Jogging in Georgia while black.

[Jack by the hedge]

What do you mean by good faith? Do you think racist are lying about their positions?

I meant that there is a difference between one's sincerity in holding a belief in some cause and the truthfulness of what one might choose to say in order to advance that cause. That seems simple, if a bit wordy. Do you disagree?

 

[BobTheCoward]

I meant that there is a difference between one's sincerity in holding a belief in some cause and the truthfulness of what one might choose to say in order to advance that cause. That seems simple, if a bit wordy. Do you disagree?

But unless someone is making a claim about themselves, I'm not sure what you mean by truthfulness in a discussion.

 

[Meadmaker]

Worth noting: a tool, possibly a hammer, is visible on the road behind him on the video. Strongly indicating he had stolen from the house under construction and dropped it as he was escaping.

Does anyone happen to know if Skeptic Tank is correct on this point? I certainly didn't see a tool, possibly a hammer, and I'm not inclined to try frame by frame analysis to try and figure it out. Is he right? Or is it about as clear as the smoke rising from the rear of the grassy knoll?

 

[whoanellie]

Does anyone happen to know if Skeptic Tank is correct on this point? I certainly didn't see a tool, possibly a hammer, and I'm not inclined to try frame by frame analysis to try and figure it out. Is he right? Or is it about as clear as the smoke rising from the rear of the grassy knoll?

There is something in the road. It doesn't look like a tool or hammer to me.

 

[BobTheCoward]

Does anyone happen to know if Skeptic Tank is correct on this point? I certainly didn't see a tool, possibly a hammer, and I'm not inclined to try frame by frame analysis to try and figure it out. Is he right? Or is it about as clear as the smoke rising from the rear of the grassy knoll?

There is a thing in the road. But a crap ton of speculation
It looks like a tool....but in the same way a cloud can look like a tool.

 

[Craig4]

Worth noting: a tool, possibly a hammer, is visible on the road behind him on the video. Strongly indicating he had stolen from the house under construction and dropped it as he was escaping.

At what point did he have the hammer in his hand? Did any witnesses see him pick up the hammer? Did any see him drop it? Did he have the hammer when the two idiot cracker boys attempt to detain him? Is a hammer an odd thing to see in the vicinity of a worksite?

 

[uke2se]

Seriously, let the racist ramble on without responding. We don't need to respond every time someone is wrong on the internet, especially when it's someone pushing a message that we would amplify if we respond.

 

[Garb]

"A hammer is visible in the vicinity, so he must have stolen it!"

What kind of backwards logic is that?

 

[TurkeysGhost]

Given that these killers are trying to argue that they were lawfully pursuing a burglar, you can almost guarantee that any stolen tools would be mentioned in any of the police reports.

Unless the suggestion is that the stolen hammer is new evidence that was missed by those involved, Occam's razor is at play here.

 

[Craig4]

What facts/evidence have convinced you that their story isn't true?

Their claim is that they loaded up to go confront this guy and try to buy time in doing so for the police to arrive and question him / arrest him - and that he then reacted in an unexpectedly rapid and violent way which necessitated a self-defense shooting.

What's disproving that in your mind? The video supports it. The lack of pre-hysteria charges supports it.

Their claim proves that the two Crackers acted outside of the law. They did not interrupt someone in the commission of a felony. Both of the morons said he looked like someone responsible for break-ins in the area. That does not meet the Georgia standard for a citizen's arrest. Their story is that the retrieved weapons to go unlawfully detain someone.

 

[JoeMorgue]

Seriously, let the racist ramble on without responding. We don't need to respond every time someone is wrong on the internet, especially when it's someone pushing a message that we would amplify if we respond.

No.

 

[JoeMorgue]

"A hammer is visible in the vicinity, so he must have stolen it!"

What kind of backwards logic is that?

The same logic where two armed citizens running down a black guy in a pickup truck because he "looked like" (via nothing more then the fact that he was black) someone who committed a string of robberies that apparently never actually happened and then gunning him down is a justified encounter but arrests made after protests are not.

 

[Craig4]

What do you suppose these two call their moms? I mean if your mom is also your older sister is there a special term of address? Maybe it's a family thing they just sort of work out.

 

[Roboramma]

I don't think I'm wrong. There is a difference.

Sorry, I didn't mean that you weren't willing to admit to being wrong even though you knew it. You may or may not sincerely believe what you express. I simply meant that you are demonstrably wrong, and have been demonstrated to be wrong. That's a resolution, at least for everyone other than you.

 

[pgwenthold]

Their best case for self-defense is going to take a very broad reading of the citizen's arrest statute.

These laws exist so shopkeepers don't get in trouble for grabbing shoplifters and other such situations. I suspect it will take a dim view of rounding up the boys to go play vigilante based on some suspicious dude trespassing at a construction site.

One of my first posts in this thread was to talk about my understanding of a citizen's arrest as taught in my high school civics. If you look at the details you discover that I was right.

The point of a citizen's arrest is to stop a felony in progress (to "arrest" the behavior). It means you can tackle a guy robbing your house and hold him until the cops get there. When you understand it that way, it makes sense.

It does not mean you can patrol the streets and harrass street gangs, or you can handcuff a guy you suspect of robbing a house yesterday, read him his rights, and haul him downtown.

 

[JoeMorgue]

What do you suppose these two call their moms? I mean if your mom is also your older sister is there a special term of address? Maybe it's a family thing they just sort of work out.

Don't do that. Making stereotypical "hardy hard southerners sleeping with their sister" routine doesn't help.

 

[Squeegee Beckenheim]

"A hammer is visible in the vicinity, so he must have stolen it!"

What kind of backwards logic is that?

The kind that defends lynchings.

If you need more information: Skeptic Tank has, in the past, openly admitted to being racist. His take on this situation, as is any other situation involving black people, is filtered through that lens.

 

[pgwenthold]

I was thinking about this issue where William Parcher claimed that they chased him with guns, so it was a robbery, and I countered that they chased him with guns, so it was a lynching, how do you tell them apart?

The more I think about it, the more I see it as an actual lynching. The only thing missing is that the guys that did it didn't claim that he raped a white woman.

Imagine the examine same situation going down with the only difference being that they claimed he had raped a white woman.

 

[Ranb]

No matter what you think of the video or the event as you currently understand them, every decent person has to find the idea of murder charges being filed because of celebrity attention and public outcry chilling.

I would have thought that finding yourself being chased down the road by men with guns was the chilling part.

 

[BobTheCoward]

Sorry, I didn't mean that you weren't willing to admit to being wrong even though you knew it. You may or may not sincerely believe what you express. I simply meant that you are demonstrably wrong, and have been demonstrated to be wrong. That's a resolution, at least for everyone other than you.

Thank you.