• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.
Status
Not open for further replies.
The question isn't how often it happens. The question is whether it's reasonable that Arbrey would have thought that the people behind any door he knocked on would be likely to let him in to their house and bar the door to the people chasing him with guns.

This doesn't even have to be a conscious thought, just even a vague "I'll find no help here" which means that it wouldn't even occur to him to try.

And that will be dependent on what he believed the make-up of that neighbourhood to be, him impression of those demographics, and his past experiences with them.

I think the other issue is whether Americans are allowed to kill people knocking at their door? Just going up to knock on a door puts you at risk of being shot dead. Why multiply your risk?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-50063364
 
Where should the line be drawn?

I don't know, that's your decision, for you to make

Who gets to draw the line?

You. Its your line.

What standards do you use to judge who has crossed the line?

You, they're your standards.

Answer those question and you might start to see the problem.

Not seeing the problem yet.

Now go back and read the chain of posts I was responding to. Once you've done that, you might start to see what I was driving at.


ETA: For other responders, I hope I don't end up having to spoon feed this to y'all. That would be a sad indictment on the level of English comprehension skills present on this forum.
 
Last edited:
I don't know, that's your decision, for you to make

You. Its your line.

You, they're your standards.

Not seeing the problem yet.

Now go back and read the chain of posts I was responding to. Once you've done that, you might start to see what I was driving at.

ETA: For other responders, I hope I don't end up having to spoon feed this to y'all. That would be a sad indictment on the level of English comprehension skills present on this forum.

That was an interesting list of people you put together. They would certainly be on most people's list of the worst examples of humanity.

I wonder if we could identify a common defining trait for all of them?
 
You really might consider examining the basis and consequences of your position here. It's the same principle espoused by genocidal tyrants, slavers, and oppressors throughout human history.

At a very minimum, you're espousing that the morlock and eloi segregation is a good idea.

That was an interesting list of people you put together. They would certainly be on most people's list of the worst examples of humanity.

I wonder if we could identify a common defining trait for all of them?

I think you are missing the point.

This was never about what I thought or what my position was, it was about what individuals think

....But yes, I feel entirely justified to dehumanize these morons and classify them as a hated other because that's what they did to someone else. It's okay to dehumanize people who deserve to be dehumanized. Not everyone is good enough to rate basic human dignity.

I've learned the lesson of 2016 well. This is a powerful and effective weapon and I, at every opportunity, online or in person apply it to their kind. I'm dehumanizing them because of choices they made to put themselves in a category that deserves it.

As soon as you start saying things like "there are some people who do not deserve to rate basic human dignity" you have started down a very unpleasant and dangerous path, in my opinion. When you dehumanise your enemy you can use that as an excuse to do anything you like to them - torture, rape, kill. Because who cares? They're subhuman. They don't deserve basic human dignity.

You're better than that. We're all better than that.

And i replied (this time with emphasis)

< snip >Its just a matter of where you draw the line.


Another way of saying it would be "your mileage may vary".

We all have our own opinions how bad or vile a person has to be before they can be dismissed as unfit to be allowed to continue to live. In many states of the US they have the death penalty for some crimes, and jury has to decide the fate of the guilty - they have to draw those lines during the penalty phase.
 
So where's the line? Sure we can't kill him. Can't tar and feather him. We can't flay his alive. Can put in Supermax? Solitary? Prison? House arrest? a 20 dollar fine? A stern talking to?
Johnny Axemurderer has every right to avail himself of the criminal justice system. That's why we have one - to avoid the anarchy of vigilante justice.
 
There are people who really do not deserve to rate basic human dignity, who should be removed from the face of the earth (and some have been) - Charles Manson, Ratko Mladić, Ted Bundy, Radovan Karadžić, Josef Mengele, John Wayne Gacy etc (I won't list any more or we could start getting further into Godwin territory)

Its just a matter of where you draw the line.

Pretty much where I stand.
I think the Nazi leadership. for example, pretty much lost their rights to claim to be human bengs.
 
Re the killing that started this thread;
Georgia really needs another little visit from General Sherman.
 
I think you are missing the point.

This was never about what I thought or what my position was, it was about what individuals think
No, I got your point.

It's a shame you completely missed mine, and apparently, everybody else's.
 
Pretty much where I stand.
I think the Nazi leadership. for example, pretty much lost their rights to claim to be human bengs.
The irony in this post is so strong it could take on Chuck Norris.
 
I think the other issue is whether Americans are allowed to kill people knocking at their door? Just going up to knock on a door puts you at risk of being shot dead. Why multiply your risk?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-50063364

You don't need to go that far back.

Last October, a Norwegian man travelled to the US to surpise his father in law, and was promptly shot at the door.

https://edition.cnn.com/2019/10/04/us/florida-man-shoots-kills-son-in-law-birthday-trnd/index.html
 
Please don't bicker, and do return to the topic.
Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Agatha
 
Ahmaud Arbery was hit with a truck before he died, and his killer allegedly used a racial slur, investigator testifies
William Bryan [the guy who filmed the infamous video] told investigators he heard Travis McMichael use a racial epithet after fatally shooting Ahmaud Arbery in Glynn County, Georgia, a Georgia Bureau of Investigation agent testified Thursday during preliminary hearings.

Bryan told police McMichael said "f***ing n***er" after three blasts from McMichael's shotgun left Arbery dead in February the streets of the Satilla Shores neighborhood, Assistant Special Agent in Charge Richard Dial said.
Body camera footage also showed a Confederate flag sticker on the toolbox of McMichael's truck, Dial said.
The allegations came as Dial outlined the events that led to Arbery's death and told the court that before Arbery was shot, the three men charged in his murder engaged in an elaborate chase, hitting the 25-year-old jogger with a truck as he repeatedly tried to avoid them.
https://www.cnn.com/2020/06/04/us/mcmichaels-hearing-ahmaud-arbery/index.html
 
Ahmaud Arbery was hit with a truck before he died, and his killer allegedly used a racial slur, investigator testifies

I may have to take a few people off ignore just to hear the arguments as to why this still means the killing has absolutely nothing to do with racism and was purely in self-defense. I expect some Olympic-level mental gymnastics over this one.

Dave
 
I may have to take a few people off ignore just to hear the arguments as to why this still means the killing has absolutely nothing to do with racism and was purely in self-defense. I expect some Olympic-level mental gymnastics over this one.

Dave

You lack imagination.

Obviously the guy is lying as part of his deal with the prosecution or whatever in order to get a reduced sentence.

I felt dirty just writing that.
 
DA needs to be strung up from a lamp post for trying to bury this murder. The tiniest bit of real police work revealed this was a lynching and the DA bent over backwards to make sure that didn't happen.
 
Last edited:
DA needs to be strung up from a lamp post for trying to bury this murder. The tiniest bit of real police work revealed this was a lynching and the DA bent over backwards to make sure that didn't happen.

I'm sure he has been busy with joining the protest marches in solidarity against police ....

Sorry, just peed a little
 
Say hello to federal hate crime modifiers boys! That little remark could be the difference between life in prison and a cold needle sliding into the veins.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom