This is just sad right here shooting of unarmed black man

[tector]

I really hope to hell we don't have to endure the more mouth-breathing members of this forum embarrassing us again, but the portents are not good.

When the Zimmerman shit happened we had countless idiots here defending that slob--fortunately for them their posts were lost in the big crash. And since the subsequent 8 years have demonstrated, beyond all doubt, what an ultimate loser he is, we rarely hear such things any longer. But what was embarrassing for this forum way back then was this: when you heard the very first fact about Zimmerman's actions--he got out of his vehicle, in the dark, in the rain, to "track down" someone he deemed "a suspect" (for Christ knows what)--you HAD TO know he was a fucking clown cop wannabe. He created an unnecessary confrontation in which he had to use his weapon. That shit is on him, forever.

Fast forward to this case, and I will give you a counterfactual. Forget this construction site lame ass bullshit--let's say the dead guy had 15 minutes earlier broken into the house where these guys lived and robbed them at gunpoint before running away. OK, so what? THAT would not justify this shoot. Your fantasies about "citizen's arrests" do not enable "citizen's judge, jury and executioner." I mean how much more obvious does it have to be--stop jerking off to plainly unnecessary confrontations with firearms. It is a shitshow for those involved and for us generally.

Some other high profile shootings were different. Michael Brown got his ass popped trying to grab a cop's gun. Great, I was all for it. Should happen 100% of the time. But we piss away our credibility to defend shoots like that when we try to cook up fantasies to defend obviously unnecessary shoots like this one.

[Racer88]

I'll take that bet. Because they did not act within that law as written.

Georgia's citizen's arrest law requires that the offender must have committed a crime in the presence of another person, or that person must have "immediate knowledge" of a crime that has taken place by the perpetrator. ... "It's insanity to even attempt to try and call that citizen's arrest[

He committed no crime in the presence of anyone. Plus they had no immediate knowledge. They based their entire stop on he matched the description.

If anything the guy was guilty of misdemeanor trespassing. If that was him at all. He was again unarmed, these men made an unlawful stop and no rights to do anything.

Because they did not witness any crime or have immediate knowledge of anything. Because again in their on words. He just matched a description of a video. They were not present nor have again immediate knowledge.

Here's a big one. They were not LAW ENFORCEMENT and had zero right to stop anyone on a public rd to question them. Let alone to try to stop them with firearms pulled on him.

I'll take your bet. 100.00 it will not be acquitted. They will be found guilty of murder of some kind

If that's the video they based this entire murder upon. They murdered a person for being noisy again if that is him. Without any actual evidence that was him. This jogger was defending himself against two armed thugs attempting to stop someone on a public road.

I've walking into new construction in the pass looking for ideas on how to build my home or just to see what it looked like quality wise.

That video showed he committed no crime than being black and chased down by two thugs and murdered. Because he reassembled a black man in a video. Which btw it still have not been confirmed it was him. But either way even if it was. No crime was committed by him in video.

Even if they had a video showing him committing a crime. It was after the fact. They still had no right to arm themselves and stalk him then attempt to stop him by pulling guns on him.

Good luck with that in court for stalking and then chasing a man down in a pickup truck stopping him with pulled guns.

If I had a choice, me I'd added attempted kidnapping for restraining someone against their will. If I'd had a weapon on me. Dufuss with shotgun would be dead.

Absolutely nothing in what these two murders did pertaining to their claim of Citizens Arrest falls within that law. That Georgia's law as written above.

There are some attorneys that are nationally-known experts that would disagree with you.

I am NOT defending the two men who approached him or their actions. It IS possible to discuss this OBJECTIVELY from a LEGAL standpoint while disagreeing with the actions from a moral / ethical standpoint. I'm capable of that... just as I predicted Trump's primary win when I discussed his brilliant strategies, even though I did not vote for him in the primary. So many people reflexively called me a "Trumpster," just because I pointed out the effective tactics he brilliantly pursued, even though I did NOT vote for him in the primary.

I can separate the conversations / issues. I also realize that MOST people cannot separate their emotional response from a logically-based response to the facts. So, I'm sure despite my CLEAR message that I don't support the actions of these two guys, I'll be attacked as if I do.... for daring to point out some objective observations.

Same goes here. Would I have done what these two guys did? Not in a million years. Do I support them? Hell, no.

