• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

The shooting of Ahmaud Arbery

Bumblebeetuna

Member
Jun 23, 2008
6,167
974
1,060
This kid has been a nuisance for a long time and had trouble coming to him at every chance.

-Why do you have a suspended license and youre in the middle of a field with drugs?

-Why did you carry a gun to school?

-Why are you belligerent around cops?

-Why are you trespassing on property numerous times?

Those dumb ass hicks shouldn't have chased him and just called the police, though. And he shouldn't have tried to take the fucking weapon when he has two people aiming at him... It's the special Olympics around those parts.
yep all things he should have been gunned down in the street for /s

There’s one reason those dumb fucks hunted him down, it was the color of his skin. Had a white dude been jogging down the street they wouldn’t have minded. I’m not going to judge how he reacted because I wasn’t in the situation. I’m not a minority so I haven’t had an entire life of racism being piled on me so while my reaction might have been different, I don’t fault him for reacting differently.

But the situation should have never happened in the first place, which makes the blame game fucking pointless.
 

StormCell

Member
Dec 11, 2018
1,245
1,207
420
This thread has degraded to garbage posts.

yep all things he should have been gunned down in the street for /s
Not the argument that was made. Continuing to deflect the argument back to the conclusion.

There’s one reason those dumb fucks hunted him down, it was the color of his skin. Had a white dude been jogging down the street they wouldn’t have minded. I’m not going to judge how he reacted because I wasn’t in the situation. I’m not a minority so I haven’t had an entire life of racism being piled on me so while my reaction might have been different, I don’t fault him for reacting differently.
Baseless claim. You have no evidence of this.

But the situation should have never happened in the first place, which makes the blame game fucking pointless.
Your opinion, but not the opinion of the law. The case will go to court to determine that which you proclaim to be pointless.
 
  • Thoughtful
Reactions: TrainedRage

StormCell

Member
Dec 11, 2018
1,245
1,207
420
Question I would like to have answered:

What did Ahmed Aubrey see as he ran around the truck that was attempting to stop him?

If he saw the barrel of a shotgun pointed at him, then he is very much within his rights to charge the gunman and stand his ground. A pointed gun is an intent to kill. I don't believe carry-laws or stand your ground, in GA, include holding someone at gunpoint in a citizen's arrest. You could, however, hold someone at gunpoint in your home if you suspect they are armed.

If he saw a man holding a shotgun (gun pointed at the ground or in the air) and charged the man in an effort to wrestle the gun away, then this was a life-threatening assault that warrants the use of the firearm to fight back. You can't blame someone for a murder because they legally carried a gun, a fight broke out for the gun, and they had to use the gun to stop it from being used on them. It would be an easier case if the guy merely had a holstered gun, but it would be the same situation again, if Ahmed charged the guy and reached for the gun in the holster -- reaching for the gun makes this a life-threatening assault.

The next logical defense I usually see is that you can't chase someone down with firearms and then escalate to shooting them when a fight erupts. This deflects attention away from numerous facts about the situation. I don't think I should have to break this down unless people really want to read what I have to say about it. Too many people have made up their minds about this case and have decided in their hearts and minds that it's wrong to chase someone down with a gun no matter what -- but that isn't the law on the matter, is it?
 
Last edited:
  • Praise the Sun
Reactions: TrainedRage

TrainedRage

Member
Feb 3, 2018
6,806
9,370
810
34
USA
Question I would like to have answered:

What did Ahmed Aubrey see as he ran around the truck that was attempting to stop him?

If he saw the barrel of a shotgun pointed at him, then he is very much within his rights to charge the gunman and stand his ground. A pointed gun is an intent to kill. I don't believe carry-laws or stand your ground, in GA, include holding someone at gunpoint in a citizen's arrest. You could, however, hold someone at gunpoint in your home if you suspect they are armed.

If he saw a man holding a shotgun (gun pointed at the ground or in the air) and charged the man in an effort to wrestle the gun away, then this was a life-threatening assault that warrants the use of the firearm to fight back. You can't blame someone for a murder because they legally carried a gun, a fight broke out for the gun, and they had to use the gun to stop it from being used on them. It would be an easier case if the guy merely had a holstered gun, but it would be the same situation again, if Ahmed charged the guy and reached for the gun in the holster -- reaching for the gun makes this a life-threatening assault.

