Comments by "Titanium Rain" (@ChucksSEADnDEAD) on "Ahmaud Arbery Bombshell Case Update" video.

@doxholiday1372 a shot was fired before the physical altercation started
4
@Ryan-xw2gm The liveleak video.
4
@a.wyattmann4370 If they wanted to kill a thief they should have done it the old fashioned way - during the commission of a crime. Boomerwaffen riding around town guns drawn looking for suspects is not exactly my idea of freedom.
3
@Goulash45 getting guns stolen from a vehicle is a sign of sheer incompetence
2
@Goulash45 Well, they're not well trained. Sorry. And I don't mind, considering it's them who enforce gun control.
2
@michaelfranciotti3900 Ah, the "so what you're saying is" argument. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k-rE03PGQfA You're not here to be a dick, but you refuse to address the actual argument at hand and then try to use underhanded tactics. Hmmmmm. I don't recommend charging. I recommend being fast on the draw and the trigger finger to get as many hollow points through the vitals.
2
If you commit a felony and kill a person over it, you get charged with murder in a lot of jurisdictions.
2
Josh Lee They're not good Samaritans, they're a couple of dummies. The law isn't about what other people did that caused the events to unfold a certain way.
2
@a.wyattmann4370 They didn't catch him in the act. Look, I'm not even going to pretend to be nice. If you think these people are protecting their communities and you want to live next to them, I can only hope you find out for yourself why that isn't a good thing. There's a fine line between protecting the community and out of control vigilantism. If this becomes a common occurrence innocent people will be killed.
2
@evilestmonkeey Correct. But also don't go around stopping random people at gunpoint or else they might defend themselves too.
2
@evilestmonkeey Doesn't matter. There's two yokels with guns on the prowl for an excuse to be the hero. You think you're safe? Oh, we're going to have a talk? You're going to force me to have that talk at gunpoint? That's a crime, bub. Don't come with the intention to have a "talk" while giving me a legal excuse to go further than that. Yeah he was shot while dodging gunfire and attempting to disarm an aggressor. He did try to get out the line of fire - you can see him using the car as cover while a shot rings out. He only started attacking the driver after circling around the car. He'd already been shot at. You can clearly listen the gunshot in the video. Yeah, I'm start enough to not charge a man holding a shotgun. I'm going to do something that will neutralize the man holding the shotgun.
2
@Goulash45 Law enforcement is literally Joe Schmoes. It's just a job, they're not super humans. If anything, having police experience can "taint" a person because they may try to use powers of arrest they do not have as private citizens.
1
@damnryn_ I'm against gun storage laws, and laws do not do anything about danger. But anyone who lets their gun get stolen from their vehicle essentially forfeited it. Call it a fine on their stupidity. Yes, it is gun control. There was a case in Canada where a man who fired warning shots at people firebombing his house spent 2 years in court battles because a prosecutor argued that because he was quick enough to defend himself, he was breaking safe storage laws. In some countries the safe storage laws are enforced by giving up your right to not be searched without a warrant - in the US it would mean giving up the 4th Amendment so that cops could check the safe. Yes, people should be made responsible for what they allow to happen with their guns.
1
In the video a shot rings out before the physical altercation.
1
@hiyorisarugaki1830 But before the man got out of his car, there's already someone pointing a gun at armed robbery. You can see him take cover by using the car itself, a shot is heard, then the driver exits the car as armed robbery circles around, and THEN the fighting starts.
1
I'm an innocent person. I will attack a person threatning me with a shotgun, just not with fists.
1
@FoulMouthActual But I am innocent. Anyone pulling guns on me is automatically a criminal. There's no liar here but you. What a childish response.
1
@chistudentnels People entering others' houses get ventilated. People brandishing guns get ventilated.
1
Guys in trucks with guns performing citizens' arrests willy-nilly is an afront to society. You can have good intentions and still break the law. If this situation happened to you, and you shot the guys in the truck, you'd be off the hook in the grounds of self-defense.
