Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
BN747
Posts: 7934
Joined: Thu Mar 28, 2002 5:48 am

Re: White House occupant defends Rittenhouse who killed two people.

Tue Sep 01, 2020 7:01 pm

N583JB wrote:
aerosreenivas wrote:
Does this 'Special Treatment Meeted Out To Rittenhouse' by the police officers the other day at Kenosha protest, finally convince you all that there is a 'Systemic Racism' in the 'Police Forces' across the entire United States?



Nope.


Too many American selectively choose to remain 'ignorant' on America's history or don't see it as important to them since 'it's not an experience they know'..they see no reason to bother.

..and therein lies the heart of the national divide.

BN747
"Home of the Brave, made by the Slaves..Land of the Free, if you look like me.." T. Jefferson
 
User avatar
stl07
Posts: 2839
Joined: Mon May 01, 2017 8:57 pm

Re: Trump defends Rittenhouse who killed two people.

Tue Sep 01, 2020 7:15 pm

He was doing the right thing. Kill all those stupid liberals. MAGA
Instead of typing in "mods", consider using the report function.
Love how every "travel blogger" says they will never fly AA/Ethihad again and then says it again and again on subsequent flights.
 
User avatar
Thunderboltdrgn
Posts: 2234
Joined: Wed Jan 18, 2012 5:39 pm

Re: White House occupant defends Rittenhouse who killed two people.

Tue Sep 01, 2020 7:17 pm

N583JB wrote:
WarRI1 wrote:
https://www.aol.com/article/news/2020/08/31/trump-defends-rittenhouse-the-right-wing-kenosha-shooter-charged-with-killing-2-protesters/24606628/


There we have it folks, once again he criticizes the legal protesters and defends a Right winger who killed two other protesters.


I mean, the kid does have a pretty good case for self-defense...


Yes I agree, those two who were shot had a very solid case for inherited self defence from those Rittenhouse tried to shoot.
Like a thunderbolt of lightning the Dragon roars across the sky. Il Drago Ruggente
 
N583JB
Posts: 1089
Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2019 9:58 pm

Re: White House occupant defends Rittenhouse who killed two people.

Tue Sep 01, 2020 7:43 pm

Thunderboltdrgn wrote:
N583JB wrote:
WarRI1 wrote:
https://www.aol.com/article/news/2020/08/31/trump-defends-rittenhouse-the-right-wing-kenosha-shooter-charged-with-killing-2-protesters/24606628/


There we have it folks, once again he criticizes the legal protesters and defends a Right winger who killed two other protesters.


I mean, the kid does have a pretty good case for self-defense...


Yes I agree, those two who were shot had a very solid case for inherited self defence from those Rittenhouse tried to shoot.


That doesn't make any sense. You say "those Rittenhouse tried to shoot". Rittenhouse shot a single person (the man we discussed earlier) and then ran. He wasn't "trying to shoot" anyone beyond the felon who was chasing him.
 
BN747
Posts: 7934
Joined: Thu Mar 28, 2002 5:48 am

Re: White House occupant defends Rittenhouse who killed two people.

Tue Sep 01, 2020 7:48 pm

N583JB wrote:
Thunderboltdrgn wrote:
N583JB wrote:

I mean, the kid does have a pretty good case for self-defense...


Yes I agree, those two who were shot had a very solid case for inherited self defence from those Rittenhouse tried to shoot.


That doesn't make any sense. You say "those Rittenhouse tried to shoot". Rittenhouse shot a single person (the man we discussed earlier) and then ran. He wasn't "trying to shoot" anyone beyond the felon who was chasing him.


What part of 'a 17yo with a rifle' wandering troubled streets, on his own volition, is not registering with you?

He had no reason to be there...his going there was simply teenage ignorance gunning for trouble - nothing more.

BN747
"Home of the Brave, made by the Slaves..Land of the Free, if you look like me.." T. Jefferson
 
N583JB
Posts: 1089
Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2019 9:58 pm

Re: White House occupant defends Rittenhouse who killed two people.

Tue Sep 01, 2020 7:50 pm

BN747 wrote:
N583JB wrote:
Thunderboltdrgn wrote:

Yes I agree, those two who were shot had a very solid case for inherited self defence from those Rittenhouse tried to shoot.


That doesn't make any sense. You say "those Rittenhouse tried to shoot". Rittenhouse shot a single person (the man we discussed earlier) and then ran. He wasn't "trying to shoot" anyone beyond the felon who was chasing him.


What part of 'a 17yo with a rifle' wandering troubled streets, on his own volition, is not registering with you?

He had no reason to be there...his going there was simply teenage ignorance gunning for trouble - nothing more.

BN747


No one involved had any reason to be there. There's a reason why everyone involved, from Rittenhouse to the three people shot, had some sort of criminal history.
 
MaverickM11
Posts: 18715
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2000 1:59 pm

Re: White House occupant defends Rittenhouse who killed two people.

Tue Sep 01, 2020 8:15 pm

N583JB wrote:
skyservice_330 wrote:
LittleSprocket wrote:
maybe the pedophile should have called the cops instead of chasing a minor? /


N583JB wrote:
(the pedophile) .


Did the shooter know the person had a past record involving crimes with children?

There seems to be a concerted effort to ensure the individuals past, awful, criminal actions involving children are known and amplified when discussing him being shot by Rittenhouse ... but if the shooter had no interaction with the person before the shooting then Rittenhouse, arguably, had no idea about the person's background - and thus it bears no relation to their interaction that night, or the shooters motivation.


I very much doubt that Rittenhouse knew the background of the first person that he shot. I only mention it because that history, when combined with the acts that this person was filmed committing earlier in the night, might speak to his general demeanor. Some people can spend 10 years in prison and come out a better person....but not everyone. Some people are just bad people and stay bad people when they come out.

Fun that Trump is credibly accused of raping a child and regularly walked into underage women changing at his pageants. Republicans always B projecting. Always.

Also fun that the biggest thin blue line boot lickers are also the biggest supporters of vigilante murder. That is not a coincidence.
I don't take responsibility at all
 
User avatar
lugie
Posts: 922
Joined: Mon Jun 03, 2013 4:11 pm

Re: White House occupant defends Rittenhouse who killed two people.

