Jogging in Georgia while black.

[Meadmaker]

Do you have a cite for "brandishing" a weapon, or aiming it at another person, being illegal in Georgia? I can't find one.

No. I confess that my knowledge on this subject is a hodge podge of data gathered from all sorts of different sources and mixed from different states.


I am going with a certain "common sense" mixture based on the idea that it's illegal to use a shotgun to threaten someone, which I'm fairly confident is true in all 50 states, but the actual specifics of the law, regarding exactly what actions might be considered to legally constitute a threat, and what may or may not be allowed depending on circumstances, may differ from one place to another, and I haven't looked up the specifics for Georgia.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

Do you have a cite for "brandishing" a weapon, or aiming it at another person, being illegal in Georgia? I can't find one.

In fact, there was recent proposed legislation to remove brandishing from Georgia law, but that was only a change to what constituted aggravated assault (as far as I can figure the bill, which didn't pass) would have made a gun not a deadly weapon unless it was pointed at someone. I guess pistol whipping or throwing a gun at someone.)

Of course, there may be other laws or case law that make pointing a gun at someone illegal in some certain circumstances. But I don't see anything in the law directly says so.

There is no specific "brandishing" charge, but there is a law against pointing a firearm.

Brandishing a firearm is covered under GA code for aggravated assault, though not by the term "brandishing". The simple assault covers the threatening injury aspect, and the aggravated comes from involving a deadly weapon. The GBI charged them with aggravated assault in addition to murder, probably stemming from the brandishing we are discussing here.


Here's an article listing the various codes with citations: https://bixonlaw.com/thin-line-brandishing-firearm-leads-aggravated-assault-charge/https://bixonlaw.com/thin-line-brandishing-firearm-leads-aggravated-assault-charge/

 

[Skeptic Tank]

...snip...

That narrative is shaken now. Assuming that the person on the surveillance videos is in fact Arbery, lots of elements of that narrative become different.

I still don't want people picking up shotguns and chasing down people who are suspected of theft. Bad things happen. People end up dead. All sorts of things can go wrong.

I respect your honesty and willingness to admit the significance of this new information.

I will concede that it looks an awful lot like Travis points the shotgun at him at the point you reference, and that this "shakes my narrative" to a degree also, but as you're well aware, I have my own guiding lights as to who would be righteous in this situation which make that a fairly easy thing to ignore.

Him pointing the gun at Ahmaud, if he did, and it looks like he did - is of little significance to me and how I feel about this. It's significance is in the disadvantageous nature it will have in court.

I see it as a profound evil for men looking out for their community to end up in prison for years or decades on account of a miserable criminal who'd been preying upon their neighborhood for months. Benjamin Crump, Talcum X, and their ilk have once again managed to spin a tale of racial victimization and got enough of a head of steam going in the public mind about this, that these men are probably toast.

The son, the man who fired, is 34. They mentioned he was with his 2 year old daughter when arrested, and he cried. This man had his best years and best fathering years ahead of him. Now, he's likely to spend those years in prison, or if he makes it out of this unconvicted, he will still be hiding / in fear / a pariah.

And all that, over some worthless thug. All that because he took an active role in trying to protect his neighborhood, and ended up having to shoot said thug after being punched and attacked by him. He likely would have been killed with his own shotgun had he not reacted as he did, given that it seems Ahmaud had decided he was prepared to do whatever he had to to avoid being there when the cops showed up.

This society is completely broken.

 

[JoeMorgue]

Jesus Christ people if you roll up and confront on someone running down the road and you're carrying a shotgun, you're brandishing it.

What is it with racists apologist pretending that just carrying a weapon isn't meant to be intimidating?

"Oh no you see he only raised the weapon 45% and not 50% and it didn't take place in the Brandishing region of France so he was only 'sparkling carrying...'"

 

[TurkeysGhost]

I see it as a profound evil for men looking out for their community to end up in prison for years or decades on account of a miserable criminal who'd been preying upon their neighborhood for months. Benjamin Crump, Talcum X, and their ilk have once again managed to spin a tale of racial victimization and got enough of a head of steam going in the public mind about this, that these men are probably toast.

The son, the man who fired, is 34. They mentioned he was with his 2 year old daughter when arrested, and he cried. This man had his best years and best fathering years ahead of him. Now, he's likely to spend those years in prison, or if he makes it out of this unconvicted, he will still be hiding / in fear / a pariah.

And all that, over some worthless thug. All that because he took an active role in trying to protect his neighborhood, and ended up having to shoot said thug after being punched and attacked by him. He likely would have been killed with his own shotgun had he not reacted as he did, given that it seems Ahmaud had decided he was prepared to do whatever he had to to avoid being there when the cops showed up.

This society is completely broken.

Perhaps he should have considered the consequences his actions would have on his young family before tripping dick-first into a murder charge. Travis had multiple opportunities to de-escalate this entire situation prior to the fatal scuffle and repeatedly made the wrong decision. Maybe he'll think back on these when he invariably gets divorce papers served to him in prison, his wife remarries, and his children learn to call another man father.

His community has decided that the best way to protect itself is to pass laws that make these kinds of actions unlawful. The McMichael's vigilante fantasy is very much out of step of what the community has decided is acceptable.

I imagine the elder McMichael probably feels quite a bit of grief for the wreckage he has brought on himself and his son. I can't think of any other greater example of failing as a father than being an accomplice to your son spending decades in prison as a murderer. If they are convicted, he may very well die of old age in jail knowing that his son is still imprisoned.

 

[Garb]

Good to know that I was eligible to be confronted and shot by taking a look at a construction site, something that I have done several times.

 

[Skeptic Tank]

Perhaps he should have considered the consequences his actions would have on his young family before tripping dick-first into a murder charge. Travis had multiple opportunities to de-escalate this entire situation prior to the fatal scuffle and repeatedly made the wrong decision. Maybe he'll think back on these when he invariably gets divorce papers served to him in prison, his wife remarries, and his children learn to call another man father.

His community has decided that the best way to protect itself is to pass laws that make these kinds of actions unlawful. The McMichael's vigilante fantasy is very much out of step of what the community has decided is acceptable.

Much like Zimmerman should not have had to expect that keeping an eye on a suspicious character in his neighborhood, from a great distance, would lead to a life or death physical attack being launched upon him - Mr. McMichael should not have had to expect that a thief he confronted while he was armed (because it's legitimate and right to confront a thief, and it's right and legitimate to be armed while doing it in case the thief is) would create a life or death moment.

Mr. McMichael expected too much of Ahmaud. He thought there would be enough self-control and rationality there to make Ahmaud have a "okay, I'm caught" moment.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

Good to know that I was eligible to be confronted and shot by taking a look at a construction site, something that I have done several times.

As a young man and teenager, I often wandered derelict buildings, idle construction sites, open fields, closed parks, and other places that were technically trespassing without being murdered.

 

[Squeegee Beckenheim]

I see it as a profound evil for men looking out for their community to end up in prison for years or decades on account of a miserable criminal[...]

Just a reminder - you've already conceded that if he pointed the shotgun at Arbrey, then he was also a criminal. Since there is now more evidence that the son is a criminal than there is that Arbrey was, will you henceforth be referring to him as such?

The son, the man who fired, is 34.

Ahmaud Arbrey was 25. He didn't even get the chance to be a father. Now he's dead, because the miserable criminal you're lionising murdered him.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

Much like Zimmerman should not have had to expect that keeping an eye on a suspicious character in his neighborhood, from a great distance, would lead to a life or death physical attack being launched upon him - Mr. McMichael should not have had to expect that a thief he confronted while he was armed (because it's legitimate and right to confront a thief, and it's right and legitimate to be armed while doing it in case the thief is) would create a life or death moment.

Mr. McMichael expected too much of Ahmaud. He thought there would be enough self-control and rationality there to make Ahmaud have a "okay, I'm caught" moment.

I'm sure that McMichael was genuinely surprised when Mr. Arbery did not surrender to such overwhelming force.

The rapid compounding of McMichael's criminal decisions producing a murder was probably quite a shock. Firearms are like that, they have the power to amplify stupid decisions in a moment. Had he attempted his vigilante fantasy while unarmed, he might be nursing a black eye right now instead of in jail for murder.