1
@magiceightballspot You don't even know what a strawman is. It doesn't matter what you do or don't do. There's two people playing wannabe cop and on the lookout for suspects. You happen to match the description that day. You don't go around burglarizing, too bad there's two armed guys on pursuit because they don't know what you did or didn't do. Society won't favor the vigilante when they start killing innocent people when they make a mistake. There's a reason who vigilantism is looked down upon. There's a difference between a vigilante that goes after the guilty when law won't and delivers justice through technically unlawful means, and a vigilante who's looking for excuses to shoot people independently of their guilt or innocence. But still, the first kind vigilante still goes to prison despite popular support. Folk heroes are often criminals in the eyes of the law. I feel safer amongst thieves. I can handle thieves. Vigilantes are a powder keg.
1
@conservativeguitarsingerjs7937 they became criminals by attempting an illegal citizen's arrest, thus allowing the use of self-defense.
1
@conservativeguitarsingerjs7937 They were not at anyone's house. Some yokels decided to go around stopping people at gunpoint. Yes, if an aggressor is attacked in self-defense and is being disarmed, he has no moral justification to use the weapon. Legally speaking the aggressor should allow himself to be disarmed. However they probably won't, and if they kill the victim they're charged with murder.
1
@conservativeguitarsingerjs7937 Nobody said anything about Floyd, why are your bringing up irrelevant situations to the argument?
1
@conservativeguitarsingerjs7937 No, I already had that belief.
1
@conservativeguitarsingerjs7937 It is totally irrelevant. In what way does that trial influence this situation? How am I left wing?
1
@conservativeguitarsingerjs7937 No, it's not obviously wrong. They became the attackers, they became the criminals. They gave up their claim to self-defense. The bad person is the person criminally using coercion to perform illegal arrests.
1
How was he to know the police was coming? You can call your friends and act like it's the police on the other end.
1
@williamnicholson8133 Not if they pointed weapons first.
1
@michaelfranciotti3900 There's nothing to assume. Including if they're telling the truth. People waving guns in my face will automatically be considered threats and liars. I'm not assuming they're calling friends, I assume they intend to do harm as their weapons and attitude display. Therefore I cannot assume that waiting will save my life. "Seeing as Aubrey wasn't armed, it sounds like you were defending his choice to physically resist with his bare hands." - Again with the so what you're saying is tactics. You argue like that annoying woman.
1
@conservativeguitarsingerjs7937 You just said in your comment that they'd be charged with a felony for the approach but not murder... the problem is that such a felony will make the murder charge a slam dunk.
1
@conservativeguitarsingerjs7937 "you guys always defend actual rapist in the act" - Strawman argument. You're out. "Even if technically they had to be a felony and the guy wasn’t technically committing a felony" - So we're right. Give it up. "he was obviously an evil piece of shit and they were obviously the good guys" - Doesn't matter. You don't get to kill people because they're bad, and good people committing crimes still need to face the consequences like all of us.
1
@conservativeguitarsingerjs7937 "so you think it should be a felony to arrest people who are absolutely committing crimes" - It is a crime to perform an illegal arrest. "that thief who has a history of violence" - It doesn't matter who it is. Justice should be blind, remember? You don't get to partake in false imprisonment simply because you have a hunch some guy is a POS. "You know you are supporting the bad guys because of their skin color alone" - False. My white ass will open fire on a bunch of armed assailants trying to kidnap me. No matter their skin color. "Even if you could legally make the case" - And we can. "why do you think in any sense morally these guys were the bad ones" - They are because they should know better, they have no powers of arrest and trying to perform an illegal arrest is a criminal act. "definitely attack them" - In self-defense.