Tue Sep 01, 2020 9:12 pm

kaitak wrote:
Thinking about the President's reaction to this, a few things come to mind:
1) If your moral compass is as skewed as the President's is, you're not going to see (and blind yourself to) the wrong that KR did
2) He cannot afford, as this stage in the election cycle, to alienate people of KR's ilk; they are a key part of his base
3) Charlottesville Part 2 - more "very fine people"?
4) Rule 1 of "How to be President": unite, don't divide (he's passed that turn a few blocks back).


Slightly o/t but this to me remains, to date, the most hypocritical feature about the current American right and in particular the Trump campaign and subsequent presidency:

Their incessant and ubiquitous whining about how the left has descended into "identity politics" while they have completely and utterly entrenched themselves in such identity politics themselves - except to them it's not identity politics because the identity they're serving is a very narrowly defined set of backwards, xenophobic middle-aged and above white people holding racial resentments that American Presidents have tried to address since the 70s.

Every single president after integration has made some sort of effort to reach across the aisle or at least address all/most Americans regardless of party affiliation.

The only one who hasn't, and has been playing a race/gender/age/region/sexuality-card ever since his campaign announcement speech, is Trump. And it's only gone downhill from there - in no speech ever has he tried to paint democrats or people living by the coasts or immigrants as even human, let alone patriotic Americans who he wants to serve during his tenure. Never. That is the definition of identity politics.

But it goes to show how deeply ingrained racism remains in American culture when being a white male is seen as the default to the extent that nobody is willing to call a spade a spade when a president engages in vicious identity politicking for that one default demographic.
Q400 E175 E190 CRJ7 CRJ9 CRJX MD88 A319 A320 A321 A332 A333 A359 B733 B73G B738 B739 B748 B764 B772 B77W B788 B789
FRA STR HAM TXL MUC ZRH ACE BRU BLL DUB MAN ARN MAD OPO LIS FNC AMS PHL RDU LGA CLT EWR ORD ATL SFO MDW IAD YYZ SJO PTY
 
BN747
Posts: 7934
Joined: Thu Mar 28, 2002 5:48 am

Re: White House occupant defends Rittenhouse who killed two people.

Tue Sep 01, 2020 9:42 pm

N583JB wrote:
BN747 wrote:
N583JB wrote:

That doesn't make any sense. You say "those Rittenhouse tried to shoot". Rittenhouse shot a single person (the man we discussed earlier) and then ran. He wasn't "trying to shoot" anyone beyond the felon who was chasing him.


What part of 'a 17yo with a rifle' wandering troubled streets, on his own volition, is not registering with you?

He had no reason to be there...his going there was simply teenage ignorance gunning for trouble - nothing more.

BN747


No one involved had any reason to be there. There's a reason why everyone involved, from Rittenhouse to the three people shot, had some sort of criminal history.


Especially, a kid from another state carrying a rifle.

Where were his parents? Jail them too!

Protesting is legal, interlopers are discouraged in places of unrest.

BN747
"Home of the Brave, made by the Slaves..Land of the Free, if you look like me.." T. Jefferson
 
User avatar
WarRI1
Topic Author
Posts: 14195
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2007 10:51 am

Re: White House occupant defends Rittenhouse who killed two people.

Wed Sep 02, 2020 1:54 am

BN747 wrote:
N583JB wrote:
BN747 wrote:

What part of 'a 17yo with a rifle' wandering troubled streets, on his own volition, is not registering with you?

He had no reason to be there...his going there was simply teenage ignorance gunning for trouble - nothing more.

BN747


No one involved had any reason to be there. There's a reason why everyone involved, from Rittenhouse to the three people shot, had some sort of criminal history.


Especially, a kid from another state carrying a rifle.

Where were his parents? Jail them too!

Protesting is legal, interlopers are discouraged in places of unrest.


They always have been except under this Administration, they are excused. We have a Commander in Chief who encourages violence and hatred and then excuses the people that he perceives as supporting or liking him. Imagine needing succor that much?

BN747
It is better to die on your feet, than live on your knees.
 
User avatar
WarRI1
Topic Author
Posts: 14195
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2007 10:51 am

Re: White House occupant defends Rittenhouse who killed two people.

Wed Sep 02, 2020 1:59 am

BN747 wrote:
N583JB wrote:
BN747 wrote:

What part of 'a 17yo with a rifle' wandering troubled streets, on his own volition, is not registering with you?

He had no reason to be there...his going there was simply teenage ignorance gunning for trouble - nothing more.

BN747


No one involved had any reason to be there. There's a reason why everyone involved, from Rittenhouse to the three people shot, had some sort of criminal history.


Especially, a kid from another state carrying a rifle.

Where were his parents? Jail them too!

Protesting is legal, interlopers are discouraged in places of unrest.


Imagine that we have a Commander in Chief who encourages unrest to try and win reelection. He tries to divide and conquer with fear and lies. He alone is bad enough, but his Acolytes are worse. They support the Buffoon to remain in their positions of power. Honor, duty country mean nothing to them, it is Self!!!

BN747
It is better to die on your feet, than live on your knees.
 
User avatar
WarRI1
Topic Author
Posts: 14195
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2007 10:51 am

Re: Trump defends Rittenhouse who killed two people.

Wed Sep 02, 2020 2:06 am

I am beginning to fear for this man in the White House. He seems erratic these days. He tries to smear Joe Biden,he should look in the mirror and so should his enablers.
It is better to die on your feet, than live on your knees.
 
tommy1808
Posts: 14563
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2013 3:24 pm

Re: White House occupant defends Rittenhouse who killed two people.

Wed Sep 02, 2020 4:53 am

N583JB wrote:
There's a reason why everyone involved, from Rittenhouse to the three people shot, had some sort of criminal history.


so... Rittenhouse ran some facial recognition software on them? Otherwise they could all have been convicted serial killers and it would not matter......

MaverickM11 wrote:
Also fun that the biggest thin blue line boot lickers are also the biggest supporters of vigilante murder. That is not a coincidence.


Not just not coincidence. If you want Biden voters to be scared of a) Corona virus and b) Trump Supporters shooting up waiting lines at polling places, that is the way to go.

best regards
Thomas
Well, there is prophecy in the bible after all: 2 Timothy 3:1-6
 
Kno
Posts: 608
Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2016 10:08 pm

Re: White House occupant defends Rittenhouse who killed two people.

Wed Sep 02, 2020 6:19 am

N583JB wrote:
casinterest wrote:
N583JB wrote:

There were many people legally carrying rifles that night. Why was this kid singled out and targeted? The protesters had no way of knowing his age.