The next logical defense I usually see is that you can't chase someone down with firearms and then escalate to shooting them when a fight erupts. This deflects attention away from numerous facts about the situation. I don't think I should have to break this down unless people really want to read what I have to say about it. Too many people have made up their minds about this case and have decided in their hearts and minds that it's wrong to chase someone down with a gun no matter what -- but that isn't the law on the matter, is it?
A rational post that will be shouted down because muh racism.
 

LoV

Member
Jan 8, 2015
45
6
310
No one is? LOL have you read the thread? Have you read Twitter?
Drive-by post proclaiming to the world that you have nothing substantial to offer in this thread...

Stick to making orange man bad posts.
 

bRacing

Member
Feb 13, 2020
419
685
320
Drive-by post proclaiming to the world that you have nothing substantial to offer in this thread...

Stick to making orange man bad posts.
You said no one in this thread claimed he should have complied. I pointed out how stupid of a statement that is.
 

LoV

Member
Jan 8, 2015
45
6
310
You said no one in this thread claimed he should have complied. I pointed out how stupid of a statement that is.
Funny how you shit post without quoting anyone... Hmmm

No, you make the post after a new video was out to deflect. I'm on to you, orange man bad poster.
 

jsnake19

Neo Member
Mar 30, 2020
40
63
100
All these white people saying he should have just stopped and complied with the orders of gun toting rednecks would react how if they were being chased by black men with guns? Yeah, thought so.
Well, considering that the scenario that you described is much much more common and happens daily across the country, the white people would be armed themselves and the outcome probably would have been different...
 

poppabk

Member
Jan 21, 2008
11,481
389
1,125
USA
Well, considering that the scenario that you described is much much more common and happens daily across the country, the white people would be armed themselves and the outcome probably would have been different...
That's the weirdest thing in this thread, the people on the McMichael's side are arguing in that situation the white man would be guilty of murder if he shot an armed black man that was chasing him down in a truck while armed. They are arguing that you don't have the right to defend yourself in that situation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SlaughterX

chitzy

Banned
Mar 8, 2020
426
778
325
I don’t see how this is anything other than textbook self-defense. We have Arbery on camera initiating the attack against the one redneck and getting blasted for it. We don’t see the rednecks make any attempt to physically apprehend Arbery. We don’t see the rednecks point their guns at Arbery before he initiated the assault. GA is an open carry state so the two rednecks are doing no wrong by driving around with guns in hand. This is a nothing burger.
 
  • LOL
Reactions: Batiman

King of Foxes

Member
Jan 9, 2018
2,073
3,912
635
Latvia
those are completely irrelevant to the events leading to his shooting.
not really, it shows the utter lack of respect and contempt he has for police who are required to carry guns.

If he acts so aggressively with actual officers of the law then him charging and attacking a man with a gun cannot be so easily dismissed....but of course your kind will just dismiss it
 

SlaughterX

Banned
Jan 12, 2007
6,738
227
1,415
Alsip, IL
SlaughterX.1up.com
not really, it shows the utter lack of respect and contempt police have for Aubrey who had no reason to get shot or tazed.

If these vigilantes acted so aggressively with all other trespassers then him shooting and killing the only man there that was black cannot be so easily dismissed....but of course your kind will just dismiss it
 
Last edited:

darkinstinct

Member
Jul 24, 2015
4,675
2,623
605
Switzerland
Question I would like to have answered:

What did Ahmed Aubrey see as he ran around the truck that was attempting to stop him?

If he saw the barrel of a shotgun pointed at him, then he is very much within his rights to charge the gunman and stand his ground. A pointed gun is an intent to kill. I don't believe carry-laws or stand your ground, in GA, include holding someone at gunpoint in a citizen's arrest. You could, however, hold someone at gunpoint in your home if you suspect they are armed.

If he saw a man holding a shotgun (gun pointed at the ground or in the air) and charged the man in an effort to wrestle the gun away, then this was a life-threatening assault that warrants the use of the firearm to fight back. You can't blame someone for a murder because they legally carried a gun, a fight broke out for the gun, and they had to use the gun to stop it from being used on them. It would be an easier case if the guy merely had a holstered gun, but it would be the same situation again, if Ahmed charged the guy and reached for the gun in the holster -- reaching for the gun makes this a life-threatening assault.

