Ahmaud Arbery Shooting
(Twitter via AP)
Previous Post
Next Post

By Russ Bynum and Ben Nadler, AP

Georgia authorities charged a father and son with murder and put them in jail in the February shooting death of a man they had pursued in a truck after spotting him running in their neighborhood.

The charges Thursday came more than two months after Ahmaud Arbery, 25, was killed on a residential street just outside the port city of Brunswick. National outrage over the case swelled this week after cellphone video that appeared to show the shooting was released.

Those close to Arbery celebrated the news but also expressed frustration at the long wait.

“This should have occurred the day it happened,” said Akeem Baker, one of Arbery’s close friends in Brunswick. “There’s no way without the video this would have occurred. I’m just glad the light’s shining very bright on this situation.”

Gregory McMichael, 64, previously told police that he and his son chased after Arbery because they suspected him of being a burglar. Arbery’s mother, Wanda Cooper Jones, has said she thinks her son, a former football player, was just jogging in the Satilla Shores neighborhood before he was killed on a Sunday afternoon.

Benjamin Crump, an attorney for the slain man’s father, Marcus Arbery, said it’s outrageous it took so long for arrests to be made.

“This is the first step to justice,” Crump said in a statement. “This murderous father and son duo took the law into their own hands. It’s a travesty of justice that they enjoyed their freedom for 74 days after taking the life of a young black man who was simply jogging.”

The GBI announced the arrests the day after it began its own investigation at the request of an outside prosecutor. The agency said Gregory McMichael and his 34-year-old son, Travis McMichael, had both been jailed on charges of murder and aggravated assault.

The GBI news release said the McMichaels “confronted Arbery with two firearms. During the encounter, Travis McMichael shot and killed Arbery.” No other details were immediately released.

It was not immediately known whether either of the McMichaels had an attorney who could comment.

Ahmaud Arbery Shooting
This photo combo of images taken Thursday, May 7, 2020, and provided by the Glynn County Detention Center, in Georgia, show Gregory McMichael, left, and his son Travis McMichael. The two have been charged with murder in the February shooting death of Ahmaud Arbery, whom they had pursued in a truck after spotting him running in their neighborhood. (Glynn County Detention Center via AP)

Georgia Bureau of Investigation director Vic Reynolds said in a Facebook post that his agency could only get involved at the request of local authorities, and that didn’t happen until this week.

“I realize that emotions are running high in this community, and they’re running high throughout this state. And the last thing anyone wants to do is extend us any patience. But I also realize that this investigation must be done correctly, and therefore I must ask for a little of your patience,” Reynolds said.

Gregory McMichael served as an investigator for Glynn County District Attorney Jackie Johnson before retiring last year. The connection caused Johnson to recuse herself from the case.

At a news conference in Atlanta before the arrests were announced Thursday, Republican Gov. Brian Kemp told reporters he was confident state investigators would “find the truth.”

“Earlier this week, I watched the video depicting Mr. Arbery’s last moments alive,” Kemp said. “I can tell you it’s absolutely horrific, and Georgians deserve answers.”

Gregory McMichael told police he suspected the runner was the same man filmed by a security camera committing a break-in. He and his grown son, Travis McMichael, grabbed guns and began a pursuit in a pickup truck.

The video shows a black man running at a jogging pace. The truck is stopped in the road ahead of him, with one of the white men standing in the pickup’s bed and the other beside the open driver’s side door.

The runner attempts to pass the pickup on the passenger side, moving just beyond the truck, briefly outside the camera’s view. A gunshot sounds, and the video shows the runner grappling with a man over what appears to be a shotgun or rifle. A second shot can be heard, and the runner can be seen punching the man. A third shot is fired at point-blank range. The runner staggers a few feet and falls face down.

Brunswick defense attorney Alan Tucker identified himself Thursday as the person who shared the video with the radio station. He did not say how he obtained it. In a statement, Tucker said he wasn’t representing anyone involved. He said he shared the video “because my community was being ripped apart by erroneous accusations and assumptions.”

Tucker did not immediately respond to a phone message or an email.

The outcry over the killing reached the White House, where President Donald Trump offered condolences Thursday to Arbery’s family.

“It’s a very sad thing,” Trump said in the Oval Office, “but I will be given a full report this evening.”

Presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden called Arbery’s death a “murder.” During an online roundtable Thursday, Biden said the video shows Arbery “lynched before our very eyes.”

