Buildings under construction are cool. It’s a chance to see the skeleton of a house, something that no one will ever see again once it is a finished home, and something that lots of people haven’t see often or even at all. When I was a kid I walked around dozens and dozens of houses, townhouses, strip malls, etc. that were in varying stages of construction. Before I even knew the motto I was leaving no trace and taking nothing but memories; it’s just that I had to make them first, eh.
That was my immediate thought when I learned about this case…maybe Arbury just wanted to see what a house under construction looked like up close. I remember when the first block of apartment buildings was being constructed in my hometown; kids (me included) loved going over there, because an apartment building was an oddity in a town full of 19th century mini-mansions and ranch houses. We didn’t mess with anything – not that I remember much being left out for us to mess with – but we loved exploring and imagining what it would be like to have neighbors in the same building instead of across the road. Heck, when my parents found out what we were doing, they went to check the place out too.
As a Georgian, I’m proud and happy that my state has such public-minded men as the McMichaels, who are brave enough to gun up, hop in the pickup, and fearlessly confront an unarmed man in running shorts and a tee-shirt. I sleep better, knowing that these amateur Batmen stand willing to defend us against a horde of trespassers. As they say, it takes a good guy with a gun to stop a bad guy with a pair of Nikes and a sweatband.
This is just a guess, but my suspicion is that he was looking for a Porta-Potty. Most runners have encountered a sudden attack of “runner’s trots”, and most of us know that a construction site will always have a Porta-Potty on hand. Hell, I keep a mental map of Porta-Potties, public restrooms, and water fountains on my regular routes (not to mention discreet bushes), and I’ve trespassed on construction sites before when Nature called urgently. Guess I should start worrying about being chased down by armed rednecks who are bravely defending their community against the plague of trespassers. Oh, wait, no - I’m white.
Oh, this is a good one.
One of the attorneys for the lynch mob is complaining about all the black pastors in the gallery, saying they are intimidating the jury.
He made a rather odd remark to the effect of it being like them “ putting a bunch of guys in whiteface dressed like Colonel Saunders in the audience”.
To which I reply —- Please do this. Please Please Please.
What the actual fuck.
The attractive nuisance doctrine comes to mind here.
They came for him because he was black.
Who will be left to speak for us when the pick-up truck with armed yahoos in the bed comes to our towns… looking to ride us down… and then gun us down?
I hope the subhumans who did this lynching never sniff freedom again for the rest of their tortured lives.
And fuck you to whoever is enough of an asshole to try to defend them. You are the reason why racism is still a problem.
A couple of weeks ago, my wife introduced to me a wonderful Korean insult: 잉여 인간 (ing-yeo in-gan). The translation is “surplus human”. That’s what those idjits and their “defenders/supporters” are.
Thing is, it doesn’t matter why he was there. The killers were just as wrong regardless of what Arbery was there for.
Its hard to put into words just how stupid this is. In what world would you just surrender to people who are not police officers while running down the road? If they weren’t armed, I may stop long enough to say “who the fuck are you to tell me to do anything?” If they are armed, I have no doubt a fight or flight response would kick in. In no circumstance would the idea of patiently waiting for random hillbillies to tell me their opinion of my actions ever enter my mind. Of course, I will never experience this, because I am not black and vilgilanty rednecks would never presume to stop me.
If he had surrendered and been killed, there would have been weird slurs about how he didn’t have the dignity or courage to defend himself and if he hadn’t been so craven, he’d have been fine.
Allow me to quote “Hamlet”:
I eagerly await Darren to explain to the almost 700 people at the capital riot that criminal trespass and resisting should result in the death penalty.
In this particular instance it is, of course, impossible to prove something like that because the entire incident is in the past. However, as Hamlet pointed out in his example, there are many, many instances in the past that clearly show a dramatic difference in how white and Black people are treated in situations that are very similar or even identical to one another.
The BLM protestors, even thought they made no effort to break into the Capital Building or any other government building for that matter, were met with a solid line of police in full riot gear. The traitors who tried to overthrow our newly elected government were almost escorted into the Capital Building.
When we were kids, we routinely would mess around on residential building sites. We wouldn’t break any locks or anything, of course. But for a large portion of the construction period, houses under construction are essentially open, with no walls or doors, and there were never any barriers to entry–no ropes, no tape, nothing. Should we have been subject to being summarily executed?
Possibly if he had stopped running or even slowed down, they would have run him over and folded him like a suit shirt at the dry cleaners.
PS- Never say never… especially if America emboldens their horrific murderous behavior by just slapping them on their wrists.
Darren, you have the reputation of being a bit of an asshole who absolutely refuses to ever admit you were wrong. The three statements above are all factually incorrect. Do you wish to start to change the way you are perceived around here, or will you dig in deeper?
Actually, the second and third statements were factually correct.
Police showed defendants video of Ahmaud Arbery before shooting, Georgia jury hears (msn.com)
Nope. I’m going by what you directly said:
1.) On October 25th black man captured on video on the property. 2.) On November 18th black man captured on video on the property. 3.) On December 17th black man captured on video on the property. 4.) On Feburary 11th black man captured on video on the property and eyewitnessed by Travis McMichael, who called 911. McMichael was clearly shaken in the audio of the 911 call. 5.) On Feburary 23rd, Ahmaud Arbery is captured on video on the property by two video cameras, one…
Bolding mine. You said that all the other times they only saw a black man. So, no, they weren’t clearly looking for Arbery. They were looking for the black man who had stolen stuff from the property before.
When you have to change your story, you really should give up.
Bullshit. The Black man in earlier videos has not been positively identified as Arbery, they admitted that when they jumped in their trucks with their guns, they thought it was the same man but had not positively identified him, and the neighborhood watch did not task anyone with finding and stopping anyone.
They weren’t sure it was him but they thought it might be him and in fact it was. I think that supports DG’s second statement. The third statement was that they were looking for him specifically is correct, because it turns out that he was the guy who had been seen in several previous videos which were shown to them - they were looking for the guy who had been seen in the previous videos, i.e. him. According to Reuters, per the link I provided.
You accused DG of being “a bit of an asshole who absolutely refuses to ever admit you were wrong”. You should think a bit more about who that applies to.