Maybe the other ones were more mature and knew how to deal with their guns. Maybe they weren't all vigilantes looking for a fight. This kid brought a gun and caused 2 deaths and a serious injury. More guns =more deaths. Not more rights.


Or maybe this kid was just in the wrong place at the wrong time and defended himself against a bad person with bad intentions. The first guy to come at him was a person who spent 10 years in prison for sexual abuse of a child....the same person who was filmed behaving very erratically prior to the shooting. It is entirely possible that the person looking for a fight was the hardened criminal who ended up getting shot.


You’re typically quick to defend a white vigilante or a cop who shoots an unarmed black guy and you’re typically quick to talk down on black victims of police brutality. This occurs in multiple threads before the facts come out.

You might as well just come out and say “I trust that white folks do the right thing even when killing and I think black folks are in the wrong anytime they are shot and killed by whites” I’m sure you’ll suggest otherwise but this consistent with your posts.
 
N583JB
Posts: 1089
Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2019 9:58 pm

Re: White House occupant defends Rittenhouse who killed two people.

Wed Sep 02, 2020 11:21 am

Kno wrote:
N583JB wrote:
casinterest wrote:


Maybe the other ones were more mature and knew how to deal with their guns. Maybe they weren't all vigilantes looking for a fight. This kid brought a gun and caused 2 deaths and a serious injury. More guns =more deaths. Not more rights.


Or maybe this kid was just in the wrong place at the wrong time and defended himself against a bad person with bad intentions. The first guy to come at him was a person who spent 10 years in prison for sexual abuse of a child....the same person who was filmed behaving very erratically prior to the shooting. It is entirely possible that the person looking for a fight was the hardened criminal who ended up getting shot.


You’re typically quick to defend a white vigilante or a cop who shoots an unarmed black guy and you’re typically quick to talk down on black victims of police brutality. This occurs in multiple threads before the facts come out.

You might as well just come out and say “I trust that white folks do the right thing even when killing and I think black folks are in the wrong anytime they are shot and killed by whites” I’m sure you’ll suggest otherwise but this consistent with your posts.


It may appear that way, but only because most of the officer-involved shootings that are discussed on this board were justified (although I have been quick to condemn those I believe were not). I've also stated several times that I think Rittenhouse had bad judgment and committed multiple crimes, but that each shooting appears to have been in self-defense.
 
sierrakilo44
Posts: 586
Joined: Tue Dec 13, 2011 1:38 am

Re: Trump defends Rittenhouse who killed two people.

Wed Sep 02, 2020 11:46 am

A video in which protesters identify Rittenhouse as pointing his rifle at them and telling them to get out of their car prior to the first shooting.

If it holds up it could show Rittenhouse was trying to provoke a response from protesters before the first filmed confrontation.

https://mobile.twitter.com/berniebroman ... 7487336448
Last edited by sierrakilo44 on Wed Sep 02, 2020 11:53 am, edited 1 time in total.
 
sierrakilo44
Posts: 586
Joined: Tue Dec 13, 2011 1:38 am

Re: White House occupant defends Rittenhouse who killed two people.

Wed Sep 02, 2020 11:52 am

N583JB wrote:
I think Rittenhouse had bad judgment and committed multiple crimes, but that each shooting appears to have been in self-defense.


Very pertinent question.

Why hasn’t the protester with the gun who was shot through the arm by Rittenhouse been charged with attempted murder? I guess if Rittenhouse was legitimately defending himself the one who was threatening him should have been charged with an offence already?

Tells you how the prosecutors see this case.....
Last edited by sierrakilo44 on Wed Sep 02, 2020 11:54 am, edited 1 time in total.
 
tommy1808
Posts: 14563
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2013 3:24 pm

Re: Trump defends Rittenhouse who killed two people.

Wed Sep 02, 2020 11:53 am

sierrakilo44 wrote:
A video in which protesters identify Rittenhouse as pointing his rifle at them and telling them to get out of their car prior to the first shooting.

If it holds up it could should Rittenhouse was trying to provoke a response from protesters.

https://mobile.twitter.com/berniebroman ... 7487336448


A "Good guy" steps in to prevent what must have seemed to them as a mass shooting about to happen any moment, and the "We need good guys with guns" fraction blames the good guys.......

Consistency seems to be pretty hard for some....

best regards
Thomas
Well, there is prophecy in the bible after all: 2 Timothy 3:1-6
 
N583JB
Posts: 1089
Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2019 9:58 pm

Re: White House occupant defends Rittenhouse who killed two people.

Wed Sep 02, 2020 1:39 pm

sierrakilo44 wrote:
N583JB wrote:
I think Rittenhouse had bad judgment and committed multiple crimes, but that each shooting appears to have been in self-defense.


Very pertinent question.

Why hasn’t the protester with the gun who was shot through the arm by Rittenhouse been charged with attempted murder? I guess if Rittenhouse was legitimately defending himself the one who was threatening him should have been charged with an offence already?

Tells you how the prosecutors see this case.....


Good question, and since I am not doing the investigation I can only speculate. Was the protester with the gun legally allowed to possess that gun in the first place? If not, what happened to the gun before he was approached by police? Did he give it to another protester who got rid of it? What I'm getting at is that if the police did not recover the gun, it would be hard to prove in a court of law that he had a gun, even though he was photographed holding a pistol. He could easily claim "it was a BB gun", and the authorities would have a hard time proving otherwise unless they had recovered the gun in question.

It is also entirely possible that the man shot in the arm will be arrested in due time once the investigation is complete.
 
N583JB
Posts: 1089
Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2019 9:58 pm

Re: Trump defends Rittenhouse who killed two people.

Wed Sep 02, 2020 1:40 pm

tommy1808 wrote:
sierrakilo44 wrote:
A video in which protesters identify Rittenhouse as pointing his rifle at them and telling them to get out of their car prior to the first shooting.

If it holds up it could should Rittenhouse was trying to provoke a response from protesters.

https://mobile.twitter.com/berniebroman ... 7487336448


A "Good guy" steps in to prevent what must have seemed to them as a mass shooting about to happen any moment, and the "We need good guys with guns" fraction blames the good guys.......

Consistency seems to be pretty hard for some....

best regards
Thomas


Rittenhouse had been out with a number of other armed people for hours before the shooting happened. He only opened fire after he was chased down. There's literally nothing to suggest that he was going to commit a mass shooting. That's about as plausible as someone else saying that Rittenhouse only opened fire because he thought the convicted child molester was on his way to assault another child.
 
