Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Eagler on November 19, 2021, 12:03:56 PM
-
Looks like it to me
Eagler
-
Not guilty all counts
-
Wonder if the city will burn to the ground tonight now
-
Wonder if the city will burn to the ground tonight now
Much better possiblity with this verdict than if it was anything else
Will they let it burn like summer of 2021 or not?
Given the reason they allowed then is gone...
Eagler
-
IN!
-
Much better possiblity with this verdict than if it was anything else
Will they let it burn like summer of 2021 or not?
Given the reason they allowed then is gone...
Eagler
Political trolling.
-
Looks like it to me
Eagler
i agree. It meets all of the requirements for a self defense 'defense' in Georgia, but I think there's a level of irresponsibility involved in this case. Taking a rifle of that type to a politically charged atmosphere is almost criminal negligence. As an investigator, my question would have been "If you thought it was so dangerous that you needed a gun, then why did you go?"
In another forum, not a gaming forum, mind you, I made the comment that quite often when people want 'justice' what they want is 'revenge' enacted by the government. I also said that, no matter the verdict, half the people were going to be mad about it, it just depended on which half. I can tell you this, though, if he'd been found guilty, the possibility of riots would be practically zero.
Politically charged? Evidently, but more of a societal issue than a political one, imho.
-
Political trolling.
Then why are you trolling the troll?
Most certainly IN.
-
Then why are you trolling the troll?
Most certainly IN.
Because his constant attempts to insert politics into every thread indicate he might no longer be aware that he is doing it by reflex.
-
worst acting that actually worked.
semp
-
worst acting that actually worked.
semp
More like a panic attack
Whatever it was the evidence spoke the loudest as it should
Eagler
-
Because his constant attempts to insert politics into every thread indicate he might no longer be aware that he is doing it by reflex.
Do you agree with the verdict?
My guess is that you do not
This thread is based on facts not politics but keep trying to shut it down.. your version of social media cancelling any opposing views
Eagler
-
From the rules for this forum, which I actually read...
5- Members are asked to not act as "back seat moderators". If you feel a post violates the forum rules, the use the "Report to Moderator" link in the post to report it.
-
This thread is based on facts not politics
Did I misunderstand what you meant by:
Given the reason they allowed then is gone...
Can you explain what you meant by that sentence?
I'll leave the verdict up to the jury. Agree or not, unless a mistrial is declared or an appeal filed, they get the final word. On that proceeding.
Now the civil suits can begin against him and/or his mother by the surviving victim, and the deceased victims families.
-
From the rules for this forum, which I actually read...
5- Members are asked to not act as "back seat moderators". If you feel a post violates the forum rules, the use the "Report to Moderator" link in the post to report it.
And what are you doing?
-
From the rules for this forum, which I actually read...
5- Members are asked to not act as "back seat moderators". If you feel a post violates the forum rules, the use the "Report to Moderator" link in the post to report it.
Thanks decoy :)
The capt and I go back and forth on many things as our pov seem to be 180 from each other which is what makes the world go round..
I posted this b4 the verdict was read interested in what the 2nd amendment group here had to say about the facts of this case
I don't think that is political
Interested now in the response the verdict will bring and how that is covered by our bias media ... the verdict response on some networks is truly amazing to be believed as it is nothing but political and biased
Eagler
-
And what are you doing?
That was just an observation. My other posts on this thread have been in response to Eagler's original post or to subsequent comments.
What are you doing? Inquiring minds and such...
-
worst acting that actually worked.
semp
As Eagler said, and as I said to you a few nights ago: that was a panic attack.
He wasn’t attempting to cry, he was hyperventilating and freaking out. I have witnessed so many in my work and I also have them from PTSD.
Watch some YouTube videos of ppl while they are having one, you’ll see the similarities….easy to spot
-
That was just an observation
As was mine.
-
Thanks decoy :)
The capt and I go back and forth on many things as our pov seem to be 180 from each other which is what makes the world go round..
I posted this b4 the verdict was read interested in what the 2nd amendment group here had to say about the facts of this case
I don't think that is political
Interested now in the response the verdict will bring and how that is covered by our bias media ... the verdict response on some networks is truly amazing to be believed as it is nothing but political and biased
Eagler
It's obvious that the media, and politician on both sides of the aisle, politicize events that are devisive enough without adding anything extra. I don't know what happened that night, but I do know that both the prosecution and the defense presented their evidence and the jury took four days to reach a decision. I have sat on traverse juries in the past and the simplest pieces of evidence get batted back and forth like tennis balls, and I'm sure that was the case here.
The media is already speculating about civil suits, but guy KR shot in the arm testified that he pointed a handgun at KR moments before he was shot. Pretty much a buzzsaw for cutting the legs off a case, imho.
-
As Eagler said, and as I said to you a few nights ago: that was a panic attack.
He wasn’t attempting to cry, he was hyperventilating and freaking out. I have witnessed so many in my work and I also have them from PTSD.
Watch some YouTube videos of ppl while they are having one, you’ll see the similarities….easy to spot
I get panic attacks all the time, that was bad acting.
semp
-
the irony of it all is that the only person going to jail is the one who bought the gun for him.
semp
-
As Eagler said, and as I said to you a few nights ago: that was a panic attack.
He wasn’t attempting to cry, he was hyperventilating and freaking out. I have witnessed so many in my work and I also have them from PTSD.
Watch some YouTube videos of ppl while they are having one, you’ll see the similarities….easy to spot
I have no doubt.
I also have little doubt that others saw a non-uniformed guy running down a street with an semi-auto rifle and people yelling "He shot someone!" As far as they knew, they were dealing with an Aurora, CO shooter. It was a crap situation all around.
Perhaps an argument for underage CosPlay LARPers to not cross state lines with near mil-grade weapons to insert themselves in situations best left to uniformed police/ National Guard units. This situation is a perfect example of why amateur vigilantism can cause more problems than it solves.
How many people did the trained, uniformed police panic-shoot that evening?
In any case, the jury has delivered the verdict. Civil juries will operate under different rules.
-
This situation is a perfect example of why amateur vigilantism can cause more problems than it solves.
I will apologize in advance, but I laughed out loud over this. Is there such a thing as professional vigilantism?
I agree with you that vigilante justice is wrong, whether it occurs at the hands of an individual, a small group of people, or at the hands of a mob. It's never a case of them having 'the right intentions.' Possibly in their own minds, but that doesn't excuse lawless behavior. Maybe I need a new business card.
-
I will apologize in advance, but I laughed out loud over this. Is there such a thing as professional vigilantism?
Fair point. It would have been better worded as "amateurs and vigilantes". I make the distinction because even if they had been deputized, they would not have been properly trained and being not being uniformed, couldn't readily be distinguished from an domestic terrorist on a shooting spree.
Again, the trained, uniformed police didn't panic-shoot anyone that night. There is a lesson there.
I expected the verdict. I didn't follow the case closely. From what I heard, it sounded over charged. But the DA may not have had good options that fit.
In any case, it is far, far from over for him I suspect. Civil cases are more flexible and easier to win. He and his mom might find getting a devastating multi-million dollar judgement against them taking everything they have and a restitution agreement taking everything they are ever going to earn going forward, a Pyric victory.
We'll see, what we'll see.
-
Damn. Now my teenager is gonna want his own AR 15 and I cannot afford a new one. Anyone got a gently used one they wanna sell? :bolt:
-
the irony of it all is that the only person going to jail is the one who bought the gun for him.
semp
I thought a 17 yr old was allowed to own a rifle in Wisc... I know they are in Alabama :salute
-
I don't think that is political
If you are not lying, then what did you mean by:
Given the reason they allowed then is gone...
-
I thought a 17 yr old was allowed to own a rifle in Wisc... I know they are in Alabama :salute
only if your parents sign for it and only for hunting. I'm surprised judge didn't allow the illegal possession of a rifle. that was clearly a crime. his friend is facing up to 20 years for buying the rifle for him.
semp
-
If you are not lying, then what did you mean by:
Not in my original post
It means exactly what it sounds like..the truth
Eagler
-
Not in my original post
It means exactly what it sounds like..the truth
Eagler
So your original post wasn't political trolling, but that one was?
So what "reason" were you referring to in the quoted post? It's a simple question. Why are you so hesitant to answer honestly?
Given the reason they allowed then is gone...
