Ahmaud Arbery

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

Mad Professor

Sharpshooter
Supporting Member
Special Hen Supporter
Joined
Dec 1, 2008
Messages
3,089
Reaction score
2,790
Location
Moore, OK
Two questions:

1) Did the deceased commit a felony in the presence of the two defendants?

2) Assuming that he did, why didn't they call the police and let them sort it out?

Yes. He charged, attacked, and tried to take away a lawfully carried firearm from one of the defendants. The deceased could have sat on the curb and let the law sort it out. Good enough for me to acquit the defendants. And good enough that the original assigned District Attorney did not file charges.

The deceased was in full control of his destiny. His actions directly led to his death.
 

SMS

Sharpshooter
Supporting Member
Special Hen Supporter
Joined
Jun 15, 2005
Messages
15,322
Reaction score
4,281
Location
OKC area
Yes. He charged, attacked, and tried to take away a lawfully carried firearm from one of the defendants. The deceased could have sat on the curb and let the law sort it out. Good enough for me to acquit the defendants. And good enough that the original assigned District Attorney did not file charges.

The deceased was in full control of his destiny. His actions directly led to his death.

It can easily be argued that it was not a lawfully carried firearm as they had no legal authority to execute an armed roadblock or to attempt to affect the armed detention of another citizen.

The defendants actions led to his death as well, as they are the ones who introduced deadly force. Arbery was under no obligation legally or morally to submit to the commands of an armed civilian posse.
 
Last edited:

Mad Professor

Sharpshooter
Supporting Member
Special Hen Supporter
Joined
Dec 1, 2008
Messages
3,089
Reaction score
2,790
Location
Moore, OK
Ok, so charging them with interfering with traffic will fix that.
I’m ok with that.

They had the legal right to openly carry a firearm from what I see and from what the DA said in the letter.


Still the deceased was in full control of his destiny.

He charged, attacked, and tried to disarm the defendant. And he lost his life doing so. Unfortunate, but I’m ok with that. From all the evidence I have seen, the defendants never placed a hand on him or pointed a firearm at him before they were attacked.

If I’m open carrying and someone attacks and tries to disarm me, it is very likely that someone is going to get shot. And I’m going to do everything in my power to see that it is not me on the receiving end of that gunshot.


I have very little sympathy for criminals and when they become victim of their own doing. That’s what I see here.
 

SMS

Sharpshooter
Supporting Member
Special Hen Supporter
Joined
Jun 15, 2005
Messages
15,322
Reaction score
4,281
Location
OKC area
That DA’s opinion is moot because he recused himself.

Commiting unlawful acts like brandishing and kidnapping negate any right or lawfulness of open carry. That’s not a complicated concept.
 

ignerntbend

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
Mar 27, 2009
Messages
15,797
Reaction score
3,270
Location
Oklahoma
Your opinion. $100 says they don’t get convicted of murder.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
I bet they get pretty stern warning.
That DA’s opinion is moot because he recused himself.

Commiting unlawful acts like brandishing and kidnapping negate any right or lawfulness of open carry. That’s not a complicated concept.
 

Mad Professor

Sharpshooter
Supporting Member
Special Hen Supporter
Joined
Dec 1, 2008
Messages
3,089
Reaction score
2,790
Location
Moore, OK
That DA’s opinion is moot because he recused himself.

Commiting unlawful acts like brandishing and kidnapping negate any right or lawfulness of open carry. That’s not a complicated concept.

It would seem it’s not complicated. But you clearly cannot comprehend it. Keep writing your fiction novel, CNN might have a well paying job for you. :)
 

Tanis143

Sharpshooter
Supporting Member
Special Hen Supporter
Joined
Jun 5, 2018
Messages
3,062
Reaction score
3,169
Location
Broken Arrow
Ok, so charging them with interfering with traffic will fix that.
I’m ok with that.

They had the legal right to openly carry a firearm from what I see and from what the DA said in the letter.


Still the deceased was in full control of his destiny.

He charged, attacked, and tried to disarm the defendant. And he lost his life doing so. Unfortunate, but I’m ok with that. From all the evidence I have seen, the defendants never placed a hand on him or pointed a firearm at him before they were attacked.

If I’m open carrying and someone attacks and tries to disarm me, it is very likely that someone is going to get shot. And I’m going to do everything in my power to see that it is not me on the receiving end of that gunshot.


I have very little sympathy for criminals and when they become victim of their own doing. That’s what I see here.

Um, no. Open carrying a firearm is one thing, using a firearm to intimidate a person unlawfully is illegal. As I and others have pointed out, unless proof comes out otherwise, the McMichaels had no legal standing on attempting to stop Arbery. None. By involving firearms they escalated it to a felony false imprisonment attempt. It does not matter what Arbery might or might not have done at that point. Citizens are not LEO's, they don't have the power to stop people to investigate crimes. They can only enact a C/A when they have witnessed or are witnessing a crime being committed, and in the state of GA that crime has to rise to a felony level to enact a C/A.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom