Quite so. Same here in OC, as my post indicated.

There are plenty of crappy white neighborhoods in the US. I don't think young people get pulled over to the same degree there. But they also tend to be more rural towns so I'm not sure if that impacts things.

Typical bad basic logic.

The following statements are consistent.

The vast majority of dangerous encounters have nothing to do with the police.
The most dangerous encounter most people will ever have is with a police office.

(Hint: most people aren't involved in criminal activity.)

You're not from the USA, and probably genuinely can't imagine how deeply racist south Georgia is. The way Europeans talk about gypsies - it's like that.

yeah. i've yet to see any claim that they previously personally witnessed an alleged thief at any time prior to the incident or that their was a description of anyone. i may have missed it.

but it clearly looks like they saw an african american walking around a construction site and immediately jumped to "hey that black guy must be the thief, chase him down with guns!" that would certainly be a "racial motive" to the incident..

Maybe he identified himself with a Boston accent, and they thought he said "armed robbery".

I was coming to this thread to point out how I realized this yesterday but you beat me by 12 minutes.

Always the bridesmaid, never the bride, eh, Luckbox?

It's better that way. I'm sure the observation has been made elsewhere as well of course.

No I'm not and while I'm sure there's racism in Georgia, I wouldn't have the same experience & perspective as yourself, so your point is taken in this regard.

That said the evidence indicates they simply felt he was a burglar, they identified him as being from the cctv footage when calling 911. They saw him running past their home and rather than leave it at calling 911 they got all gung ho and armed themselves which is intent to confront and considering their guns were loaded, intent to potentially kill. Plus a third neighbour followed and cut Mr Arbery off and it's for these reasons they deserve to go to trial.

Did they recognise him from the cctv footage or simply equate any black guy running past their house as a burglar? I don't know. But again considering their mentioning him in connection with the security footage and from what I've read/watched, they have no history of racism, again the facts and evidence so far indicates they felt they were chasing a burglar which again doesn't justify things in the slightest but doesn't appear to be as simple as the black guy lynched while jogging narrative.
But again I do hear you on your point. The facts will come out at trial hopefully. But you guys seem to have enough problems with both guns and racism/issues as in quite serious problems. When shootings like this happen which combines both, then people should take a step back and observe objectively, free of political ideology regardless of what stripe, before engaging in emotive narratives which won't help things.

I agree that the two statements can both be true, but I'm very confident that the bolded is false.

To clarify on my earlier post, while I presently don't see a racial motive, I'm quite open minded that racism may indeed have been a factor and will readily acknowledge this if new information comes to light.

Idk...I've only one time had people attempt to rob me (I ran) but I've had numerous encounters with police. So while it isn't true for me it easily could be.

Luckbox, are these the cops who were harrassing you?

Reads three times.

Groans.

(well played)

Trust us (Americans).
It was a factor.

Yeah I kinda ****ed that up... should have been more like "they thought he was from Boston and said 'armed robbery'".

pleas stop now.
(still funny though)

Again I'm taking this on board. However my pet bugbear is false narratives in criminal cases and the racism angle could well be a false narrative. So again at present I don't see a racist motive here and prefer to wait until more facts come to light. If a history of racism is uncovered wrt the McMichaels I'll readily acknowledge this but so far there hasn't been anything like that uncovered and I reckon it would have surfaced by now, so again at present I'll reserve judgement.

when we say racism was obviously a factor we aren't saying they chased him down and murdered him specifically because he was black. i know a lot of racism defenders want the only definition of racism to be hitting minorities with sticks while also yelling racial slurs at them.

we're saying they picked him out and decided that he must be their thief without any proof because he was black. are you really saying that you don't think there was a racist motive in them assuming he must be the thief because he was african american? because if so that is a much bigger problem.

+1

This.

And I would add that they used lethal force for the same reason.
Remember, this was an unarmed man trying to flee. He only fought when cornered.

As far as the media narrative, fair enough. Race tensions sell news clicks.
But I'm also having a hard time believing that the prosecutor would have swept it under the rug so easily if not for race. And if it's handled properly from day one it's a minor story and doesn't cause a public outcry. (which is what the media is reporting)

So I'm not blaming the media on this one. They're not without sin but this is a real story with real racial components imo.


And for the record, Arbery doesn't appear to be a model citizen and may very well have been up to no good. The solution for that is following him at a safe distance while waiting for the police and hopefully id-ing him. Even making some verbal contact would have been okay (although probably dumb) but to go hands on ? And to feel so entitled that they'd use deadly force when he didn't comply ? Nah, that isn't happening with a local white kid.

You don't know that and have no way of knowing what they were thinking and have offered absolutely nothing to base your claim on other than the victim was black & the killers (and hopefully soon to be convicted murderers) were white.

Again you've offered nothing to support your assertion regarding their assuming anything and here's what I actually wrote:
I also fully outlined my reasons for my position- I'm going by the evidence so far instead of automatically seeing race and presuming accordingly.
I'm not a racism defender either so I think we're good and racism has a standard definition, not what people decide it to be, so I'm dismissing your comment in that regard.

While you're all seeing this in racial terms, non Americans are still trying to wrap their heads around the fact that in America an armed person can shoot an unarmed person (on the street as opposed to defending their home) and get away with it, like George Zimmerman and Roderick Scott and hopefully not the McMichaels. I find that insane.

But unless you can provide actual evidence of racism instead of basically "Hey the dude was black, the killers were white and it happened in Redneckville Georgia" then again at present, I don't see a racist motivation here although again am quite open minded that it could have very well been.Again I'd rather wait until more info came to light in this regard. Rather than assume stuff.

I don't like to generalise but from what I can see Americans seem race obsessed, or if not racial issues certainly seem to permeate every aspect of your society. So I'm not sure if I can regard you as reliable sources when you immediately assert racism in horrible shootings such as this. So again until I get further evidence, I'll retain my position, cheers.

Because he was black? Again we've nothing solid to base this on except presumption due to the races involved.

I completely agree.

I can't comment on the prosecutor but I'll say fair enough on the rest. I think there should be a public outcry on shootings like this in general, more so if it emerges that racism was indeed the motive. Deliberately stoking racial tensions by peddling narratives in order to sell copy is the epitome of irresponsible journalism, and I've no time for false narratives, they've caused serious damage in several high profile crime cases and this is a high profile crime. They have an ethical responsibility to factually report instead of shaping a potentially false narrative, so I don't think they deserve a pass in this regard.


I don't care if he wasn't a model citizen there was zero justification for what the McMichaels did, and those in general who bring this up on various forums/media outlets, are attempting to justify the McMichaels crimes imo.

Very much agreed minus the verbal contact part (They'd no business interacting with him at all, if they had suspicions they should have limited their action to calling 911, the end and nothing more) and have pretty much said the same thing itt.
Again can't comment on that and we've no way of knowing, that's just an assumption.We don't know how many shootings occurred in Georgia of unarmed people black or white that simply didn't make national news, for example so again I can't comment.

What's the standard definition?