Mr. Chatywin et al. Posted October 27, 2021 Share Posted October 27, 2021 24 minutes ago, Varysblackfyre321 said: Oh, that would seem like a job for the cops to handle. But they didn’t know he underage. That wasn’t the reason they attacked him. And the cops clearly weren't doing their job, which is why civilians were in a position to have to act. Also, you're very selectively assigning motives here, always giving the benefit of the doubt to the person who illegally brought a gun to a protest and killed two people. Quote Would strike them and then chase after them whilst they try to flee from you? Wow. Raising a gun at someone as you step back is not trying to flee without intent of inflicting fatal damage to another. Quote And, eh I’ve seen 18 year olds look younger than their age, and 15 year olds older, I’m not gonna start wrestling guns away from people in a open carry state because I think someone looks young. I would contact law-enforcement. Not do the incredibly stupid thing these men did. Again, just wow. I'm absolutely trying to remove a firearm from a kid who is brandishing it. Especially when the police are doing nothing. And the incredibly stupid thing is a kid illegally having a firearm, illegally bringing it across state lines and illegally displaying it at a protest that itself was illegal. Your desire to find a way to justify all of this and absolve this murderer of blame is mystifying. Quote can you Show me evidence any of their actions came from the idea that they were dealing with a child and correcting a legal wrong? They tried to get a gun away from someone who common sense indicates should not have had it. And they would have been correct to do so. Quote The adult thing would be to contact the police if they thought Rittenhouse was doing something illegal. They didn’t. because they had no significant reason to suspect such I think. Again, the cops were supporting his illegal behavior. Quote Because he was attacked and only started shooting is when he was being assaulted by people who had no evidence based reason he had done anything illegal enough worth such aggression. You keep saying he was attacked even though he illegally brought the gun to a rally. If someone is brandishing a gun at you, you're the one acting in self-defense to get it away from them. And you're the victim if you get shot in the process. Quote So no evidence then. Seemed to be enough evidence for the cops to murder Tamir Rice. A 12 year old. Also another reason why you can't just always fall back on trusting the police. Quote But you can see why a scared child wouldn’t put much stock in the benignity of the men trying to beat him. They could merely take it and give a beating. Or they could have taken it and killed him. The latter outcome is not some irrational proposition. He wouldn't be seen as a child if he was black, which is why I brought up the altered scenario. That's a full grown man then. And if he was that scared, why would he go? Why would he commit multiple crimes in the process? What's irrational is to defend the person who at every stage was in the wrong and give them every benefit of the doubt, which is exactly what you're doing here. 33 minutes ago, Varysblackfyre321 said: Eh I don’t think in the case of Rittenhouse it was bullshit at least. Hence there being video of him actually giving water to protesters who needed it. Giving out water doesn't mean shit, and nobody drives across state lines to protect some random small town's small businesses. That's just an excuse to do what he did. Quote Also everyone at the protest was there illegally. It was done under a curfew dude. And? Protestors were breaking curfew, so Rittenhouse committing multiple crimes is basically the same? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoodedCrow Posted October 27, 2021 Share Posted October 27, 2021 Rittenhouse was acting irresponsibly before he murdered people. I think going armed to a protest is reckless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Chatywin et al. Posted October 27, 2021 Share Posted October 27, 2021 4 minutes ago, Varysblackfyre321 said: Do you think the people attacking knew of that? Yes, I would assume a young looking white kid playing soldier with white nationalists might do something dumb. And he did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Varysblackfyre321 Posted October 27, 2021 Share Posted October 27, 2021 1 minute ago, Tywin et al. said: And the cops clearly weren't doing their job, which is why civilians were in a position to have to act. Nah, can’t start assaulting people because you suspect they might be too young to hold a gun. Wait Where are you getting this idea that they’ve even claimed to have such a suspicion? 