In The News...

treesmith said:

I daresay I am no more opinionated than anyone else. And I’d like you to quote any text of mine that led you to believe I was okay with MURDER, regardless of the flavor of the victim. As to its legality in “Alabama”, it’s no more legal than anywhere else. Are you being sarcastic or antagonistic?

Click to expand...

I was sarcastic on my last point.
I am confused with the regardless after MURDER in your sentence above. The way I read it, is that depending on the tan level of a person you could kill him/her? Don't answer, I'm teasing!
You mention the 'flavor' of the victim... This does not exist for a human being. Whether the person is white, black, yellow, green like Hulk or red like your idiotic pres. , we all are biologically identical. I think using the expression 'flavor of the victim' is discriminatory. Does it come from the times when in the south states of the US, it was legal to rape the female slaves? Flavor... really?
Based on your posts 7565 and 7581, your first reaction was not to be ashamed but try to convince us that it was not a racist crime. When Mick could not retrieve the complete video your reaction was that it did not happen... That's why I was waiting for your reaction when Nick found it again and posted it. This was my train of thought and I was hoping that you would show some kind of empathy for the victim.
The killers treated the young black man as a person inferior to them (in others words as a sub-sh..t), simply because of his tan level. This is racism!!!

Gee I wonder what the specifics are of the description he matched...
Sounds like their reasoning is “ I thought he was someone else.”

Wonder if they’ll survive their sentences. Dad might get just a few years, but Junior is gonna get 20+ I predict.

Mick! said:

Well I’m not, clearly. @Merle Nelson?

Click to expand...

What, who, me? No I'm not black either.



Mick It seems that there are things about the US that you don't agree with. I suspect if you knew us better there would be many more.

I'm not positive what you are asking me to answer. I know I can't satisfy you. But I can tell you a few things that if you use your imagination and extrapolate them out a ways it might bring you a bit of peace the the whole issue of how screwed up the US is is unsolvable.

A) First of all it is deemed justifiable to kill people at times in the eyes of the law. In California where I live you have to retreat as much as possible, preferably into your own home but then if faced with death or great bodily harm to you or another you can do what it takes to prevent this. In Texas you can do about the same if someone is stealing your property. From references in the news clips I think this happened in a state similar to Texas.

B) A citizen here can arrest a person. There are some rules to it but it can be done. This type of activity was referred to in the news piece too.

C) Those two probably would have been just as "happy" to kill you as to kill a black person. Taking your avatar picture, if we had reports of thefts by some white guy in an orange hard hat for days or weeks beforhand, then have someone call 911 reporting that the white guy with the orange hat is doing x suspicious activity and these two pick up on it and they set out to arrest you with guns in hand. Then instead of you stopping and talking to them or getting the cops there you jink around them two or three times when they try to cut you off with a pickup. Then when they do get you stopped you use ineffective grappling methods to try and take their gun away.

You get the picture right?

Seems like you don't know "us" too well either, Merle.

A) you can kill a person in self defence here, no problem.

Some years back there was a robbery in a store specializing in REALLY expensive watches.
2 Eastern europeans held a knif to the store owners daughter's throat while they gathered a few million $ worth of watches.
As they left the store, the owner got a handgun out of a drawer and shot them both in the back.

He was fined for having an unlicensed gun.

B) A Citizen here can arrest a person.
We just do it slightly different.
When I did it, I just gently held the person back until the cops arrived, I didn't simply shoot him.

C) Biggest difference, we don't have a lot of fat rednecks running around with guns.

Man, they really ought to have shot him a couple more times, then.

Stig the watch owner in your example above would have been charged with two counts of murder or something close to it here. As are these two guys once you get past the "Good Ol Boy" network that had protected him at first.

I suspect Carl isn't advocating for the guy being shot, he seems to just like all the facts out in my mind. I like that too. When you have the facts you can more easily see the tendencies in motivation. When you have an idea of motivations it's easier to understand what might have had a thing go in one direction or another.

I totally agree I don't understand your situations - didn't mean to imply I did or any slight by anything I said.