-
only if your parents sign for it and only for hunting. I'm surprised judge didn't allow the illegal possession of a rifle. that was clearly a crime. his friend is facing up to 20 years for buying the rifle for him.
semp
I'll simply point out the observable fact that this was adjudicated in this case. The court found that his possession of the gun was lawful. Even the prosecution offered no disagreement when questioned by the judge. The reality is they knew it wasn't a valid charge but did it anyway and lied to the press and the court about the legal basis of their position. Sorry you fell for that lie.
-
I'll simply point out the observable fact that this was adjudicated in this case. The court found that his possession of the gun was lawful. Even the prosecution offered no disagreement when questioned by the judge. The reality is they knew it wasn't a valid charge but did it anyway and lied to the press and the court about the legal basis of their position. Sorry you fell for that lie.
Still gotta wait 7 1/2 years to rent a car though :rolleyes:
-
I'll simply point out the observable fact that this was adjudicated in this case. The court found that his possession of the gun was lawful. Even the prosecution offered no disagreement when questioned by the judge. The reality is they knew it wasn't a valid charge but did it anyway and lied to the press and the court about the legal basis of their position. Sorry you fell for that lie.
the judge decided on his own the law only applied to short barrel rifles. which is not true.
ask yourself this question if he could buy a gun why did he ask his friend to buy it.
and more if he didn't break the law why is his friend facing jail time.
there's a meme going around on Facebook which is amusing. I wish somebody loved me the way that judge loves the kid.
semp
-
the judge decided on his own the law only applied to short barrel rifles. which is not true.
ask yourself this question if he could buy a gun why did he ask his friend to buy it.
and more if he didn't break the law why is his friend facing jail time.
semp
If you knew there was a ruling and it was ruled as being lawfully possessed, why then do you still falsely declare he was possessing it unlawfully?
-
If you knew there was a ruling and it was ruled as being lawfully possessed, why then do you still falsely declare he was possessing it unlawfully?
like I said the judge loved him. why is his friend facing jail time if it was lawful possession?
semp
-
like I said the judge loved him. why is his friend facing jail time if it was lawful possession?
semp
Why not simply answer the question. You knew he was not in possession of the rifle illegally yet stated and seem to be continuing to state something you know is false. Why ?
-
Why not simply answer the question. You knew he was not in possession of the rifle illegally yet stated and seem to be continuing to state something you know is false. Why ?
already answered the question, you just didn't like the answer. the judge decided that the law only applies to short barrel guns. he could have legally bought the gun with his parents approval. he didn't. he had a friend buy it for him, which is illegal. that's why his friend is facing jail time.
the judge just loved him on that charge. his friend isn't gonna be that lucky, he had a different judge.
semp
-
already answered the question, you just didn't like the answer.
semp
You did not answer the question you danced around it and continue to do so now. The judge made a ruling based on the law which was not contested by the Prosecution. He did so based on how the law was written and the fact pattern of the case. It is a matter of observable fact that Kyle was not illegally in possession of the gun yet you continue to falsely claim he was. Facts actually do matter and ignoring them while coming up with an alternate version does not make the facts no longer facts nor do your opinions become facts simply because you want them to. As the saying goes, you are entitled to your own opinions but not to your own facts. There is no value in discussing opinions if either party can not agree on the actual facts. Hence, I'm trying to help us all establish the facts.
-
Capt you know
Just trying not to aggravate your main derangement syndrome
Eagler
-
Capt you know
Just trying not to aggravate your main derangement syndrome
Eagler
Are you admitting now you were inserting a political statement? Or were you referring to something other that what it appears?
I'm not saying this because I'm trying to be a forum mod. I'm saying this because you continually inject political statements in threads and anyone disagreeing has to hold their tongue to avoid breaking the forum rules that you seem to ignore with impunity. That simply isn't a fair discussion. You know it, and you are exploiting the advantage of that asymmetry to slip your propaganda in unchallenged.
Either HT needs to remove the rule so we can all reply in kind, or you should abide by the same rules as the rest of us are trying to.
Jeez. Even DemonSlayer has mostly canned his garbage. Why don't you do us a favor and join him.
