The killing of Ahmaud Arbery (23rd February 2020)

[Damien]

He ie charging at the shooter, isn't he? So again what I said the other day. It's important to figure out what happened that made this situation escalate.

He's jogging, there's a person on the left of the truck in his path with a gun in his hand. He changes path to go to the right of the truck and the person on the left of the truck moves to try and stop him from going past and the scuffle starts about here. I'm guessing what made the situation escalate was being ambushed and fenced in by people wielding guns while he was going about minding his own business. For me, Ahmaud's actions were in self defence. From his clothing he was unlikely to be carrying weaponry and the three people involved were looking like they were going to be the type to shoot and ask questions later so he tried to deal with the biggest threat. He knew he was in all likelihood going to die, and it was a matter of whether to lie down and take it or do what he felt would give him the greatest chance of survival.

Here's an article on fight or flee. He was close enough that fighting was a better option.

 

[Carolina Red]

That's straight out of the Jim Crow era murder.

 

[Wednesday at Stoke]

If he is jogging, there's a good chance he had earplugs and some music on so he wouldn't even have heard them chasing him until the last moment. Now imagine being a black man in deep south Georgia with bubba and his redneck daddy coming at you with a shot gun and his actions make complete sense.

 

[RedPed]

Imagine, just going out for a jog and ending up getting murdered in broad daylight.

 

[Atze-Peng]

Does need to be made clear, but by the offenders' own series of events Ahmaoud didn't begin his run to chase these guys down. They chased him and tried to stop him when he charged at one of them, more than likely to avoid being shot or at the response of being called a n.... no doubt.

Judging by Ahmaoud's clothing he was clearly not carrying any form of weapons, or at least large weapons. EVEN if he had a small handgun or knife, unlikely, what would you do when approached aggressively by heavily armed militia?

When I go just jogging and someone stops me, I don't usually charge at them while swinging.

Also is this the entire situation or did they had something before happen and then they drove past him and stopped?

 

[Carolina Red]

When I go just jogging and someone stops me, I don't usually charge at them while swinging.

You're also not a black man in rural Georgia being confronted by armed rednecks.

Can't believe I just had to explain that, but here we are...

 

[Wednesday at Stoke]

When I go just jogging and someone stops me, I don't usually charge at them while swinging.

Also is this the entire situation or did they had something before happen and then they drove past him and stopped?

Out of curiosity, how often do people stop you with a shot gun pointed at your mug while out jogging?

 

[Dr. Dwayne]

FFS Atze. If someone is brandishing a shotgun at you are you just gonna stand there and let them shoot you?

 

[Dumbstar]

You're also not a black man in rural Georgia being confronted by armed rednecks.

Can't believe I just had to explain that, but here we are...

It's madness. @Atze-Peng for your sakes please, please, please do not ingest (that means drink) bleach whatever you may have heard elsewhere.

 

[Atze-Peng]

FFS Atze. If someone is brandishing a shotgun at you are you just gonna stand there and let them shoot you?

Did you consider that maybe he got shot, because of charing towards the guy with a gun? You know, the guy might have just reacted instinctively or in panic or something? And yes, the guy who got shot also potentially paniced, but whatever happend there, it wasn't deescalating the situation, but furhter escalating. Generally it's not a good idea to escalate someone that points a weapon at you, though.

 

[Dr. Dwayne]

Did you consider that maybe he got shot, because of charing towards the guy with a gun? You know, the guy might have just reacted instinctively or in panic or something? And yes, the guy who got shot also potentially paniced, but whatever happend there, it wasn't deescalating the situation, but furhter escalating. Generally it's not a good idea to escalate someone that points a weapon at you, though.

As Carolina Red said, you're not a black man in Georgia being confronted by armed rednecks. This is an important perspective. The situation was already escalated (people brandishing firearms aren't inviting anyone to a picnic). At that moment, fight or flight takes over. Both options end with him getting shot. One gives him a small chance of survival.

 

[Dr. Dwayne]

You know, the guy might have just reacted instinctively or in panic or something?

Also, specifically to this. If I'm wielding a shotgun and you're not, I'm not the one's who's going to be panicking.

 

[George Owen]

Did you consider that maybe he got shot, because of charing towards the guy with a gun? You know, the guy might have just reacted instinctively or in panic or something? And yes, the guy who got shot also potentially paniced, but whatever happend there, it wasn't deescalating the situation, but furhter escalating. Generally it's not a good idea to escalate someone that points a weapon at you, though.

