A 25-year-old black man was shot dead in Georgia while jogging, prompting online protests labeling the incident as racial profiling

[Norman]

Detaining someone for possible felony is not illegal.

In Georgia, from what I’ve found myself and from reading all that SavannahMann hss posted on this and the other threads, the detainers must have witnessed a felony in progress or have *first hand knowledge of a felony in progress and when bringing lethal force to the citizens arrest they must be absolutely certain that if lethal force were to be used it must be reasonable and fit the crime. Detainers risk going to prison if guess wrong.

in this case there was no felony to be witnessed immediate to then shooting.

I have posted the law MULTIPLE times now. How damn difficult is it to read? There is no such requirement, you only need to SUSPECT a felony if someone is fleeing. In the police report they said they suspected a burglary - a felony.

The Fourth Amendment says that a person shall be secure in his person and papers from unreasonable search and seizure. But we find all sorts of excuses not to do this don’t we? Why? Isn’t it plain that this is prohibited? But the Courts find that each reasonable exception is another foundation for the next reasonable exception. And if the people demand a warrant, the cops go in anyway quite often. Why? Don’t they understand the simple words of the Amendment?

Because our Courts interpret the law. What does it mean, and how does it apply. I posted the words of an experienced Criminal Defense Attorney who said that the law you are reading, is not like that based upon precedence. But we already know that don’t we? The First Amendment says Freedom of Religion. But we would arrest a cult who was murdering people at midnight even if it was their religion wouldn’t we?

The law as interpreted means that the McMichaels do not have that defense. Or you could go and let a lot of people out of prison. Armed Robbers could claim that they were afeared for their lives and had to kill the clerk. They suspected the clerk was selling Cigarettes to underage people, which is a total crime.

Of course, leave it to an idiot to argue law with the cops, who enforce the law and who know it is illegal and wanted to arrest the McMichaels on the spot. The Lawyers who argue the Law and know what the courts have decided. And the Judges who have long ago decided what the law means and how it applies.

Search and seizure?

Nothing to do with the case, now you are bringing in completely unreasonable standards just like far-left Faun, who claims Arbery was coerced into jumping to the shotgun. Do you see any searches or seizures on the video? No, so stop pretending being a retard to defend your black dindunothing.

Get rid of your white sin, it is disturbing.

I was giving an example of what things say and what they are interpreted to mean.

The famous poem. Do good fences make good neighbors? Is that what the poet was saying? Another example of the words and meaning not being the same.

The only people who are supporting McMichaels clearly illegal actions are those with racist motivations, the willfully stupid, and those who are ignorant. I won’t say you fall into a category of the ignorant. Ignorant means you do not know. Stupid means you won’t learn. So either you are willfully stupid refusing to learn or you are a racist. Either way you do not look good.

Racist motivations? Hahaha hahaha all you got huh. Watch the video

Is he a liberal or a conservative? Conservatives don't screech RACIST RACIST RACIST like hysterical maniacs.

 

[SavannahMann]

A black man jogging in an affluent suburban Georgia neighborhood was shot dead by neighbors on February 23, who thought he was a robber, setting off online protests labeling the incident as racial profiling, The New York Times reported.

Ahmaud Arbery was jogging around Brunswick, Georgia, before he was killed in nearby Satilla Shores. Arbery ran by Gregory McMichael who called to his son Travis McMichael before grabbing their .357 magnum revolver and shotgun and followed Arbery in a truck, according to The Times.

"Stop, stop," they shouted at Mr. Arbery, according to The Times, "we want to talk to you."

Gregory McMichael told police he thought Arbery was the suspect in a string of break-ins. Arbery died after being shot twice in after "a struggle over the shotgun," according to The Times.

According to The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, the elder McMichael, who is a former police officer, was the only source quoted in the police report and that led critics to suspect that "his influence played a role in authorities' decision not to bring charges."

