That is why it is called fight or flight. Some folks instincts are to fight. I suspect I would fight as my chances of outrunning a bullet is pretty slime.
It seems like publicity is picking up. I’m surprised it took this long - or maybe I just haven’t been tuned in. It’s frustrating that people are already labeling the shooters as white supremacists and making it out to sound like they just wanted to shoot a black dude that day. That sort of thing makes it political from the beginning, which is never good for discourse. I don’t think these guys showed up planning to shoot the guy. The article I read said they anticipated he was armed, but that sounds like bull shit to me. I’d guess they probably showed up with guns to intimidate the guy and to “take him into custody.” He sees the guns, flips out, and tries to fight back. Now at this point, they’re in danger of having their own shotgun turned around on them, so they freak out and kill the guy. Sounds like self defense to me, on both sides, but what do I know? For example, say they never shoot the guy, and he lived, but broke the driver’s jaw. I would argue that he did so while acting in self defense. But at the same time, they didn’t shoot him until he was clearly trying to grab the gun from the dude. So also self defense? Idk. It’s a stupid situation for the two dudes to have instigated, but I’m not sure what benefit it serves to show nice pictures of the victim and claim he was gunned down by white supremacists, at this point.
I don't believe blocking a road with 2 guns cocked and ready to head off an unarmed jogger is self defense.
I think you're correct that with what little we know right now there wasn't necessarily a premeditated objective to shoot him, or that it was done consciously because of his race. But in terms of both parties acting in self defense... If one party introduces deadly force, they are responsible for its use. Period. I don't think that's a controversial take, I am pretty sure that is what CCP training, and firearms training in general preaches. They should have never brandished a weapon at him under these circumstances. At a minimum, charges should be filed along those lines, along the lines of riding in the back of a pickup truck with a rifle out, etc. That they haven't is telling.
So, showing up with a gun to essentially kidnap ("taking him into custody" when they have no authority or reason to do so) a guy because he has the same skin color as a guy that they saw on camera breaking into the house and then shooting the guy is self defense?
To be shot by a shotgun takes 3 things. 1) loaded gun, 2) finger on the trigger, and 3) barrel of the gun pointing towards you. At no time was Ahmaud's finger on the trigger or the barrel pointed at the white guy. Just the opposite happened. Pretty hard to argue self defense in my opinion.
Look - they saw a black guy with roughly similar physical features of the guy breaking in. They decided to be Billy Bad Ass, when he started pushing back that only reinforced their notion that this was the guy, and it went downhill from there. No clue if these dudes are racists, white supremacists, or whatever, but I'm 99% confident they have small [penis] syndrome and are trying to feed their ego just like every other cop wannabe.
I feel like assuming all that about them is the same thing as assuming the jogger is a bad guy based on a past shoplifting charge. Both are unfair.
Do we know for a fact they wanted to take him into custody? Maybe they wanted a closer look to see if he was their guy? You’re leaving out the part where the guy attacked the dude with the gun and tried to grab it from him. Based on the video, I think it’s reasonable for them to think that if the jogger gets that shotgun away from him, he’s gonna shoot them. Maybe even more reasonable to think that than to think that the two dudes who showed up with the guns in the first place have an intention to shoot someone.