-
the judge decided on his own the law only applied to short barrel rifles. which is not true.
ask yourself this question if he could buy a gun why did he ask his friend to buy it.
and more if he didn't break the law why is his friend facing jail time.
there's a meme going around on Facebook which is amusing. I wish somebody loved me the way that judge loves the kid.
semp
Except it is true:
The subsection reads: “This section applies only to a person under 18 years of age who possesses or is armed with a rifle or a shotgun if the person is in violation of s. 941.28 ...” That section of law isn’t specific to minors, but rather forbids any person from having a short-barreled shotgun or rifle.
A loophole or oversight in the law? Perhaps.
His friend is facing jail time because the purchase of the firearm was a straw sale. You check a specific box on the 4473 that asserts you are the transferee/buyer of the firearm. Defendant admitted in testimony that he gave his friend the money to purchase the firearm FOR HIM, with the intent to give it to him when he was legally allowed to OWN (eg. transfer to his name) the firearm at age 18.
-
Except it is true:
The subsection reads: “This section applies only to a person under 18 years of age who possesses or is armed with a rifle or a shotgun if the person is in violation of s. 941.28 ...” That section of law isn’t specific to minors, but rather forbids any person from having a short-barreled shotgun or rifle.
A loophole or oversight in the law? Perhaps.
His friend is facing jail time because the purchase of the firearm was a straw sale. You check a specific box on the 4473 that asserts you are the transferee/buyer of the firearm. Defendant admitted in testimony that he gave his friend the money to purchase the firearm FOR HIM, with the intent to give it to him when he was legally allowed to OWN (eg. transfer to his name) the firearm at age 18.
having somebody else buy a gun when you are not able to do it yourself is against the law. the fact that he took possession of it before he was 18, proves it. had he gone hunting or perhaps a rifle range would have bee ok. he took a gun and put himself in a position where he had to use it, isnt cool. had he stayed where he said according to him to "protect property" even though the owner said he never ask him or anybody else to protect it, would have been ok. but he put himself in a position in a middle of a riot, that is wrong. fact is those who were there legally to protect and serve never fired a weapon. only killing was done by him because he put himself in that position. that's what I think anyway.
semp
-
having somebody else buy a gun when you are not able to do it yourself is against the law. the fact that he took possession of it before he was 18, proves it. had he gone hunting or perhaps a rifle range would have bee ok. he took a gun and put himself in a position where he had to use it, isnt cool. had he stayed where he said according to him to "protect property" even though the owner said he never ask him or anybody else to protect it, would have been ok. but he put himself in a position in a middle of a riot, that is wrong. fact is those who were there legally to protect and serve never fired a weapon. only killing was done by him because he put himself in that position. that's what I think anyway.
semp
So you agree he was legally in possession of his rifle?
-
So you agree he was legally in possession of his rifle?
no.
semp
-
Kyle did nothing wrong.
And i have no idea how anything about this case has anything to do with racism but that's what some political commentators are suggesting which is just blows my mind.
God bless america
-
no.
semp
Since you can't accept observable fact as observable fact, there is no point discussing the matter with you.
-
Kyle did nothing wrong.
And i have no idea how anything about this case has anything to do with racism but that's what some political commentators are suggesting which is just blows my mind.
God bless america
God knows he was there to save the day.... just disappointed he forgot to ride in on a white stallion.
-
God knows he was there to save the day.... just disappointed he forgot to ride in on a white stallion.
HE SAVED THE DAY
HERO
-
Since you can't accept observable fact as observable fact, there is no point discussing the matter with you.
if I ask you to buy a gun I am not legally allowed to buy, we both should be in jail. it isnt simpler than that. he wasnt hunting or at a shooting range.
semp
-
he wasnt hunting or at a shooting range.
Well, sorta, apparently.
:noid
-
having somebody else buy a gun when you are not able to do it yourself is against the law. the fact that he took possession of it before he was 18, proves it. had he gone hunting or perhaps a rifle range would have bee ok. he took a gun and put himself in a position where he had to use it, isnt cool. had he stayed where he said according to him to "protect property" even though the owner said he never ask him or anybody else to protect it, would have been ok. but he put himself in a position in a middle of a riot, that is wrong. fact is those who were there legally to protect and serve never fired a weapon. only killing was done by him because he put himself in that position. that's what I think anyway.
semp
You are mostly incorrect.
