Current Events > Ahmaud Arbery Murder Case

(+) Yeah! (+)

FursonaNonGrata posted...

Its very telling that you think black people should just allow themselves to be taken into custody by random citizens. Theres nothing reasonable about giving up your personal freedoms at a moments notice because some hillbillies are chasing you down in a truck.

Whats it very telling of? I said nothing about any race, I think all people should act that way.

Stopping (or never running in the first place) when approached or questioned by someone when youre not on your own property, not in your own neighborhood, and not doing anything of significant importance to your own privacy, security, safety, or personal freedom(s) isnt difficult to address.

I also dont think you should grab guns and chase down someone, whether its your legal right or not. The very least, you dont get out of your vehicle with a weapon when someone is in the back with one. I think its a poor decision to put yourself in that position, even if you know the person has committed a crime and you have it on your own recorded video. Its just avoidable.

---

Conker posted...

Stopping (or never running in the first place) when approached or questioned by someone when youre not on your own property, not in your own neighborhood, and not doing anything of significant importance to your own privacy, security, safety, or personal freedom(s) isnt difficult to address.

Lol this is complete bullshit

Take it from someone who has been stabbed twice.

"Stop when people you don't know run at you screaming or chase you in a car" is insane logic. Redoubled if you are female.

Odds are overwhelming they are up to no good and even ignoring that, your fight or flight instinct is going to kick in.

If they are in a car, you can't flight on foot. So you're going to fight.

It's comical to go "Well in a reasonable situation you would..." when guys with guns are screaming at you and chasing you in a car.

I really really really really hope you're just trolling for attention because if you're serious than.... Wow... That's beyond pathetic.
---

UnfairRepresent posted...

Lol this is complete bullshit

Take it from someone who has been stabbed twice.

"Stop when people you don't know run at you screaming or chase you in a car" is insane logic. Redoubled if you are female.

Odds are overwhelming they are up to no good and even ignoring that, your fight or flight instinct is going to kick in.

If they are in a car, you can't flight on foot. So you're going to fight.

It's comical to go "Well in a reasonable situation you would..." when guys with guns are screaming at you and chasing you in a car.

I really really really really hope you're just trolling for attention because if you're serious than.... Wow... That's beyond pathetic.

Yea, I have a fight instinct as opposed to flight. I almost myself in trouble once for beating shit out of a walgreens loss prevention officer who thought I had stolen something (I didn't) and tried to detain me. I ended up walking away free, no charges, while that guy went to the hospital. But it was the logic above that could have gotten me into serious trouble.

Edit: Some context. I was browsing a busy Walgreens in downtown San Franciso, and saw that some Cadbury Easter Eggs were on sale for only 10 centz each. So I grabbed two of em' and waited in line. The line was super long, it would have taken like 15 minutes to check out...and for two items that cost less than a quarter. So I just tossed them in one of the nearby bins and walked out of the store. As I walk out of the store a 6ft 300lb fat dude that was dressed in baggy cloths, and wearing gold chains hopped in front of me and put his hand on my chest to prevent me from walking away, and started yelling...dude seriously looked like Heavy D.

It was only a split second reaction time, but it felt like a minute or so where in my head I quickly accessed the situation. This is person I don't know, he physcially assaulting me, and acting aggressive...I don't know why, but he looks like a thug. Is this someone I pissed off in the club the night before, did I accidentally step on his shoes just now and piss him off, is he racist crazy person, am I being robbed --all of these crazy things went through my head, none of which was anything close to "this is walgreens loss prevention."

So, being a trained college wrestler (and in the middle of my MMA career) I instinctually waxed off his arm and hit an arm drag takedown. This caused him to fall flat on his face, and it broke his glasses and busted his nose. He got up in a rage (and rightfully so) and came at me with all intents pointing to the fact that he wanted to kill me. So I beat him down...badly.

Two more guys (much smaller) dressed as thugs came out of the store to attack me - I thought they were his boys, so I ran away. I came back with the cops 10 minutes later, only to find out that they were all "plain clothes" loss prevention officers. They wanted to press charges, even after I proved to them that I didn't steal their fucking dime eggs. They claimed that a normal person wouldn't have reacted the way that I did. That I should have frozen, and awaited further instruction...

...I just said, well, you picked the wrong guy. Police sided with me, and asked if I wanted to press charged against them. I said no, and ended up leaving the store w/ a gift card.

This is what he looked like:


---

STEROLIZER posted...

Yea, I have a fight instinct as opposed to flight. I almost myself in trouble once for beating shit out of a walgreens loss prevention officer who thought I had stolen something (I didn't) and tried to detain me. I ended up walking away free, no charges, while that guy went to the hospital. But it was the logic above that could have gotten me into serious trouble.

Edit: Some context. I was browsing a busy Walgreens in downtown San Franciso, and saw that some Cadbury Easter Eggs were on sale for only 10 centz each. So I grabbed two of em' and waited in line. The line was super long, it would have taken like 15 minutes to check out...and for two items that cost less than a quarter. So I just tossed them in one of the nearby bins and walked out of the store. As I walk out of the store a 6ft 300lb fat dude that was dressed in baggy cloths, and wearing gold chains hopped in front of me and put his hand on my chest to prevent me from walking away, and started yelling...dude seriously looked like Heavy D.

It was only a split second reaction time, but it felt like a minute or so where in my head I quickly accessed the situation. This is person I don't know, he physcially assaulting me, and acting aggressive...I don't know why, but he looks like a thug. Is this someone I pissed off in the club the night before, did I accidentally step on his shoes just now and piss him off, is he racist crazy person, am I being robbed --all of these crazy things went through my head, none of which was anything close to "this is walgreens loss prevention."

So, being a trained college wrestler (and in the middle of my MMA career) I instinctually waxed off his arm and hit an arm drag takedown. This caused him to fall flat on his face, and it broke his glasses and busted his nose. He got up in a rage (and rightfully so) and came at me with all intents pointing to the fact that he wanted to kill me. So I beat him down...badly.

Two more guys (much smaller) dressed as thugs came out of the store to attack me - I thought they were his boys, so I ran away. I came back with the cops 10 minutes later, only to find out that they were all "plain clothes" loss prevention officers. They wanted to press charges, even after I proved to them that I didn't steal their fucking dime eggs. They claimed that a normal person wouldn't have reacted the way that I did. That I should have frozen, and awaited further instruction...

...I just said, well, you picked the wrong guy. Police sided with me, and asked if I wanted to press charged against them. I said no, and ended up leaving the store w/ a gift card.

This is what he looked like:

So you're saying Ahmaud Arbery was 100% in the right when he tried to defend himself against the men that ended up murdering him.

---

100% right might be the wrong wording

But Arbey's actions were legal, understandable and self-defense.

The men that shot him did actions were not legal, not understandable and not self-defense.
---

DarkChozoGhost posted...

So you're saying Ahmaud Arbery was 100% in the right when he tried to defend himself against the men that ended up murdering him.

Yup.

---

DarkChozoGhost posted...

So you're saying Ahmaud Arbery was 100% in the right when he tried to defend himself against the men that ended up murdering him.

Yes he was

---

Glad we agree

---

UnfairRepresent posted...

Lol this is complete bullshit

Take it from someone who has been stabbed twice.

"Stop when people you don't know run at you screaming or chase you in a car" is insane logic. Redoubled if you are female.

Odds are overwhelming they are up to no good and even ignoring that, your fight or flight instinct is going to kick in.

If they are in a car, you can't flight on foot. So you're going to fight.

It's comical to go "Well in a reasonable situation you would..." when guys with guns are screaming at you and chasing you in a car.

I really really really really hope you're just trolling for attention because if you're serious than.... Wow... That's beyond pathetic.

Nope, because he was jogging down the road and avoiding people already before any threat happened. This is not the same as youre trying to say, because of other things leading up to being confronted by men with guns in a truck.

You continually act like he just got rolled up on and they were ready to open fire. Its not even close to the same fucking response a normal person should have. Especially given the prior circumstances hes well aware of (even the slight perception they thought he was trespassing and stole something and someone yelled at him about it). You dont know whats perceived but you 100% know what it looked like you might have been doing and address it.

---

They're murderers and whether or not Arbery was a criminal and/or fighting them should be irrelevant. Motherfuckers playing cop chased a dude down with shotguns.

---

hockeybub89 posted...

They're murderers and whether or not Arbery was a criminal and/or fighting them should be irrelevant. Motherfuckers playing cop chased a dude down with shotguns.

Except its not irrelevant if it impacts why the people were chasing him playing cop. What the fuck is so hard to acknowledge about that?

The result of someone getting killed is different than discussing the situation. Had someone not been killed, all other aspects being the same up to that point and they just fought over the gun, were they ok legally doing what they did? If the law allows it, at what point did that change? Only because someone died?

Im not even saying the law does allow any of it, but thats a strong basis for the argument started from this topic.


---

Conker posted...

Except its not irrelevant if it impacts why the people were chasing him playing cop. What the fuck is so hard to acknowledge about that?

The result of someone getting killed is different than discussing the situation. Had someone not been killed, all other aspects being the same up to that point and they just fought over the gun, were they ok legally doing what they did? If the law allows it, at what point did that change? Only because someone died?

Im not even saying the law does allow any of it, but thats a strong basis for the argument started from this topic.

Every aspect of everything the shooters did should be highly illegal. Call the fucking cops and go home.

---

Conker posted...

Except its not irrelevant if it impacts why the people were chasing him playing cop. What the fuck is so hard to acknowledge about that?

Even if he had robbed a place they would not have been justified and would still be murderers

---

hockeybub89 posted...

Every aspect of everything the shooters did should be highly illegal. Call the fucking cops and go home.

I dont disagree here but unfortunately its not all highly illegal.

DarkChozoGhost posted...

Even if he had robbed a place they would not have been justified and would still be murderers

This is not what is argued in the video with support. Im not saying the guy is 100% right, but interpreting the law and backing up your case is what justifies something legally.

---

So Georgia's citizen arrest laws can be traced back to 1863. I am not surprised to see the taint of Fugitive Slave Laws and Jim Crow in its interpretation.

---

Conker posted...

Except its not irrelevant if it impacts why the people were chasing him playing cop. What the fuck is so hard to acknowledge about that?

The result of someone getting killed is different than discussing the situation. Had someone not been killed, all other aspects being the same up to that point and they just fought over the gun, were they ok legally doing what they did? If the law allows it, at what point did that change? Only because someone died?

It changed when they chased him in a truck then jumped out with guns screaming.

That's not self-defense or citizens arrest it's being a dangerous lunatic
---

Has anyone else itt even watched the video to see what happened? I have like 40 times and in slow motion. I can tell who hasnt because their version of the story is wrong, or they are just making shit up like one poster repeatedly has.

https://youtu.be/3XbF7-Hk7hc

Oh boy thats their lawyer?

---

ViewtifulGrave posted...

Oh boy thats their lawyer?

He has a glorious ponytail. Sounds like dad is distancing himself from his son, who actually did the shooting. Every man for himself?

UnfairRepresent posted...

It changed when they chased him in a truck then jumped out with guns screaming.

That's not self-defense or citizens arrest it's being a dangerous lunatic

So youre suggesting had they not had guns, it was legal?

Or had they not been screaming and gotten out of the vehicle, itd have been legal?

You just always get over-emotional and extreme in every attempt to reply, without answering what is actually being asked. Its clear you cant discuss anything else about the entire case without ignoring the legal aspects that can be argued (which I dont even think are ok things or should be legal myself).

Had the exact same situation happened without the end result being someone dying, why cant you respond about the legality of those things?

If they didnt have guns and still chased him, he still attacked, but instead of shooting they punched him a couple times and he died from getting knocked out and hitting his head on the ground. Same response?

They still did every other aspect people say makes them lunatics, dangerous, and didnt have the right to do.

Everytime you respond its not about the question Im asking...its your personal opinion of their behavior, which Ive never attempted to argue because I agree the way they were acting. That doesnt mean I cant attempt to understand both perspectives, unlike you.

Yet every specific thing they were doing is arguably legal (as supported to an extent by the topic video).

Im not even saying it is right or will be justified, Im just willing to consider the legal side of the issue to know how this could be judged in a court of law.

---

Yea lot of dudes making these extreme posts, not realizing the way this is rolling out and the things they are calling for will make it harder to get a conviction. More serious the charge the more proof you need. Multiple people saying they deserve to die too, both of em, which is crazy but theyre speaking from the heart and not the mind. Eye for an eye shit.

Callin it now, i said way back that manslaughter charges are a better way to get this dude hard time then murder charges. Involuntary or voluntary, im obviously not familiar with Georgia law.

Murder requires premeditation or intent to kill. Some dudes say, " he pulled the trigger thats intent" criminal law is all about the fuckin nuance. If they wanted to kill the guy, straight up, they wouldnt have called 911 before pursuing because they told on themselves. And they would have picked the victim off as he was jogging towards them, or as they drove by to park, multiple times they could have safely killed Arbery. He never would have been allowed close enough to take the shotgun away and potentially kill the shooter first if their intent was to murder him. So now the self defense law activates for shooter and victim. Either could have potentially legally killed the other and had a case. And if youve seen the video, the dad doesnt even take out his pistol until between the first and second shotgun blasts. I could call it down to the second.