User avatar
Aaron747
Posts: 15024
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:07 am

Re: Trump defends Rittenhouse who killed two people.

Wed Sep 02, 2020 2:11 pm

N583JB wrote:
There's literally nothing to suggest that he was going to commit a mass shooting.


You cannot definitively say what he was there for. It doesn't have to be a mass shooting - if he had fever dreams of being some kind of hero once 'shit went down', then it's not a stretch he sought a situation to bring that to fruition in. Much more will be known once his communications and online activities prior to these events are thoroughly examined. They can still be recovered even though he deleted most of his social media accounts.

His TikTok seemed to state his intentions in some way, no?

http://www.fairfaxunderground.com/forum ... 2-40-1.png
If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
 
emperortk
Posts: 100
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2018 2:01 pm

Re: White House occupant defends Rittenhouse who killed two people.

Wed Sep 02, 2020 2:28 pm

N583JB wrote:
I've also stated several times that I think Rittenhouse had bad judgment and committed multiple crimes, but that each shooting appears to have been in self-defense.


In most states, not sure about WI, if you are engaged in committing a crime, you are explicitly exempted from the ability to claim self-defense. If Rittenhouse was unlawfully carrying a weapon, he is going to be very unlikely to succeed in claiming self-defense. If you commit a felonious crime and someone dies as a result, you will usually be charged with murder regardless of the specific circumstances that led to the person's death.
 
tommy1808
Posts: 14563
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2013 3:24 pm

Re: Trump defends Rittenhouse who killed two people.

Wed Sep 02, 2020 3:02 pm

N583JB wrote:
There's literally nothing to suggest that he was going to commit a mass shooting.


Self defense has to happen before you are shot dead. If you carry a weapon, you invite anyone to see a thread in whatever you do, that doesn't allow to wait for your intentions. Have your muzzle onto a person for a fraction of a second, bend your trigger finger a tiny bit and you put anyone else on the scene in a "now or never" position.
More careful judgement can only be expected from trained law enforcement officers, and as a gazillion threads on this board proof, in the US even they are not expected to have any better judgement. If he had been shot by police with a 100 rounds, requiring reload inbetween, you would now be defending the police.

Best regards
Thomas
Well, there is prophecy in the bible after all: 2 Timothy 3:1-6
 
N583JB
Posts: 1089
Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2019 9:58 pm

Re: Trump defends Rittenhouse who killed two people.

Wed Sep 02, 2020 3:06 pm

tommy1808 wrote:
N583JB wrote:
There's literally nothing to suggest that he was going to commit a mass shooting.


Self defense has to happen before you are shot dead. If you carry a weapon, you invite anyone to see a thread in whatever you do, that doesn't allow to wait for your intentions. Have your muzzle onto a person for a fraction of a second, bend your trigger finger a tiny bit and you put anyone else on the scene in a "now or never" position.
More careful judgement can only be expected from trained law enforcement officers, and as a gazillion threads on this board proof, in the US even they are not expected to have any better judgement. If he had been shot by police with a 100 rounds, requiring reload inbetween, you would now be defending the police.

Best regards
Thomas


That is not correct. You can't just assault anyone and everyone you see with a gun because you are afraid they are a mass shooter.
 
MaverickM11
Posts: 18715
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2000 1:59 pm

Re: Trump defends Rittenhouse who killed two people.

Wed Sep 02, 2020 3:15 pm

N583JB wrote:
tommy1808 wrote:
sierrakilo44 wrote:
A video in which protesters identify Rittenhouse as pointing his rifle at them and telling them to get out of their car prior to the first shooting.

If it holds up it could should Rittenhouse was trying to provoke a response from protesters.

https://mobile.twitter.com/berniebroman ... 7487336448


A "Good guy" steps in to prevent what must have seemed to them as a mass shooting about to happen any moment, and the "We need good guys with guns" fraction blames the good guys.......

Consistency seems to be pretty hard for some....

best regards
Thomas


Rittenhouse had been out with a number of other armed people for hours before the shooting happened. He only opened fire after he was chased down. There's literally nothing to suggest that he was going to commit a mass shooting. That's about as plausible as someone else saying that Rittenhouse only opened fire because he thought the convicted child molester was on his way to assault another child.

I see you're still leaning hard into vigilante murder. How do you tell the difference between white male with long gun mass shooter and white male with long gun "protecting property"? White male Trump supporters with long guns have blown away mosques, synagogues, and a Walmart--should we have assumed they were "protecting property"?
I don't take responsibility at all
 
User avatar
casinterest
Posts: 13538
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 5:30 am

Re: Trump defends Rittenhouse who killed two people.

Wed Sep 02, 2020 3:21 pm

N583JB wrote:
tommy1808 wrote:
N583JB wrote:
There's literally nothing to suggest that he was going to commit a mass shooting.


Self defense has to happen before you are shot dead. If you carry a weapon, you invite anyone to see a thread in whatever you do, that doesn't allow to wait for your intentions. Have your muzzle onto a person for a fraction of a second, bend your trigger finger a tiny bit and you put anyone else on the scene in a "now or never" position.
More careful judgement can only be expected from trained law enforcement officers, and as a gazillion threads on this board proof, in the US even they are not expected to have any better judgement. If he had been shot by police with a 100 rounds, requiring reload inbetween, you would now be defending the police.

Best regards
Thomas


That is not correct. You can't just assault anyone and everyone you see with a gun because you are afraid they are a mass shooter.


This coming from the person that is justifying a kid that punches women, and waves a gun around bullying people?
Twenty years from now you will be more disappointed by the things you didn't do than by the ones you did..So throw off the bowlines. Sail away from the safe harbor. Catch the trade winds in your sails. Explore. Dream. Discover.--Mark Twain
 
N583JB
Posts: 1089
Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2019 9:58 pm

Re: Trump defends Rittenhouse who killed two people.

Wed Sep 02, 2020 3:26 pm

MaverickM11 wrote:
N583JB wrote:
tommy1808 wrote:

A "Good guy" steps in to prevent what must have seemed to them as a mass shooting about to happen any moment, and the "We need good guys with guns" fraction blames the good guys.......

Consistency seems to be pretty hard for some....

best regards
Thomas


Rittenhouse had been out with a number of other armed people for hours before the shooting happened. He only opened fire after he was chased down. There's literally nothing to suggest that he was going to commit a mass shooting. That's about as plausible as someone else saying that Rittenhouse only opened fire because he thought the convicted child molester was on his way to assault another child.