The outside prosecutor now overseeing the case, Tom Durden, had said Monday that he wanted a grand jury to decide whether charges are warranted. Georgia courts are still largely closed because of the coronavirus.

Previous Post
Next Post

504 COMMENTS

  1. Let’s try to wait for more info before we form solid conclusions. There’s all sorts of things that could be going on here. I know, it’s the comment section…

    • I agree but also, watching the video, there does not appear to be any reason to have shot the man. Even if he did commit the burglary, he was not inside the house committing the crime when they shot him.

      • Irrelevant under Georgia law. They had video of him committing the burglary, they attempted to lawfully detain him. He attacked them. End of story.

        • There appears to be somebody of tape doing something, maybe burglary, maybe not. There is zero evidence it was Mr. Arbery at this time. I have not seen any tape showing the alleged burglary, have you? If so, please provide that link.

          What they have is somebody doing something that appears nefarious. Under GA law you cannot citizen arrest someone without directly seeing the event or have direct knowledge that the person did something. they had neither. They only assumed it he was the perpetrator.

        • You missed the part where they were far from their property on a public street. They were in no danger from him and were instead trying to play police officer.

          If you would do the same thing I suggest you discuss it with an attorney who will no doubt advise you to call police and take pictures not shoot people or try to apprehend yourself.

        • Self defense. Not guilty.

          Grabbing the barrel of a shotgun is incredibly stupid!.

          Play stupid games win stupid prizes.

          That being said; not my people not my problem. I would not have gone looking unless they had done great bodily injury to family members or killed a family member.

        • Had Arbery been carrying, he’d have been justified to use it to defend himself. No reasonable, rational human being suspects a man – in jogging clothes in broad daylight – of being a fleeing burglar. I mean, I don’t know if there is a mental disability concern with the McMichaels, but otherwise, not a plausible suspicion in the least.

          This Should Have Been a Defensive Gun Use.

        • It should have been a defensive gun use. If two dudes chased me around in their vehicle, and one got out and threatened me with a shotgun, I’d shoot to stop the threat, exactly as I’ve been trained to do. In every sense of the law, what is on that video is an imminent, deadly threat. In Texas at least, no prosecutor who wanted to keep their job would consider pressing charges against me. If the shotgun toting vigilante died as a result of me stopping the threat, then the driver should also be charged with manslaughter as an accessory to his death.

        • Go read the statute guys… slowly.

          “A private person may arrest an offender if the offense is committed in his presence or within his immediate knowledge. If the offense is a felony and the offender is escaping or attempting to escape, a private person may arrest him upon reasonable and probable grounds of suspicion.”

          Pretty sure residential burglary is a felony in Georgia…

          Unless you’re telling me that a pair of dudes picked a random black guy to chase and couldn’t reasonably ID him from a surveillance video… just because the dudes in question happen to be white. That seems rather racist.

          The only reason this is even in the news is that the blacktivists want to lynch them some whiteys and need another paycheck from the outrage mob.

          The only question here is if the father and son were acting in good faith and within the law. So far, evidence would indicate that they were.

        • Well – they had to leave their property, and pursue him down the street, and apparently provoke him into an attack, to justify shooting him.

          That’s the problem I had with the douchebag, Zimmerman. He didn’t have the balls to address the “suspect” under the streetlights, as the youngster walked past his car. Instead, he stalked the young man into the darkness between the houses.

          When you pick up a weapon, and chase down your suspect, you no longer get to claim “self defense”, or “stand your ground”, or any of the other magical catch-phrases.

          IF, and ONLY IF, they caught their “suspect” in the act, might they have a justifiable killing. Believing that maybe the recognize someone with dark skin several days later doesn’t cut it. Murder.

        • Serge, I can’t remember if English isn’t your first language or not, but that’s not what “in his presence or within his immediate knowledge” means. He was not a “fleeing felon”. What they did was neither the letter or spirit of the law.
          It has nothing to do with race.

        • “If the offense is a felony”

          Just checked, residential burglary is, in fact, a felony in Georgia.

          “a private person may arrest him upon reasonable and probable grounds of suspicion.”

          Pretty sure seeing someone who matches what you saw on video constitutes a “reasonable and probable grounds of suspicion.”

          Was it smart? No. Is it going to cost them? Yes. Was it illegal? No.

