2 trials, 1 theme: White men taking law into their own hands

Your title is dishonest. Kyle didn't "take the law into his own hands" he obeyed the law as was proven in a court of law.

The only reason he shot anybody was because they took the law into their own hands. He had to defend himself against vigilantes.

The McMichaels weren't.

You are operating completely without facts.

 

They create their own imaginary narrative completely out of whole cloth.

They're saying Kyle was a vigilante no the riots were made up of vigilantes that's what a riot is. It was vigilantes that threatens Kyle and that he had no choice to shoot.

They're all 100% for vigilantism as long as it's the right kind. But if you dare to defend yourself against these bloodthirsty murderous vigilantes you should be lynched and that's what they were trying to do with Kyle.

 

Maybe you misunderstood. Kyle was carrying a rifle, a medbag and a real literal fire extinguisher when the arsonist began chasing him. Video of him carrying these items to the car lot where he was attacked was shown at the trial. He wasn't metaphorically putting out fires, he was literally on his way to put out vehicles fires that were possibly started by the arsonist who attacked him when he got there.

Would you say that putting out arson fires is vigilanteism?

 

Simple, lawful self defense, it was clear to anyone it could be a dangerous area to work in, as such that was a common sense thing to do.

 

But they are not obligated to protect anyone's property.

 

In many parts of the country they don't.

 

Interesting; where I live they do help people in distress or at least from what I've witnessed before.

 

Some cops do do that, but they are not obligated to. They can let us all die and do not have to protect us, and it’s been that way for a while now.

https://mises.org/power-market/police-have-no-duty-protect-you-federal-court-affirms-yet-again

https://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/28/...ot-have-a-constitutional-duty-to-protect.html

 

Denying ones ability to carry in public also comes with problems. While you and I enjoy the luxury of having this discussion from safety, criminals prefer unarmed victims. Police officers are the first to see crime scenes and are overwhelmingly in favor of armed citizens.

 

They may and probably will but are not obligated by law to do such.

 

They are in Texas.

 

Untrue.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/04-278.ZS.html

 

Here in Texas we really don't care what northern, blue, radical liberals say:
https://www.kwtx.com/content/news/G...ivate-property-during-protests-570894561.html
https://www.kwtx.com/content/news/G...ivate-property-during-protests-570894561.html

 

I spent a year in Iraq as a civilian supporting over a thousand American civilian contract firefighters. The left always called us "mercenaries". Can you imagine? "Mercenary" firefighters?

 

Is the analogy meant to suggest that you believe the arsonist attacked Kyle not because Kyle had a fire extinguisher, but because Kyle had a rifle?

 

I was looking to get into that many years ago. I recall they required an ARFF cert that I didn't have.

Wasn't it a 'mercenary' company (like Blackwater or etc) that employed them? I don't think there's necessarily anything wrong with being a mercenary. Mercs can still choose to take on 'good' or 'bad' jobs. The bonus to merc work (aside from the money ofc) is unlike professional military, I understand one can usually refuse immoral orders and instead quit and go home. Granted, doing so probably makes one 'blacklisted' from that profession, but thats a lot better than a dishonorable discharge or a military prison imo.

 

I spent two years in Iraq as a civilian contractor. My first year was training the NEW Iraqi Army. It was an amazing time. I had trained Americans in Basic long before and it was night and day. Arab recruits don't give a damn about country or patriotism. Its all all about religion, religion and such.

 

Liberals. Put up or shut up. Please attempt to repeal the 2nd Amendment. And do this before the next midterm elections.

 

Liberals declared "sanctuary cities" where federal immigration laws are simply ignored. Texas is now a "2d amendment sanctuary STATE"... As of 1 September we have "Constitutional Carry" which is open or concealed carry... either one... for any legal gun owner. And silencers made in Texas are exempt from federal gun laws. TEXAS ROCKS!

 

Likewise here in WV other than with respect to suppressors. The liberals said there would be wild west shoot outs and blood running in the streets when Constitutional carry was passed but crime went down.

 

When the police will not enforce the law there is no law.

Evil triumphs when good people do nothing.

 

No matter how one may feel about this topic, I don't know how they can't find AARguy's comment hilarious. If merely jogging down the street, was cause for enough suspicion for these men to chase after Arbery, to make a "citizens' arrest," just imagine what the reaction would be to his running down their street, with a GUN!

Yeah, that might have made Arbery safer-- as long as he was wearing a bullet proof vest, and the gun he carried, was an Uzi (machine gun)!

Do they also make bullet proof pants, and helmets?

 

He wasn’t ‘just running down the street’. He was running after seeing someone call on a phone about him.