The next logical defense I usually see is that you can't chase someone down with firearms and then escalate to shooting them when a fight erupts. This deflects attention away from numerous facts about the situation. I don't think I should have to break this down unless people really want to read what I have to say about it. Too many people have made up their minds about this case and have decided in their hearts and minds that it's wrong to chase someone down with a gun no matter what -- but that isn't the law on the matter, is it?
The law doesn't matter. If you attack someone that is holding a gun, there are not many outcomes.

a) you are killed
b) you kill the attacker
c) you kill the attacker and are then killed by the third guy on the truck
d) you kill the attacker and the guy on the truck

It's a perfect example as to why people shouldn't be allowed to own guns. Take the guns away and this situation ends up with a brawl and some broken bones.
 

crobb991

Banned
Feb 15, 2018
289
250
300
im just wondering

all those guys out protesting with their guns, including the moron in the subway with his rocket launcher, (why the fuck does a member of the public need a rocket launcher anyway)

would they have been left to carry on if they had have been a minority... or do you think the police would have shot them...
 

Honey Bunny

Member
Dec 1, 2011
2,848
203
660
Last edited:

DeepEnigma

Gold Member
Dec 3, 2013
34,909
54,194
1,170
im just wondering

all those guys out protesting with their guns, including the moron in the subway with his rocket launcher, (why the fuck does a member of the public need a rocket launcher anyway)

would they have been left to carry on if they had have been a minority... or do you think the police would have shot them...

You keep repeating this garbage, and people show you evidence in which you overlook it, constantly.

Get a new gig.
 
  • Like
Reactions: and 3 others

Nester99

Member
Sep 17, 2016
1,631
1,276
440
BC
im just wondering

all those guys out protesting with their guns, including the moron in the subway with his rocket launcher, (why the fuck does a member of the public need a rocket launcher anyway)

would they have been left to carry on if they had have been a minority... or do you think the police would have shot them...
Left to carry.

Any other stupid race bait questions you want to get off your chest?
 

StormCell

Member
Dec 11, 2018
1,245
1,207
420
The law doesn't matter. If you attack someone that is holding a gun, there are not many outcomes.

a) you are killed
b) you kill the attacker
c) you kill the attacker and are then killed by the third guy on the truck
d) you kill the attacker and the guy on the truck

It's a perfect example as to why people shouldn't be allowed to own guns. Take the guns away and this situation ends up with a brawl and some broken bones.
The operative in your argument is "to attack." If you attack. Isn't that the root illegal action in the actual altercation? Someone attacked. I'm not keen to gun debates. In this specific case, you are actually arguing that because illegal actions, we must forfeit this right where this right is a set that far exceeds the intersection of illegal actions into this right. Obviously, this right is the the right to gun ownership here.

I don't like this case either. I have personal opinions. I think the duo acted hastily and carelessly, and their poor judgment aided in, if not fully, costing Ahmed his life. Even worse, we're likely to lose another citizens arrest law. I do believe that sometimes we as citizens must act under the law to enforce said law. It is not solely the business of law enforcement to do so, and frankly every direct encounter with police carries a moderate risk of death*--I have anecdotal experiences that reinforce this belief. You may seek to argue that leaving the matter to the police is best, and I don't agree. It's a whole separate topic, though.

* I don't envy the jobs of police officers. When they're directed to you for an encounter, they have little idea what they are in for or what emotional state you'll be in by the time they arrive. I don't blame them for being hyper alert and extremely cautious because it's their life on the line too.
 
Last edited:

DunDunDunpachi

Patient MembeR
Apr 18, 2018
22,794
48,813
1,335
USA
dunpachi.com
This thread is the secular equivalent of arguing with Evangelical extremists who insist that Hurricane Katrina was God's punishment against the homosexuals and deviants in New Orleans.

If a black person gets shot, it's racist. We work backward from there to explain the details, no matter how incongruently they might fit together.

The thread is a microcosm of the media firestorm surrounding the shooting of a person we never met, in a town most never visited: packed with commenters (many of them fresh returnees, huge surprise!) latching onto a story to repeat the same accusations of "racism" and "systemic violence" that they repeat in all other stories anyway, making the details of the story itself nearly impossible to discuss openly and honestly. It's like some invisible hand sics the NPCs on a topic and they rush in to execute their script, unthinking, unmoved by logic or facts.