        • So if a couple yahoos pulled over and told you they were “detaining” you at gunpoint because they thought you looked like a criminal, you would be okay with it and comply?

          I wouldn’t. I’d be in fear of my life. Too many crazies out there these days.

        • You are the one that needs to re-read the statute and evaluate the timeline of events. The video of someone burglarizing property was done several days prior to this event (i.e. NOT ESCAPING or attempting to ESCAPE).

          What happened is they had video of somebody doing something several days before, then on this day, saw Mr. Arbery running along and ASSUMED it was him they saw on the video.
          Therefore they had no reasonable or probable grounds to conduct a citizen’s arrest.

        • @JWT you are wasting your breath. The break in happened at a different time, even if he was “fleeing” it would not matter under Georgia law. The statue reads immediately not after the fact. Unfortunately we have numerous readers here who can’t understand that. Then you also have to assume he was the actual perpetrator.

          These two murdered this man and yes it should of been a DGU. If they had caught him on the property or fleeing with their property I would be more understanding. Extremely bad decisions and it paints all gun owners as some sort of crazed vigilantes.

        • Citizens can make arrests not detentions. Detentions are strictly a law enforcement function. Arrests (which anybody can do) are made based on probable cause, which these two dudes did not have. Detentions (which only cops can do) are based on reasonable suspicion, which is a stretch in this case. Cold case, no standing on the property (which was a house under construction and not an occupied dwelling), and video surveillance which is very subjective as a piece of evidence. I think cell phones would have been a better tool in this criminal investigation than guns. Try again Serge

        • I find it interesting that all the legal eagles on this site seem to be more familiar with Georgia criminal law that the original prosecutor on the case. You know, the one who said that there was no evidence of a crime.

        • I find it interesting that you don’t know anything about statutory/case law or how to look up legal definitions on Google, but you seem to have very strong opinions on criminal law.

          … also: “Immediate knowledge” is like the whitechurch shooting in Texas and the guys who chased the suspect down. They didnt witness the mass murder and they weren’t in the church. But they were immediately aware of it and acted based on their “immediate knowledge”. Try again Serge

        • I find it interesting that you don’t know anything about statutory/case law or how to look up legal definitions on Google, but you seem to have very strong opinions on criminal law.

        • Again… the original prosecutor on the case agreed with my reading of the statute. You’re assuming dozens of facts not in evidence and have no access to the full record.

        • …says the guy who doesn’t have access to the case file and is make dozens of assumptions.

        • PWRSERGE,

          You apparently don’t know about all the shady dealing WRT Glynn County PD, Sheriff and the DA’s office.

        • No, I just happen to have to initial conclusions of the person assigned the case. Funny how his reading of the Georgia statute seems to match my own.

        • pwrserge. Lawfully detain, perhaps. Murder? Absolutely not, which this is a very clear case of. Brandishing and discharging firearms in a neighborhood on a public roadway (which is a federal offense) committing premeditated murder because they “thought he looked like” someone that broke into a house.. You clearly are extremely ignorant of the law concerning firearms. I suggest you do some research before you stake claims of knowing the law. It really just appears to me that you condone this sort of killing….

        • Yeah… the DA’s office didn’t immediately string up that pair of crackers… they mus be racis

          My rule of thumb, based on how literally EVERY SINGLE PREVIOUS CASE LIKE THIS played out is to trust the original prosecutor on the case.

          My first reaction was “holly shit, this looks bad. Hold on, wait for the rest of the story to come out, because there’s got to be more to it.”
          24 hours later
          – original DA declined to prosecute
          – plain reading of Georgia statute seems to support his decision
          – every racist blacktivist organization under the sun seems to be involved
          Me: “Hmm… second verse seems to be the same as the first… half dozen.”

        • Maybe there is more to this. But all I saw was a guy running, at a leisurely pace down the street, with empty hands. Looked more like a jogger than a burglar to me.

        • OK, now it’s all out in the open about our friend Sergei.

          Is there any doubt in anyone’s mind about the danger individuals like him present to our society, especially when they’re armed with lethal weapons?

          This is exactly the type of individual that is giving POTG a bad name and causing ordinary citizens to become concerned about their safety around armed people.

          If reasonable POTG do not begin ostracizing individuals like this, and reporting the especially crazy ones to the relevant authorities, we will see our rights continue to eroade.