"There's a lot of suspicion of law enforcement down here," Akeem Baker, a friend of Arbery told AJC.

Neither the father nor son have been charged with Arbery's killing.

A 25-year-old black man was shot dead in Georgia while jogging, prompting online protests labeling the incident as racial profiling

So now you can't jog while black.

How is it that you can just grab your gun and chase someone down the block, kill them and then return home for dinner.

Oh that's right there is no more racism in the South anymore.

No charges?!

Seems like it was self defense, they white guys wanted to ask him a question, and the black Violently attacked the two guys

"Seems like it was self defense, they white guys wanted to ask him a question, and the black Violently attacked the two guys "


conservative human scum lie about everything.

only a deranged piece of shit (that's you) would think 2 white bubbas with shot guns have a RIGHT to detain a black person who hadn't committed any crime.....

He trespassed, crime. Drop mic

Nope. He did not trespass. Not according to Georgia Law.

 

[SavannahMann]

Detaining someone for possible felony is not illegal.

In Georgia, from what I’ve found myself and from reading all that SavannahMann hss posted on this and the other threads, the detainers must have witnessed a felony in progress or have *first hand knowledge of a felony in progress and when bringing lethal force to the citizens arrest they must be absolutely certain that if lethal force were to be used it must be reasonable and fit the crime. Detainers risk going to prison if guess wrong.

in this case there was no felony to be witnessed immediate to then shooting.

I have posted the law MULTIPLE times now. How damn difficult is it to read? There is no such requirement, you only need to SUSPECT a felony if someone is fleeing. In the police report they said they suspected a burglary - a felony.

The Fourth Amendment says that a person shall be secure in his person and papers from unreasonable search and seizure. But we find all sorts of excuses not to do this don’t we? Why? Isn’t it plain that this is prohibited? But the Courts find that each reasonable exception is another foundation for the next reasonable exception. And if the people demand a warrant, the cops go in anyway quite often. Why? Don’t they understand the simple words of the Amendment?

Because our Courts interpret the law. What does it mean, and how does it apply. I posted the words of an experienced Criminal Defense Attorney who said that the law you are reading, is not like that based upon precedence. But we already know that don’t we? The First Amendment says Freedom of Religion. But we would arrest a cult who was murdering people at midnight even if it was their religion wouldn’t we?

The law as interpreted means that the McMichaels do not have that defense. Or you could go and let a lot of people out of prison. Armed Robbers could claim that they were afeared for their lives and had to kill the clerk. They suspected the clerk was selling Cigarettes to underage people, which is a total crime.

Of course, leave it to an idiot to argue law with the cops, who enforce the law and who know it is illegal and wanted to arrest the McMichaels on the spot. The Lawyers who argue the Law and know what the courts have decided. And the Judges who have long ago decided what the law means and how it applies.

Search and seizure?

Nothing to do with the case, now you are bringing in completely unreasonable standards just like far-left Faun, who claims Arbery was coerced into jumping to the shotgun. Do you see any searches or seizures on the video? No, so stop pretending being a retard to defend your black dindunothing.

Get rid of your white sin, it is disturbing.

I was giving an example of what things say and what they are interpreted to mean.

The famous poem. Do good fences make good neighbors? Is that what the poet was saying? Another example of the words and meaning not being the same.

The only people who are supporting McMichaels clearly illegal actions are those with racist motivations, the willfully stupid, and those who are ignorant. I won’t say you fall into a category of the ignorant. Ignorant means you do not know. Stupid means you won’t learn. So either you are willfully stupid refusing to learn or you are a racist. Either way you do not look good.

Racist motivations? Hahaha hahaha all you got huh. Watch the video

I did. I saw two white guys breaking the law.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Racist motivations? Hahaha hahaha all you got huh. Watch the video

SavannahMann has provided more than you got. The video confirms that two white armed men targeted a black man who was jogging down the street and they hemmed him in, engaged close range with a shotgun, a shot was fired when the two men converged in front of the truck, with the elder gunman holding an IPhone as if recording the first shot. And then a struggle for the shotgun between the two began and then both men drifted to the left - locked in combat - together. Combat initiated by the gunmen.