The dads walking. No doubt in my mind. I dunno about the son.

Conker posted...

So youre suggesting had they not had guns, it was legal?

No

Or had they not been screaming and gotten out of the vehicle, itd have been legal?

Probably not legal but I doubt any charges would have stuck if they stayed in the vehicle and didn't block him off.

You just always get over-emotional and extreme

lol

Had the exact same situation happened without the end result being someone dying, why cant you respond about the legality of those things?

They still would be commiting crimes? Just not murder?

If they didnt have guns and still chased him, he still attacked, but instead of shooting they punched him a couple times and he died from getting knocked out and hitting his head on the ground. Same response?

Loaded question. Answer is almost certainly

They still did every other aspect people say makes them lunatics, dangerous, and didnt have the right to do.

And they are

Everytime you respond its not about the question Im asking...its your personal opinion of their behavior,

lol

Yet every specific thing they were doing is arguably legal
lol

Im not even saying it is right or will be justified, Im just willing to consider the legal side of the issue to know how this could be judged in a court of law.

No you're just desperate for attention. Everything you say is just a lazy attempt to get people to respond to you.

And because a guy is dead, people are biting.
---

Keith_Valentine posted...

Callin it now, i said way back that manslaughter charges are a better way to get this dude hard time then murder charges. Involuntary or voluntary, im obviously not familiar with Georgia law.

Murder requires premeditation or intent to kill. Some dudes say, " he pulled the trigger thats intent" criminal law is all about the fuckin nuance. If they wanted to kill the guy, straight up, they wouldnt have called 911 before pursuing because they told on themselves. And they would have picked the victim off as he was jogging towards them, or as they drove by to park, multiple times they could have safely killed Arbery. He never would have been allowed close enough to take the shotgun away and potentially kill the shooter first if their intent was to murder him. So now the self defense law activates for shooter and victim. Either could have potentially legally killed the other and had a case. And if youve seen the video, the dad doesnt even take out his pistol until between the first and second shotgun blasts. I could call it down to the second.

The dads walking. No doubt in my mind. I dunno about the son.

You do realize someone on trial for murder can end up with a manslaughter verdict right? You sound like goofballs who say Zimmerman would have been put away for manslaughter even though he was found not guilty of it.

Also, they chased him in a car with guns and screaming. As we said earlier. That's murder.
---

UnfairRepresent posted...

You do realize someone on trial for murder can end up with a manslaughter verdict right? You sound like goofballs who say Zimmerman would have been put away for manslaughter even though he was found not guilty of it.

Also, they chased him in a car with guns and screaming. As we said earlier. That's murder.

Yea i know. They added that at the last second and argued murder charges though. If they had approached it differently, maybe Zimmerman wouldnt have walked.

Chasing someone in a car with guns and screaming isnt murder. You like to be literal, so there you go. That doesn't make sense. Also why do you keep saying they were screaming? Theres no proof of that, you seem to be trying to make them out to be psychos. You realize theres a video i can PM you right now if you actually want to talk about this from a position of knowledge and not speculation?

Keith_Valentine posted...

Yea i know. They added that at the last second and argued murder charges though. If they had approached it differently, maybe Zimmerman wouldnt have walked.

BWHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!

Okay that confirms it.

Oh lawd.
---

UnfairRepresent posted...

BWHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!

Okay that confirms it.

Oh lawd.

Stop trolling man.

Unfortunately Keith, there really is nothing to say since it gets ignored to say were trolling or laugh as if that means shit for a response.

Even if chasing someone with guns could be considered legal under specific circumstances, itd be ignored.

Yet the only response is always something like, Lol, thats dangerous lunatic behavior or It still is murder.

We dont make the decision or have to say whether its legal or not, if there is a condition met that allows someone to do that behavior (no matter how crazy you believe it is), they wont always be considered breaking the law or found guilty.

Different actions are considered legal or not depending on the circumstances and local laws. We dont have to like it or agree with it to recognize the possibility, just having the perspective that its not as simple as how we feel.