 

[Balu]

Did you consider that maybe he got shot, because of charing towards the guy with a gun? You know, the guy might have just reacted instinctively or in panic or something? And yes, the guy who got shot also potentially paniced, but whatever happend there, it wasn't deescalating the situation, but furhter escalating. Generally it's not a good idea to escalate someone that points a weapon at you, though.

Surely the ones who play sheriff and chase someone down the street with guns are the ones who should be capable of staying calm once it escalates? It's completely mental to suggest that the guy who was jogging down the street and was put into an impossible situation, where he rightfully feared for his life, can be blamed for "escalating" the situation. I mean, what the feck?

It's insane that they're allowed to do that in the first place, even if nothing happens in the end. But obviously they have to be responsible if they aren't in control of the dangerous situation they've created.

 

[Grinner]

Did you consider that maybe he got shot, because of charing towards the guy with a gun? You know, the guy might have just reacted instinctively or in panic or something? And yes, the guy who got shot also potentially paniced, but whatever happend there, it wasn't deescalating the situation, but furhter escalating. Generally it's not a good idea to escalate someone that points a weapon at you, though.

He was confronted by somebody using deadly force to intimidate him. The law in Georgia says that he can defend himself in that situation. It's actually one of the better ways to defend yourself against a long gun by charging and reducing the distance.

 

[Atze-Peng]

As Carolina Red said, you're not a black man in Georgia being confronted by armed rednecks. This is an important perspective. The situation was already escalated (people brandishing firearms aren't inviting anyone to a picnic). At that moment, fight or flight takes over. Both options end with him getting shot. One gives him a small chance of survival.

Because my skin colour naturally neglects all my argumentation. Let's have complete segregation from now on? Whites aren't allowed to talk towards things that concerns non-whites and vice versa. Why not just have homogenic nations from now on to avoid these issues? Or wait, you didn't think this through, right?
And when he runs away and gets shot it's simple homicide. Plus it's not a given that happens, but plain assumption on your part.

Also, specifically to this. If I'm wielding a shotgun and you're not, I'm not the one's who's going to be panicking.

Because in close range there isn't the risk of having your gun dragged out of your hands? What are you fecking on? The black dude was in fist swinging range. So yes, it was also a threatening situation for the gun-carrier as well.

He was confronted by somebody using deadly force to intimidate him. The law in Georgia says that he can defend himself in that situation. It's actually one of the better ways to defend yourself against a long gun by charging and reducing the distance.

"using". No, he didn't use deadly force. He confronted the guy intimidating him with a gun. If that was done based on "don't escalate this or you will be on the losing end" or "we are looking for an excuse to use these" is an important question, but not a given. He USED deadly force AFTER he got attacked. Now if it is his fault for being attacked is what the court will be all about.

 

[Adam-Utd]

Did you consider that maybe he got shot, because of charing towards the guy with a gun? You know, the guy might have just reacted instinctively or in panic or something? And yes, the guy who got shot also potentially paniced, but whatever happend there, it wasn't deescalating the situation, but furhter escalating. Generally it's not a good idea to escalate someone that points a weapon at you, though.

Why on earth do you need to play devils advocate in this situation?

How could running at a man with a shotgun ever be a good idea unless it's your last chance of survival? he tried to wrestle it off him in fear and ended up getting murdered.

I'm very close to calling you the N word myself (not the racist slur) but I'll bite my lip.

 

[Dr. Dwayne]

Because my skin colour naturally neglects all my argumentation. Let's have complete segregation from now on? Whites aren't allowed to talk towards things that concerns non-whites and vice versa. Why not just have homogenic nations from now on to avoid these issues? Or wait, you didn't think this through, right?
And when he runs away and gets shot it's simple homicide. Plus it's not a given that happens, but plain assumption on your part.

Well, that escalated quickly.

It has nothing to do with your skin colour. It may have something to do with your knowledge and experience of American history in the southern United States. I think the gun toting bubba in the video above would like to see a return to segregation, whites only drinking fountains, whites only theatres, blacks riding at the back of the bus, etc. They certainly appear to think blacks have no legitimate purpose to be in their neighbourhood. IF you consider these points, instead of resorting to complete and total hyperbole, you might just gain insight into why the victim decided to fight for his life rather than stand there and be gunned down ,or handed over to the police and gunned down (maybe you've missed the Cops in America Doing a Bad Job thread?)

Because in close range there isn't the risk of having your gun dragged out of your hands? What are you fecking on? The black dude was in fist swinging range. So yes, it was also a threatening situation for the gun-carrier as well.