The person asking to purchase the firearm is not violating the law. The person purchasing the firearm for said individual who cannot is in violation of the law (straw sale). Possessing the firearm according to the wording of the law in WI was legal.
He wasn't on trial for being in the wrong place at the wrong time. Was he an idiot for being there? Yes. Was it against the law for him to be there? Not any more 'against the law' than the other thousands of people there past the 8PM curfew.
Conflicting testimony regarding the business owners. Multiple witnesses testified they were asked or were happy that their businesses were being protected. They testified under oath (which in their case does not mean a whole lot as they don't have any reason to lie or not to lie).
Again, he was not charged with the crime of 'putting himself in a middle of a riot' (also terribly English, but alas).
He discharged his firearm when he was being attacked. In lots of footage during the night and plenty of witnesses and testimony, there was no example of him brandishing the firearm or attempting to intimidate anyone throughout the night. You've likely never had a pistol pointed at your head, so you likely have zero idea what it's like to be on death's door.
-
HE SAVED THE DAY
HERO
Oh Lighten up man. No doubt some people though Josef Mengele was an amazing Doctor and Anthropologist.
-
if I ask you to buy a gun I am not legally allowed to buy, we both should be in jail. it isnt simpler than that. he wasnt hunting or at a shooting range.
semp
Yes it is. You choose to interpret the law to your convenience instead of accepting observable fact that the matter was adjudicated and the actual facts of the law and case were used to determine he lawfully possessed the rifle that night.
You can but... but... but.. it all you want but facts are facts and your opinions do not negate them.
-
Yes it is. You choose to interpret the law to your convenience instead of accepting observable fact that the matter was adjudicated and the actual facts of the law and case were used to determine he lawfully possessed the rifle that night.
You can but... but... but.. it all you want but facts are facts and your opinions do not negate them.
I must change my answer to maybe. been trying to get info on it. here's a pretty interesting thing.
https://www.realclearpolicy.com/blog/2014/06/16/can_someone_else_buy_a_gun_for_you.html
semp
-
I must change my answer to maybe. been trying to get info on it. here's a pretty interesting thing.
https://www.realclearpolicy.com/blog/2014/06/16/can_someone_else_buy_a_gun_for_you.html
semp
If you enduce or encourage or (reward?) someone for commiting a crime for you, is that Conspiracy?
-
I must change my answer to maybe. been trying to get info on it. here's a pretty interesting thing.
https://www.realclearpolicy.com/blog/2014/06/16/can_someone_else_buy_a_gun_for_you.html
semp
You can but... but... but.. it all you want but facts are facts and your opinions do not negate them.
-
To me, seemed quite obviously self defense.
-
Argue away, But None of us heard all of the evidence presented, therefore we know considerably less than the jury does and even less than the court and attorneys…
-
You can but... but... but.. it all you want but facts are facts and your opinions do not negate them.
dude I accept the fact that he was found innocent. he was tried he was found not guilty. do I think he's innocent, no, i do not. just like oj simpson. I dont like it but that's just the way it is.
semp
-
dude I accept the fact that he was found innocent. he was tried he was found not guilty. do I think he's innocent, no, i do not. just like oj simpson. I dont like it but that's just the way it is.
semp
:rolleyes:
See above post.
You’re playing judge and jury with merely a modicum of facts.
-
Political trolling.
He meant George Floyd I believe - NOT political issue.
Thus YOU are the one inserting politics. :rolleyes:
-
Floyd who?
-
Argue away, But None of us heard all of the evidence presented, therefore we know considerably less than the jury does and even less than the court and attorneys…
The entire trial was televised and the facts are well documented through many good videos. There were also a number of lawyers who were directly involved in the case who live streamed through the entire trial as well and there was a ton of inside info as well as top level experts discussing how the facts played out. Rekietalaw was just one lawyer who started out streaming the pretrial motions and it snowballed into the most watched live stream and coverage of the trial. He often had twice to as many as three times the number of viewers as PBS for example. He had over 150k simultaneous viewers last might. There were over two dozen lawyers with all aspects and specialties covered including those directly participating in the trial.
