Ahmaud Arbery

Gatling

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Yes. Guns can go off during a struggle.

Your a firearms expert no sorry no .

No .

Guy:Incognito

Kidchameleon wrote: »

. At this point it is unclear weather Travis McMichaels pulled the trigger on all three occasions or if the gun discharged during the struggle.

Holy ****. this is what youre reduced to now?

He had the gun at the start, he had the gun all the way through, he had the gun at the end. Youll probably say the shot that happened off screen was him but the other 2 were Arbery shooting himself .

Guy:Incognito

Kidchameleon wrote: »

was caused by Mr Arbery trying to grab the shotgun after he ran around the truck.

You mean when he ran around the oposite side of the truck to avoid Travis but then travis moved from the side to the front to head him off, thus instigating the struggle?

Gatling

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

Holy ****. this is what youre reduced to now?

He had the gun at the start, he had the gun all the way through, he had the gun at the end. Youll probably say the shot that happened off screen was him but the other 2 were Arbery shooting himself .

This is it were are now in a completely new dimension stuck with this one man crusade to solely blame Ahmaud Aubrey

Kidchameleon

Guns go off in struggles all the time. I did a quick YouTube search and this was the first result:

The district attorney report posted earlier in thread also speculates that one or more shots may have been accidental:


"The video made by William Bryan clearly shows the shooting in real time. From said video it appears Ahmaud Arbery was running along the right side of the McMichael truck then abruptly turns 90 degrees to the left and attacks Travis McMichaelwho was standing at the front left corner of the truck . A brief skirmish ensues in which it appear Arbery strikes McMichael and appears to grab the shotgun and pull it from McMichael The shot is through Arbery s right hand palm which is consistent with him grabbing and pulling the shotgun at the barrel tip , the 2nd and 3rd wounds are consistent with the struggle for the shotgun as depicted in the video , the angle of the 2nd shot with the rear of the butt stock being pushed away and down from the fight are also consistent with the upward angle of blood plume shown in the video and that McMichael was attempting to push the gun away from Arbery while Arbery was pulling it toward himself. The 3rd shot too appears to be in a struggle over the gun. The angle of the shots and the video show this was from the beginning or almost immediately became-- a fight over the shotgun. Given the fact Arbery initiated the fight, at the point Arbery grabbed the shotgun, under Georgia Law , McMichael was allowed to use deadly force to protect himself. Just as importantly, while we know McMichael had his finger on the trigger, we do not know who caused the firings. Arbery would only had to pull the shotgun approximately 1/ 16th to 1/ 8th of one inch to fire weapon himself and in the height of an altercation this is entirely possible."

Gatling

Kidchameleon wrote: »

The district attorney report posted earlier in thread also speculates that one or more shots may have been accidental

The biased DA lol .


Bahhhhaaaaa

Overheal

Homelander wrote: »

Never heard of Kaitlin Bennet but a legally held firearm being used to highlight the legality of open-carry is hardly the same as someone attempting to access a high-school game with a concealed and illegally held weapon.

I'm not for a second arguing the morality of it, or supporting her political agenda, or even disputing that she's possibly a nutter. No idea.


But hardly even a vaguely credible comparison.

Why are they not the same?

Why wouldn’t a student feel the need to protect themselves and others when there’s a school shooting every week?

I’d like to hear your detailed explanation for why they are worlds apart. She broke the law too.

Gatling

Hopefully mods look into this thread .

Overheal

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Guns go off in struggles all the time. I did a quick YouTube search and this was the first result:

The district attorney report posted earlier in thread also speculates that one or more shots may have been accidental:


"The video made by William Bryan clearly shows the shooting in real time. From said video it appears Ahmaud Arbery was running along the right side of the McMichael truck then abruptly turns 90 degrees to the left and attacks Travis McMichaelwho was standing at the front left corner of the truck . A brief skirmish ensues in which it appear Arbery strikes McMichael and appears to grab the shotgun and pull it from McMichael The shot is through Arbery s right hand palm which is consistent with him grabbing and pulling the shotgun at the barrel tip , the 2nd and 3rd wounds are consistent with the struggle for the shotgun as depicted in the video , the angle of the 2nd shot with the rear of the butt stock being pushed away and down from the fight are also consistent with the upward angle of blood plume shown in the video and that McMichael was attempting to push the gun away from Arbery while Arbery was pulling it toward himself. The 3rd shot too appears to be in a struggle over the gun. The angle of the shots and the video show this was from the beginning or almost immediately became-- a fight over the shotgun. Given the fact Arbery initiated the fight, at the point Arbery grabbed the shotgun, under Georgia Law , McMichael was allowed to use deadly force to protect himself. Just as importantly, while we know McMichael had his finger on the trigger, we do not know who caused the firings. Arbery would only had to pull the shotgun approximately 1/ 16th to 1/ 8th of one inch to fire weapon himself and in the height of an altercation this is entirely possible."

Still grasping at straws to put Arbery on trial. You have a sickness.

Homelander

Overheal wrote: »

Why are they not the same?

Why wouldn’t a student feel the need to protect themselves and others when there’s a school shooting every week?

I’d like to hear your detailed explanation for why they are worlds apart. She broke the law too.

Did she? From what I see it was a legally held fire-arm and as a non-student after graduating, she could open carry.

So all perfectly legal, putting the moral/crappy political statement/whatever aspect of it aside because we're not talking about that.

Now, the other case, I believe, was someone who had an illegally held firearm, and most certainly didn't have a carry license.

So no, they are still not the same at all. I've no idea why he had a gun at that basketball game. I don't pretend to. I'm just stating that they are not similar examples.

Kidchameleon

Homelander wrote: »

Did she? From what I see it was a legally held fire-arm and as a non-student after graduating, she could open carry.

So all perfectly legal, putting the moral/crappy political statement/moral aspect of it aside because we're not talking about that.

Now, the other case, I believe, was someone who had an illegally held firearm, and most certainly didn't have a carry license.

So no, they are still not the same at all. I've no idea why he had a gun at that basketball game. I don't pretend to. I'm just stating that they are not similar examples.

Just out of interest, do you know if the girls firearm was loaded?

Overheal

Homelander wrote: »

Did she? From what I see it was a legally held fire-arm and as a non-student after graduating, she could open carry.

So all perfectly legal, putting the moral/crappy political statement/whatever aspect of it aside because we're not talking about that.

Now, the other case, I believe, was someone who had an illegally held firearm, and most certainly didn't have a carry license.

So no, they are still not the same at all. I've no idea why he had a gun at that basketball game. I don't pretend to. I'm just stating that they are not similar examples.

Okay I see the problem here: that you have no idea wtf you are talking about. She broke the law carrying a firearm onto a college campus. There are laws against that.

Jog on Irish boy. You are out of your pond.

Beasty

Gatling wrote: »

Hopefully mods look into this thread .

Please do not comment on moderation in thread

I'm closing this thread permanently. It appears we have a combination of amateur sleuths and US legal experts speculating about what happened and how. I'm sure the US legal system will assess and address the relevant issues. As and when this episode comes to a conclusion hopefully you will all be able to educate yourselves further

In the meantime, the bickerfest is stopping now