Comments by "cchris874" (@cchris874) on "Additional footage being reviewed in fatal shooting of Ahmaud Arbery" video.

He attacked a man with a gun after he was illegally chased down for 5 minutes, guns displayed. How would you feel if you were followed by yelling, gun-toting, strangers? Might you feel just a bit afraid? Might you wonder, "who are these lunatics"? Seriously, get real.
2
@PrimeNPC They did not say they positively identified him at the time of the shooting. Kindly provide link for that (if you have one.) The issue of whether, based on GMs encounter a few night previous, they had some reason for suspicion is mooted by the fact they were conducting an unwise and illegal pursuit of a citizen's arrest to begin with. That's how i see it.
2
Who is that following a man for 5 minutes, while displaying their shotguns, reversing when he reverses? Being blocked by a 2nd vehicle. That's just perfectly OK, right?
1
ice fishing Had they actually seen him go in there that morning you might have a case. But they did not. As Greg Travis said himself, they were following him "on a hunch." You don't subject people to a scary armed chase, waiving your guns, when you have no proof of any kind.
1
@laurasanchez7105 I hate to break it to you, that timeline is flat out wrong. The video of him that afternoon in the construction zone was neither seen by nor reported to the McMichaels before they began chasing him. Exclamation point! Therefore their chase was illegal. In their lawyer's own words, they sought a citizens arrest merely on a "hunch." That's a direct unequivocal quote. They saw him run by, said to themselves, "well he looks like he could be that man we saw in the past." You cannot start a potentially dangerous chase, with guns displayed, on a hunch. No no no. Absolutely not. The law was very specific here: the arrest was only permitted "in the arrestor’s presence or within his or her immediate knowledge." There was neither presence nor immediate knowledge. Now despite my high level of confidence, if I have somehow not got the facts correct, kindly correct me and I will put my tail between my legs and retract this claim. cheers
1
@laurasanchez7105 PS these arrests are only for serious felony offenses. Merely seeing a black man on a property, without any knowledge of who he is or if he has legitimate grounds for being there, and speculatively concluding he's a criminal, is not only a ridiculous ground for a citizen's arrest, it's pure racism.
1
@laurasanchez7105 You're right about Arbery. It was stupid to grab the gun. But I cut him slack because as his mother has stated, he suffered from mental illness. Yet another reason it's unwise to allow private citizens to go on armed chases. Travis did see him trespass before, but it's pretty doubtful citizen's arrest law at the time was justified. A citizens arrest was only allowed: " if the offense is committed in his presence or within his immediate knowledge. If the offense is a felony and the offender is escaping or attempting to escape, a private person may arrest him upon reasonable and probable grounds of suspicion." -no crime was committed in the father/son's presence on this particular day. -no crime was committed within their immediate knowledge. -doubtful a trespass without theft or vandalism would be a felony -even if the trespass was a felony, there's no attempted escape involved I believe the McMichels are victims of the mob mentality. They are being used as examples based on public outrage, and that has led to an almost hysterical overreaction. But they still acted unwisely and illegally, so to me some type of manslaughter-type charge is still appropriate. We cannot allow private citizens to chase people on the basis of a hunch. It's a recipe for more deaths and shootings. The goal of law enforcement is to de-escalate. Citizen's arrests are more likely to escalate things and put the public at greater risk. Had we left it to marked uniformed police, the death would have been far less likely.
1
No I haven't noticed this. Bottom line, the McMichaels pursued an illegal citizens arrest. Their self-defense claim must be seen in this broader context. They created reckless endangerment. So it's up for grabs how much if any weight should be given to their right of self-defense.
1
Yes, it seems both sides are ultra polarized as usual. I think it's just as ridiculous to say these 2 men acted wisely and judiciously.
1
Alternative reality you are in. The 2 McMichaels created their own reckless pursuit. The enhanced video shows that Travis lifted his gun and pointed it at AA several seconds before AA got to the truck. This is assault with a deadly weapon. Discuss.
1
@dragorn3212 I agree the racism card distorts everything. You are right, ultimately the criminals are the primary reason they and law enforcement and others get killed. But in the age of BLM, basic principles no longer matter. The same goes for the alt-right lest I be accused of racism. But that doesn’t give the McMichaels a free pass. Do I have some sympathy? Yes. I believe that despite most likely being typical racist pigs, in their own minds they probably felt they were in the right: just trying to be proactive citizens and keeping their neighborhood free of crime. But they used poor judgment. I have read the former Georgia citizen’s arrest statute several times. The McMichaels jumped the gun because they could not positively ID Arbery. In the words of GM’s lawyer, they chases him on a “hunch.” Hunches don’t cut it. If they did, then every time someone suspected somebody of something, we would have to put up with armed chases and roadblocks around the clock. Do you want to live in a society like that? The FBI enhanced version of the video shows that Travis had his gun aimed at Arbery before he even neared the back of their truck. That’s armed assault!! An armed road block and assault with a deadly weapon is reckless when you can’t positively ID your man. So while I have given the Ms the benefit of the doubt, the fact remains they created reckless endangerment. We can’t just erase their contribution to the killing on the grounds that the criminals are the primary sources of harm.
1
It's important to be informed, but this past history is ultimately irrelevant. Because either way, the McMichaels' broke the law: they were pursuing a citizen's arrest based on a "hunch," to use the defendants' word. That's out of bounds, period, exclamation point.
1