Some people will never think its ok to smoke weed. Even if its legalized, some people think its crazy behavior, dangerous, and various myths about consumption. Trying to have a conversation about where or how it can be legal based on laws in different places is ignored because they dont personally like it. That doesnt mean the person that considers the legality to even consume it themself or is defending others doing it but rather is willing to look at why and how its not their opinion that makes it ok.

---

Its probably safe to assume that anyone defending the people who shot him are probably racist

just a little bit

probably a lot

---

Samurontai posted...

Its probably safe to assume that anyone defending the people who shot him are probably racist

just a little bit

probably a lot

Way to contribute to division and ignorance. Any other 200 IQ posts you wanna make?

I dont think one person itt has defended this fucker.

"Probably safe to assume the people" aka another dude who hasnt watched the raw footage and is talking out his ass.

I have no idea why people keep arguing with resident NFLB racist troll Conkers.

He's going on about it in TWO topics right now
---

Oh shut it Devin. I've never said a damn racist thing on NFLB. LMFAO at you thinking I'm a resident on any board or troll. I'm willing to argue with people who have shit logic and can be a bit pedantic towards bait (self-aware of that), that's about it. If someone decides to troll me, I have no qualms giving it back to them.

---

Bio1590 posted...

He's going on about it in TWO topics right now

My last post in this topic before Devin bumped it was over 12 hours before even starting to post in that other topic. Nice reach.

---

Again,

Everyone knows you're a fucking racist on the board. We fucking seen it when it came to any minority issue on that board. There's multitude of reasons a lot of people have called YOU and Codmons racist.

You will get ZERO argument out of me as I'm not about to spend 200+ posts like people did in this topic arguing with a clear-cut racist.

^the boobs are nice but not really the place for them

---

---Devin--- posted...

Again,

Everyone knows you're a fucking racist on the board. We fucking seen it when it came to any minority issue on that board. There's multitude of reasons a lot of people have called YOU and Codmons racist.

You will get ZERO argument out of me as I'm not about to spend 200+ posts like people did in this topic arguing with a clear-cut racist.

I'm not a racist and have never said anything to suggest that. So get the fuck out of here with that shit. Minority issues...I AM a minority. Mostly Mayan Indian. I'm basically a mutt who's mom was almost pure Mayan indian from Honduras and father was a mix of European (Italy, Greece, Spain) and African countries (Mali, Senegal, and other northern places I'm not fully sure of).

Also, the "a lot of people" you're referring to is like 3 people, you and a couple others that argued with me about completely non-race related shit literally years ago and I barely post so...nice try. Literally the only thing someone took to be racist was a monkey emoji that had no race connotation.

---

It seems pretty obvious as the story comes out that this kid was up to no good. Which explains my initial question of "why was he so aggressive right off the bat"

The answer was because he was worried about getting into trouble.

That's not to say I'm on the side of the shooters here. They're essentially karen's with guns. Which is a troublesome, and obviously it's terrible this kid was killed. But the whole framing online of a guy just out for a jog and shot for no reason is a lot more troubling tbh

---

Where do the racists keep getting these 20 y/o accounts?

---

SanninFormBee posted...

Where do the racists keep getting these 20 y/o accounts?

Are you talking about me?

Just wanna make sure before I roast you

---

---Devin--- posted...

Again,

Everyone knows you're a fucking racist on the board. We fucking seen it when it came to any minority issue on that board. There's multitude of reasons a lot of people have called YOU and Codmons racist.

You will get ZERO argument out of me as I'm not about to spend 200+ posts like people did in this topic arguing with a clear-cut racist.

This isn't the MMA board.

---

Samurontai posted...

Its probably safe to assume that anyone defending the people who shot him are probably racist

just a little bit

probably a lot

I dont think they are racist, I think they are just attention seeking.
You'll notice they are only saying things that are likely to provoke a response.
---

UnfairRepresent posted...

I dont think they are racist, I think they are just attention seeking.
You'll notice they are only saying things that are likely to provoke a response.

What attention are they seeking? I haven't defended anyone myself, but questioned what both sides were doing from the different information that has come out.

I am more of someone that's just curious about logic and might try too much to understand details, and at times I can get long-winded attempting to explain something so it appears defensive. So it probably comes across as annoying if you're already set in your ways so instead of acknowledge and address my main questions, people often get defensive (or offensive) and deflect to ad hominem because they can't see outside their narrow view.