Do I think they'll be acquitted? Heck, it might not even go beyond the grand jury. Why? Because of what I've read, and from what a highly-respected expert (attorney) in the specialized field of self-defense law has illustrated, they're going to walk, if the law is applied as written. Using poor judgement is not illegal. Neither is being immoral. Being a "clown" or a "tool" is also not illegal. It does NOT mean I agree or am defending what they did.

I'm NOT saying that's a "good thing." I'm also not saying it's a "bad thing." It's just the way it is, and the way Georgia law is CURRENTLY written. My expert friend stipulates they acted within Georgia law.

No doubt, this will be "Zimmerman 2.0" as it relates to the social and cultural reactions. I honestly thought there would be riots after the Zimmerman acquittal. Thankfully, that did not materialize. I'm again concerned for the same reasons, this time.

So, to be clear and reiterate: This is NOT a defense of their actions. I DISAGREE. Got it? I don't even necessarily agree with the Georgia laws. But, objectively looking at the situation within the parameters of Georgia law, as explained by my friend - a nationally-known expert... I believe they will not be convicted. If we... rather the citizens of Georgia, really.... don't like it, then the laws can be changed.

We will see, I guess. I shall now don my asbestos suit, for daring not to join the righteously indignant torch and pitchfork brigade.

[tector]

I posted no opinion on the law here. The law is frequently an ass--Exhibit A, O.J. Simpson. There are innumerable others.The Zimmerman verdict was probably correct under the law. That changes nothing about what an incredible dumbfuck he was and is. Nor does it change the terrible damage he, and now these two assholes, do to the rest of us. If you don't offer lame justifications for these guys, I have no beef you. The law will do what it does regardless of what any of us say here.

[n0rlf]

I predict that just like Zimmerman, brown, the Baltimore guys, Freddy Gray, and even crazy Casey we will see armchair lawyers speculating and posting their opinions based on what is really very little fact and evidence but rather mostly rumor and media announcements.

Then the disagreements turn to cursing and name calling and feelings get bent. Can we please just skip all of that this time and just wait for all of the facts to come out.

Do we really need another media circus to get everyone riled up? Sadly I guess we do.

In the end some prosecutor will over charger these guys and they will get off. At least that seems to be how it usually winds up. Hard to convict on 1st degree when there is even a hint of something else.

Oh well it does distract from the real issues, oh wait, the current career corrupt politicians (Notice that is CCCP) would never try to manipulate they media to do that would they?

[Firemedic2000]

Hear hear I second that but just a note I do not think none of us here would stoop to personal attacks on each other. For just having an opinion. I think those days are in the past. Yes also there are crooked lawyer that can get around any crime. Just like O.J. and especially this Casey situation.

I'm still waiting for Casey's book. Did not O.J. write a book on how he got away with it.

[Taco]

There are far too many words here for me to catch up... haven't seen the video, haven't heard the story...

What I care about is this headline. Why is 'unarmed' in there? Is my carring a firearm a free license for me to be shot- or is it just black men who should be shot if they are armed?

Language matter. Words matter. If someone was murdered does it matter the method? Maybe, but mostly a side detail and not the headline. Does their skin color matter? Very unlikely, again a minor detail only relivent if the crime has something directly tied to race. Does their carry status matter? Very unlikely unless they were in the act of committing a crime.

[P5 Guy]

Is trespassing on a construction site a felony in GA like it is in FL?

[Firemedic2000]

There are far too many words here for me to catch up... haven't seen the video, haven't heard the story...

What I care about is this headline. Why is 'unarmed' in there? Is my carring a firearm a free license for me to be shot- or is it just black men who should be shot if they are armed?

Language matter. Words matter. If someone was murdered does it matter the method? Maybe, but mostly a side detail and not the headline. Does their skin color matter? Very unlikely, again a minor detail only relivent if the crime has something directly tied to race. Does their carry status matter? Very unlikely unless they were in the act of committing a crime.

need to read and findout what happened. I see what your doing and it will not work. You know good and well what is meant by unarmed. Like shot in back while trying to escape to thugs.

Again on color. How can you post on so anything that in your own words you've not read about or watched video. It's been in the NEWS all week. Taco have you been violating your stay at home orders

You attempting to cause trouble in a post you've not read, plus about an incident you state you need heard about. So quit twisting words. You know better than that. Maybe not after all your taco

[GunsandHoses]

Not everything is as it’s initially portrayed! Seems as though someone was committing a felony (but he was such a good boy) and when confronted by law abiding citizens, decided to fight! Wrong move!

I say they walk!

[tector]

You guys are fucking hopeless.