Oh, and citizens arrest here is to be handled in a much more circumspect way too. In general if you go out and commit a crime here and it causes other injuries to happen as you do those are added on to your charges. Same would happen if you tried to arrest someone and it escalated. ( In California if you took a gun while you did it you would be the aggressor - criminal.)

The social "world" crying injustice for either side when the collective "we" have no breadth of the circumstances and evidence of the situation is laughable.

Great video. Thanks for putting that up Carl. I like facts, like this guys take on things. I think we would do so much better as a society if more people adopted something much closer to this way of thinking.

I don't need to assume one way or the other myself. I have so much respect for an individual human beings choices in life that I'm comfortable with them also owning the follow on results. In this instance it sounds like Georgia law will land closer to the side of those two guys. ( In spite of how you pre-judge their looks Stig.)

That would be his "official" right to arrest, correct? He is still a citizen and has that right to arrest.

This may be of interest for some of the laws at play....or was that the video Carl put up? One or both have good info on pertinent laws.







Yeah both this and post #7625

Having worked in carpentry & roofing for over 20 years I've seen hundreds of people walk through framed in places both occupied by workers and not...I've done it myself. Always liked seeing a good floor plan or how the utilities ran.

So what was the temp in Georgia that day?

Arrest means detain...not kill...big difference. The shooter was totally outside any authority he might have IMO.

There are more minutes (7?) of inside video that may yet be released Fiddler. I agree on all of your basic concepts.

Well, a court will decide it and some will be happy and some POed. Maybe a nice riot even...then life goes on for some of us...

I saw Carl’s video the other day, but I may have forgotten some details.

But the fishing tackle that was stolen was never reported to the police and only referred to after the shooting, so why is that a thing? just something that someone said after the incident, no relevance whatsoever

Plus did I read/hear that one of the shooters had a pistol stolen from a car on his drive?
I would say the issue there was the leaving around of firearms unattended rather than any theft, I’m pretty sure his licence would be revoked over here for such carelessness, but that’s à European perspective, I’m aware things are different there.

What always happens in these cases is that one community paints the victim as a saint, the other trys to dig up as much negative press about him as possible, some true, a lot is speculation just trying to muddy the waters.

I hear arguments like that all the time, Mick, and while I agree, firearms should be secured against misuse (such as by children), leaving a gun (or anything of value, for that matter), unattended, does NOT give someone a right to steal it. The American West is known for hanging horse thieves, and in those days at least, the horses didn’t have locks. I have the right to lay a $100 bill on my front porch and expect it to stay there. Just because I left it laying there doesn’t mean it’s yours for the taking.

Good irresponsible people with guns = bad guys with guns.

You don’t live in the american West in the 1800s, no more than I live in Victorian London where you were sent to Australia for stealing a loaf of bread.

I am not saying anyone has the right to steal it, but if you're already committing a criminal act, ie searching an unlocked car for valuables, and you find a gun, you will nick it.

You are placing the gun in the hands of a criminal, through negligence.

I am saying that the theft of the gun reflects worse on the father or son who left it there, than the black guy for whom there no proof whatsoever that he took it.

So theft is not really theft? If I see you left the keys in your truck, does that excuse a quick joyride? If your front door is unlocked, do I get to pilfer your home? They only use that ridiculous argument when it comes to firearms. A hammer left unattended is just a hammer. A chain saw is just a chain saw, etc. It's only the guns that enjoy such status.

Sakes alive! I see unattended stuff all the time that I wouldn't mind having!

kevin bingham said:

Good irresponsible people with guns = bad guys with guns.

Click to expand...

Anyone who'd STEAL (anything)....is ALREADY a BAD GUY......

And thats all they would be with out good people leaving their weapons lying around. Stupid people with guns are no better than bad people with guns. One in the same.

Here you get a fine if you leave your car unattended with the keys in the ignition.
Plus insurance won't cover theft of a car left like that.

Someone drives around and checks to see if your car is locked?

Inform Comrade.....Inform!