3 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said: Also, you're very selectively assigning motives here, always giving the benefit of the doubt to the person who illegally brought a gun to a protest and killed two people. Where are you getting the motive of these men recognizing Rittenhouse as underage and merely interested in disarming him? 4 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said: Wow. Raising a gun at someone as you step back is not trying to flee without intent of inflicting fatal damage to another. Tell me where do you see that in any of the videos released before being struck in any fashion? 6 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said: They tried to get a gun away from someone who common sense indicates Where are you getting this motive from? And no, they had no definite evidence of Rittenhouse having done anything illegal. I doubt they’d go after him like they did if he was wearing a BLM shirt and chanting ACAB. 8 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said: Again, the cops were supporting his illegal behavior. You think they knew Rittenhouse would be there ahead of time and knew definitely he was underage? Eh. 10 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said: He wouldn't be seen as a child if he was black, You wouldn’t cry he’s guilty of murder if he was black and shot three white proud boys at a protest under the same circumstance. 11 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said: You keep saying he was attacked even though he illegally brought the gun to a rally. He was attacked and again none of the people attacking him had any concrete knowledge he had no legal right to wield a firearm as he did. 13 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said: Seemed to be enough evidence for the cops to murder Tamir Rice. A 12 year old. There it is. The individual circumstances of the incident don’t really matter as much scoring a victory in your culture war. A White conservative boy shot and killed three leftists Rittenhouse by default was always going to be guilty in your mind and should fry. 16 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said: And if he was that scared, why would he go? I think he got considerably more scared as people attacked him. Hey quick question if Rittenhouse was an adult would the shootings be justified? 17 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said: And? Protestors were breaking curfew, so Rittenhouse committing multiple crimes is basically the same? And so crying “he shouldn’t have EVen BEen there!” Is bullshit. None of the people should have been there but you only say Rittenhouse shouldn’t have been there to imply any aggression towards him would be justified because obviously he wanted trouble by going where he didn’t belong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoodedCrow Posted October 27, 2021 Share Posted October 27, 2021 Rittenhouse was running around with a lethal and visible weapon at a protest. I get it you are equivocating to defend a reckless person for whatever your motives are. Please don’t ever take jury duty, if you think this threatening, illegal, and unsafe behavior is okay. On the other hand, he should be tried in a court as a juvenile ( because he I was) and his parents should be punished for enabling illegal activity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Chatywin et al. Posted October 27, 2021 Share Posted October 27, 2021 30 minutes ago, Varysblackfyre321 said: Nah, can’t start assaulting people because you suspect they might be too young to hold a gun. Wait Where are you getting this idea that they’ve even claimed to have such a suspicion? People on the scene were saying they were trying to disarm him. And yes, you can disarm someone you believe to be a child holding a gun. That is legal. What's illegal is basically everything Rittenhouse did. Quote Tell me where do you see that in any of the videos released before being struck in any fashion? The limited video evidence is of him shooting at people, with the worst spin that two people are attacking him with a skateboard and a plastic bag. Not exactly a serious threat comparatively when you have an AR-15. Quote Where are you getting this motive from? And no, they had no definite evidence of Rittenhouse having done anything illegal. Simply being there was illegal by your own account. And that's on top of the other obvious crimes committed. Quote I doubt they’d go after him like they did if he was wearing a BLM shirt and chanting ACAB. Probably because that person would also be threatening them with a gun, duh. Quote You think they knew Rittenhouse would be there ahead of time and knew definitely he was underage? Eh. This is not relevant at all. Quote You wouldn’t cry he’s guilty of murder if he was black and shot three white proud boys at a protest under the same circumstance. Yes I would, if this hypothetical black kid did everything Rittenhouse did. Because murder is murder. Quote He was attacked and again none of the people attacking him had any concrete knowledge he had no legal right to wield a firearm as he did. He says he was attacked. The evidence of that is iffy. He may have just tripped during a confrontation and started firing. Keep in mind there was