The predictable result is that the facts are no longer the focus of the thread but instead the arguments about whether or not it's racist. Good job, slide posters.
 

chitzy

Banned
Mar 8, 2020
426
778
325
The law doesn't matter. If you attack someone that is holding a gun, there are not many outcomes.

a) you are killed
b) you kill the attacker
c) you kill the attacker and are then killed by the third guy on the truck
d) you kill the attacker and the guy on the truck

It's a perfect example as to why people shouldn't be allowed to own guns. Take the guns away and this situation ends up with a brawl and some broken bones.
Wow it's almost like it's not a good idea to initiate an assault on another person, thus putting that person's life at risk, if you want to keep your own life.
 
Last edited:
  • Thoughtful
Reactions: StormCell

bRacing

Member
Feb 13, 2020
419
685
320
not really, it shows the utter lack of respect and contempt he has for police who are required to carry guns.

If he acts so aggressively with actual officers of the law then him charging and attacking a man with a gun cannot be so easily dismissed....but of course your kind will just dismiss it
Just like "your kind" dismisses how white people treat cops and how differently cops treat those white people than they would if black people were treating them in the same exact manner. Funny how double standards work.
 

Knch

Member
Jan 12, 2009
526
254
920
Belgium
not really, it shows the utter lack of respect and contempt he has for police who are required to carry guns.

If he acts so aggressively with actual officers of the law then
That's between him and the cops, not these rednecks.

him charging and attacking a man with a gun cannot be so easily dismissed....
Yeah, he should have just waited for them to yell "He's coming right for us" and gotten shot in the face nice and quiet like a good little n-word.

but of course your kind will just dismiss it
Random white people dismissing completely irrelevant things? (Yes, I'm a dirty race assuming, sue me)
 

Nester99

Member
Sep 17, 2016
1,631
1,276
440
BC
Yeah, he should have just waited for them to yell "He's coming right for us" and gotten shot in the face nice and quiet like a good little n-word.
What is this utter bullshit you just made up? sounds like a personal fantasy of yours.

ridiculous, void of fact. Shameless.
 

V4skunk

Member
Nov 20, 2018
1,833
1,671
365
I never thought racism would be a wide spread as console fayboyism is on this site, but I'm starting to see that they kinda go hand in hand.
You nonces don't live in reality and you are all too weak to do anything about it outside your own bedroom.
 

StormCell

Member
Dec 11, 2018
1,245
1,207
420
What is this utter bullshit you just made up? sounds like a personal fantasy of yours.

ridiculous, void of fact. Shameless.
It's an assumption that they were going to kill him no matter what.

There's no common ground to be found with this side as long as they stick to the assumption that the father and son intended to kill Ahmed.
 

Knch

Member
Jan 12, 2009
526
254
920
Belgium
What is this utter bullshit you just made up? sounds like a personal fantasy of yours.

ridiculous, void of fact. Shameless.
My personal fantasies are far more shameless but far less violent.

There's this thing called fight or flight. He was denied flight. So he fought, which he had every fucking right to do and thus doesn't need to be dismissed.

I'll try and be more literal and/or add the obvious /s next time...
 

Knch

Member
Jan 12, 2009
526
254
920
Belgium
But he was under a citizen's arrest, was he not?



Am I going to find this codified in any state's laws?
You're assuming they had the right to do so, I am not.
You're saying I can walk up to you and threaten you with a gun and you don't have every right to defend yourself?
 
  • Like
Reactions: SlaughterX

chitzy

Banned
Mar 8, 2020
426
778
325
You're assuming they had the right to do so, I am not.
You're saying I can walk up to you and threaten you with a gun and you don't have every right to defend yourself?
Zero evidence that they threatened him, there was no attempt to apprehend Arbery on the video. All we see is Arbery attacking a redneck holding a shotgun.
 
  • Like
Reactions: off duty ninja

Knch

Member
Jan 12, 2009
526
254
920
Belgium
Zero evidence that they threatened him, there was no attempt to apprehend Arbery on the video. All we see is Arbery attacking a redneck holding a shotgun.
Nothing threatening about two cunts chasing you down in their truck and blocking you from getting away while holding guns. Got it.
 

StormCell

Member
Dec 11, 2018
1,245
1,207
420
This is a good set of details of the event published hours ago.

