All of this back and forth and still nobody can tell me what the defense will use in court?

 

They will say it was self defense because Ahmaud defended himself against two guys that already had guns drawn.

They will say it was self defense because Ahmaud defended himself against two guys that already had guns drawn.

 

If he had a weapon himself that day, would he have been justified in using it?

If he had a weapon himself that day, would he have been justified in using it?

 

Yes.

 

But then the killers would have definitely gotten away with it if he had a weapon.

Yes.

 

But then the killers would have definitely gotten away with it if he had a weapon.

 

I see it the other way, if he would have been able to legally use a weapon, that’s pure self defense.

I see it the other way, if he would have been able to legally use a weapon, that’s pure self defense.

 

But if he's dead, they'd say they knew he had a gun, so that's why they had theirs.

But if he's dead, they'd say they knew he had a gun, so that's why they had theirs.

 

I hear you, I’m just stating how I would present the case to the jury. I would ask them if AA would have been able to use a weapon granted he was chased down by 3 unknown guys with multiple weapons.

How do you think half the heroin addicts get money for their drugs? It's not by going to a 9-5 job everyday. I'm surprised by how many people think it's completely normal to go on a construction site without any suspicion. Thefts at construction sites or remodeled homes is a common thing and the majority of time, in NKY, it's a white person doing it.

 

The market house they were building right next to mine had appliances stolen out of it while they were building it. We got asked if we potentially saw anything. I think a lot of times the subcontractors may be in on it and get a cut.

 

Not that it happened here but I just felt like chiming in.

Allowing citizen arrests seems like a major problem that needs addressed.

 

Sure it might help stop some petty left in retail stores, but I think it leaves things way to open for more dangerous situations. I don't want any random dude, especially with a gun, no matter the color of their skin, trying to make any type of citizen arrest for anything.

Allowing citizen arrests seems like a major problem that needs addressed.

 

Sure it might help stop some petty left in retail stores, but I think it leaves things way to open for more dangerous situations. I don't want any random dude, especially with a gun, no matter the color of their skin, trying to make any type of citizen arrest for anything.

 

What does average person do if 3 unknown people roll up them out of nowhere, with weapons?

 

Run, hide, or fight.

I don't want any random dude, especially with a gun, no matter the color of their skin, trying to make any type of citizen arrest for anything.

 

Yep. I believe Georgia is a "stand your ground" state too. So in an instance where someone attempts a citizens arrest, and walks up on someone who also has a gun, which law(s) take priority if everybody starts shooting?

What does average person do if 3 unknown people roll up them out of nowhere, with weapons?

 

Run, hide, or fight.

 

Anybody that carries, that's an easy answer IMO.

What does average person do if 3 unknown people roll up them out of nowhere, with weapons?

 

Run, hide, or fight.

 

Probably crap their pants and somehow hope they survive it.

Allowing citizen arrests seems like a major problem that needs addressed.

 

Sure it might help stop some petty left in retail stores, but I think it leaves things way to open for more dangerous situations. I don't want any random dude, especially with a gun, no matter the color of their skin, trying to make any type of citizen arrest for anything.

 

The only reason I can think of it still being around is for stores with loss prevention workers. It's common for loss prevention to detain shoplifters until police can arrive. With that said, if that's the only reason for the law, which has been suggested on here, then revise the law to specify it.

 

I could see where many years ago, before radios, smart phones etc it could have been hard to relay information to the police about a suspects information but those days are long gone. I would be surprised if someone from Georgia isn't already writing new legislation regarding the law as it is today.

Edited May 11, 20206 yr by sportsfan41
added sentence to end of post

The only reason I can think of it still being around is for stores with loss prevention. It's common for loss prevention to detain shoplifters until police can arrive. With that said, if that's the only reason for the law, which has been suggested on here, then revise the law to specify it.

 

I could see where many years ago, before radios, smart phones etc it could have been hard to relay information to the police about a suspects information but those days are long gone. I would be surprised if someone from Georgia isn't already writing new legislation regarding the law as it is today.

 

I pray that is the case.

I don’t know what any of us would do in a situation where two men have guns drawn on us. Defusing would be my step if I had to answer right now. Call the police myself, but if I reached for my phone are they going to shoot me because they thought I was reaching for a weapon? He decided to fight back and I can understand that. He felt his life was in danger. Those two shooting him is not self defense. It’s not like he was a trained SEAL and his body considered a dangerous weapon. This case should be open and shut, guilty. The citizens arrest law should not be a loophole for this kind of action. If video has surfaced of him attending clan rallies, then I would say this could observed as pre-meditated.