I see you're still leaning hard into vigilante murder. How do you tell the difference between white male with long gun mass shooter and white male with long gun "protecting property"? White male Trump supporters with long guns have blown away mosques, synagogues, and a Walmart--should we have assumed they were "protecting property"?


So just to be clear, you are advocating physically assaulting anyone who carries a gun?
 
N583JB
Posts: 1089
Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2019 9:58 pm

Re: Trump defends Rittenhouse who killed two people.

Wed Sep 02, 2020 3:27 pm

casinterest wrote:
N583JB wrote:
tommy1808 wrote:

Self defense has to happen before you are shot dead. If you carry a weapon, you invite anyone to see a thread in whatever you do, that doesn't allow to wait for your intentions. Have your muzzle onto a person for a fraction of a second, bend your trigger finger a tiny bit and you put anyone else on the scene in a "now or never" position.
More careful judgement can only be expected from trained law enforcement officers, and as a gazillion threads on this board proof, in the US even they are not expected to have any better judgement. If he had been shot by police with a 100 rounds, requiring reload inbetween, you would now be defending the police.

Best regards
Thomas


That is not correct. You can't just assault anyone and everyone you see with a gun because you are afraid they are a mass shooter.


This coming from the person that is justifying a kid that punches women, and waves a gun around bullying people?


It doesn't matter if he punched a girl or not, he still has the right to defend himself.
 
User avatar
casinterest
Posts: 13538
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 5:30 am

Re: Trump defends Rittenhouse who killed two people.

Wed Sep 02, 2020 3:27 pm

N583JB wrote:
MaverickM11 wrote:
N583JB wrote:

Rittenhouse had been out with a number of other armed people for hours before the shooting happened. He only opened fire after he was chased down. There's literally nothing to suggest that he was going to commit a mass shooting. That's about as plausible as someone else saying that Rittenhouse only opened fire because he thought the convicted child molester was on his way to assault another child.

I see you're still leaning hard into vigilante murder. How do you tell the difference between white male with long gun mass shooter and white male with long gun "protecting property"? White male Trump supporters with long guns have blown away mosques, synagogues, and a Walmart--should we have assumed they were "protecting property"?


So just to be clear, you are advocating physically assaulting anyone who carries a gun?


If I deem them to be a threat, I will shoot them. Seems to be what you are advocating right? Shoot first ask questions later.
Twenty years from now you will be more disappointed by the things you didn't do than by the ones you did..So throw off the bowlines. Sail away from the safe harbor. Catch the trade winds in your sails. Explore. Dream. Discover.--Mark Twain
 
N583JB
Posts: 1089
Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2019 9:58 pm

Re: Trump defends Rittenhouse who killed two people.

Wed Sep 02, 2020 3:56 pm

casinterest wrote:
N583JB wrote:
MaverickM11 wrote:
I see you're still leaning hard into vigilante murder. How do you tell the difference between white male with long gun mass shooter and white male with long gun "protecting property"? White male Trump supporters with long guns have blown away mosques, synagogues, and a Walmart--should we have assumed they were "protecting property"?


So just to be clear, you are advocating physically assaulting anyone who carries a gun?


If I deem them to be a threat, I will shoot them. Seems to be what you are advocating right? Shoot first ask questions later.


Please state exactly where I advocated this? Exact quotation would be appreciated. Thanks in advance.
 
User avatar
casinterest
Posts: 13538
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 5:30 am

Re: Trump defends Rittenhouse who killed two people.

Wed Sep 02, 2020 4:11 pm

N583JB wrote:
casinterest wrote:
N583JB wrote:

So just to be clear, you are advocating physically assaulting anyone who carries a gun?


If I deem them to be a threat, I will shoot them. Seems to be what you are advocating right? Shoot first ask questions later.


Please state exactly where I advocated this? Exact quotation would be appreciated. Thanks in advance.


Don't need one, it is all over your feeds.
Cops can shoot in the back, kids can shoot when threatened. Hell, I feel threatened when I see a gun not in an officiers possession when walking down a street. , so shoot first , ask questions later.
Twenty years from now you will be more disappointed by the things you didn't do than by the ones you did..So throw off the bowlines. Sail away from the safe harbor. Catch the trade winds in your sails. Explore. Dream. Discover.--Mark Twain
 
N583JB
Posts: 1089
Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2019 9:58 pm

Re: Trump defends Rittenhouse who killed two people.

Wed Sep 02, 2020 4:12 pm

casinterest wrote:
N583JB wrote:
casinterest wrote:

If I deem them to be a threat, I will shoot them. Seems to be what you are advocating right? Shoot first ask questions later.


Please state exactly where I advocated this? Exact quotation would be appreciated. Thanks in advance.


Don't need one, it is all over your feeds.
Cops can shoot in the back, kids can shoot when threatened. Hell, I feel threatened when I see a gun not in an officiers possession when walking down a street. , so shoot first , ask questions later.


Translation- "can't find one". Exactly what I thought.
 
User avatar
Aaron747
Posts: 15024
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:07 am

Re: Trump defends Rittenhouse who killed two people.

Wed Sep 02, 2020 4:14 pm

N583JB wrote:
casinterest wrote:
N583JB wrote:

Please state exactly where I advocated this? Exact quotation would be appreciated. Thanks in advance.


Don't need one, it is all over your feeds.
Cops can shoot in the back, kids can shoot when threatened. Hell, I feel threatened when I see a gun not in an officiers possession when walking down a street. , so shoot first , ask questions later.


Translation- "can't find one". Exactly what I thought.


Great, now that that's cleared up, you can respond to rebuttal 10 posts up.
If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
 
User avatar
casinterest
Posts: 13538
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 5:30 am

Re: Trump defends Rittenhouse who killed two people.

Wed Sep 02, 2020 4:15 pm

N583JB wrote:
casinterest wrote:
N583JB wrote:

Please state exactly where I advocated this? Exact quotation would be appreciated. Thanks in advance.


Don't need one, it is all over your feeds.
Cops can shoot in the back, kids can shoot when threatened. Hell, I feel threatened when I see a gun not in an officiers possession when walking down a street. , so shoot first , ask questions later.


Translation- "can't find one". Exactly what I thought.



I think other posters will agree that this is exactly what you advocate for, People without guns don't have rights in your eyes to practice their constitutional rights when abusive cowards with guns can shoot to kill anything anytime and provoke others.
Twenty years from now you will be more disappointed by the things you didn't do than by the ones you did..So throw off the bowlines. Sail away from the safe harbor. Catch the trade winds in your sails. Explore. Dream. Discover.--Mark Twain
 
N583JB
Posts: 1089
Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2019 9:58 pm

Re: Trump defends Rittenhouse who killed two people.

