Y'all have got to understand that Brunswick is the deepest most foul smelling part of the Georgia swamps. If you aren't from down there you probably can't really judge just how racist these gentleman surely are. The 64 year old one is old enough to remember when folks down there went out shooting at black people just for fun.

Some of y'all blathering on about the criminal record the victim might have and stand your ground.

When some redneck crazies with guns in a pickup run you down, you have a right to stand your ground. When someone points a gun, that's an assault and a threat of deadly violence, and you have a right to stand your ground (a moral right at any rate). And it doesn't matter how many things a person might have robbed if he's unarmed and running he's not the ****ing cause of the situation mother****ers.

Some of you are just stupid, racist mother****ers defending stupid racist mother****ers.

As we can see itt, they'll come up with any excuse to justify it.

His name was Ahmaud Marquez Arbery. His dad's name is Marcus Arbery Sr., older brother Marcus Arbery Jr. and a sister Jasmine Arbery. Just search that local news site for Arbery and you'll see many of their athletic accomplishments proudly mentioned in articles, as well as an updated article with his actual name about weapon possession.

It seems pretty likely that name could easily be confused with "Avery" by the newspaper. Take a step back from the computer.

Imagine the egg on your face when your own source calls him a jogger too. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...d-justice.html No surprise though really, considering how often you fail to read or selectively "forget" information that doesn't fit your narrative.

Today would have been Ahmaud Arbery's 26th birthday.

DailyMail is a sensational British tabloid. The are better than our national MSM as far as giving actual details about US events (which says a lot about our MSM), but they definitely have their own agenda and are more than willing to run with narratives to fit that agenda.

But thanks for playing.

Normally you need to have a degree of reasonableness to use force.
So I wouldn't agree that they're completely different. Some of the stand your ground laws may not have that component, I'm not sure. And not a lawyer.

Anyway, this is a case of no video and the guy who has friends in the DA's office literally gets away with murder. It's also a race issue but there's no cure for that down there. Haters gonna hate.

Thanks for putting your dumb ****ery on display again on this new account.

Okay.

But what's your point regarding this story ?
What did the US MSM get wrong ? I'm not seeing it.

This is all a giant tangent, but the point is that as of yesterday the people coming into this thread that only saw MSM reporting had very strong opinions on the incident, but no clue about what actually happened, and I had to direct them to DailyMail so they could at less get some basic facts on the case.

This isn't a one off. This seems to be the rule. I think this indicates a big problem with how our MSM operates. You are free to disagree.

Given that multiple people have independently confirmed that he was a regular jogger and police stated that there were no reported break-ins in the neighbourhood at all this year up until his murder then yeah, it seems like he was probably out jogging.

I know that you don't think your conclusions to be based on ideology but you are giving greater precedence to your ideas about how the the media act than actual independent evidence. At that point there is no justification behind your conclusion other than your a priori biases.

The part you seem unable to accept is that I am not basing my deductions off of some untested, abstract principle of how the world works. I am basing them off of my experience of how the media works. The next time I cook some food on the stove I am not going to stick my hand in the flame, not because of ideology, but because of my intuition of what would happen based on life experiences and my understanding of how the world works.

Also, I am not infallible. I could be wrong. But my intuitions about when the media is pushing red herrings is right way more than they are wrong IMO. I think the whole jogging thing is a red herring. You disagree. We will probably find out at some point.

Kelhus independently confirmed this by thinking about it.

You're picking the wrong hill to die on.
The video was out yesterday too.

Also, FWIW no reported break-ins and no break-ins are 2 very different things. For good or bad, in USA#165 petty crimes pretty much never get solved or resolved, or even investigated, so most people never bother to report them, especially as the police generally make it a big inconvenience and pain in the ass to you if you do try to report them as they don't want to waste their time on it.

Yeah. That's what I figured.
You're just making excuses for the execution.
WTF ?

Stop. Please.

Rapes are notoriously under-reported, so he was probably a rapist, amirite?

You realise that this is exactly the same as what you always rant about right? People's ideologies are always reflections of their experiences and understanding of how the world works. The only difference between your view of the media and what you criticise everyone for is that one comes from your own personal experience and one comes from other people's experience.

As I've said before, literally everyone views the world through their own ideological lenses that have been formed based on their own experiences and understanding. In politics that can cause frustration when people have very different lenses but is inevitable so I try not to let it bother me. It is your constant rants at others combined with a complete inability to recognise that your own ideological biases have a huge influence on your own posts that frustrates me.

I am not dying on any hill. I am saying what happened. The rest of you guys are rewriting history.

No one that came into this thread that had seen the video had the slightest clue what had happened. They all literally thought the guy was just jogging and the vigilantes pulled him over randomly to execute him, because that is the narrative the MSM was pushing.

No one had a clue that they guys in the truck and the guy taking the video were actively chasing him, allegedly because they thought he had committed a crime, and had even called the police to report it while they were chasing him.

FYP.

Really? I first read saw about this story on unstuck and that's pretty much exactly what people were saying there. Who was saying anything about pulling over to randomly execute him, ITT or elsewere?

But that is what happened. The fact that they called the cops and suspected him of trespassing or a property crime isn't a justification of what they did.

He was denied due process which is to say he was dealt with randomly.

Well, you seem to be making some abstract point that everything anyone thinks is based off ideology. In this framework then I don't think I am especially different than the other 6 billion people on the planet, so I guess I am guilty of ideology too. If we are using this framework, then I will say some ideologies are better than others, and if you ideology leads you to take everything the MSM says or insinuates at face value, then you probably should recalibrate your ideology.

And I would say that if your ideology says to disbelieve everything the MSM says regardless of how much evidence there is to support it then you should probably recalibrate your ideology. Just this week you have calling two different things "red herrings" with no evidence except your a priori views about media narratives. One you were categorically incorrect about and the other is essentially an unfalsifiable claim but has plenty of circumstantial evidence that suggests you are wrong.

And to be clear re the bolded, that is basically what I'm saying. Everyone filters everything through their own ideological lens and you are no different from anyone in that regard but insist on criticising everyone else for it anyway.

I'm super confused about why you are so shot in the ass with the Daily Mail, given your intuition that the jogging angle is false. Having now looked at more stories on this incident, it seems that The Daily Mail promoted the narrative you describe as a "red herring" as least as aggressively as other outlets I have seen. For ****'s sake, the headline of the Daily Mail article was: "Horror moment two white men shoot an unarmed black jogger dead in their neighborhood while they were 'looking for a burglar' as calls mount for pair to be charged".

I watched the video. I can't say for sure whether he was running for exercise or some other reason, but the more important point is that I have not seen any evidence that he was actually committing a crime or that it was reasonable for these guys to think he was committing a crime, other than possibly trespassing.

And even if they thought he had committed a burglary, and even if that belief was objectively reasonable, it was LOL idiotic for them to play the role of gun-toting vigilantes. I feel comfortable saying that without knowing the intricacies of Georgia law.

What if I told you we have video evidence of him jogging?

Are you really amazed by it, knowing what you know about these guys?

But that's the whole point.