Just like I'll do now: It makes no sense why anyone would seek attention in this one topic, and if in my case, probably the only interaction I've ever (and will ever) have on these boards with a lot of posters. I'm not seeing how that'd be attention seeking and makes no damn sense to suggest it's only to provoke a response when there are a million better or more efficient ways to accomplish such a thing (I mean, jfc look at this board!). Yet, the simple fact that I'm willing to reply in the first place and question someone's way of thinking often causes that person to believe that validates their perspective. "Oh, Conker is being defensive and justifying why he's arguing with a long post, that means what I'm saying must be true!" Nah.

---

Case and point
---

Nope, not at all.

---

Unfair is referring to conker and me i believe, since hes said the same thing directly to us earlier itt as well.

Boiled down hes basically saying by posting itt we are attention seeking and its wrong to make posts that people respond to. The whole point of a forum is to make posts and other people respond. Its like hes implying we are trying to be controversial as opposed to actually meaning what we say. Which is rich coming from a user who many accuse of saying shit just to disagree, piss someone off, or provoke a response. Then considering the false shit they claimed itt and arguing semantics after instead of admitting they were wrong, this users opinion has low value atm.

UnfairRepresent posted...

Case and point

The phrase is 'case in point'.

kewldude475 posted...

@STEROLIZER

You should know better than to link to Brandon Tatum. He is a well known anti-black racist, despite being black himself. You should watch Aba and Preach instead, they are devoid of political and racial bias; unlike Brandon Tatum, who is very racist and biased, possibly for views/shilling purposes.

https://youtu.be/9LmjFnZAoA4

At 9 minutes, the guy they're watching went entirely wrong about the entire citizen's arrest description in Georgia, which he was using to support the entire thing. It bugs the hell out of me and makes me doubt he understands shit. Then again, it seems so many people constantly get that wrong about requiring a felony or fleeing it's hard to take them seriously, do you know how sentences work! I don't even think the citizen's arrest is legit anyways. To me, it makes them look like they're trying really hard to say the citizen's arrest thing doesn't make sense...when they could just give valid points why it doesn't make sense rather than incorrect reasons.

As I've said before, I don't think the citizen's arrest thing holds up whether someone says it was anything being committed, so the McMichael's are likely going to be found guilty in some manner. I absolutely think they were stupid to chase him or get out of the vehicle and confront him with the weapon, but I don't know for a fact that their intent was just to kill him. There's a lot of shit that was just idiotic (especially the other issues revolving around the case after the events), and they made some careless or downright negligent decisions that ended up getting someone killed.

---

The more info that comes out, the more stupid the McMichaels look in some ways. I think it was the dad who said he caught Arbery in the work zone before, he says Arbery 'reached in his pants' so they suspected he was armed. And thats why they grabbed their guns when they pursued. Also by the dads on statement , they started following Arbery just because they saw him running down the street in a 'suspicious' way and recognized him from before. To give him some slack, he had been involved in prosecuting Arbery when got arrested for bring a gun to campus and obstructing a cop. So he knew of the victim somewhat. Also Arberys brother has been in prison and jail and his cousin has been arrested. I dunno if Greg the dad knew that, its possible.

So they said they were gonna citizens arrest him. For what? By his own words it doesnt seem they were aware of a crime. Wasnt one of the mcmichaels cars burglarized and a gun stolen? And why did Arbery keep returning to empty houses? No one knows. And theres no proof he was out jogging or getting a drink of water.

Arbery was trying to run away and they blocked him so he went back the other way. They passed him. And parked up the road and Travis the son stood in the road with his shotgun. Dad in the truck bed with his pistol bolstered, Travis has the shotgun held loosely but not aimed. This is the distinction right here. Where all the people calling this a murder keep getting it wrong. This is where bad choices from both sides stacked up. The critical moments before the physical altercation and the shootings.

People say "they" killed Arbery, only the son did. The father didnt take his gun out until between the second and first shots and it was to cover his son , even then he wasnt aiming his gun at them because he kbew he had no clear shot. Theres no intent to kill or shots from the dad. The third man recording is not armed suppossedly or at least not aiming any weapobs or threatening force.

Why did Arbery run in first place when confronted by the neighbor? Why didnt he try to talk his way out of this, when he didnt do anything? People bring up fight or flight, its a weak argument. Why did he jog at the McMichaels truck instead of walking up slowly and analyzing? He moved at the son when he was armed, why? People say they were out to Arbery, thats ridiculous. They could have easily and safely murdered Arbery multiple times and would not have called the police. Im not victim blaming, im wondering to myself why the victim made the choices he did. It was like, everything that could go wrong, went wrong.