          When events like this shooting in Georgia occur, it’s easy to see why the Karens want to disarm their fellow citizens, and remember the perpetrators of this murder were law-enforcement experienced who would work for the prosecutors office for years.
          Does anyone honestly think this is the very first time dad had colored outside the lines regarding suspects and their rights?

          “That’s the night that the lights went out in Georgia… “

        • miner. Your love of red flags says a lot about you. You are the flip side of serge. He’s the uber right wing nutter and you’re the uber left wing nutter.

          Sensible folk should pay no attention to either one of you. Except as examples.

        • Yeah… How dare I not support a lynch mob after the original DA on the case laid out a good argument for why no crime occurred? I’m not going to make predictions, but this seems to be another Martin / Brown case. I don’t like political prosecutions and I certainly don’t like forum shopping.

          But hey, you can call me a racist all you want. I don’t give a shit. Why? Because I didn’t grow up in a society where an accusation of racism is a scarlet letter. I happen to apply reason and logic to my arguments rather than emotion and racebaiting.

          You want to convince me that the original DA was wrong or acting because of bias? Prove the bias. Otherwise, I’m going to defer to the man on the ground who has been an elected DA for about as long as I have been alive. You’d think that if your claims were true, the guy would have been up on federal civil rights charges YEARS ago.

        • Great! Now Miner49er showed up to argue with Serge. This comment thread is never going to die now!

        • Oh, I’m done shouting at a wall. It seems that the crowd here is ready to grab some rope and string up a pair of guys for the crime of being politically inconvenient while white. Forget that we don’t have access to the file or that the original DA who did yeeted the case.

          Let’s all put on our pink hats and grab our pitchforks over our moral indignation and a total lack of knowledge of the case or relevant law. Certainly we are more qualified to judge the facts of the case and applicable law than an elected DA who has been prosecuting cases for longer than a lot of us have been alive.

          I’ve lived long enough to know that nothing the mainstream media prints can be trusted at face value. I defer to the people on the ground. We’ll see how it turns out. But I’m done.

        • No crime report of any burglary, no video has surfaced

          They had no right to detain him.
          He was confronted with the crime of kidnap and presenting a firearm.
          He had a right to resist.
          They had no right to harm him.
          Murder – or Lynching.
          I served as an officer for 23 years. My degree is Criminal Justice.
          I am shocked it took so long to charge these men, that is the real problem.
          the original DA was a fool. This should have went to the Grand Jury.

          BTW– the Chief and the top staff were indicted in Feb on different charges!

        • ALERT!! ALERT!!

          Use of the racial slur “cracker” detected. Everyone go to your safe space while we clean this mess up!! Oh wait, it’s just a slur against honkeys. Eh, never mind, guys you can come back out. White people aren’t offended by those naughty words, and if they are, so what! They’re white!

        • Law only applies if the victim is absolutely sure they have the right person to accuse. No half baked guessing games, or let me see or I thoughts, etc. If you have a video then you take said video to the police.
          To see where the so called suspect goes you can follow the so called suspect from a non confrontational distance. And that could get you a stalking charge if the suspect wasn’t who you thought. No matter what you do not confront the suspect in this case PERIOD.
          In order for the law to apply to the two in jail for murder they needed both feet firmly inside the bounds of the law. Straddling the fence and semantics don’t cut it.

        • There is a lot more information out there for you to read and listen to. There’s a report and a 9-1-1 call to go along with the video. Consume that evidence if you don’t want to work from a position of bias.

          The reason these 3 men were not charged is because the DA had a personal connection with the killers. The 2nd DA also had a personal connection with the killers. The 3rd DA decided not even attempt to touch such a nuclear case. The killers had worked for the police and DA office before the killing of Arbery.

          Arbery tried to run from 3 men, 2 trucks and 2 guns. Of course race plays a part in the situation because it’s Georgia and most of the men involved with the case are old.

          The father and son were armed with a shotgun and pistol. The father was in the back of the trunk and the son was driving. Their buddy was in another truck filming and on the phone. The son drove the trunk down the road to cut of Arbery again for the final time. The son got out of the truck and pointed the gun in the direction of Arbery and demanded he stop for a chat. Arbergy attempted to dodge the shotgun carrying man by quickly running to the right side of the truck. The father had his pistol in his hand while Arbery ran around the truck (again). The son moved to the front of the truck this time to intercept Arbery. Then Arbery ran toward the son, this is when he was shot in the hand. The situation became a fight for life. Arbery was shot again while he was punching, he was shot a third time (fatally) when he couldn’t hold onto the gun.

          The law is not on the side of the killers nor is morality. The 3rd suspect is lucky he was recording and far removed from the shooting because he too would be charged, but now he will become a witness against the killers. What a friend…

          The video is said to have been leaked by a lawyer because of the corruption in government. The case was covered up by people who worked with the killers. It was the only way to bring attention to the homicide. The person who leaked it is an older white man.

          If you think white men won’t protect other white men, because those men don’t realize they are white men, you are not living in the real world. Same applies for cops protecting cops because they are cops. This is normal for the U.S.. I already predicted it would turn out to be because the white men involved had connections with the government. It’s way too common in America especially in the not too distant past.

          Don’t lie by saying this shit ain’t common and never happens in Republican areas.

          Do you remember Bradford cover up? Of course not because he was a young black male assumed to be a felon, thus summarily executed without warning. Go back and read all the comments from white men on that one.

          This issue is a major reason why many moral men (of all colors) left the NRA.

        • They had video of SOMEONE committing a burglary. Absolutely no reason for this!

        • @pwrserge
          I am sure you have read the statute slowly, without a doubt.

          “Attempting to escape” means trying to flee the scene of the crime. That man was in the street, and if he did commit the crime, he already escaped. One does not have the right to arm themselves and look for the person who they think committed the crime, that is revenge.

          You cannot look for someone after the crime, you cannot arm yourself and go to their house to arrest them, or drive around and look for them.

        • Paul – You’re an IDIOT! Try going back and reading the transcripts of the Zimmerman trial. Zimmerman was returning to his vehicle when Trayvon ambushed him – THAT IS A FACT! He had Zimmerman on the ground beating his head against the pavement and was trying to take Z’s gun when Z shot him. It’s stupid f**ks like you who insist on continuing to tell lies that are the problem – you demented asswipes can’t accept the truth because it never fits your narrative!

        • Paul said:

          “That’s the problem I had with the douchebag, Zimmerman. He didn’t have the balls to address the “suspect” under the streetlights, as the youngster walked past his car. Instead, he stalked the young man into the darkness between the houses.”

          Didn’t happen like that Paul. Zimmerman observed the burglar Trayvon(yes, Trayvon had committed at least one burglary before coming to Zimmerman’s neighborhood) going between houses and peering into windows. While it was uncomfortably cool and raining, mind you. Zimmerman called 911 and reported Trayvon was acting suspiciously. Why would he “address” him?

        • pwserge said:
          “They had video of him committing the burglary, they attempted to lawfully detain him. He attacked them. End of story.”

          Then jwtaylor said:
          “Exactly right, they committed murder. End of story.”

          Wait, how did you get from “video of him committing the burglary…lawfully detain him” to your “they committed murder”?

        • Actually, that’s incorrect. § 17-4-60 only allows a “citizen’s arrest” “if the offense is committed in his presence or within his immediate knowledge.”

          These lunatics allegedly had video from a burglary of an under-construction house days earlier (oddly enough, when a real reporter checked incident reports, no such burglary had been reported to the police). They thought Arbery LOOKED like the same person; they didn’t know for sure, which is why they said they wanted to talk to him. Gregory McMichael told 911 that a suspicious person was running through the neighborhood. The 911 operator directly asked him, “I just need to know what he was doing wrong, was he just on the premises and not supposed to be?” McMichael was unable to cite a definite crime, much less one that would justify lethal force.

          It’s also worth noting that the McMichaels did not tell the police that they were doing a citizen’s arrest. That was invented several weeks later by Waycross DA Barnhill.

          The video also conflicts with what they told they police, omitting the first shot by Travis BEFORE he and Arbery were enaged physically.

        • @Paul: That douchebag Zimmerman was on the phone with 911 and was heading back to his truck when Saint Trayvon attacked him in what his girlfriend described as a state of homophobic rage. Martin was a few hundred feet from his temporary residence when he decided to go after Zimmerman. These are all facts placed in evidence during Zimmerman’s trial. If you are not familiar with facts you should refrain from editorializing.

        • pwrserge would have been right at home defending lynchings in the 1800s because “a woman said he whistled at her”

        • “He attacked them. End of story.” You are either a complete idiot or a racist. Maybe both?

