A Tale of Two Citizens Arrests

What else needs to shade in this conversation? What valuable points need to be considered?

Video brought to you by CBD Ops, THC FREE CBD at http://www.cbdops.com because wars are won within

TATUM’s VID: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sjCzJyFKoqo&t
—-
APPAREL: http://www.relentlessdefender.com/mtc
INSTAGRAM: http://www.instagram.com/mike_thecop
FACEBOOK: http://www.facebook.com/realmikethecop
TWITTER: http://www.twitter.com/mikethecop
—-

** (Disclaimer: This video content is intended for educational and informational purposes only) **

Author: rafael.nieves

ANGELHOUSE © 2009 - 2020 | HOSTING BY PHILLYFINEST369 SERVER STATS| & THE IDIOTS ROBOT AND CONTROL INC. |(RSS FEED MODULE)| ALL YOUTUBE VIDEOS IS A REGISTERED TRADEMARK OF GOOGLE INC. THE YOUTUBE CHANNELS AND BLOG FEEDS IS MANAGED BY THERE RIGHTFUL OWNERS (phillyfinest369.com)

27 thoughts on “A Tale of Two Citizens Arrests

  1. Citizens arrest shouldn't exist, period. I do window cleaning as a business. I've been "Citizens arrested" twice by HOA members for tresspassing on a customers property. Held with threats for force if I tried to leave. Once at gun point. And each time the cops just say "oh its a misunderstanding." Once I was issued a tresspass that doesn't allow me to enter an entire public neighborhood. (Not sure if that is even legal, but not going to argue) I will not service anyone who has an HOA because of it. You give someone an inch of percieved power, they will abuse it. Im just glad most people never heard of a Citizens arrest. Otherwise, every Karen out there would be conducting one. Every bozo with a hero complex and nothing in life, will want to make a name for himself. My brother in law has concealed carry and is always pulling it on (his words) "n#$$%&s who are up to no good." I wish I had the balls to record him one day and give it to the cops, but considering the one time he did get the cops called on him, they arrested the guy instead of him because the guy couldn't show why he was in the neighborhood.

  2. Your GANG Insignia, "Thin Blue Line" Flag, is 100% against the UNITED STATES CODE TITLE 18-Part I. CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE-CHAPTER 33 – EMBLEMS, INSIGNIA, AND NAMES § 700-Desecration of the flag of the United States-Specifically Subsection (a)(1) – “Whoever knowingly mutilates, defaces, physically defiles, burns, maintains on the floor or ground, or tramples upon any flag of the United States shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for not more than one year, or both.”

    Also 4 U.S. Code § 8 – Respect for flag – No disrespect should be shown to the flag of the United States of America; the flag should not be dipped to any person or thing. Also (g) The flag should never have placed upon it, nor on any part of it, nor attached to it any mark, insignia, letter, word, figure, design, picture, or drawing of any nature. Also (i) The flag should never be used for advertising purposes in any manner whatsoever. At last (k) The flag, when it is in such condition that it is no longer a fitting emblem for display, should be destroyed in a dignified way, preferably by burning.

    Very Disrescpectfull to the Citizens of the US

  3. Ahmad Aubrey was not an armed man when he died. No matter what the outcome turned out to be people say he was on armed. The fact is he had his hands on the shotgun trying to take it.He wasn’t trying to take it away from him to clean it. Just saying he probably would’ve been fine if he just ran the other way

  4. If hashtags is doing nothing to make a change to issues, would the same be said for any other slogans, flags and banners? If we, as a country, want to end the division within its culture, the only Flag should be The American Flag and the only banner should be "We The People", and the law of the land is The Constitution, which includes amendments stating innocent until proven guilty in a court of law, not the court of public opinion and hypocrisy.

    Carry On!

  5. Man, the facts that you give to justify the citizen's "arrest" and shooting don't apply. You conveniently bring up the fact that Arbery matches the description for a "breaking and entry"/trespassing suspect and the the son had a gun stolen from his vehicle sometime before. There was no link to the stolen gun and the Arbery and while it may have bearing on the state of mind of the father/son duo it doesn't in this specific situation. There was no "breaking and entry" which is a far more "active" crime and an exaggeration of what really happen….Arbery might have been guilty of trespassing if the owner of the property, where the house was being built, wanted to press that, but the father/son were not the owners of the property. Additionally, there is surveillance video that shows two things, one that the only thing Arbery did was drink some water from the hose and second MANY people "trespassed" on that property. But the father/son duo decided to PURSE Arbery for potentially trespassing on property that was not theirs and bring a shotgun into the situation. Why? What made this different than all those other people? I don't know but there is no way their response is justified, none. They roll up on the guy cutting him off aggressively with their truck, far away from the potential trespassing site (how far…I don't know but they were driving to get to Arbery), toting a shotgun, and basically stating that they want to want to talk….with a shotgun…but how did Arbery respond, it appears that he tried to run away, which was not threatening to the father/son duo. ONLY after the son got out of the truck, still toting the shotgun, and confronted Arbery did the struggle happen. The son is the one who introduced the gun into the situation not Arbery and because Arbery didn't comply with the duo it was a justified shooting??!?! I don't know Georgia state laws but in many states Arbery would have the right to defend himself here because at this point it's very likely that felt threatened and it's likely that he didn't know why. But we won't know because he's dead. But you don't see how or why people are upset about how it all went down!??! Oh and to answer your question about the difference between the two citizen's "arrests" based on the limited information you provided about the second one shown in the video….the second citizen's "arrest" appeared to have took place WHILE a crime (or potential crime) was happening. The situation with Arbery did not. That Sir is a very big LEGAL distinction and one you should know.

  6. you know as i watched the second video i noticed a team. i think a mention of the mixed police team and maturity of the officers had something to do with the outcome. just something i have noticed. mixed cop teams.

Leave a Reply