two, not one, shooting instances that evening, so it's not like he immediately tried to retreat. Quote There it is. The individual circumstances of the incident don’t really matter as much scoring a victory in your culture war. A White conservative boy shot and killed three leftists Rittenhouse by default was always going to be guilty in your mind and should fry. Lol, no. That's just you showing your own hand, hence why you said if the reverse was true and it was a black kid shooting three white people I'd defend the shooter. Quote I think he got considerably more scared as people attacked him. More people "attacked" him, pauses for dramatic effect, BECAUSE HE WAS FUCKING SHOOTING AT THEM. In your world he's allowed to shoot people in self-defense, but they can't try to disarm him? What kind of twisted logic is that? Quote Hey quick question if Rittenhouse was an adult would the shootings be justified? Nope. Quote And so crying “he shouldn’t have EVen BEen there!” Is bullshit. None of the people should have been there but you only say Rittenhouse shouldn’t have been there to imply any aggression towards him would be justified because obviously he wanted trouble by going where he didn’t belong. Because he was the one who committed multiple felonies on top of breaking curfew. The other people are not guilty of that. And yet you still defend he's the one that should get the benefit of the doubt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Varysblackfyre321 Posted October 27, 2021 Share Posted October 27, 2021 29 minutes ago, HoodedCrow said: Rittenhouse was running around with a lethal and visible weapon at a protest. Wisconsin is an open carry state. Holding a gun openly isn’t license for others to take it by force or attack. You don’t get post hoc justify doing assaulting someone after it’s been discovered they committed a crime you couldn’t be expected to know about. 25 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said: People on the scene were saying they were trying to disarm him. Where are you getting it was because they suspected he was a minor? 25 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said: And yes, you can disarm someone you believe to be a child holding a gun. Where are you getting they went after him because they thought he was a child? 25 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said: The limited video evidence is of him shooting at people, with the worst spin that two people are attacking him with a skateboard and a plastic bag. Not exactly a serious threat comparatively when you have an AR-15. Sure, he should have taken comfort in the idea the people beating him would act rationally as they continue they try to beat him. 25 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said: Simply being there was illegal by your own account. Okay anything illegal they weren’t also guilty of doing. 25 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said: Probably because that person would also be threatening them with a gun, duh. Far from an initial threat Rittenhouse literally tried to flee from them. 25 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said: This is not relevant at all. Sure it is when you proclaim the men couldn’t call the police because they were deliberately ignoring Rittenhouse’s crimes prior to that night. Because that would have been the responsible thing to do if they actually suspected Rittenhouse was underage. 25 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said: He says he was attacked. The evidence of that is iffy. The video is not blurry. The men hounded him as he tried to flee from them. He only used violence in response to them doing so. 25 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said: Lol, no. Lol, yeah hench bringing up Tamir rice as if that tragedy automatically disqualifies Rittenhouse from being able to defend himself. 25 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said: More people "attacked" him, pauses for dramatic effect, BECAUSE HE WAS FUCKING SHOOTING AT THEM. He shot at them BECAUSE THEY WERE ATTACKING HIM. 25 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said: In your world he's allowed to shoot people in self-defense, but they can't try to disarm him? W If he started shooting at people before they started to attack him it’d be murder. That’s not what happened though. 25 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said: Nope Got it. So even if Rittenhouse wasn’t underage and legally owned the gun, leftists still get to beat him,(maybe even even kill him) and rob him of his gun anyway because well…they’re your side. 25 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said: The other people are not guilty of that. They were guilty of being some place they legally shouldn’t have been. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoodedCrow Posted October 27, 2021 Share Posted October 27, 2021 I’m against murder, reckless use of firearms, and life threatening behavior. I’m against parents who encourage illegal and behavior. ( Sandy Hook anyone?) I consider going with guns out in public to be criminally negligent. I think people right now who excuse this behavior are contributing to the overall violence in the United States. Sort of like Donald. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ran Posted October 27, 2021 Share Posted October 27, 2021 3 minutes ago, HoodedCrow said: I consider going with guns out in public to be criminally negligent. Laws in most states of the union do not agree with you, and they are what decides things, not your personal preference. Stating this fact is not making excuses. It's just stating the fact that the laws in most states do not see people who go out with guns in public as being criminally negligent by default. Even the case of Rittenhouse, the state has charged him with a misdemeanor in respect to his possession of the gun, not a felony. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Horse Named Stranger Posted October 27, 2021 Share Posted October 27, 2021 1 hour ago, Varysblackfyre321 said: Where are you getting this motive from? And no, they had no definite evidence of Rittenhouse having done anything illegal. I doubt they’d go after him like they did if he was wearing a BLM shirt and chanting ACAB. I like the way you invoke the hypothetical murderous lefty to justify the murders of right wing nut. If he were wearing a BLM or was screaming ACAB at the top of his lungs, cops wouldn't have let him anywhere near the protests with his illegal gun coming from outta state. The officers allowing him to get anywhere near there should be removed from the police. If that hasn't happened, yet. 46 minutes ago, Varysblackfyre321 said: He shot at them BECAUSE THEY WERE ATTACKING HIM. He shot, because he got himself in a dangerous situation, by illegally crossing state lines with a firearm. So why did he go there illegally armed and dangerous? To provide protesters and the police with warm tea and cookies? To sing we shall overcome? On that note, it's impressive how you point out that protesters were violating the curfew as some sorta of justification for Rittenhouse being there (violating the curfew and coming from another state). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoodedCrow Posted October 27, 2021 Share Posted October 27, 2021 In the United States there is a huge problem with the police not enforcing laws( or only with certain skin colors). The police should have stopped the dangerous activity. But then, Republicans in the United States don’t have to obey subpoenas or corruption rules…yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Varysblackfyre321 Posted October 27, 2021 Share Posted October 27, 2021 4 minutes ago, A Horse Named Stranger said: I like the way you invoke the hypothetical murderous lefty to justify the murders of right wing nut. I’m not justifying murder at all. 5 minutes ago, A Horse Named Stranger said: He shot, because he got himself in a dangerous situation, He shot because he was being attacked. His presence at the protest doesn’t mean any leftist gets to do whatever they want to him because of some sense provocation. 6 minutes ago, A Horse Named Stranger said: So why did he go there illegally armed and dangerous? To provide protesters and the police with warm tea and cookies? To sing we shall overcome? To protect businesses and dissuade rioting probably. 8 minutes ago, A Horse Named Stranger said: On that note, it's impressive how you point out that protesters were violating the curfew as some sorta of justification for Rittenhouse being there (violating the curfew and coming from another state). It’s not a justification for anyone to be. It’s just noting the hypocrisy of crying “he shouldn’t have been there!” as reason for why there can be no allowance for him to cite self defense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sologdin Posted October 27, 2021 Share Posted October 27, 2021 the comparative analysis of certain acts by other defendants is not relevant to the homicide case. those facts would be relevant to a civil suit or a constitutional argument. but the argument that this juvenile offender should be locked away forever because african americans have been treated improperly or because leftists have been treated differently doesn't make the world a better place. quite the contrary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Centrist Simon Steele Posted October 27, 2021 Share Posted October 27, 2021 8 hours ago, Varysblackfyre321 said: Hey if a group of proud boys chased down a leftist during curfew, hit them hard enough to fall to the ground, and then in response the leftist used a weapon would you be going “well that protester shouldn’t have violated curfew.” as reason why the leftist couldn’t defend themselves? I would wager no. Whether or not someone was “looking for trouble” doesn’t automatically mean others get to do what they want at any sense of provocation. Your Reminds me of the cons who’d blather that a protestor mowed down in the street shouldn’t have been on the road. Obviously they were looking for trouble, with violating the law so they can’t complain about getting deliberately hit with cars. But this isn't what happened to Rittenhouse. He showed up, armed, to a protest ready to shoot "rioters." He wasn't merely passing through during curfew. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoodedCrow Posted October 27, 2021 Share Posted October 27, 2021 There are gun laws. They should be enforced. Most people driving are not thinking” and I might just bag me a pedestrian”. ( I hope) Seatbelt laws are enforced, and driving rules are enforced. Vehicular homicide is a crime. These are not just my personal preferences. I would prefer that loaded guns were not allowed at all in public settings and to knowledge public dangers. One way to protest the Trumpifying ( and increasing violence)is to express dismay and disapproval. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Horse Named Stranger Posted October 27, 2021 Share Posted October 27, 2021 58 minutes ago, Varysblackfyre321 said: His presence at the protest doesn’t mean any leftist gets to do whatever they want to him because of some sense provocation. To protect businesses and dissuade rioting probably. It’s not a justification for anyone to be. It’s just noting the hypocrisy of crying “he shouldn’t have been there!” as reason for why there can be no allowance for him to cite self defense. Can we establish a timeline with events in an observable reality here, first? The protests with the leftists mob, were already going on, they were indeed very much the reason why he picked up his gun and went there. So it's not like he went duck hunting and took a wrong turn and ended up in this situation by accident. To protect business and dissuade rioting? a) is the job of the police, not of some vigilante with a gun. b) to dissuade somebody at gun point, peacefully. Is that your argument, really? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martell Spy Posted October 27, 2021 Share Posted October 27, 2021 Just now, A Horse Named Stranger said: Can we establish a timeline with events in an observable reality here, first? The protests with the leftists mob, were already going on, they were indeed very much the reason why he picked up his gun and went there. So it's not like he went duck hunting and took a wrong turn and ended up in this situation by accident. To protect business and dissuade rioting? a) is the job of the police, not of some vigilante with a gun. b) to dissuade somebody at gun point, peacefully. Is that your argument, really? So, he's not a security guard right? He isn't being paid to do this. What was it about these particular protesters that drew him there? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frey family reunion Posted October 27, 2021 Share Posted October 27, 2021 I empathize with the prosecutors in this case, because cases where the defense is self-defense can be difficult to prove. In my State at least the burden of proof is on the prosecutor to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the killing was not done in self-defense. And you add the media coverage and the political element and I can only imagine that this case is a nightmare to try and get an impartial jury. As for the judge’s ruling, it’s fairly common for a judge to disallow the prosecutor to refer to those killed as victims. Especially when the defense is self-defense. But I was a little surprised that the judge didn’t also shut down the defense attorneys in calling those that were shot, looters or rioters. As far as I know those have a legal connotation, and nobody involved was charged with those crimes. Either way, this is usually within the purview of a judge’s discretion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gruff one Posted October 27, 2021 Share Posted October 27, 2021 Rittenhouse, the 2 dead, the 1 wounded. Which of these didn't create the circumstances of what happened that night? Are any of them not culpable? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DireWolfSpirit Posted October 27, 2021 Author Share Posted October 27, 2021 9 hours ago, Varysblackfyre321 said: You were under the wrong impression. I'm pretty sure you are the one under the wrong, narrative bending impression here. The lead-up to violence Jeremiah told USA Today he was trying to get to his car when he came across Rittenhouse, who was among a group of armed men in the parking lot of Car Source, a used car dealership across the street from Froedtert South Kenosha Medical Center. Unprompted, Rittenhouse aimed his rifle at the 24-year-old Black man. He began shouting at Jeremiah, who shouted back. “I’m trying to get out of here. If you’re gonna shoot me, just shoot!” Jeremiah said. Rittenhouse didn’t fire. A few moments later, however, Jeremiah saw him point the gun at someone else. This time, Rittenhouse did shoot, he said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.