So it is fair to say that all information wasn't publicly available it is safe to say almost all was and so much more beyond what the jury knew.
-
dude I accept the fact that he was found innocent. he was tried he was found not guilty. do I think he's innocent, no, i do not. just like oj simpson. I dont like it but that's just the way it is.
semp
I'm simply trying to establish actual fact and not even going to opinion. As a matter of actual fact, the legality of his possession of the rifle that night was litigated and the judge followed the law. As a matter of observable fact, he lawfully possessed the rifle that night. Your speculations beyond do not negate the basic facts.
You refuse to separate actual facts from what you want to be true and still seem to think that your opinions are more valuable than actual facts. That's why I have not even tried to step into the realm of actual opinion. You can't even separate the two enough to have a discussion beyond that first step.
Why not simply own your weakness and grow beyond it? I'm actually not trying to attack you. In almost every conversation I see you get into here, you kill the thread by doing this same thing. I'm not naïve enough to think this will happen as it is ingrained into your persona but in fairness to you, I'm trying to help you see something you are consistently blind to.
-
OJ Simpson comparison?
Lol
Nothing in this case is like that double murder commited by that psychopath
Eagler
-
Was going to chime in on this but it degenerated so quickly an fully to personal attacks and political posturing it isn't worth it.
-
He meant George Floyd I believe - NOT political issue.
Thus YOU are the one inserting politics. :rolleyes:
Nope. Good try. He knows what he was referring to and admitted it by by saying he was trying to avoid my "Main Derangement Syndrome."
Floyd Derangement Syndrome isn't a thing. We know what he is referring to. Nice deflection try.
-
Not only was he cleaning up the mess that rioters created, treating injured and putting out fires.
He shot only in self defence, rioters and a pedo, ((Rosenbaum) If you have 11 counts of sexual misconduct with a child and get killed rioting, I'm pretty 'meh' about it.)
The Media tried to demonize him... He beat the media and not many can say that.
The guy's a farking hero!
-
Kyle was more than likely set up from the start, which is why he ended up alone, and why the FBI had a drone lined up in that spot in the first place. Pretty schiesty the prosecution would provide unclear resolution video in the first place. But that is another story.
What do people expect to happen when your town is being demolished by total lunatics and your tax paying organizations don't stop it? People will take matters into their own hands and deal with the situation. We aren't gonna sit here anymore and allow thugs to destroy our property after some corrupt clown calls off the national guard. Infact the military should have been out there protecting the businesses and citizens that pay them their taxes. That is another story.
The fact that people are protesting that a sexual abuser and child abuser got what they deserved is what is wrong with this country and the media right now. A bunch of sick Fs is what they all are. The fact that high level media and officials are calling him a "white supremacist" et al, after he shot only white people attacking him, is what is wrong with the sick delusional and demented media in this country. I hope they all burn in hell for the division and destruction they have caused in the country.
In the end. The jury made the right decision and I thank them for that after all the abuse they received. Kyle proved that proud Americans will no tolerate destruction of their property and when he got attacked, he did what he had to do. I applaud him for that. I hope he sues the living crap out of all of these people who falsely labeled him.
-
With this verdict the slander lawsuits will begin
He has cases against the majority of our unbiased media outlets to the top potato head in the land...
I wish him well with those
Eagler
-
With this verdict the slander lawsuits will begin
He has cases against the majority of our unbiased media outlets to the top potato head in the land...
I wish him well with those
Eagler
There's even talk of Kyle suing Biden. :aok
Coogan
-
The entire trial was televised and the facts are well documented through many good videos. There were also a number of lawyers who were directly involved in the case who live streamed through the entire trial as well and there was a ton of inside info as well as top level experts discussing how the facts played out. Rekietalaw was just one lawyer who started out streaming the pretrial motions and it snowballed into the most watched live stream and coverage of the trial.
So it is fair to say that all information wasn't publicly available it is safe to say almost all was and so much more beyond what the jury knew.
I’m not as certain about that as you are, even with all the televised parts of the trial and the streaming.
I’ve unfortunately had to sit through five murder 1 trials for the two men who heinously beat my brother to death.
I got to see so much that the general public is oblivious to, it is NOT like the show Law & Order. It’s considerably more complex.
The judge will always require the jury to leave the courtroom when new evidence or other issues are being argued over for their relevance and other issues that may influence the jury but not be legal to become admissible. The jury will also be asked to leave for numerous other reasons, like outbursts by family/friends or anybody (including the lawyers) disrupting testimony.
I’m sure the judge had the power to shut down televised portions for evidentiary arguments that might end up getting back to the jury.
Nevertheless, I certainly don’t know most of the evidence and therefore can’t judge. However from the modest amount I did see and watch, it appears like his intention was to help people and knew he had to be armed to do so. He feared for his own life as he was being attacked while trying to run away - that meets the requirements for use of lethal force in self defense in Arizona and most states (I can’t speak for Wisconsin though).
-
Btw, if the jury doesn’t have a verdict in the first day, the large majority of the time it’s going to be acquittal or a hung jury. So their verdict should not be a surprise.
-
Kyle was more than likely set up from the start, which is why he ended up alone, and why the FBI had a drone lined up in that spot in the first place. Pretty schiesty the prosecution would provide unclear resolution video in the first place. But that is another story.
What do people expect to happen when your town is being demolished by total lunatics and your tax paying organizations don't stop it? People will take matters into their own hands and deal with the situation. We aren't gonna sit here anymore and allow thugs to destroy our property after some corrupt clown calls off the national guard. Infact the military should have been out there protecting the businesses and citizens that pay them their taxes. That is another story.
The fact that people are protesting that a sexual abuser and child abuser got what they deserved is what is wrong with this country and the media right now. A bunch of sick Fs is what they all are. The fact that high level media and officials are calling him a "white supremacist" et al, after he shot only white people attacking him, is what is wrong with the sick delusional and demented media in this country. I hope they all burn in hell for the division and destruction they have caused in the country.
In the end. The jury made the right decision and I thank them for that after all the abuse they received. Kyle proved that proud Americans will no tolerate destruction of their property and when he got attacked, he did what he had to do. I applaud him for that. I hope he sues the living crap out of all of these people who falsely labeled him.
is there anything in this world that isnt a conspiracy to you?
semp
-
Not only was he cleaning up the mess that rioters created, treating injured and putting out fires.
He shot only in self defence, rioters and a pedo, ((Rosenbaum) If you have 11 counts of sexual misconduct with a child and get killed rioting, I'm pretty 'meh' about it.)
The Media tried to demonize him... He beat the media and not many can say that.
The guy's a farking hero!
:aok
-
All I can say is this, what sort of retarded mother drives her son to a riot. Also, two dead dirt bags and another who will be jerking off with their non dominant had for the rest of their life does not break my heart.
-
do I think he's innocent, no, i do not.
Semp, I'm not meaning to be combative, just honestly curious what you see in Rittenhouse's firing of his weapon that is not self defense.
-
Sometimes it seems we live in two Americas:
1. Confederacy 2.0.
2. American Democratic progressive states for the betterment of humanity.
-
Sometimes it seems we live in two Americas:
1. Confederacy 2.0.
2. American Democratic progressive states for the betterment of humanity.
Or, as seen by the other half of the American population:
1. Leftist Communist/Socialist States of Amerika
2. American conservative states for the betterment of humanity.
-
Sometimes it seems we live in two Americas:
1. Confederacy 2.0.
2. American Democratic progressive states for the betterment of humanity.
Or, as seen by the other half of the American population:
1. Leftist Communist/Socialist States of Amerika
2. American conservative states for the betterment of humanity.
Here's the thing, though.
If the US followed the Constitution, and the Federal Government wasn't an overpowering monolith, striving to control all states, both of those views could peacefully coexist just fine. Whatever your end of the political spectrum, just go live in the state that suits you.
-
Sometimes it seems we live in two Americas:
I am not saying one is better than the other BTW. Just an observation. I am not perfect at articulation so don't try to read into it that I am this or that or prefer one over the other.
I will add that if one is highly polarized by certain non-fact-based media, it could lead to an entirely different take. In this, I wish current generations could experience the likes of Walter Cronkite. He was absolutely dedicated to reporting the truth and news. Note making the news or selling an agenda.