Fists are scarier than a shotgun WTF are you on bro?

P.S. you're also ignoring the guy with the magnum revolver taking cover behind the cab of the pickup.

 

[Carolina Red]

Because my skin colour naturally neglects all my argumentation. Let's have complete segregation from now on? Whites aren't allowed to talk towards things that concerns non-whites and vice versa. Why not just have homogenic nations from now on to avoid these issues? Or wait, you didn't think this through, right?
And when he runs away and gets shot it's simple homicide. Plus it's not a given that happens, but plain assumption on your part.



Because in close range there isn't the risk of having your gun dragged out of your hands? What are you fecking on? The black dude was in fist swinging range. So yes, it was also a threatening situation for the gun-carrier as well.



"using". No, he didn't use deadly force. He confronted the guy intimidating him with a gun. If that was done based on "don't escalate this or you will be on the losing end" or "we are looking for an excuse to use these" is an important question, but not a given. He USED deadly force AFTER he got attacked. Now if it is his fault for being attacked is what the court will be all about.

Will you please shut up?

You've produced here one of the worst series of posts I've ever read on this site.

 

[Ekkie Thump]

I don't always pursue a jogger down the street, leap from my vehicle and threaten him with a shotgun but when I do and he dies as a result I certainly think the focus should be on the actions of the guy I shot. Certainly my own actions would be completely understandable and entirely unimpeachable throughout the entire process.

 

[Atze-Peng]

Why on earth do you need to play devils advocate in this situation?

How could running at a man with a shotgun ever be a good idea unless it's your last chance of survival? he tried to wrestle it off him in fear and ended up getting murdered.

I'm very close to calling you the N word myself (not the racist slur) but I'll bite my lip.

Because everyone here is jumping to conclusions while I simply do not think it is as clear cut and actually - legally speaking - an interesting case that provides a lot of nuances that can swing it one or the other way. And yes, there is a chance that the dude overstepped his boundaries by going in with a gun into the situation (I am not a legal expert on the laws that are in place locally as well as in the US as a whole, that's why it's for experts to decide) - but even if he overstepped his boundaries, it can still be an unfortunate event where both sides overreacted in a panic and thus be considered self-defense.
But yet everyone instantly assumes it must be, because he is black. Ironically while still on this page a security guard got shot by people with non-european names and no one there is taking their pitchforks out. It is hypocritical and it is dangerous for a society as a whole to jump to these conclusions right away. Even if we assume that the two guys went out "N+gga hunting" (and I say it purposefully in this offensive term, because this is what you guys assume these "rednecks" must have thought) - you guys instantly jumping to conclusions and prejudgement are doing the EXACT SAME behaviour as they do. Just that they took it to the logical conclusion of these judgements.

Well, that escalated quickly.

It has nothing to do with your skin colour. It may have something to do with your knowledge and experience of American history in the southern United States. I think the gun toting bubba in the video above would like to see a return to segregation, whites only drinking fountains, whites only theatres, blacks riding at the back of the bus, etc. They certainly appear to think blacks have no legitimate purpose to be in their neighbourhood. IF you consider these points, instead of resorting to complete and total hyperbole, you might just gain insight into why the victim decided to fight for his life rather than stand there and be gunned down ,or handed over to the police and gunned down (maybe you've missed the Cops in America Doing a Bad Job thread?)

I honestly do not give two shits of the background and judge the situation at hand. Skincolour may have been the motivator for the altercation of confronting him, but that can have many reasons that aren't necessarily racism-related (like profiling or simply statistics considernig the city this happened is like 60% black). Plus it requires a lot of assumption and mindreading on you guys part knowing that this is what the two guys did. Maybe they did, maybe not. But we do not know - only they do.
What we know is that they confronting him while having guns for the reason of being potentially suspicious based on their perception as there have been burglaries around the area. Then black guy attacks guy with shotgun and tries to grab it. In that close range shotgun guy fires.

Everything else is assumptions on your part, because you guys are clearly omniscient.

Fists are scarier than a shotgun WTF are you on bro?

P.S. you're also ignoring the guy with the magnum revolver taking cover behind the cab of the pickup.

You really have never been in a physical escalation, have you? Not like you can have your gun be slapped out of your hand or some other unexpected event happening. Guns are midranged (or long range if you go for rifles) tools. They can be a liability in close range. Every expert will tell you that.
The black guy quickly closed in to close range and thus it became a threatening situation for BOTH.

Also you mean that guy with the revolver who had to grab it after the first shot was fired already? Did we watch the same video?

