiate ... I just wonder if it's as simple as citizen's arrest law. You have to review the facts.
Yeah, he may be legally holding a weapon, but is that how it works? Is it that simple? If you're trimming your bushes at home and I approach with a loaded gun pointed at you and the circumstances are such that you know I'm not there for a game of chess ... all you know is that I've got a live gun pointed at you, are you expected to concern yourself with my legal standing to do so?
This is why these laws are bullshit. If I approach you at a restaurant, and we don't know each other, and I motion like I'm going to jack you, and your assessment of my intentions are reasonable (e.g., you have no reason to believe I'm just fucking around), then you are legally entitled to wipe the floor with me. That much I'm pretty sure.
I'm not saying it was smart of the guy to bull rush him. I, myself, would have complied hoping someone was watching.
But we weren't there and God knows those two dudes look like they are right out of central casting for Deliverance and he's a black kid in Ga. and these two hillbilly-looking mother fuckers are following him in a pick-up truck and then approach him with guns. From a distance at least, it's like a scene out of Mississippi Burning (great movie, btw) for Christ's sake.
I agree with you. It has all the tragedy of the Trayvon Martin matter. Keep your fucking gun at home and call the fucking cops. If someone is missing another yard ornament, WFAF.
Without the release of the video do they get charged?
Nope.
Pretty amazing that it was video that their boy took that did them in.
You can't chase a dude down with a gun then act surprised and claim self defense when there's a struggle for the gun.
There was an attempt at self defense but it wasn't by the two who are still alive.
I can't see how running towards a loaded gun is self-defense. It might work in the movies, but Jason Bourne isn't real.
Real life is different, as this video shows.
The defense is going to argue that anyone who goes at a guy who's legally holding a loaded gun shows a dangerous intent on the part of the victim in this case. And, in all likelihood, it's going to stick with a couple jurors.
I'm not proud of it at all, but this is a very Trayvon type situation here. And to me, that case is a tragedy of epic proportions, but not surprising.
It'll be an interesting legal strategy to say the least. When you're in apprehension of imminent physical harm, what you're legally allowed to do to other human beings changes drastically. At least as I recall from Crim Law. Not my area, but if someone pulls a gun on you in a situation that you did not initiate ... I just wonder if it's as simple as citizen's arrest law. You have to review the facts.
Yeah, he may be legally holding a weapon, but is that how it works? Is it that simple? If you're trimming your bushes at home and I approach with a loaded gun pointed at you and the circumstances are such that you know I'm not there for a game of chess ... all you know is that I've got a live gun pointed at you, are you expected to concern yourself with my legal standing to do so?
This is why these laws are bullshit. If I approach you at a restaurant, and we don't know each other, and I motion like I'm going to jack you, and your assessment of my intentions are reasonable (e.g., you have no reason to believe I'm just fucking around), then you are legally entitled to wipe the floor with me. That much I'm pretty sure.
I'm not saying it was smart of the guy to bull rush him. I, myself, would have complied hoping someone was watching.
But we weren't there and God knows those two dudes look like they are right out of central casting for Deliverance and he's a black kid in Ga. and these two hillbilly-looking mother fuckers are following him in a pick-up truck and then approach him with guns. From a distance at least, it's like a scene out of Mississippi Burning (great movie, btw) for Christ's sake.
I agree with you. It has all the tragedy of the Trayvon Martin matter. Keep your fucking gun at home and call the fucking cops. If someone is missing another yard ornament, WFAF.
Another case where a jury is required to do the impossible task of reading minds, one of which is dead. Quickly switches to "What would I have done in that situation?" While regrettable that the son took the shotgun out of the truck while dad was already holding & aiming, I'm trying to find 1 person out of twelve who will say, as the jogger, "I would've bull-rushed the guy holding the shotgun - to Defend myself."
How the hell do you get 12 jurors to feel the same way, given that video?
Without the release of the video do they get charged?
Nope.
Pretty amazing that it was video that their boy took that did them in.
You can't chase a dude down with a gun then act surprised and claim self defense when there's a struggle for the gun.
There was an attempt at self defense but it wasn't by the two who are still alive.
I can't see how running towards a loaded gun is self-defense. It might work in the movies, but Jason Bourne isn't real.
Real life is different, as this video shows.
The defense is going to argue that anyone who goes at a guy who's legally holding a loaded gun shows a dangerous intent on the part of the victim in this case. And, in all likelihood, it's going to stick with a couple jurors.
I'm not proud of it at all, but this is a very Trayvon type situation here. And to me, that case is a tragedy of epic proportions, but not surprising.
It'll be an interesting legal strategy to say the least. When you're in apprehension of imminent physical harm, what you're legally allowed to do to other human beings changes drastically. At least as I recall from Crim Law. Not my area, but if someone pulls a gun on you in a situation that you did not initiate ... I just wonder if it's as simple as citizen's arrest law. You have to review the facts.
Yeah, he may be legally holding a weapon, but is that how it works? Is it that simple? If you're trimming your bushes at home and I approach with a loaded gun pointed at you and the circumstances are such that you know I'm not there for a game of chess ... all you know is that I've got a live gun pointed at you, are you expected to concern yourself with my legal standing to do so?