You're assuming they had the right to do so, I am not.
You're saying I can walk up to you and threaten you with a gun and you don't have every right to defend yourself?
But that's the claim. Someone can place you under a citizen's arrest whether you believe they saw you breaking the law or not. You can even be ignorant of the law you broke and be under a citizen's arrest. It would then be up to a court to decide if the citizen's arrest was proper. It's not up to you to decide that, and choosing to fight someone attempting to detain you is, itself, a crime.

I think the second part of what you wrote will be central to the case. If Ahmed ran around the truck and met the end of a shotgun, then he absolutely had a right to charge the son. If the son was just standing there holding a shotgun (gun not pointed at Ahmed), then I actually think that changes the situation. What do you think?
 

StormCell

Member
Dec 11, 2018
1,245
1,207
420
Chasing someone down with trucks and guns is the definition of threatening...

Change your avatar, you disrespect the ODB
There can be truth to this if they were driving after Ahmed waving guns or pointing them at him. Otherwise, just having the guns while pursuing someone isn't quite the same. You will see in the link I shared above that there is a history that suggests they had every reason to believe Ahmed could be armed, including a criminal firearm possession.
 

chitzy

Banned
Mar 8, 2020
426
778
325
Nothing threatening about two cunts chasing you down in their truck and blocking you from getting away while holding guns. Got it.
The video showed the rednecks parked on the side of the road. Arbery clearly wasn't blocked in the least and could have kept running had he not decided to assault a guy with a shotgun. GA is an open carry state, nothing at all illegal about carrying a weapon.
 

Taxexemption

Member
Oct 11, 2011
514
623
775
The law doesn't matter. If you attack someone that is holding a gun, there are not many outcomes.

a) you are killed
b) you kill the attacker
c) you kill the attacker and are then killed by the third guy on the truck
d) you kill the attacker and the guy on the truck

It's a perfect example as to why people shouldn't be allowed to own guns. Take the guns away and this situation ends up with a brawl and some broken bones.
It's not a good example actually. There is some evidence that you actually get more violent crime as you restrict firearm access. This isn't my personal hobby horse so I don't have a bunch of studies ready, but it's believed by many who study it that people are more willing to throw down and get in violent altercations when they believe there is little or no chance the other person will have a gun. They also feel more confident in getting into these altercations that nothing serious will come of it. Ironically, by banning guns you may actually ensure more people die in violent confrontations. Just because people don't have guns, doesn't mean they won't kill each other in a brawl, whether on purpose or on accident. Once you've been brawling and the other guy is on the ground for a moment, a lot of people aren't going to have the self control to not start stomping on their head.
 
  • Like
Reactions: StormCell

Taxexemption

Member
Oct 11, 2011
514
623
775
How high is the violent crimes rate in Japan?
When people make the comparison they usually go for the UK rather than Japan. Japan is effectively an ethnostate. So, the whole discussion about racism wouldn't be taking place, and this wouldn't be an interesting story. I mean, if your argument is going to be that we should be an ethnostate, well you can make that argument but it's not popular.
 
  • Thoughtful
Reactions: off duty ninja

Taxexemption

Member
Oct 11, 2011
514
623
775
I didn't say anything about race I asked how the violent crime rate is in Japan compared to the US since they aren't allowed to own guns.
You specifically chose a country that is an ethnostate. You need to make a fair comparison. If this incident really is caused by racism, it likely would not have taken place in Japan. If some amount of crime is caused by the fact that people are racist, you won't have these crimes in countries where virtually everyone is the same race.


What I'm saying if you don't get it, is there is an important confounding factor that makes it an unfair comparison. If the violent crime rate in Japan is low, it makes the argument that you shouldn't have racial diversity in a society just as well as it makes the argument about gun control. When you want to know whether something is caused by another thing statistically, you try to compare things that are otherwise similar. The UK is more similar to the US than it is to Japan.


Edit: To further clarify, if you think racism causes crime, societies that are racially diverse will have more crime.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Ornlu

jsnake19

Neo Member
Mar 30, 2020
40
63
100
I didn't say anything about race I asked how the violent crime rate is in Japan compared to the US since they aren't allowed to own guns.
But by choosing Japan as the comparison, you intentionally picked a place that has variables to the situation, namely they lack the cultural diversity of western nations. You cant compare violent crimes between two completely different countries when their citizens have completely different values and morals.