Wed Sep 02, 2020 4:27 pm

casinterest wrote:
N583JB wrote:
casinterest wrote:

Don't need one, it is all over your feeds.
Cops can shoot in the back, kids can shoot when threatened. Hell, I feel threatened when I see a gun not in an officiers possession when walking down a street. , so shoot first , ask questions later.


Translation- "can't find one". Exactly what I thought.



I think other posters will agree that this is exactly what you advocate for, People without guns don't have rights in your eyes to practice their constitutional rights when abusive cowards with guns can shoot to kill anything anytime and provoke others.


That seems to be the reality you are hoping for. I've never stated as such, though. Perhaps you have your own beliefs confused with mine.
 
User avatar
casinterest
Posts: 13538
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 5:30 am

Re: Trump defends Rittenhouse who killed two people.

Wed Sep 02, 2020 4:29 pm

N583JB wrote:
casinterest wrote:
N583JB wrote:

Translation- "can't find one". Exactly what I thought.



I think other posters will agree that this is exactly what you advocate for, People without guns don't have rights in your eyes to practice their constitutional rights when abusive cowards with guns can shoot to kill anything anytime and provoke others.


That seems to be the reality you are hoping for. I've never stated as such, though. Perhaps you have your own beliefs confused with mine.


No, i just see how hard you go in all threads to justify a shooter. It's usually convenient when the dead person can't speak for themselves. Fascists and dictators have always seen that as a plus.
Twenty years from now you will be more disappointed by the things you didn't do than by the ones you did..So throw off the bowlines. Sail away from the safe harbor. Catch the trade winds in your sails. Explore. Dream. Discover.--Mark Twain
 
N583JB
Posts: 1089
Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2019 9:58 pm

Re: Trump defends Rittenhouse who killed two people.

Wed Sep 02, 2020 4:30 pm

MaverickM11 wrote:
N583JB wrote:
tommy1808 wrote:

A "Good guy" steps in to prevent what must have seemed to them as a mass shooting about to happen any moment, and the "We need good guys with guns" fraction blames the good guys.......

Consistency seems to be pretty hard for some....

best regards
Thomas


Rittenhouse had been out with a number of other armed people for hours before the shooting happened. He only opened fire after he was chased down. There's literally nothing to suggest that he was going to commit a mass shooting. That's about as plausible as someone else saying that Rittenhouse only opened fire because he thought the convicted child molester was on his way to assault another child.

I see you're still leaning hard into vigilante murder. How do you tell the difference between white male with long gun mass shooter and white male with long gun "protecting property"? White male Trump supporters with long guns have blown away mosques, synagogues, and a Walmart--should we have assumed they were "protecting property"?


Perhaps with a little bit of common sense? 19 muslim men hijacked four airliners on 9/11. Would you support just randomly attacking any brown looking man you see on an airplane? Black people are overrepresented amongst known cop killers and murderers. Would you support just shooting any black person you saw? Of course not. So, stop with the hyperbole.
 
N583JB
Posts: 1089
Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2019 9:58 pm

Re: Trump defends Rittenhouse who killed two people.

Wed Sep 02, 2020 4:33 pm

casinterest wrote:
N583JB wrote:
casinterest wrote:


I think other posters will agree that this is exactly what you advocate for, People without guns don't have rights in your eyes to practice their constitutional rights when abusive cowards with guns can shoot to kill anything anytime and provoke others.


That seems to be the reality you are hoping for. I've never stated as such, though. Perhaps you have your own beliefs confused with mine.


No, i just see how hard you go in all threads to justify a shooter. It's usually convenient when the dead person can't speak for themselves. Fascists and dictators have always seen that as a plus.


I just enjoy countering the hysterical, criminal-defending narratives pushed by many before any semblance of facts are known. I know you'd probably support burning down the local hardware store because of a rumor that your wife's cousin's brother's dog's hairdresser saw posted on her kid's facebook, but some of us like to know the facts before we rush to judgment.
 
User avatar
casinterest
Posts: 13538
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 5:30 am

Re: Trump defends Rittenhouse who killed two people.

Wed Sep 02, 2020 4:34 pm

N583JB wrote:
casinterest wrote:
N583JB wrote:

That seems to be the reality you are hoping for. I've never stated as such, though. Perhaps you have your own beliefs confused with mine.


No, i just see how hard you go in all threads to justify a shooter. It's usually convenient when the dead person can't speak for themselves. Fascists and dictators have always seen that as a plus.


I just enjoy countering the hysterical, criminal-defending narratives pushed by many before any semblance of facts are known. I know you'd probably support burning down the local hardware store because of a rumor that your wife's cousin's brother's dog's hairdresser saw posted on her kid's facebook, but some of us like to know the facts before we rush to judgment.



Yet you always rush to judgement when the person shot is unarmed. Their fault for not bringing a gun to a fascist rally right?
Twenty years from now you will be more disappointed by the things you didn't do than by the ones you did..So throw off the bowlines. Sail away from the safe harbor. Catch the trade winds in your sails. Explore. Dream. Discover.--Mark Twain
 
N583JB
Posts: 1089
Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2019 9:58 pm

Re: Trump defends Rittenhouse who killed two people.

Wed Sep 02, 2020 4:36 pm

casinterest wrote:
N583JB wrote:
casinterest wrote:

No, i just see how hard you go in all threads to justify a shooter. It's usually convenient when the dead person can't speak for themselves. Fascists and dictators have always seen that as a plus.


I just enjoy countering the hysterical, criminal-defending narratives pushed by many before any semblance of facts are known. I know you'd probably support burning down the local hardware store because of a rumor that your wife's cousin's brother's dog's hairdresser saw posted on her kid's facebook, but some of us like to know the facts before we rush to judgment.



Yet you always rush to judgement when the person shot is unarmed. Their fault for not bringing a gun to a fascist rally right?


I never rush to judgment. I simply offer plausible explanations that the "burn down the entire world because of a Facebook rumor" crowd doesn't care about, because facts don't matter to many people.
 
MaverickM11
Posts: 18715
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2000 1:59 pm

Re: Trump defends Rittenhouse who killed two people.