This is why these laws are bullshit. If I approach you at a restaurant, and we don't know each other, and I motion like I'm going to jack you, and your assessment of my intentions are reasonable (e.g., you have no reason to believe I'm just fucking around), then you are legally entitled to wipe the floor with me. That much I'm pretty sure.
I'm not saying it was smart of the guy to bull rush him. I, myself, would have complied hoping someone was watching.
But we weren't there and God knows those two dudes look like they are right out of central casting for Deliverance and he's a black kid in Ga. and these two hillbilly-looking mother fuckers are following him in a pick-up truck and then approach him with guns. From a distance at least, it's like a scene out of Mississippi Burning (great movie, btw) for Christ's sake.
I agree with you. It has all the tragedy of the Trayvon Martin matter. Keep your fucking gun at home and call the fucking cops. If someone is missing another yard ornament, WFAF.
Another case where a jury is required to do the impossible task of reading minds, one of which is dead. Quickly switches to "What would I have done in that situation?" While regrettable that the son took the shotgun out of the truck while dad was already holding & aiming, I'm trying to find 1 person out of twelve who will say, as the jogger, "I would've bull-rushed the guy holding the shotgun - to Defend myself."
How the hell do you get 12 jurors to feel the same way, given that video?
Murder guys? Really?
Agreed. A lot will depend on jury instructions and whether you have one or two jurors who don’t adhere exactly to them. And whether there are, or are not, other pertinent facts.
Without the release of the video do they get charged?
Nope.
Pretty amazing that it was video that their boy took that did them in.
You can't chase a dude down with a gun then act surprised and claim self defense when there's a struggle for the gun.
There was an attempt at self defense but it wasn't by the two who are still alive.
I can't see how running towards a loaded gun is self-defense. It might work in the movies, but Jason Bourne isn't real.
Real life is different, as this video shows.
The defense is going to argue that anyone who goes at a guy who's legally holding a loaded gun shows a dangerous intent on the part of the victim in this case. And, in all likelihood, it's going to stick with a couple jurors.
I'm not proud of it at all, but this is a very Trayvon type situation here. And to me, that case is a tragedy of epic proportions, but not surprising.
It'll be an interesting legal strategy to say the least. When you're in apprehension of imminent physical harm, what you're legally allowed to do to other human beings changes drastically. At least as I recall from Crim Law. Not my area, but if someone pulls a gun on you in a situation that you did not initiate ... I just wonder if it's as simple as citizen's arrest law. You have to review the facts.
Yeah, he may be legally holding a weapon, but is that how it works? Is it that simple? If you're trimming your bushes at home and I approach with a loaded gun pointed at you and the circumstances are such that you know I'm not there for a game of chess ... all you know is that I've got a live gun pointed at you, are you expected to concern yourself with my legal standing to do so?
This is why these laws are bullshit. If I approach you at a restaurant, and we don't know each other, and I motion like I'm going to jack you, and your assessment of my intentions are reasonable (e.g., you have no reason to believe I'm just fucking around), then you are legally entitled to wipe the floor with me. That much I'm pretty sure.
I'm not saying it was smart of the guy to bull rush him. I, myself, would have complied hoping someone was watching.
But we weren't there and God knows those two dudes look like they are right out of central casting for Deliverance and he's a black kid in Ga. and these two hillbilly-looking mother fuckers are following him in a pick-up truck and then approach him with guns. From a distance at least, it's like a scene out of Mississippi Burning (great movie, btw) for Christ's sake.
I agree with you. It has all the tragedy of the Trayvon Martin matter. Keep your fucking gun at home and call the fucking cops. If someone is missing another yard ornament, WFAF.
Another case where a jury is required to do the impossible task of reading minds, one of which is dead. Quickly switches to "What would I have done in that situation?" While regrettable that the son took the shotgun out of the truck while dad was already holding & aiming, I'm trying to find 1 person out of twelve who will say, as the jogger, "I would've bull-rushed the guy holding the shotgun - to Defend myself."
How the hell do you get 12 jurors to feel the same way, given that video?
Murder guys? Really?
Agreed. A lot will depend on jury instructions and whether you have one or two jurors who don’t adhere exactly to them. And whether there are, or are not, other pertinent facts.
I know I wouldn’t want to be in their shoes.
All the rules are supposed to deter speculation by jurors. Yet that's what this case will be mostly decided upon.
Without the release of the video do they get charged?
Nope.
Pretty amazing that it was video that their boy took that did them in.
You can't chase a dude down with a gun then act surprised and claim self defense when there's a struggle for the gun.
There was an attempt at self defense but it wasn't by the two who are still alive.
I can't see how running towards a loaded gun is self-defense. It might work in the movies, but Jason Bourne isn't real.
Real life is different, as this video shows.
The defense is going to argue that anyone who goes at a guy who's legally holding a loaded gun shows a dangerous intent on the part of the victim in this case. And, in all likelihood, it's going to stick with a couple jurors.
I'm not proud of it at all, but this is a very Trayvon type situation here. And to me, that case is a tragedy of epic proportions, but not surprising.
