Travis McMichael says in his murder trial that he felt threatened by Ahmaud Arbery

So I guess both sides had the right to use self defense?

If someone is following you and will not relent, and then when you try running away at a fast speed they try cutting off your path with a car, is it okay to use self defense against those people?

How about when police arrive? Still okay to use "self defense"?

 

Their claim was that they were going to arrest him. They chased him down and blocked off all possible escape. That's an arrest. And you don't get to threaten to blow someone's head off for not identifying themselves. If you want to know my identity, you need more than that to chase me down and block off all escape routes. Please tell me you understand this.

 

And it is different from Rittenhouse because Rittenhouse was bing chased and the perps were chasing Aubery.

 

And there would have been a different outcome if they had been police?

 

You don't get to shoot somebody for protecting themselves against your unlawful use of force. "I had to shoot the cop who was arresting me for terrorism! He unholstered his gun when I threatened to kill him! It was self defense!" Do you realize how stupid that is?

Unless they are lawfully detaining you, of course you have the right to self defense!

 

Exactly

 

Arbery was caught in a situation similar to KR's - but without a gun.

 

Yes. That is true.

 

There's no evidence they were actually attempting to arrest the suspect. They were trying to slow him down, since he was running away.
If he had merely been walking at a slow pace (and staying in the street) it might have been a different situation.

That's probably exactly why they were trying to slow him down.

This guy wasn't willing to stop and talk.

Your idea of just "calling the police" is totally unrealistic when the person is running away and you're not allowed to do anything to try to slow them down.

 

Yes, a trained officer would not have acted the way the redneck did. Getting that close was stupid, even if he had the legal authority to arrest the guy.

 

Citizens arrest is when one non-LE citizen detains another with the intent of putting them in police custody. Isn't that what these guys were trying to do?

 

No. They cut off his path trying to slow him down a little bit. And were trying to intimidate him to make him stop.

There's not really any solid proof that they were planning on trying to detain him.

 

Slow him down/make him stop for what purpose?

 

For police to arrive. They probably wanted to know his identity.

(Maybe even see if there might be something stolen in his pocket, but that would have been secondary)

There might not be enough evidence of a crime but they still wanted to stop him and know who this person was.
Police do that all the time, when there is the slightest reason to think that person might be suspicious.

For all they knew he might have had a criminal record of burglary, or be wanted by police.

 

Except they testified that this is EXACTLY what they were trying to do.

You mean force him to come to a stop against his will . . . like an arrest.

If all they wanted him to do was slow down (which wouldn't be a legitimate defense anyway) then why did they threaten to shoot him?

WHICH IS HIS LEGAL ****ING RIGHT! You don't get to threaten to kill someone just because they don't want to talk to you! What the hell are you thinking?

Yes, it is. They were capable of identifying him.

 

Thats basically a citizens arrest...

 

Then why does your version of their intent contradict what they had to say for themselves about their intent? Why are they claiming they were attempting an arrest instead of claiming what you are saying here? Have you read their minds or something?

 

If I had a bunch of strangers following me yelling at me to stop...I wouldn't. I'd be taking off.

 

Especially if they were chasing me down . . . brandishing fire arms . . . trying to forcefully stop my escape and threatening to kill me.

 

And no one is saying he didn't have the right to try to run away.

 

Yah. I would be in flight mode. It's commonsense reaction.

 

Oh please. "brandishing" is a semantic argument

 

If he had the right to run away (thank you for admitting that), then he had the right to defend himself when prevented from running away. And no one had the right to threaten to "shoot [his] ******n head off" if he kept running away.

 

Running straight at someone with a gun is not.

 

Not when people are chasing you down in a truck and threatening to shoot you.