 

[FireballXL5]

Words fail.

 

[Adam-Utd]

@Atze-Peng Are you completely nuts? the guy is jogging in the road, there is a car WAITING for him with a man standing in the back with a loaded shotgun, and a man in the driver seat that gets out as he approaches. He tries to run around it and gets blocked. Whatever he does after that is instinct.

These 2 groups of men have gone there with the intention to shoot him, or at best scare him off permanently. Idiots and murderers.

 

[Carolina Red]

because this is what you guys assume these "rednecks" must have thought

I have lived in the rural south my entire life! That's exactly what they were thinking!

 

[Atze-Peng]

@Atze-Peng Are you completely nuts? the guy is jogging in the road, there is a car WAITING for him with a man standing in the back with a loaded shotgun, and a man in the driver seat that gets out as he approaches. He tries to run around it and gets blocked. Whatever he does after that is instinct.

These 2 groups of men have gone there with the intention to shoot him, or at best scare him off permanently. Idiots and murderers.

At 0:11 of the video you can see that jogger sees guy with gun ahead of him. Then he moves around the car and starts fist-swinging and trying to grab the shotgun. So in these 9 seconds he already made the choice of going in for attacking. Is it justifiable? Possibly. But it is definitely not that "the guy standing in the back with a loaded shotgun" when he openly approached the jogger
At 0:20 the camera just gets into the action again in with the jogger charging at shotgun guy and shortly after you hear the shot.
At 0:24 you see guy on top of the car taking his gun which he didn't have before.

These timestamps disprove your interpretation of the situation.

 

[Dumbstar]

Ok @Atze-Peng, I bow to your superior knowledge. Please drink the bleach. You know, playing the devil's advocate.

 

[Carolina Red]

“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!”

That call went blank for several minutes, with the dispatcher trying several times to reach the caller. The call eventually hangs up.

At some point during all this, Gregory McMichael was outside at his son’s Satilla Drive home when he saw Arbery running down the street, he told police. He ran inside, armed himself and told his son to grab a gun, Gregory McMichael told police. He said they had seen Arbery on surveillance cameras. The two men got into his son’s pickup truck and caught up to Arbery at Burford Road and Satilla Drive, he told police. After asking Arbery several times to stop, Travis McMichael stepped out of the truck with a shotgun, Gregory McMichael told police.

Gregory McMichael told police a struggle for the gun ensued between Travis McMichael and Arbery, during which his son fired twice. Arbery died at the scene.



1) him being black definitely mattered to them

2) they went, armed themselves, left their property, tracked him down, started a confrontation, shot him, then claimed self defense. That's bullshit.

 

[KirkDuyt]

Imagine trying to defend this. I'm not biting, but feck me, give yer head a wobble, you know who you are.

 

[Dr. Dwayne]

I honestly do not give two shits of the background and judge the situation at hand. Skincolour may have been the motivator for the altercation of confronting him, but that can have many reasons that aren't necessarily racism-related (like profiling or simply statistics considernig the city this happened is like 60% black). Plus it requires a lot of assumption and mindreading on you guys part knowing that this is what the two guys did. Maybe they did, maybe not. But we do not know - only they do.
What we know is that they confronting him while having guns for the reason of being potentially suspicious based on their perception as there have been burglaries around the area. Then black guy attacks guy with shotgun and tries to grab it. In that close range shotgun guy fires.

Everything else is assumptions on your part, because you guys are clearly omniscient.

They are easy assumptions because of what we know about this incident. There is no great leap of logic in what we have determined.

You are unable to see this because you wilfully ignore the history of the area and the reality of racism in America. Presumably because its omission supports your position.

Skin colour wasn't the motivation for confronting him, it was the motivation for assuming he had criminal intent just by being in their neighbourhood. This led them to arm themselves, pursue him, ambush him and then kill him. This is two armed men ambushing one unarmed jogger. The armed men have nothing to fear but one clearly has no experience because he let himself get into an altercation. The question is why did he allow that when he had opportunity to take cover like his partner?

You really have never been in a physical escalation, have you? Not like you can have your gun be slapped out of your hand or some other unexpected event happening. Guns are midranged (or long range if you go for rifles) tools. They can be a liability in close range. Every expert will tell you that.
The black guy quickly closed in to close range and thus it became a threatening situation for BOTH.

Also you mean that guy with the revolver who had to grab it after the first shot was fired already? Did we watch the same video?