That summary is based on the video.

Why do you want us to watch it?

The gunmen hemmed the jogger in using
the threat of lethal force and tried to block him from passing by.

Your heroes are seen in the video setting up an armed barricade which is a felony.
They were the only ones committing a felony prior to the three shots being fired while they were in possession of their weapons, fatally wounding an unarmed black man when he was jogging through their.

The video does not show heroes. It shows two out of control killers. Two assholes with guns actually.

 

[SavannahMann]

Detaining someone for possible felony is not illegal.

In Georgia, from what I’ve found myself and from reading all that SavannahMann hss posted on this and the other threads, the detainers must have witnessed a felony in progress or have *first hand knowledge of a felony in progress and when bringing lethal force to the citizens arrest they must be absolutely certain that if lethal force were to be used it must be reasonable and fit the crime. Detainers risk going to prison if guess wrong.

in this case there was no felony to be witnessed immediate to then shooting.

I have posted the law MULTIPLE times now. How damn difficult is it to read? There is no such requirement, you only need to SUSPECT a felony if someone is fleeing. In the police report they said they suspected a burglary - a felony.

The Fourth Amendment says that a person shall be secure in his person and papers from unreasonable search and seizure. But we find all sorts of excuses not to do this don’t we? Why? Isn’t it plain that this is prohibited? But the Courts find that each reasonable exception is another foundation for the next reasonable exception. And if the people demand a warrant, the cops go in anyway quite often. Why? Don’t they understand the simple words of the Amendment?

Because our Courts interpret the law. What does it mean, and how does it apply. I posted the words of an experienced Criminal Defense Attorney who said that the law you are reading, is not like that based upon precedence. But we already know that don’t we? The First Amendment says Freedom of Religion. But we would arrest a cult who was murdering people at midnight even if it was their religion wouldn’t we?

The law as interpreted means that the McMichaels do not have that defense. Or you could go and let a lot of people out of prison. Armed Robbers could claim that they were afeared for their lives and had to kill the clerk. They suspected the clerk was selling Cigarettes to underage people, which is a total crime.

Of course, leave it to an idiot to argue law with the cops, who enforce the law and who know it is illegal and wanted to arrest the McMichaels on the spot. The Lawyers who argue the Law and know what the courts have decided. And the Judges who have long ago decided what the law means and how it applies.

Search and seizure?

Nothing to do with the case, now you are bringing in completely unreasonable standards just like far-left Faun, who claims Arbery was coerced into jumping to the shotgun. Do you see any searches or seizures on the video? No, so stop pretending being a retard to defend your black dindunothing.

Get rid of your white sin, it is disturbing.

I was giving an example of what things say and what they are interpreted to mean.

The famous poem. Do good fences make good neighbors? Is that what the poet was saying? Another example of the words and meaning not being the same.

The only people who are supporting McMichaels clearly illegal actions are those with racist motivations, the willfully stupid, and those who are ignorant. I won’t say you fall into a category of the ignorant. Ignorant means you do not know. Stupid means you won’t learn. So either you are willfully stupid refusing to learn or you are a racist. Either way you do not look good.

Everyone who is not mesmerized by the fake news media is supporting the American heroes. You are living in an alternative reality, fake conservative.

So to be a Conservative in your view I have to celebrate criminals so long as they are white? I have to say the law that was in effect for decades is bullshit? I have to argue there is any circumstance that allows armed posse’s to chase down people who are innocent of any crime? If that is your definition of Conservative then no. I am not one.