Wed Sep 02, 2020 4:37 pm

N583JB wrote:
MaverickM11 wrote:
N583JB wrote:

Rittenhouse had been out with a number of other armed people for hours before the shooting happened. He only opened fire after he was chased down. There's literally nothing to suggest that he was going to commit a mass shooting. That's about as plausible as someone else saying that Rittenhouse only opened fire because he thought the convicted child molester was on his way to assault another child.

I see you're still leaning hard into vigilante murder. How do you tell the difference between white male with long gun mass shooter and white male with long gun "protecting property"? White male Trump supporters with long guns have blown away mosques, synagogues, and a Walmart--should we have assumed they were "protecting property"?


So just to be clear, you are advocating physically assaulting anyone who carries a gun?

JuSt To bE clEaR here's a red herring that is nowhere in what I wrote. If people are having trouble trusting cops' motives, why would anyone sane trust random wannabe cops with guns milling about? And how do you tell the nefarious ones from the well intentioned ones--if there is such a thing?

casinterest wrote:
N583JB wrote:
MaverickM11 wrote:
I see you're still leaning hard into vigilante murder. How do you tell the difference between white male with long gun mass shooter and white male with long gun "protecting property"? White male Trump supporters with long guns have blown away mosques, synagogues, and a Walmart--should we have assumed they were "protecting property"?


So just to be clear, you are advocating physically assaulting anyone who carries a gun?


If I deem them to be a threat, I will shoot them. Seems to be what you are advocating right? Shoot first ask questions later.

You have to understand that the victims' sum total of their history is enough reason to justify the murder retroactively. The white boy with a gun doing the murdering's history is completely off limits because reasons: white boy w/ gun = hero. Simple 2 follow! :roll:
I don't take responsibility at all
 
User avatar
casinterest
Posts: 13538
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 5:30 am

Re: Trump defends Rittenhouse who killed two people.

Wed Sep 02, 2020 4:39 pm

N583JB wrote:
casinterest wrote:
N583JB wrote:

I just enjoy countering the hysterical, criminal-defending narratives pushed by many before any semblance of facts are known. I know you'd probably support burning down the local hardware store because of a rumor that your wife's cousin's brother's dog's hairdresser saw posted on her kid's facebook, but some of us like to know the facts before we rush to judgment.



Yet you always rush to judgement when the person shot is unarmed. Their fault for not bringing a gun to a fascist rally right?


I never rush to judgment. I simply offer plausible explanations that the "burn down the entire world because of a Facebook rumor" crowd doesn't care about, because facts don't matter to many people.



Facts do matter, but your judgments are that the people who have been shot, have facts that matter less.
Twenty years from now you will be more disappointed by the things you didn't do than by the ones you did..So throw off the bowlines. Sail away from the safe harbor. Catch the trade winds in your sails. Explore. Dream. Discover.--Mark Twain
 
N583JB
Posts: 1089
Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2019 9:58 pm

Re: Trump defends Rittenhouse who killed two people.

Wed Sep 02, 2020 4:43 pm

MaverickM11 wrote:
N583JB wrote:
MaverickM11 wrote:
I see you're still leaning hard into vigilante murder. How do you tell the difference between white male with long gun mass shooter and white male with long gun "protecting property"? White male Trump supporters with long guns have blown away mosques, synagogues, and a Walmart--should we have assumed they were "protecting property"?


So just to be clear, you are advocating physically assaulting anyone who carries a gun?

JuSt To bE clEaR here's a red herring that is nowhere in what I wrote. If people are having trouble trusting cops' motives, why would anyone sane trust random wannabe cops with guns milling about? And how do you tell the nefarious ones from the well intentioned ones--if there is such a thing?



It is called common sense and using your brain. There are more guns than people in the United States. Chances are, wherever you go, someone is armed there. People legally have the right to carry firearms in most places. You can't just attack them because of the color of their skin.
 
N583JB
Posts: 1089
Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2019 9:58 pm

Re: Trump defends Rittenhouse who killed two people.

Wed Sep 02, 2020 4:45 pm

casinterest wrote:
N583JB wrote:
casinterest wrote:


Yet you always rush to judgement when the person shot is unarmed. Their fault for not bringing a gun to a fascist rally right?


I never rush to judgment. I simply offer plausible explanations that the "burn down the entire world because of a Facebook rumor" crowd doesn't care about, because facts don't matter to many people.



Facts do matter, but your judgments are that the people who have been shot, have facts that matter less.


Once again, it seems as if you have mistaken me for another poster. Since you have made all kinds of accusations about me but have refused to provide even one quote to back up your attacks, I'd appreciate if you'd stick to the topic at hand instead of resorting to baseless personal attacks.
 
User avatar
casinterest
Posts: 13538
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 5:30 am

Re: Trump defends Rittenhouse who killed two people.

Wed Sep 02, 2020 5:24 pm

N583JB wrote:
casinterest wrote:
N583JB wrote:

I never rush to judgment. I simply offer plausible explanations that the "burn down the entire world because of a Facebook rumor" crowd doesn't care about, because facts don't matter to many people.



Facts do matter, but your judgments are that the people who have been shot, have facts that matter less.


Once again, it seems as if you have mistaken me for another poster. Since you have made all kinds of accusations about me but have refused to provide even one quote to back up your attacks, I'd appreciate if you'd stick to the topic at hand instead of resorting to baseless personal attacks.



No I haven't mistaken you.

We are talking about a 17 year old charged with homicide in the deaths of 2 people and injuring a third, and you are defending his rights to shoot those people. I haven't seen charges against the survivor yet.
Twenty years from now you will be more disappointed by the things you didn't do than by the ones you did..So throw off the bowlines. Sail away from the safe harbor. Catch the trade winds in your sails. Explore. Dream. Discover.--Mark Twain
 
N583JB
Posts: 1089
Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2019 9:58 pm

Re: Trump defends Rittenhouse who killed two people.

Wed Sep 02, 2020 5:45 pm

casinterest wrote:
N583JB wrote:
casinterest wrote:


Facts do matter, but your judgments are that the people who have been shot, have facts that matter less.


Once again, it seems as if you have mistaken me for another poster. Since you have made all kinds of accusations about me but have refused to provide even one quote to back up your attacks, I'd appreciate if you'd stick to the topic at hand instead of resorting to baseless personal attacks.



No I haven't mistaken you.

We are talking about a 17 year old charged with homicide in the deaths of 2 people and injuring a third, and you are defending his rights to shoot those people. I haven't seen charges against the survivor yet.