I'm an experienced firearms enthusiast. I'm telling you otherwise. Shotguns like the one in the video are close range weapons. It's not a duck hunting shotty with a 28-30" barrel. It's maybe 18" at most. Shotguns of that size are for security detail. When you are wielding a weapon like that with two hands it's unlikely that you will be disarmed as you have control of the more important leverage points and also have the bad end pointing away from you. Any confrontation between an armed individual and an unarmed individual is ALWAYS less threatening for the armed individual. That's the whole purpose of arms, whether they are clubs. blades or guns.

The guy with the revolver (which isn't holstered, it's just not being pointed at the victim until they begin struggling) and his position gives them a tactical advantage. This removes almost any need for the two armed men to be fearful in this situation. Had the guy with the shotgun also taken a defensive position there's a good chance no one would have died. He didn't and his aggressive approach let to the confrontation, which let to Arbery's death. That you would place any blame on an unarmed man who was ambushed like this at all is stupefying.

 

[Dumbstar]

Imagine trying to defend this. I'm not biting, but feck me, give yer head a wobble, you know who you are.

Now just imagine if a white dude did the running away from that housing site. A bearded Muslim American citizen sees something wrong and decides to chase him down with his bearded son and his legally bought shotguns to enquire as to what he was doing. A struggle ensues and the bearded man kills the white dude.

How much waterboarding will those bearded citizens be enduring by now?

 

[Adam-Utd]

At 0:11 of the video you can see that jogger sees guy with gun ahead of him. Then he moves around the car and starts fist-swinging and trying to grab the shotgun. So in these 9 seconds he already made the choice of going in for attacking. Is it justifiable? Possibly. But it is definitely not that "the guy standing in the back with a loaded shotgun" when he openly approached the jogger
At 0:20 the camera just gets into the action again in with the jogger charging at shotgun guy and shortly after you hear the shot.
At 0:24 you see guy on top of the car taking his gun which he didn't have before.

These timestamps disprove your interpretation of the situation.

There is zero ways you can swing this to be harmless or an accident you Nazi feck

 

[Dumbstar]

There is zero ways you can swing this to be harmless or an accident you Nazi feck

Now, now. Follow the board rules. You can't call him a feck.

 

[Maagge]

@Atze-Peng it sounds a bit like you're arguing that it's legal to arm yourself and follow someone until a situation arises whereby the person followed acts in a way that might look like you can act in self-defence at which point you can shoot him without any repercussions.

 

[decorativeed]

There is zero ways you can swing this to be harmless or an accident you Nazi feck

Calm down, that's just triggered me into imagining the arms of a jogger passing my yard. Must go and grab my gun now just to be on the safe side...

 

[Carolina Red]

@Atze-Peng it sounds a bit like you're arguing that it's legal to arm yourself and follow someone until a situation arises whereby the person followed acts in a way that might look like you can act in self-defence at which point you can shoot him without any repercussions.

It's like he would actually believe that the black man found dead in a ditch shot 15 times is a suicide because Sheriff Beauregard Jackson Lee said so.

 

[Carolina Red]

It shouldn't need to be pointed out, but we're talking about a state that STILL models its state flag after a Confederate flag design and is famous for several instances of white men in pickup trucks chasing down black people and lynching them. Georgia is surpassed by only Mississippi in number of confirmed lynching deaths.

 

[KirkDuyt]

Now just imagine if a white dude did the running away from that housing site. A bearded Muslim American citizen sees something wrong and decides to chase him down with his bearded son and his legally bought shotguns to enquire as to what he was doing. A struggle ensues and the bearded man kills the white dude.

How much waterboarding will those bearded citizens be enduring by now?

They'd probably invade Iraq again.

 

[Organic Potatoes]

It shouldn't need to be pointed out, but we're talking about a state that STILL models its state flag after a Confederate flag design and is famous for several instances of white men in pickup trucks chasing down black people and lynching them. Georgia is surpassed by only Mississippi in number of confirmed lynching deaths.

This is basically a lynching, plain and simple. His crime was walking around the foundation of an unfinished house where no construction was taking place.

 

[Dr. Dwayne]

This is basically a lynching, plain and simple. His crime was walking around the foundation of an unfinished house where no construction was taking place.

Correction, his crime was having the same skin colour and t-shirt colour as a guy walking around the foundation of an unfinished house where no construction was taking place.

 

[Carolina Red]

This is basically a lynching, plain and simple. His crime was walking around the foundation of an unfinished house where no construction was taking place.

Oh, no doubt. It's basically a scene out of Mississippi Burning.