If your definition is that the Constitution is the supreme law of the land then yes I am. If your definition is that individuals should answer for their actions then you bet I am. If your definition is that honor and integrity matter. I am there. The funny part is that about 90% of Georgian folks do not agree with you. And they’re gonna be on the Jury. It is why I said there was a 50/50 chance at a hung jury. One idiot like you is liable to make it on the Jury. That is literally the best case scenario for the McMichaels if it goes to trial.

 

[Norman]

Racist motivations? Hahaha hahaha all you got huh. Watch the video

SavannahMann has provided more than you got. The video confirms that two white armed men targeted a black man jogging down the street and they hemmed him in, engaged close range with a shotgun, a shot was fired when the two men converged, in front of the truck, with the elder gunman holding an IPhone as if recording the first shot. And then a struggle for the shotgun between the trio men drifted to the left.

That summary is based on the video.

Why do you want us to watch it.

The gunmen hemmed the jogger in using Firearms and the threat of lethal force and tried to block him from passing by.

Your heroes are seen in the video setting up an armed barricade which is a felony. They were the only ones committing a felony prior to the three shots being fired while they were in possession of their weapons, fatally wounding an unarmed black man when he was jogging through their.

The video does not show heroes. It shows two out of control killers.

And now... perhaps the best liberal genius as of yet...

"They were setting up an armed barricade."

It is amazing how you can watch the video and conclude this. True sign of bias and mental damage. Stopping your vehicle and stepping out is now "setting up an armed barricade".

These people can not be reasoned with, they have to be dealt with by other means. Absolutely deranged lunatics.

 

[Meathead]

Racist motivations? Hahaha hahaha all you got huh. Watch the video

SavannahMann has provided more than you got. The video confirms that two white armed men targeted a black man jogging down the street and they hemmed him in, engaged close range with a shotgun, a shot was fired when the two men converged, in front of the truck, with the elder gunman holding an IPhone as if recording the first shot. And then a struggle for the shotgun between the trio men drifted to the left.

That summary is based on the video.

Why do you want us to watch it.

The gunmen hemmed the jogger in using Firearms and the threat of lethal force and tried to block him from passing by.

Your heroes are seen in the video setting up an armed barricade which is a felony. They were the only ones committing a felony prior to the three shots being fired while they were in possession of their weapons, fatally wounding an unarmed black man when he was jogging through their.

The video does not show heroes. It shows two out of control killers.

Yeah, I can't imagine this guy committing a crime:

 

[SavannahMann]

Racist motivations? Hahaha hahaha all you got huh. Watch the video

SavannahMann has provided more than you got. The video confirms that two white armed men targeted a black man jogging down the street and they hemmed him in, engaged close range with a shotgun, a shot was fired when the two men converged, in front of the truck, with the elder gunman holding an IPhone as if recording the first shot. And then a struggle for the shotgun between the trio men drifted to the left.

That summary is based on the video.

Why do you want us to watch it.

The gunmen hemmed the jogger in using Firearms and the threat of lethal force and tried to block him from passing by.

Your heroes are seen in the video setting up an armed barricade which is a felony. They were the only ones committing a felony prior to the three shots being fired while they were in possession of their weapons, fatally wounding an unarmed black man when he was jogging through their.

The video does not show heroes. It shows two out of control killers.

And now... perhaps the best liberal genius as of yet...

"They were setting up an armed barricade."

It is amazing how you can watch the video and conclude this. True sign of bias and mental damage. Stopping your vehicle and stepping out is now "setting up an armed barricade".

These people can not be reasoned with, they have to be dealt with by other means. Absolutely deranged lunatics.

Ok. Prove us wrong. Come on down to Georgia and stop your truck in the road. Jump out and wave your shotgun around. Georgians will like it. They will insist you stay for a while.

 

[Norman]

Racist motivations? Hahaha hahaha all you got huh. Watch the video

SavannahMann has provided more than you got. The video confirms that two white armed men targeted a black man jogging down the street and they hemmed him in, engaged close range with a shotgun, a shot was fired when the two men converged, in front of the truck, with the elder gunman holding an IPhone as if recording the first shot. And then a struggle for the shotgun between the trio men drifted to the left.

