The murder of Ahmaud Arbery/All three perpetrators found guilty

Originally posted by Robtard
What makes them "hicks", surt?

Will be glad to answer once you answer what makes these men racist. After all, I inquired first.

So if you wanna keep this thread on topic, answer...now if you don't wanna discuss the claims you made we can talk about other things.

Originally posted by Robtard
Your dodge has been noted. Would have been rather simple for you to post the numbers.

If I prove your numbers wrong, will you apologize?

Rob seems right to me.

Caught up again. Seems like Robtard characterized this correctly:

Similar to George Zimmerman and Treyvon Martin.

These guys were acting like bounty hunters. Unless it is Texas and that property belonged to them AND the guy jogging had just stolen something from them, there is 0 justification to shoot the jogger.

Did the jogger at any point yell at or attack the 2 shooters? If no, these two guys need to be charged with and swiftly convicted of manslaughter.

Originally posted by Old Man Whirly!
[Img]https://i.imgur.com/k4Vm0LL.jpg[/Img Rob seems right to me.

Rob said 98.27%, your graphic doesn't say anything close to that.

Originally posted by Surtur
Will be glad to answer once you answer what makes these men racist. After all, I inquired first.

So if you wanna keep this thread on topic, answer...now if you don't wanna discuss the claims you made we can talk about other things.

Originally posted by Robtard
What makes them "hicks"?

He still doesn't see it. Too funny.

Originally posted by Silent Master
If I prove your numbers wrong, will you apologize?

Another dodge. That's it, you had your chance to post your data, you're done, troll.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Caught up again. Seems like Robtard characterized this correctly:

Similar to George Zimmerman and Treyvon Martin.

These guys were acting like bounty hunters. Unless it is Texas and that property belonged to them AND the guy jogging had just stolen something from them, there is 0 justification to shoot the jogger.

Did the jogger at any point yell at or attack the 2 shooters? If no, these two guys need to be charged with and swiftly convicted of manslaughter.

But he didn't characterize it correctly: he claimed they were racist without proof.

Just like there is no proof George Zimmerman did what he did out of racial animus.

Why can we not say some people stupidly tried to take the law into their own hands and leave it at that? Unless some other evidence is unearthed, of course.

Originally posted by Robtard
He still doesn't see it. Too funny.

I do see it: you're a coward.

At least I explained why I used the term, you have still yet to give any valid reason for why they are racist

Originally posted by Surtur
But he didn't characterize it correctly: he claimed they were racist without proof.

Just like there is no proof George Zimmerman did what he did out of racial animus.

Why can we not say some people stupidly tried to take the law into their own hands and leave it at that? Unless some other evidence is unearthed, of course.

Originally posted by Old Man Whirly!
Sorry Surt, he did.

Prove it. Open challenge to anyone to prove this wouldn't have happened if the jogger had white skin.

Originally posted by Robtard
Another dodge. That's it, you had your chance to post your data, you're done, troll.

^
Says the guy that didn't post the data to back up his original claim

Originally posted by Surtur
But he didn't characterize it correctly: he claimed they were racist without proof.

Just like there is no proof George Zimmerman did what he did out of racial animus.

Why can we not say some people stupidly tried to take the law into their own hands and leave it at that? Unless some other evidence is unearthed, of course.

Ummm, have you heard the Zimmer call to 9/11? Why do you always take the side of the Alt-Right, Surt? Not a good look.

Originally posted by Surtur
But he didn't characterize it correctly: he claimed they were racist without proof.

Just like there is no proof George Zimmerman did what he did out of racial animus.

Why can we not say some people stupidly tried to take the law into their own hands and leave it at that? Unless some other evidence is unearthed, of course.

I don't care about yours and Robtard's petty word game over the word 'racism.'

But I do agree with SM and you about it being VERY easy to prove if these guys were racist. It should take just a few seconds and any of you could do it by just looking at their social media profiles if they are public.

So get to it.

Originally posted by Silent Master
^
Says the guy that didn't post the data to back up his original claim

Originally posted by Silent Master
Rob said 98.27%, your graphic doesn't say anything close to that.

That was a typo, I meant 78.27%. That's the vast majority of White men voting Trump in GA.

You time-waster troll.

Originally posted by Robtard
Ummm, have you heard the Zimmer call to 9/11? Why do you always take the side of the Alt-Right, Surt? Not a good look.

I'm still waiting for the proof of racism here.

Will it come yes or no?

Originally posted by Robtard
That was a typo, I meant 78.27%. That's the vast majority of White men voting Trump in GA.

You time-waster troll.

Thanks for admitting you were wrong.

Originally posted by dadudemon
I don't care about yours and Robtard's petty word game over the word 'racism.'

But I do agree with SM and you about it being VERY easy to prove if these guys were racist. It should take just a few seconds and any of you could do it by just looking at their social media profiles if they are public.

So get to it.

To be fair you came in saying he characterized it correctly and for that to be true would mean racism as a motivation was proven, but you seem to acknowledge it has not been.

So...he didn't characterize it correctly. It's like if he took a test and got half the questions right. That is more apt a comparison IMO.

And you know I'm lazy but I sought out articles from NPR and CBS and CNN and found no proof of racism. I'm not doing more than that, Rob can do the rest of the work to prove his claim.

Originally posted by Surtur
I'm still waiting for the proof of racism here.

Will it come yes or no?

Court of law, yes: innocent until proven guilty.

This is real life. Burden of proof does not exist contrary to what the internet psuedo-intellectuals claim. "You can't prove a negative!" Yes you can it is complete and utter bullshit to say you can't. Lots of science is done to prove a negative - all the damn time.

If they posted racist shit: likely racist.

If they didn't: likely not.

Both of you would be looking at the same set of data. How hard is it to look at it and prove your side of the case?