        • No bro, he ‘looked like’ a guy who committed a crime. And the ‘look like’ came from a doorbell camera. These two yahoos armed up and hunted the man down. Naturally an armed confrontation that they causes ensued and the ‘looks like’ guy got smoked.

          They picked that fight and killed a man. Murder 2 at least.

        • “The homeowner, who declined to share the clips with CNN, said there were previous videos on other occasions showing a man entering the property and stealing fishing tackle but he could not identify the man and he did not file a police report.”

          Want to try again, or is it too dim with your head up your own ass for you to actually use critical thinking for once?

        • They did not have a video of him committing a burglary, they had a video of someone committing a burglary a few weeks/months ago. From what you can see in the video, one truck was parked on the road in front of him while another was coming up in the back.(Videoing) I saw an unarmed black man jogging and getting shot and killed.

        • But there is no video of a home burglary. There are also no police reports of a home burglary in that time frame except for a report of someone stealing a gun that was left in a vehicle.
          That vehicle was one of the shooters.

        • No. At the time f the killing they did now have the tape. I was downloaded later.
          Further, there a multiple parts of the tape that shows people doing the same thing. Have they been tracked down and arrested?

      • “I agree but also, watching the video, there does not appear to be any reason to have shot the man.”

        Except for the attempting at wresting away the victim’s shotgun at 0:15, or the punch to the head of the victim at 0:23.

        “Even if he did commit the burglary, he was not inside the house committing the crime when they shot him.”

        Right, the convicted felon/current burglar was shot while attacking his victim.

        • You can’t stick a shotgun in someone’s face then claim self defense when they are shot trying to take it away from you.

          If these men had called 911 and followed the jogger they suspected of trespassing days prior at a distance, this never would have made the news.

          Even if they chased down the right man, they are going to fight an uphill battle in court. Most jurors are going to be wondering why the men didn’t let the police handle this. It really is what most reasonable people would do. Especially over a minor property crime. It’s not like the victim was accused of raping their daughter or drove by in their stolen car.

        • Mister Fleas – The McMichaels were not victims. Aubrey was jogging down the street at 1pm and these two used their truck to cut him off and stop him several times. He continued to jog and ran around the truck. The son got out of the truck at once point with a shotgun.

          The GA law requires someone to have witnessed a crime firsthand and recently (meaning minutes). These two did not witness a crime and had ZERO right to stop him. They tried to stop him illegally, then stopped him with a shotgun. They were the aggressors, they cannot claim self defense when they were the ones who instigated the entire situation.

          What they did was illegal and they are going to prison for decades if not life.

    • Did they go through and review the decision making process? Nope. They could have stopped any number of times before the shooting. Stopping and thinking. Mature adult thinking.
      “Wait. Let’s think this over. What if we do this, then what things (plural) could happen as resulting consequences?”

      One stupid mistake after another, compounded and cascading into an event that should have been foreseen.

      Father and son will go to prison for a long time. Blood on their hands. Their families destroyed. Not for bigotry or racism. For not thinking things through. For being stupid. For bring loaded weapons thinking they were badges of authority and persuasion.

      What were those 4 rules of firearms safety?
      Dumb and dumber.

      • Look at the zimmerman case and people saying this is similar, it’s not. zimmerman followed martin why talking to 911. The 911 dispatcher asked are you following him, zimmerman said yes and the 911 dispatcher said we don’t need you to do that. From the testimony at trial, it was proven zimmerman stopped following martin and walking back to his car to meet the cop. martin had run around the building and circled around to confront zimmerman, that’s when the altercation happened and martin was the aggressor.

        In this case the father and son pursued and tried to use the truck to stop Arbery several times then exited the truck with a shotgun. They instigated everything here.

        At the very most they should have followed Arbery while talking to 911 and giving them the description and location. They did not witness a crime, they had zero right to try to stop Arbery and are going to prison.

    • Hello everyone, moving forward, here is a question to answer (privately to yourself), without thinking about it.

      Would you really attack or shoot someone, while that individual(s) was actively avoiding (running away) from you, when said individual(s) were not currently, and did not previously *aggressively approach or *attack you, or anyone in your care?

      The question is “would you?” There is no question about your reasoning for doing so; either way.

      I would request TTAG to generate a poll for this question; and count the moral failures.

  2. No reason to take the law into your own hands. The statement “running through our neighborhood”… is very telling. You don’t own your neighborhood, anyone can jog through your neighborhood in this Country… If you suspect someone is/has committed a crime, take pictures/video and turn that into the police.