That summary is based on the video.

Why do you want us to watch it.

The gunmen hemmed the jogger in using Firearms and the threat of lethal force and tried to block him from passing by.

Your heroes are seen in the video setting up an armed barricade which is a felony. They were the only ones committing a felony prior to the three shots being fired while they were in possession of their weapons, fatally wounding an unarmed black man when he was jogging through their.

The video does not show heroes. It shows two out of control killers.

And now... perhaps the best liberal genius as of yet...

"They were setting up an armed barricade."

It is amazing how you can watch the video and conclude this. True sign of bias and mental damage. Stopping your vehicle and stepping out is now "setting up an armed barricade".

These people can not be reasoned with, they have to be dealt with by other means. Absolutely deranged lunatics.

Ok. Prove us wrong. Come on down to Georgia and stop your truck in the road. Jump out and wave your shotgun around. Georgians will like it. They will insist you stay for a while.

They will love it when I stop one of your criminals on an escape indeed.

The criminals you protect like they were your son. Then again, he could have been.

 

[jc456]

Detaining someone for possible felony is not illegal.

In Georgia, from what I’ve found myself and from reading all that SavannahMann hss posted on this and the other threads, the detainers must have witnessed a felony in progress or have *first hand knowledge of a felony in progress and when bringing lethal force to the citizens arrest they must be absolutely certain that if lethal force were to be used it must be reasonable and fit the crime. Detainers risk going to prison if guess wrong.

in this case there was no felony to be witnessed immediate to then shooting.

I have posted the law MULTIPLE times now. How damn difficult is it to read? There is no such requirement, you only need to SUSPECT a felony if someone is fleeing. In the police report they said they suspected a burglary - a felony.

The Fourth Amendment says that a person shall be secure in his person and papers from unreasonable search and seizure. But we find all sorts of excuses not to do this don’t we? Why? Isn’t it plain that this is prohibited? But the Courts find that each reasonable exception is another foundation for the next reasonable exception. And if the people demand a warrant, the cops go in anyway quite often. Why? Don’t they understand the simple words of the Amendment?

Because our Courts interpret the law. What does it mean, and how does it apply. I posted the words of an experienced Criminal Defense Attorney who said that the law you are reading, is not like that based upon precedence. But we already know that don’t we? The First Amendment says Freedom of Religion. But we would arrest a cult who was murdering people at midnight even if it was their religion wouldn’t we?

The law as interpreted means that the McMichaels do not have that defense. Or you could go and let a lot of people out of prison. Armed Robbers could claim that they were afeared for their lives and had to kill the clerk. They suspected the clerk was selling Cigarettes to underage people, which is a total crime.

Of course, leave it to an idiot to argue law with the cops, who enforce the law and who know it is illegal and wanted to arrest the McMichaels on the spot. The Lawyers who argue the Law and know what the courts have decided. And the Judges who have long ago decided what the law means and how it applies.

Search and seizure?

Nothing to do with the case, now you are bringing in completely unreasonable standards just like far-left Faun, who claims Arbery was coerced into jumping to the shotgun. Do you see any searches or seizures on the video? No, so stop pretending being a retard to defend your black dindunothing.

Get rid of your white sin, it is disturbing.

I was giving an example of what things say and what they are interpreted to mean.

The famous poem. Do good fences make good neighbors? Is that what the poet was saying? Another example of the words and meaning not being the same.

The only people who are supporting McMichaels clearly illegal actions are those with racist motivations, the willfully stupid, and those who are ignorant. I won’t say you fall into a category of the ignorant. Ignorant means you do not know. Stupid means you won’t learn. So either you are willfully stupid refusing to learn or you are a racist. Either way you do not look good.

Racist motivations? Hahaha hahaha all you got huh. Watch the video

I did. I saw two white guys breaking the law.

Which part of the video?

 

[Meathead]

Ok. Prove us wrong. Come on down to Georgia and stop your truck in the road. Jump out and wave your shotgun around. Georgians will like it. They will insist you stay for a while.

Here's another idea, "jog" around your state and go into unoccupied property then jog away (really, really fast LOL).

 

[NotfooledbyW]

65#1292 reply to 65#1286

"They were setting up an armed barricade."

It is amazing how you can watch the video and conclude thi

it’s not amazing to see how your white extremist gun fanaticism distorts your mind whereas you cannot see this as an armed barracade set up to hem the jogger in and stop him.

If they were going to let him pass the Gunman (yellow arrow) would have stayed put on left of the double yellow line. The jogger would be alive and the two assholes would not be arrested for aggravated assault and murder.

Do you think the shotgunner walked or ran to the location designated by the yellow arrow? Did he not “rush” the attacker.

SavannahMann do you know if the police were given this video at the time of the arrest. And if not why did it’s owner withold it from police?

This video does not help the murderers because shotgunner had to move pretty fast toward his target to initiate contact.

 

[SavannahMann]

Detaining someone for possible felony is not illegal.

In Georgia, from what I’ve found myself and from reading all that SavannahMann hss posted on this and the other threads, the detainers must have witnessed a felony in progress or have *first hand knowledge of a felony in progress and when bringing lethal force to the citizens arrest they must be absolutely certain that if lethal force were to be used it must be reasonable and fit the crime. Detainers risk going to prison if guess wrong.

in this case there was no felony to be witnessed immediate to then shooting.

I have posted the law MULTIPLE times now. How damn difficult is it to read? There is no such requirement, you only need to SUSPECT a felony if someone is fleeing. In the police report they said they suspected a burglary - a felony.

The Fourth Amendment says that a person shall be secure in his person and papers from unreasonable search and seizure. But we find all sorts of excuses not to do this don’t we? Why? Isn’t it plain that this is prohibited? But the Courts find that each reasonable exception is another foundation for the next reasonable exception. And if the people demand a warrant, the cops go in anyway quite often. Why? Don’t they understand the simple words of the Amendment?

Because our Courts interpret the law. What does it mean, and how does it apply. I posted the words of an experienced Criminal Defense Attorney who said that the law you are reading, is not like that based upon precedence. But we already know that don’t we? The First Amendment says Freedom of Religion. But we would arrest a cult who was murdering people at midnight even if it was their religion wouldn’t we?

The law as interpreted means that the McMichaels do not have that defense. Or you could go and let a lot of people out of prison. Armed Robbers could claim that they were afeared for their lives and had to kill the clerk. They suspected the clerk was selling Cigarettes to underage people, which is a total crime.

Of course, leave it to an idiot to argue law with the cops, who enforce the law and who know it is illegal and wanted to arrest the McMichaels on the spot. The Lawyers who argue the Law and know what the courts have decided. And the Judges who have long ago decided what the law means and how it applies.

Search and seizure?

Nothing to do with the case, now you are bringing in completely unreasonable standards just like far-left Faun, who claims Arbery was coerced into jumping to the shotgun. Do you see any searches or seizures on the video? No, so stop pretending being a retard to defend your black dindunothing.

Get rid of your white sin, it is disturbing.

I was giving an example of what things say and what they are interpreted to mean.

The famous poem. Do good fences make good neighbors? Is that what the poet was saying? Another example of the words and meaning not being the same.

The only people who are supporting McMichaels clearly illegal actions are those with racist motivations, the willfully stupid, and those who are ignorant. I won’t say you fall into a category of the ignorant. Ignorant means you do not know. Stupid means you won’t learn. So either you are willfully stupid refusing to learn or you are a racist. Either way you do not look good.

Racist motivations? Hahaha hahaha all you got huh. Watch the video

I did. I saw two white guys breaking the law.

Which part of the video?

The part before even the shooting. Which is why they are arrested for the crime I saw. Aggravated Assault.

 

[SavannahMann]

Ok. Prove us wrong. Come on down to Georgia and stop your truck in the road. Jump out and wave your shotgun around. Georgians will like it. They will insist you stay for a while.

Here's another idea, "jog" around your state and go into unoccupied property then jog away (really, really fast LOL).

Ok. Providing there are no sighs that say No Trespassing and I have not been told by the owner or his representative to leave then it would be legal.

 

[Meathead]

Ok. Prove us wrong. Come on down to Georgia and stop your truck in the road. Jump out and wave your shotgun around. Georgians will like it. They will insist you stay for a while.

Here's another idea, "jog" around your state and go into unoccupied property then jog away (really, really fast LOL).

Ok. Providing there are no sighs that say No Trespassing and I have not been told by the owner or his representative to leave then it would be legal.

You're not much brighter than the dead thug.

 

[SavannahMann]

Ok. Prove us wrong. Come on down to Georgia and stop your truck in the road. Jump out and wave your shotgun around. Georgians will like it. They will insist you stay for a while.

Here's another idea, "jog" around your state and go into unoccupied property then jog away (really, really fast LOL).

Ok. Providing there are no sighs that say No Trespassing and I have not been told by the owner or his representative to leave then it would be legal.

You're not much brighter than the dead thug.

Ok. Quote the law that says I am wrong.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Stopping your vehicle and stepping out is now "setting up an armed barricade".

Back to lying are ya?

Never said that. Never will.

This is “setting up an “armed” barricade:

 

[Meathead]

Ok. Prove us wrong. Come on down to Georgia and stop your truck in the road. Jump out and wave your shotgun around. Georgians will like it. They will insist you stay for a while.

Here's another idea, "jog" around your state and go into unoccupied property then jog away (really, really fast LOL).

Ok. Providing there are no sighs that say No Trespassing and I have not been told by the owner or his representative to leave then it would be legal.

Ok. Prove us wrong. Come on down to Georgia and stop your truck in the road. Jump out and wave your shotgun around. Georgians will like it. They will insist you stay for a while.

Here's another idea, "jog" around your state and go into unoccupied property then jog away (really, really fast LOL).

Ok. Providing there are no sighs that say No Trespassing and I have not been told by the owner or his representative to leave then it would be legal.

You're not much brighter than the dead thug.

Ok. Quote the law that says I am wrong.

Don't quibble. Just "jog" in and out of private property. See how that works out for you.

 

[Norman]

Stopping your vehicle and stepping out is now "setting up an armed barricade".

Back to lying are ya?

Never said that. Never will.

This is “setting up an “armed” barricade:

View attachment 336857

I see a criminal about to be caught for his crime. No barricades anywhere, you need to watch a lot less CSI or whatever it is you are getting this from.

 

[SavannahMann]

Ok. Prove us wrong. Come on down to Georgia and stop your truck in the road. Jump out and wave your shotgun around. Georgians will like it. They will insist you stay for a while.

Here's another idea, "jog" around your state and go into unoccupied property then jog away (really, really fast LOL).

Ok. Providing there are no sighs that say No Trespassing and I have not been told by the owner or his representative to leave then it would be legal.

Ok. Prove us wrong. Come on down to Georgia and stop your truck in the road. Jump out and wave your shotgun around. Georgians will like it. They will insist you stay for a while.

Here's another idea, "jog" around your state and go into unoccupied property then jog away (really, really fast LOL).

Ok. Providing there are no sighs that say No Trespassing and I have not been told by the owner or his representative to leave then it would be legal.

You're not much brighter than the dead thug.

Ok. Quote the law that says I am wrong.

Don't quibble. Just "jog" in and out of private property. See how that works out for you.

As I said. It would be fine. With those provisions. The problem you have is that you refuse to admit that it is not illegal. It just burns your ass worse than 5 alarm Chili the next day.