It'll be an interesting legal strategy to say the least. When you're in apprehension of imminent physical harm, what you're legally allowed to do to other human beings changes drastically. At least as I recall from Crim Law. Not my area, but if someone pulls a gun on you in a situation that you did not initiate ... I just wonder if it's as simple as citizen's arrest law. You have to review the facts.
Yeah, he may be legally holding a weapon, but is that how it works? Is it that simple? If you're trimming your bushes at home and I approach with a loaded gun pointed at you and the circumstances are such that you know I'm not there for a game of chess ... all you know is that I've got a live gun pointed at you, are you expected to concern yourself with my legal standing to do so?
This is why these laws are bullshit. If I approach you at a restaurant, and we don't know each other, and I motion like I'm going to jack you, and your assessment of my intentions are reasonable (e.g., you have no reason to believe I'm just fucking around), then you are legally entitled to wipe the floor with me. That much I'm pretty sure.
I'm not saying it was smart of the guy to bull rush him. I, myself, would have complied hoping someone was watching.
But we weren't there and God knows those two dudes look like they are right out of central casting for Deliverance and he's a black kid in Ga. and these two hillbilly-looking mother fuckers are following him in a pick-up truck and then approach him with guns. From a distance at least, it's like a scene out of Mississippi Burning (great movie, btw) for Christ's sake.
I agree with you. It has all the tragedy of the Trayvon Martin matter. Keep your fucking gun at home and call the fucking cops. If someone is missing another yard ornament, WFAF.
Another case where a jury is required to do the impossible task of reading minds, one of which is dead. Quickly switches to "What would I have done in that situation?" While regrettable that the son took the shotgun out of the truck while dad was already holding & aiming, I'm trying to find 1 person out of twelve who will say, as the jogger, "I would've bull-rushed the guy holding the shotgun - to Defend myself."
How the hell do you get 12 jurors to feel the same way, given that video?
Murder guys? Really?
I see what you're saying, but do you stand there and get executed? As creep mentioned, these guys fit the profile of a duo having no problem killing a black fella.
They roll up on you guns out and your read is they intend to kill, am I more likely to survive out running a bullet or charging the source?
Comments
As opposed to Arbaury who you never heard of until over two months after his death.
Strong point.
Your worst fucking effort.
You are more than welcome to run as far as you like for her.
Right or wrong, when it involves black and white people, especially in the south, there’s going to be a shit storm because of a lot history. Most who read it that way didn’t get the memo that everything got worked out in the 60s. YMMV.
Real life is different, as this video shows.
The defense is going to argue that anyone who goes at a guy who's legally holding a loaded gun shows a dangerous intent on the part of the victim in this case. And, in all likelihood, it's going to stick with a couple jurors.
I'm not proud of it at all, but this is a very Trayvon type situation here. And to me, that case is a tragedy of epic proportions, but not surprising.
I was hoping to rile up the Fremont's of the world but theyve pretty much all been taken by the vid
Sometimes those things are needed. I'm not saying this was one of them don't twist.
If it turns out what these dudes did was legal then the laws need to be changed. Yesterday.
Same thing here. Maybe there will be some cases where the citizen's arrest might have been helpful. But it seems to me that having people who are not trained to apprehend and are not trained to manage situational escalation and deescalation with deadly firearms, not to mention all the good judgment that comes with experience from doing it day in and day out ... those are the people - cops - who should be doing this. Yeah, some guys are going to get away, but I'd rather take that chance than more of this.
Like I said in my earlier post: I was taught to keep it put away unless I found myself in a situation where firing it was an entirely real option. Waiving it around to scare people when you clearly don't know what the fuck you're doing is a "what can go wrong" scenario.
Those are my "feelings".
Yeah, he may be legally holding a weapon, but is that how it works? Is it that simple? If you're trimming your bushes at home and I approach with a loaded gun pointed at you and the circumstances are such that you know I'm not there for a game of chess ... all you know is that I've got a live gun pointed at you, are you expected to concern yourself with my legal standing to do so?
This is why these laws are bullshit. If I approach you at a restaurant, and we don't know each other, and I motion like I'm going to jack you, and your assessment of my intentions are reasonable (e.g., you have no reason to believe I'm just fucking around), then you are legally entitled to wipe the floor with me. That much I'm pretty sure.
I'm not saying it was smart of the guy to bull rush him. I, myself, would have complied hoping someone was watching.
But we weren't there and God knows those two dudes look like they are right out of central casting for Deliverance and he's a black kid in Ga. and these two hillbilly-looking mother fuckers are following him in a pick-up truck and then approach him with guns. From a distance at least, it's like a scene out of Mississippi Burning (great movie, btw) for Christ's sake.
I agree with you. It has all the tragedy of the Trayvon Martin matter. Keep your fucking gun at home and call the fucking cops. If someone is missing another yard ornament, WFAF.
How the hell do you get 12 jurors to feel the same way, given that video?
Murder guys? Really?
I know I wouldn’t want to be in their shoes.
"Hard Cases make Bad Law" seems at play here.
They roll up on you guns out and your read is they intend to kill, am I more likely to survive out running a bullet or charging the source?