    • And how many times does your house or your neighbor’s house have to be broken into with no action by the police before it’s time to take the law into your own hands?

      • Yeah Dan, you’re right, gun down whoever you think did it!

        I’m so glad you’re armed with lethal weapons, you certainly do present a real benefit to society.

        • I don’t think making blanket statements is good response to blanket statements….. what’s your point Miner49? Without the sarcasm and screaming.

        • miner is a well known leftist troll that looks for any excuse to disarm people. That’s the only point he has.

        • Jay, I’m not looking to disarm everybody and you know it.

          But there is no question, I don’t think everybody has the mental stability or temperament to walk around with a lethal weapon and employ it at will.

          Our friend Sergei here is a perfect example, he stands ready to do exactly what these two perpetrators did, gun down an innocent man.

          Do you really believe that every citizen in America should have a lethal weapon with him at all times, every single citizen without respect to the mental capacity or temperament?

          The supreme court does not agree with you, they’ve already ruled on this very situation in 1905 in Jacobson v Massachusetts.

          “The liberty secured by the Constitution of the United States does not import an absolute right in each person to be at all times, and in all circumstances, wholly freed from restraint, nor is it an element in such liberty that one person, or a minority of persons residing in any community and enjoying the benefits of its local government, should have power to dominate the majority when supported in their action by the authority of the State.”

          Of course, you will probably claim that those justices were leftist activist judges, in league with the secret muslim Obama, all the way back in 1905.

        • Continuing the mental stability argument…Miner, will you be voting for Joe Biden to be the commander in chief of the most powerful military on the planet? If so, it’s hard to take your argument seriously for obvious reasons.

        • I disagree with Miner a lot. We’ve had it out a couple times. But I agree here. 100%. When give the question: “How long before you take the law into your own hands when the cops refuse to do something?” Think of the repercussions when you are wrong, and then decide if being a vigilante is worth it. Whole lotta nope. Defend yourself and your own household. Plain and simple. That’s the problem with these retired tyran… LEOs… they still think they have a right to manipulate the law in their favor and investigate further. Wrong. Especially when there is zero evidence other than a borderline mistaken identity. Even if it was him, was he doing anything illegal at the time? So proving that it was in fact him would need to be rock solid, because he was not doing anything illegal. And then deciding that an ambush was the correct tactic based on having seen nothing illegal and convincing yourself that is was the criminal is definitely not a good plan of action either.

      • “Take the law into your own hands” is a very subjective statement. In this case they killed a guy who cannot be linked to said burglaries and now they have been arrested for murder. In this case “taking the law into their own hands” wasn’t a great idea. It might be a good idea in other circumstances, but definitely not in this case.

        • The original DA on the case disagrees.
          “Third
          It appears Travis McMichael,Greg McMichael, and Bryan William were following, in
          pursuit burglary suspect, with solid firsthand probable cause, in their neighborhood, and
          asking/ telling him to stop. It appears their intent was to stop and hold this criminal suspect until
          law enforcement arrived. Under Georgia Law this is perfectly legal,”

          https://int.nyt.com/data/documenthelper/6916-george-barnhill-letter-to-glyn/b52fa09cdc974b970b79/optimized/full.pdf#page=1

        • Those are some very legal sounding buzz words you’re using there, but the way you’re using them is nonsense and illustrates your ignorance…. please just stop Serge.

        • The guy in the back of the pickup was a retired investigator who previously worked for the DA who decided not to prosecute. His son is the shooter. So the DA was protecting one of her own, which she has a reputation for. She protected cops in the Caroline Small shooting, and then she helped one of those cops bond out after stalking his ex-wife and then getting into an armed standoff with the police. That same ex-cop that she protected by preventing a witness from testifying at the bond hearing tracked down his estranged wife (Katie Sasser) and killed her two months later, after killing her male friend in front of her. Yeah, we should really trust the experienced judgement of Glynn County DA Jackie Johnson. I used to live in Brunswick, GA, for years. This was murder, not citizens arrest.

        • Yup and when some good old boys lynched black men in the olden days that’s exactly what they’d say too.

          There’s a reason the FBI had to step in to start prosecuting hate crimes and it is exactly this. Two bubbas can murder a man in broad daylight and racists will come up with an excuse to defend them.