Defending his rights to shoot those people? I've stated that the shootings to me looked like they were in self-defense. I've also stated that it may not matter since Rittenhouse may have been committing a crime before the shootings. In fact, I believe I was the first person in this thread to bring up the felony murder rule and apply it to Rittenhouse. There is a huge legal gray area, which is why this case is so interesting to me. Indeed, if he is charged with a crime, the only reason he would likely be charged at all would be because of his age. It is crazy to me to think that if Rittenhouse were a few months older he'd either be a free kid right now or he'd have a much easier trial, but the law is the law. Should be interesting to follow.
 
User avatar
seb146
Posts: 23734
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:19 am

Re: Trump defends Rittenhouse who killed two people.

Wed Sep 02, 2020 5:49 pm

N583JB wrote:
casinterest wrote:
N583JB wrote:

I never rush to judgment. I simply offer plausible explanations that the "burn down the entire world because of a Facebook rumor" crowd doesn't care about, because facts don't matter to many people.



Facts do matter, but your judgments are that the people who have been shot, have facts that matter less.


Once again, it seems as if you have mistaken me for another poster. Since you have made all kinds of accusations about me but have refused to provide even one quote to back up your attacks, I'd appreciate if you'd stick to the topic at hand instead of resorting to baseless personal attacks.


Under Wisconsin law, open carry is legal. However, the minimum age to posses firearms is 18. There probably were other people there openly carrying who were over 18. And they did not fire on anyone. This 17 year old domestic terrorist did. He was not trained, obviously. He had no idea about gun safety. Like "do not point guns at people" and "do not pull the trigger while pointing guns at people" and now he is paying the price. And Republicans are twisting themselves into all sorts of knots to defend this domestic terrorist.
You bet I'm pumped!!! I just had a green tea!!!
 
N583JB
Posts: 1089
Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2019 9:58 pm

Re: Trump defends Rittenhouse who killed two people.

Wed Sep 02, 2020 5:52 pm

seb146 wrote:
N583JB wrote:
casinterest wrote:


Facts do matter, but your judgments are that the people who have been shot, have facts that matter less.


Once again, it seems as if you have mistaken me for another poster. Since you have made all kinds of accusations about me but have refused to provide even one quote to back up your attacks, I'd appreciate if you'd stick to the topic at hand instead of resorting to baseless personal attacks.


Under Wisconsin law, open carry is legal. However, the minimum age to posses firearms is 18. There probably were other people there openly carrying who were over 18. And they did not fire on anyone. This 17 year old domestic terrorist did. He was not trained, obviously. He had no idea about gun safety. Like "do not point guns at people" and "do not pull the trigger while pointing guns at people" and now he is paying the price. And Republicans are twisting themselves into all sorts of knots to defend this domestic terrorist.


If he was a "domestic terrorist", as you say, he was a pretty bad one, as he only appeared to engage in defensive action (i.e., he only shot people that were attacking him). As a 17 year-old, he never should have been out there in the first place. The question is, does the fact that he was underage negate his right to self-defense? It may, it may not. There are a lot of opinions either way. We'll find out if this ever makes it to trial.
 
User avatar
casinterest
Posts: 13538
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 5:30 am

Re: Trump defends Rittenhouse who killed two people.

Wed Sep 02, 2020 5:57 pm

N583JB wrote:
casinterest wrote:
N583JB wrote:

Once again, it seems as if you have mistaken me for another poster. Since you have made all kinds of accusations about me but have refused to provide even one quote to back up your attacks, I'd appreciate if you'd stick to the topic at hand instead of resorting to baseless personal attacks.



No I haven't mistaken you.

We are talking about a 17 year old charged with homicide in the deaths of 2 people and injuring a third, and you are defending his rights to shoot those people. I haven't seen charges against the survivor yet.


Defending his rights to shoot those people? I've stated that the shootings to me looked like they were in self-defense. I've also stated that it may not matter since Rittenhouse may have been committing a crime before the shootings. In fact, I believe I was the first person in this thread to bring up the felony murder rule and apply it to Rittenhouse. There is a huge legal gray area, which is why this case is so interesting to me. Indeed, if he is charged with a crime, the only reason he would likely be charged at all would be because of his age. It is crazy to me to think that if Rittenhouse were a few months older he'd either be a free kid right now or he'd have a much easier trial, but the law is the law. Should be interesting to follow.

Either way, his self defense is going to be mired by the fact that he himself fell to the ground. He put himself into a defenseless position, and those coming after him were trying to disarm him after he shot another person. He made himself judge,jury and executioner, after flouting the law to bring the gun across state lines under age.
Twenty years from now you will be more disappointed by the things you didn't do than by the ones you did..So throw off the bowlines. Sail away from the safe harbor. Catch the trade winds in your sails. Explore. Dream. Discover.--Mark Twain
 
N583JB
Posts: 1089
Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2019 9:58 pm

Re: Trump defends Rittenhouse who killed two people.

Wed Sep 02, 2020 5:59 pm

casinterest wrote:
N583JB wrote:
casinterest wrote:


No I haven't mistaken you.

We are talking about a 17 year old charged with homicide in the deaths of 2 people and injuring a third, and you are defending his rights to shoot those people. I haven't seen charges against the survivor yet.


Defending his rights to shoot those people? I've stated that the shootings to me looked like they were in self-defense. I've also stated that it may not matter since Rittenhouse may have been committing a crime before the shootings. In fact, I believe I was the first person in this thread to bring up the felony murder rule and apply it to Rittenhouse. There is a huge legal gray area, which is why this case is so interesting to me. Indeed, if he is charged with a crime, the only reason he would likely be charged at all would be because of his age. It is crazy to me to think that if Rittenhouse were a few months older he'd either be a free kid right now or he'd have a much easier trial, but the law is the law. Should be interesting to follow.

Either way, his self defense is going to be mired by the fact that he himself fell to the ground. He put himself into a defenseless position, and those coming after him were trying to disarm him after he shot another person. He made himself judge,jury and executioner, after flouting the law to bring the gun across state lines under age.


He fell to the ground as he was fleeing. Not sure how that can be held against him. Also not sure how much the other protesters who were shot can be faulted if they reasonably believed that Rittenhouse was a threat. It is very possible that this could be a case where no one ends up going to jail. Rittenhouse thought he was defending himself, protesters thought they were defending themselves, and each side was reasonable to believe as such.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: AABusDrvr, BaconButty, Baidu [Spider], Virtual737 and 25 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos