Jogging in Georgia while black.

[varwoche]

I think we're getting caught in a trap here, of post-event analysis.

Of course, whenever a terrible thing happens, we can look back on it and say "he should have done something different." We now know things we did not or could not know then. We're like the audience at a horror movie, yelling at the screen "No, don't open that door!"

Thieves came and stole my TV. I should have put better bars on the window. I should have had a different TV. I shouldn't have this or should have that. And of course, in some sense that's true. In some irrelevant, red-herring way, whenever a crime is committed, there's something we can point to afterward that redistributes the responsibility.

But when a crime is committed, it's the criminal who does it. When a bunch of yahoos in a pickup truck accost a jogger and kill him, it's their fault. All of it is their fault. When we look at the video and see what happened, and see what might have been done, it's useful to plan for our own future, but if we use it to evaluate the event itself, we are diving into a morass of moral equivocation and speculation and critique of inferred attitude, which at best is useless and at worst results in accusations, real or not, that we make victims the authors of their demise.

Indeed. Consider though... Frequently I hear black people describe how they instruct their children to behave in order to avoid risky confrontations with cops. They don't do this because they think their kids are guilty of something, or because they think cops are always in the right. They do this in the interest of protecting their kids from harm.

Here on the internet, it's hard to distinguish that sentiment from excusing the perps.

(I'm not addressing this to you.) It's my sense that Thermal is not excusing the perps in any way, and I wish posters would lighten up on him.

 

[Jim_MDP]

... I take an interest in self defense and fighting strategies, and am always interested in real-time testing. Here, it falls with something I've always advocated: don't rush a group of armed nuts when unarmed. There is a good time to run like hell to the sides, and this was one. We are not bulletproof.

I'm a big ol' pussy and busted up as well, but a smoothbore might be the only weapon I'd charge, if the angle was right. That's a big cone of hurt and I'd take 20 seconds to "run" out of it if cover wasn't three steps away. I have to figure anyone who JUST tried to murder me would be just fine with strolling over to where I lay and finishing up the job.

Handgun? Dodge, weave, dive and roll... "serpentine" (what was the stupid younger Stark's name again?)

"Hunting" caliber with (hopefully) a big ol' 10x mount blocking the iron... run, baby run. Serpentine.

Select fire "style" rifle... "uhhh, is this high enough? I can raise them higher."

I kid... I'd just wimper at the AK/AR (maybe), but I really might logically charge the shotgun. And if I was in motion as this guy was (which I honestly, really CAN'T physically do any more) and the closest cover was ~40 feet away... ???

 

[CORed]

It could change who was charged. If the man in the pickup truck is pointing a gun at the jogger, he is committing a crime. If not, then he is merely a witness to a crime.

He still could be guilty of felony murder as an accomplice in a crime. It's no nearly as clear cut, though.

 

[William Parcher]

Indeed. Consider though... Frequently I hear black people describe how they instruct their children to behave in order to avoid risky confrontations with cops. They don't do this because they think their kids are guilty of something, or because they think cops are always in the right. They do this in the interest of protecting their kids from harm.

It's all over the place though. White parents instructing their children to behave in order to avoid risky confrontations with black people or black people neighborhoods. It's not that their kids are guilty of anything, they are doing it to protect their kids from harm. They don't want their children to be killed just because they were white walking on "black street."

As I said, it's the same thing all over the place.

 

[varwoche]

It's all over the place though. White parents instructing their children to behave in order to avoid risky confrontations with black people or black people neighborhoods. It's not that their kids are guilty of anything, they are doing it to protect their kids from harm. They don't want their children to be killed just because they were white walking on "black street."

As I said, it's the same thing all over the place.

I don't buy it. One group has justifiable concerns, and the other group is motivated by racism. Speaking in general of course.

 

[JoeMorgue]

As I said, it's the same thing all over the place.

Yeah except when black people kill white people they actually go to jail over it.

 

[quadraginta]

My impression is that most lynchings involved taking someone who had already been arrested from the jail to kill them.

<snip>

I think your impression may be an artifact of movies and TV. I would be unsurprised to find that the majority of them did not fit that description.

 

[William Parcher]

Yeah except when black people kill white people they actually go to jail over it.

Is that just another of your army of straw men? Of course it is. Don't ever change, Joe.

 

[Thermal]

Indeed. Consider though... Frequently I hear black people describe how they instruct their children to behave in order to avoid risky confrontations with cops. They don't do this because they think their kids are guilty of something, or because they think cops are always in the right. They do this in the interest of protecting their kids from harm.

Here on the internet, it's hard to distinguish that sentiment from excusing the perps.

(I'm not addressing this to you.) It's my sense that Thermal is not excusing the perps in any way, and I wish posters would lighten up on him.

Thanks, varwoche, and you are spot on. If I had my way, it would be 20 years to life to display a firearm in public, barring some LEO and security personel. These rednecks declared themselves executioners when they grabbed guns and headed out to the public street, full stop. Arbery did nothing to warrant a gun drawn, even if he was actively robbing that construction site, which it's pretty obvious he wasn't.

But that's not a fun position to clutch pearls about, so here we are.

 

[Thermal]

I'm a big ol' pussy and busted up as well, but a smoothbore might be the only weapon I'd charge, if the angle was right. That's a big cone of hurt and I'd take 20 seconds to "run" out of it if cover wasn't three steps away. I have to figure anyone who JUST tried to murder me would be just fine with strolling over to where I lay and finishing up the job.