 

[Garb]

Much like Zimmerman should not have had to expect that keeping an eye on a suspicious character in his neighborhood, from a great distance, would lead to a life or death physical attack being launched upon him - Mr. McMichael should not have had to expect that a thief he confronted while he was armed (because it's legitimate and right to confront a thief, and it's right and legitimate to be armed while doing it in case the thief is) would create a life or death moment.

Mr. McMichael expected too much of Ahmaud. He thought there would be enough self-control and rationality there to make Ahmaud have a "okay, I'm caught" moment.

True, Mr. McMichael had no reason to believe someone might act irrationally when being confronted by men with tools made for killing.

 

[Craig4]

Much like Zimmerman should not have had to expect that keeping an eye on a suspicious character in his neighborhood, from a great distance, would lead to a life or death physical attack being launched upon him - Mr. McMichael should not have had to expect that a thief he confronted while he was armed (because it's legitimate and right to confront a thief, and it's right and legitimate to be armed while doing it in case the thief is) would create a life or death moment.

Mr. McMichael expected too much of Ahmaud. He thought there would be enough self-control and rationality there to make Ahmaud have a "okay, I'm caught" moment.

At what point was the victim ever under a legal obligation to allow himself to be detained by Cracker 50?

 

[quadraginta]

I know it's pointless and really beside any useful point anyway, but in all my years, I have found many tools, including hammers (one was a really nice leather-handled Estwing!), screwdrivers, wrenches, pliers, vise grips, pry bars, cordless drills, chisels, transit parts, bolt cutters, crimpers, cell phones, knives both cheap and very expensive, a working camera, a surprising number of wallets, and many other things, on residential roads and even well traveled city streets. People leave stuff on car roofs, under hoods, and on truck bumpers all the time.

If Skeptic Tank has not found at least one hammer by now, and if he's telling the truth, he's either young, unlucky, or unobservant.

It's still more likely that the object identified as a possible hammer was actually a stick or a squirrel or something of the sort. I've stopped many a time for things that looked from one angle like something they're not. On the other hand, since one of the salient points that keeps coming up is that there was new construction right in the area, a lost hammer is not so far-fetched.

True story.

Today, as in, this morning. I went shopping. Third time in two months. The local Harris Teeter supermarket has reserved 6:00am to 8:00am on Mondays and Thursdays for us old farts. Theoretically because they have completed restocking and deep cleaning the night before, so that conditions and merchandise are at the most opportune for us old farts. (Plus, we don't sleep like regular people anyhow. )

So. I was there at 6:00am sharp. I happened across the very last package of toilet paper of any kind on the shelves. To my surprise it was the exact brand, variety, and size that we have always bought. I hadn't planned on buying any toilet paper. I felt that it must be a sign of some sort, so even though I was nowhere nearly in danger of running out of toilet paper I went ahead and bought it anyway.

On the way home, a trip of about three miles, I fortuitously happened to see, in my rear view mirror, the toilet paper blown out of the back of my pickup. It had been stacked on top of the less crushable groceries.

It was a four lane road with a divider. I couldn't turn around to go back and pick it up until I could make a U-turn at the next stoplight. Which I did, and drove back to where I could stop beside the divider across from my errant TP.

It was almost smack dab in the center of the two lanes. Right next to the dashed line.

And as I went to pick it up I thought to myself, "I'm glad some black guy who happened to be jogging by didn't see this and try to get it out of traffic. He could have gotten shot as a burglar.".

It was worth more than a hypothetical hammer.

 

[BobTheCoward]

Much like Zimmerman should not have had to expect that keeping an eye on a suspicious character in his neighborhood, from a great distance, would lead to a life or death physical attack being launched upon him - Mr. McMichael should not have had to expect that a thief he confronted while he was armed (because it's legitimate and right to confront a thief, and it's right and legitimate to be armed while doing it in case the thief is) would create a life or death moment.

Mr. McMichael expected too much of Ahmaud. He thought there would be enough self-control and rationality there to make Ahmaud have a "okay, I'm caught" moment.

If arbury believes he did not commit a crime, he has a right to defend himself.

 

[quadraginta]

All the known racists on this forum are on my ignore list. I do my best not to be tempted to engage them, and I only see what they post when other users quote them, and then I try to only post about them to others rather than directly to them. Why do I do this? Because talking to them gives them oxygen - it validates them and can fool others into thinking their points are worthwhile addressing - it gives them air time.

They get the airtime anyway. We can't prevent that. They are members and can post whatever they want whenever they want (within the limits of the MA of course).

No matter how much you try, no matter how many infallible, irrefutable arguments you might come up with, you will NEVER convince these racists that their position is wrong. All you do by addressing their arguments is to allow them to talk about what THEY WANT TO TALK ABOUT! That is their whole plan, the trap they set every time they post, and a whole bunch of you foolishly fall right into it, every time.

This is unquestionably true. But those bigots are not the only people reading these threads. We members are not the only people reading these threads.

There is some merit in pointing out how gormless and devoid of merit their arguments are to others who come upon this thread and read it as a way to learn about the incident.

 

[Olmstead]

I've been wondering: if Arbery had been armed, would it have been legal for him to draw his gun when accosted by civilians holding guns? And what happens if they shoot him when he does that?

 

[uke2se]

They get the airtime anyway. We can't prevent that. They are members and can post whatever they want whenever they want (within the limits of the MA of course).




This is unquestionably true. But those bigots are not the only people reading these threads. We members are not the only people reading these threads.

There is some merit in pointing out how gormless and devoid of merit their arguments are to others who come upon this thread and read it as a way to learn about the incident.

You can point that out without posting a single word in reply to any of their posts. Much of it doesn't even need to be pointed out. What replying to them does - aside from giving them oxygen - is amplifying their message that a black man deserves to be shot, no matter the circumstances. Their hateful fan-fiction gets read over and over and then picked apart and analyzed. This is their goal.

 

[quadraginta]

I don't think that these guys had any intention of executing or murdering Arbery and the reason is because they made a call to 911 summoning the police right before they took off after him. That doesn't seem like the thing to do if you are about to execute somebody... at least not if you want to somehow get away with it and not be charged with murder. They don't even know when the cops are going to show up. A patrol car could be close when they get the call from dispatch. So they might need to do this execution very quickly and they don't even have full control of Arbery in order to do it immediately.

We're they planning to plant a gun on Arbery in order to justify killing him?

It just doesn't seem like a plan for execution/murder In the street when you've already called the cops to get their asses over there to the same street.

This is my opinion.

That doesn't really matter. It is clear by their own testimony that they went out with the express and sole intent to apprehend and restrain Arbery, and they intentionally took firearms with them to do it

They had no legal basis to go out to apprehend and restrain Arbery, let alone with arms, but they did it anyway. Anything which happened after they made the decision to take such an action is on them.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

I've been wondering: if Arbery had been armed, would it have been legal for him to draw his gun when accosted by civilians holding guns? And what happens if they shoot him when he does that?

I don't really see that changing the legal situation at all. Arbery was in the right to try to disarm McMichael, he would have been in the right to shoot McMichael with his own shotgun during the struggle, and he would have been his legal right to produce his own firearm and defend himself against two armed attackers.

Both men have been charged with aggravated assault in addition to the murders. Unless some evidence comes forth to exonerate them of this, using lethal force to repel this armed assault would have been perfectly legal. He wouldn't have even needed to rely on a "stand your ground" defense, as the circumstances fall neatly into ordinary self defense that are widely understood in all states.

 

[Skeptic Tank]

If arbury believes he did not commit a crime, he has a right to defend himself.

I've been wondering: if Arbery had been armed, would it have been legal for him to draw his gun when accosted by civilians holding guns? And what happens if they shoot him when he does that?

One of the most important things about the newer footage is that it demonstrates without a shadow of a doubt that Mr. Arbery understood himself to be a criminal who'd been caught, and these men as agents of getting in trouble, not racist KKK murderers.

This means that he knew he was in the wrong, they were in the right, and he had no plausible "I thought I was about to get murdered" excuse for "self defense."

Ironically, for all the weeping over this POS that's been going on across the world in the last week or so, Mr. Arbery himself would have a hard time recognizing this version of him which has been created. He knew what he was.