Separate names with a comma.
Welcome to Oklahoma Shooters Association! Join today, registration is easy!
Discussion in 'Self Defense and Handgun Carry' started by gerhard1, May 10, 2020.
Peaceful Jogger assaulting a citizen legally carrying a shotgun.
I see that point. There is an argument to be made there but the McMichaels don’t appear to be making it. They should man up and stand on that hill if that’s their position.
Their defense seems to be that their actions were lawful. My opinion is that they were not. They were reckless and, given the frequency of mistaken identity on the part of both citizens and cops, could end in tragedy for a truly innocent victim if allowed to run rampant in a “community”.
This is an argument?
This is ridiculous. Who was trying to detain who, and at the point of a gun?
Yeah... post of the year right here.
Or they may have killed someone who would have turned his life around and helped many others do the same. You can go both ways with that line and of thinking and is exactly why vigilantism is outlawed. I find it completely ironic how you compare their actions as to having a peaceful neighborhood vs a frontier when vigilantism was most prominent in frontier life.
Assume, just for the sake of argument that this is true.
The point that some of us are trying to make here is that unless the McMichaels either saw or had direct knowledge of Arbery committing a felony, they had no legal basis to detain him. Doing so at gunpoint was not only illegal, it was stupid. And when Arbery acted to defend himself, he was killed. That is possibly murder or more likely manslaughter.
The bottom line is that the McMichaels' actions were illegal, and were the cause of Arbery losing his life.
That's kind of the point.
When the bad guys are bold and numerous, and the law is not effective for whatever reason - vigilantism may be the cure. Obviously a cure with bad side effects, but better than the status quo.
I have a feeling these kinds of events will happen more often in coming years, for better or worse.
I'm picking up what you're putting down. I just don't think we are there yet.
It's a lot more complicated than that, and is one of the more difficult areas of law to master (as is all of evidence, generally.) There are requirements as to type of crime (felony/misdemanor), conviction status, relevance to the testimony, well, I could go on for pages and still not cover it all.
Wow. I guess the militarization of a local police force isn't good enough? I guess a PD that hasn't been accredited IN YEARS isn't good enough? Yep, lets ASSUME someone is doing bad, chase them down and execute them. Excellent idea.
As to the police encounter with the failed Taser deployment:
He was actually pretty tame in the beginning. I can tell a lot of folks have never worked law enforcement in an area with lots of persons like Ahmaud Arbery. I could predict the officer's approach and demeanor was going to spark that attitude as soon as the officer did it. And guess what? It did. I bet the officer knew what he was sparking, too. It was intentional.
Note that Arbery still backed off and complied whenever commands were given well before force was needed in every instance, even when the officer searched him for weapons and even when the dimwit officer tried to taser him.
This video makes Glynn County look very bad.
It makes Arbery look like expected and no more. The officers in the video either do not know how to deal with somebody like Arbery or they know exactly how to deal with somebody like Arbery and were itching to spark violence.
And, yes, Virginia, there are officers like that. I have known several of them personally.
This thread has given me one helluva headache, so with these last words, I will see myself to the door.