Handgun? Dodge, weave, dive and roll... "serpentine" (what was the stupid younger Stark's name again?)

"Hunting" caliber with (hopefully) a big ol' 10x mount blocking the iron... run, baby run. Serpentine.

Select fire "style" rifle... "uhhh, is this high enough? I can raise them higher."

I kid... I'd just wimper at the AK/AR (maybe), but I really might logically charge the shotgun. And if I was in motion as this guy was (which I honestly, really CAN'T physically do any more) and the closest cover was ~40 feet away... ???

I talk with guys that have all kinds of theories about what do do with a gun in sight. I think generally, if it is one guy and the weapon is within hand range, you have a chance at gaining control. Beyond that you are a target, and as you say, moving ones are harder to hit.

I hope to hell none of us ever have to face something like this. But hopefully the seed might get planted in our brains to run fast. Don't surrender, or wait, or continue. Get the **** out of there before a bead gets drawn on you.

 

[William Parcher]

I don't buy it. One group has justifiable concerns, and the other group is motivated by racism. Speaking in general of course.

Be extra careful about what neighborhoods you go jogging in. It's a shame that some of America is unsafe for black people and some is unsafe for white people. It is what it is and all you can do is just keep chugging along. Stay calm and carry on.

 

[William Parcher]

Whenever I hear "serpentine" I think of Peter Falk in The In-Laws.

 

[BobTheCoward]

X2
(crap... that was the wrong place to put "x2". I thought I was right after my own "placeholder" post. Oops. )

Bob I thought I'd see if anyone replied in the intervening ~30 posts... they didn't.

I understand the national standard for a CA is immediate pursuit of or in the company of a witness of, a suspect of a felony.
No legit felony CA... then brandishing applies.

Change my mind... O Socratic defender of the Harvard Debate Society Way (tm).

I didn't state an opinion on if it was a legitimate citizens arrest or not, I stated a conditional "if" and asked a question based on that condition.

 

[Mike!]

Now the fun part is watching how elaborate the apologist's fan fiction is gonna have to get so they can keep saying that without directly saying it.

Because yeah there's no way to square that circle. Either this is outright murder or you're arguing the guy should have surrendered.

How about a third option? I would have liked him to run the heck away from them, maybe through a yard (Trespassing? Who freaking cares, your life is in danger!) or towards a home where he could have beat on a door while screaming, "Help, there's two crazy crackers with guns after me! Help! Someone call the police!" I'd rather be reading a humorous story about a couple dumb rednecks driving their truck into a neighbors swimming pool, while chasing an innocent jogger, than the one we're discussing now, any day of the week.

 

[William Parcher]

How about a third option? I would have liked him to run the heck away from them, maybe through a yard (Trespassing? Who freaking cares, your life is in danger!) or towards a home where he could have beat on a door while screaming, "Help, there's two crazy crackers with guns after me! Help! Someone call the police!"

He would have been shot dead at the door by the homeowner. It happens every time. JoeMorgue will tell you about it.

 

[Squeegee Beckenheim]

FWIW, I think that the defence of "I shot him because I feared for my life" is fatally flawed, even absent all other factors. It means that you've got more excuse to shoot a black person than a white person, just so long as you're scared of black people because you're racist. It essentially means that being racist is a valid defence against the charge of murdering a black person.

 

[Thermal]

How about a third option? I would have liked him to run the heck away from them, maybe through a yard (Trespassing? Who freaking cares, your life is in danger!) or towards a home where he could have beat on a door while screaming, "Help, there's two crazy crackers with guns after me! Help! Someone call the police!" I'd rather be reading a humorous story about a couple dumb rednecks driving their truck into a neighbors swimming pool, while chasing an innocent jogger, than the one we're discussing now, any day of the week.

Hey hey hey! There's no other options or discussion around here, mister. There is only pro-racist and anti-racist, and the attendant strawmen. .

 

[Carlotta]

It seems to me that, if he had cut and run, they'd have shot him for trespassing as soon as he set foot on someone's yard/property.

 

[Meadmaker]

FWIW, I think that the defence of "I shot him because I feared for my life" is fatally flawed, even absent all other factors. It means that you've got more excuse to shoot a black person than a white person, just so long as you're scared of black people because you're racist. It essentially means that being racist is a valid defence against the charge of murdering a black person.

The law agrees with you. It is not a valid defense to say that you feared for your life. It is only a valid defense to say that a reasonable person would have feared for his life. It's a very important distinction.

ETA: Which is not to say that juries always respect the distinction, even if explicitly instructed by the judge to do so.

 

[whoanellie]

Hard for me to picture guys standing in the road with guns (I live in a no carry state). Just seeing a firearm in public would likely have me diving for cover, not continuing to run and waiting to see if he put me in his sights.



But with that 20/20 hindsight, 2 or three weapons in sight and me empty handed...i dunno. Can't see doing anything but running hard and fast to the sides as a best possible chance.



The police report was filled out via testimony of the killers. Not sure how objectively we should take it. They could have been self serving in presenting the run up. IIRC, they claimed two shots were fired during the struggle, but we know it was three.



Also, still curious why the video recording buddy posted the footage. Conscience got the better of him after the fact? Or bragging?

What makes you think the buddy posted it?