[Tyrantus]

Originally Posted by fapfapfap ↗

I don't know how you can say this; he charged and swung on a dude holding a shotgun.

You can make a case either way all day, but to say this is "clear" is kind of silly, IMO.

Whenever this kind of things happens, everyone seems to pick one side that they decide can be excused for all escalations, and any escalations by the other side are unwarranted and deserve death or imprisonment. And it's never that clear.

I can say that because his only option left was to charge and attack. What would you have done if it were you in his shoes? He obviously didn't want anything to do with those men. He tried fleeing, and ran from them until he was trapped.

They're not the victims here. They had all the power in this dynamic. They had the trucks, they brought the guns, they chose to stop in the road and make themselves vulnerable to melee attack in order to confront Arbery.

If you still think that's silly, then whatever man.

I will say this though, please dont put me in your "everyone picks one side" group because I dont fit in it. I've changed my opinion many times as new information is presented and am not afraid to backtrack if I had something wrong.

That's why I refrain from using absolutes as much as possible. I was calling for 1st degree murder on page 3.....30 pages later? Ive changed my opinion.

I dont expect you to know that about me though. It's just a pet peeve of mine when someone tries to put me in a box while disregarding the opinions I've already shared.

[fapfapfap]

Originally Posted by Tyrantus ↗

I dont expect you to know that about me though. It's just a pet peeve of mine when someone tries to put me in a box while disregarding the opinions I've already shared.

I totally get that, and can relate. My opinion has changed multiple times as well. I was speaking generally more than anything else but it wasn't fair to tack it on to my reply to you.

I don't see how someone can think his only choice was to attack the son. You can definitely argue that he may have had reason to think that, but I think it's a near-certainty that had he stopped running and not charged the man with the gun, he would almost certainly be alive today.

[Tyrantus]

Right, and that's where things get muddled, and I'm sure will be a focus of a trial/trials if it goes that far. I'm glad I'm not the lawyers that will have to work that one out... More info will probably come out by then, but yeah.

I dont disagree with you about had Abery just stopped to begin with, the odds of him getting shot was probably very low (I actually said that in my 1st degree murder post) because it seems like the intent was to just stop the dude for the cops but things got out of hand and bad decisions were made by all.

The one thing about those videos where Arbery is getting arrested (which I initially thought was irrelevant to the shooting) shows he seems to show a pattern of escalating situations with authority figures for no good reason...so that may have played a role here. It doesn't excuse the actions, but might help explain how things got so bad.

[fapfapfap]

I almost mentioned that but didn't feel like going on a long tangent.

In the video of his interaction with police, you can see he is filled with desperation and indignance. He was aggressive with the police with a small amount of provocation.

Now imagine instead of the cops harassing you when you're not doing anything, it's two rednecks chasing you down a road, yelling at you and waving a shotgun. AND rather than just hanging out at the park, you know you were, at the very least, trespassing on local property.

Nearly every one of these situations includes multiple escalations from both parties. And nearly all of those escalations are emotional reactions that are predicated on a complete and total distrust of the other person based on their skin color.

We're never going to have any chance to unravel that distrust when these incidents are viewed through a polarized lens, and the mainstream narratives are based on knee-jerk reactions. It's only creating another generation of people who will behave worse next time, and that's what kills me.

[Tyrantus]

Originally Posted by fapfapfap ↗

We're never going to have any chance to unravel that distrust when these incidents are viewed through a polarized lens, and the mainstream narratives are based on knee-jerk reactions. It's only creating another generation of people who will behave worse next time, and that's what kills me.

That reminds me of the epic speach Charlie Chaplin's character makes at the end "The Great Dictator". I'm going to be lazy and shamelessly plagiarize the summary.

In his first speaking role, Charlie Chaplin makes one of the most moving and thought-provoking speeches in cinematic history. The Great Dictator, a movie written, produced, directed by and starring Charlie Chaplin, premiered on October 15, 1940, while the United States was still promoting appeasement with Nazi Germany.

This speech is still prevalent in today’s culture due to its pathos-evoking delivery and powerful message. Snippets of it can be heard in many places if you listen closely.

Paolo Nutini’s song Iron Sky contains parts of the speech in the bridge, making the song very powerful.

The first time he ever spoke on film, and he says this:

Quick note - (The song is from the 2010 mindfuck of a movie Inception, which, to be clear, wasn't available during The Great Dictator's inception.)

[SDG]

Were the McMichaels wrong in trying to stop Arbery and ask him what he was doing? I don't think so. Yes they were armed but that doesn't mean they had intent to kill, it means they were looking out for their own safety as Arbery, who had a criminal past, could have been armed, they didn't know otherwise because he was just inside a house snooping around. Arbery attacked them, they didn't attack Arbery, and because of that, I see it as justified. If it had been the cops and Arbery attacked them, as he has resisted officers in the past, the cops would have been justified in shooting Arbery. No different for the McMichaels.

[KittYPaws]

This is so sad.

[shadowplay]

Originally Posted by pokerplay ↗

There is a 911 call - recorded. There are statements from several witnesses. There is a criminal record of the perp bringing guns to a high school event. There is video of him breaking into the house four times before. You have to be willfully blind or intellectually dishonest to claim you can't find the evidence on this story. Enough of it adds up to at least a right to ask the jogger running away from the crime if he had anything to do with it. CCP is legal. He grabbed the gun - on camera - and was shot. Simple. Those are not jogging pants, he was not a jogger, he was a criminal commtting crimes and caught in the act. Shouldn't have been killed but only killed because he acted violently - something he was convicted of doing before. Where are you getting your information- from his high school year book photo?

Where did you get this information from? I'm not debating or disputing it, just curious where it came from. I've tried "digging up dirt" so to speak & couldn't come up with anything.

[Ms Moody]

Fucking awful!!

[Killgaad]

I might now have to concede to the notion that, as imprudent and obviously as deadly of a spur-of-the-moment decision as it was, Ahmaud Arbery might have been emotionally justified in feeling trapped and freaking out like that, as to attack—if indeed he did run for a while in the opposite direction before, in order to try to avoid and get away from the men with trucks—which he had the right to do, since they were not police. Were there, most certainly, subliminal racial tensions, seething and ultimately percolating on both sides? Most certainly, and that is very sad. But murder was not the issue I think—on either side. Just rage, and self-defense—respectively.