1
@conservativeguitarsingerjs7937 "You do get to kill people when they attack you" - Not if you're committing a crime! A home invader can't claim self-defense if attacked by the residents. "why do you defend Jacob Blake?" - Who's Jacob Blake? "Doesn’t sound much like a strawman anymore does it?" - It does because that's exactly what a strawman is - pretending people said things they never said. "you claiming that I said you can kill people for being bad people" - But I didn't. You were using "bad" and "good" as ways to let people off criminal charges. "They killed him for charging him while they had firearms" - And they were the aggressors. "They killed him in self defense" - Not when they're committing a crime. "Even if they weren’t legally allowed to make the arrest" - Which makes them criminals. "do you think the criminal Animal knew that he only commit a misdemeanor and it wasn’t a felony so they couldn’t make a citizens arrest?" - Completely irrelevant to the facts at hand. There was a crime committed and the criminals killed someone as a result. "They killed him for attacking them. What were they supposed to do at that point?" - So if a criminal breaks into your house, and you defend yourself against him, would you ask what's the criminal supposed to do? "So people are just allowed to commit crimes and if the police don’t get there to stop them and the person goes away they can just get off Scott free?" - Huh. I hate to break it to you but that's how it works. If you weren't even there to witness the crime you can't perform citizen's arrests on random people in the street. You do understand that a criminal getting away is better than innocent people getting killed because of mistakes, right? "this is obviously just a black and white skin color issue with you" - It isn't. "But I just wanted to point out you actually made the strawman argument." - I didn't. I replied to what you said. That's why I use quotes.
1
@conservativeguitarsingerjs7937 Do you know how society works? We say it's better for a hundred criminals to go free than one innocent person being punished. We as a society agree that it's better to catch someone later than trying to rush justice. You can attack a police officer if they are acting illegally. There's been cases of people who fired on cops performing no-knock raids. "If they are attacking you you should absolutely kill them" - Not if you're committing a crime. You won't have justification. "This is common sense dude you fucking common sense and just have a base level of morality." - The morality is that false imprisonment and kidnapping are serious charges. Attempting to do an illegal citizen's arrest you f you up for life. "There are already other videos of him doing the same stuff." - Irrelevant. The shooting is defined by the facts at hand, not who is the worst person in the mix. "Quit supporting the evil guy." - The evil guys are the people who jump into trucks and start patrolling the streets and doing checkpoints. That's not freedom, that's tyranny.
1
@oliverwells8011 So bad people never lied? Police is on its way! Just sit here with us for a minute. Yeah, right.
1
@oliverwells8011 It doesn't matter. It's not about one believes. It was an illegal citizen's arrest and by committing that crime you've forfeited your self-defense rights if someone responds accordingly. Saying that the police has been called doesn't matter. First of all, it doesn't have to be truthful. Second, it doesn't legitimize a false imprisonment done at gunpoint. Your idea is that we should just submit to random hicks driving around town looking for suspects when they don't have the right to do that. That's wrong. And I hope the next hicks who try to pull this BS come across an innocent person who happens to have a CCW and the skills to dome those idiots. It's sad that it has come to this, but people have to start getting clapped on the streets to learn to behave. This goes for all kinds of criminals, the career criminals and the people who think that they have a right to rule society for having a truck and a gun. "Common sense" doesn't exist now that the law is involved. It's "common sense" that he was the right guy. But that's not what the law is about. You can break the law and tell the judge how it was "common sense" you had to do it, see how far that will take you.
1
Josh Lee How does that matter? Yes, they were on the lookout for suspects and as luck would have it, they happened to get the right guy. They attempted an illegal citizen's arrest.
1
But the McMichaels were committing a crime themselves. Should have someone else shot them in turn?
1
Okay. Let's see you surrender peacefully to the two bubbas. You trust you're not gonna end up gagged and hogtied in the trunk?
1
@terrymcgee3504 And Epstein didn't have the stereotypical glasses and pedostache. So what, sometimes bad people don't look like movie characters. All I'm saying is, it's gonna be satisfying when one day an innocent guy gets stopped and he John Wicks the hicks. No charges, because it's clear cut self-defense. People got to learn the hard way not to do stupid things.
1