Comments by "annoyed aussie" (@annoyedaussie3942) on "New Footage Shows Georgia Police Trying to Tase Ahmaud Arbery | NowThis" video.

@coreyn8272 totally agree with you. When I was 13 but probably looked older I was running in a park in the early morning this is back in the 80s in Australia. An unmarked car stopped beside me and 2 big gentleman wearing shirt and ties got out. They stopped me and asked me what I was doing and my name. I guess I would have given them my school id. Then one of them went to call it in on the radio and yes just like the movies I saw a gun in his sock. For me that was a bit scary at the time. There is no possibility I would have started swearing at the police. Arbery wasn't scared he swore at the policeman first and was the aggressor and the policeman got annoyed and a bit scared and swore back initially but didn't swear after that and called for another policeman. I am a white male.
2
He didn't search for drugs which is what he was talking about , he checked for weapons. That seems pretty straight forward to me.
2
@InsidetheCasino thanks for explanation. I disagree with the last bit though. The police in the end didn't think he was hiding anything otherwise they would have taken further action in one way or another . Arbery seemed to not like police and was being aggressive. Another point is this has nothing to do with what happened in the McMichael s case.
1
He meant drugs.
1
@pingo.with.a.camera9897 it showed enough to demonstrate that the police and Arbery both did nothing wrong. What is of greater concern is either the laws regarding the use of body cam footage are insufficient or that this is stolen property. Normally and I would suggest it will be the case that such videos have very strict criteria about how they can be used for privacy issues etc. The motive of whoever released it might be to cause delays in the justice system or outright subvert the course of justice with the use of a stolen video which is the serious issue here. The guardian was unwise to release it in my opinion although they do have certain protections regarding not saying who gave it to them. The guardian is a left wing media organization so what was there motive in releasing it? We don't know the answers to many things and have to wait and see.
1