-
Or, as seen by the other half of the American population:
1. Leftist Communist/Socialist States of Amerika
2. American conservative states for the betterment of humanity.
However one sees their position, no one seems to recognize or maybe even care that the nation becomes more divided every day. People won't even consider talking to one another, and the idea of compromise seems to make most people want to vomit.
On the other hand, think about how much talk you hear about bringing about the solution through force.
-
All I can say is this, what sort of retarded mother drives her son to a riot. Also, two dead dirt bags and another who will be jerking off with their non dominant had for the rest of their life does not break my heart.
I honestly thought that this horse would have been beaten to a pulp by now, but dude, you hit my buttons. Seriously, no sane individual ever does anything that puts their child at imminent risk of harm. I'm not talking teaching them to ride a bicycle or a horse. But yeah, an 18YO at a riot with a sporter carbine (the official name for an 'assault rifle') is just beyond sanity.
As for the victims, well, they were some mothers' sons, but those mothers did a crappy job raising them. As for 'Mr. Non-Dominant,' if you point a gun and the other guy doesn't run, it's time to pull.
Thanks for a breath of fresh air.
-
I will add that if one is highly polarized by certain non-fact-based media,
All media, on every side, these days is highly partisan and full of propaganda. If anyone thinks the media he reads/watches is true, and the other side is fake, he is a media patsy.
-
I honestly thought that this horse would have been beaten to a pulp by now, but dude, you hit my buttons. Seriously, no sane individual ever does anything that puts their child at imminent risk of harm. I'm not talking teaching them to ride a bicycle or a horse. But yeah, an 18YO at a riot with a sporter carbine (the official name for an 'assault rifle') is just beyond sanity.
As for the victims, well, they were some mothers' sons, but those mothers did a crappy job raising them. As for 'Mr. Non-Dominant,' if you point a gun and the other guy doesn't run, it's time to pull.
Thanks for a breath of fresh air.
Except that his mother did not drive him there. She thought he went to work. The narrative of she drove him there is a media talking point and not based on the known facts.
-
Semp, I'm not meaning to be combative, just honestly curious what you see in Rittenhouse's firing of his weapon that is not self defense.
because he put himself in a situation where he had to use his rifle. seen videos of I dont know i could be 20 or 200 or a million of other guys who also said they were there to protect property. none of them walked into a middle of a riot. they didnt fired a single shot, neither did the police.
he walked a way to a place that he shouldnt have been, then claimed self defense. he shouldnt have been in the middle of it. violence was around, he knew it, that's why he brought a rifle. had they gone after him when he was by the dealership, that would have been self defense. but he didnt, he for whatever reason walked into the middle of a place that he shouldnt have been in and created a situation where he had to use his rifle.
semp
-
All media, on every side, these days is highly partisan and full of propaganda. If anyone thinks the media he reads/watches is true, and the other side is fake, he is a media patsy.
this is a true point. too many lazy people who let others think for them. there is no us against them, there's only us. and trust me if we split this country in 1/2, nobody wins. we all lose.
semp
-
However one sees their position, no one seems to recognize or maybe even care that the nation becomes more divided every day.
The media, the partisan croniest machinery (tech, education, big business, orgs, institutions, etc.), and the partisans on each side are in an ideological war. They are aggressively ramping up the war, pulling the nation into the two opposing camps.
If people allow the Federal government and large institutions to be used as tools of force in this conflict, we could be in for a mortal fight.
Better would be to keep the ideals of our founding: freedom, liberty, and minimal federal government with much power reserved to the states. Supplemented by a culture that is OK with different states doing things their own way.
-
this is a true point. too many lazy people who let others think for them. there is no us against them, there's only us. and trust me if we split this country in 1/2, nobody wins. we all lose.
semp
Someone always wins
-
Someone always wins
but as a country nobody does.
semp
-
because he put himself in a situation where he had to use his rifle.
The "Well, he was asking for it" argument isn't valid.
You don't lose your right to defend yourself just because you went into some sketchy situation, or because someone disagrees with your motives. None of that negates your right to defend yourself. None of that gives other people legal right to assault or to kill you.
If a girl dresses in skimpy clothes and goes into a sketchy night club -- that is unwise -- but it still is not legal to molest her, and she doesn't lose her right to defend herself.
-
Except that his mother did not drive him there. She thought he went to work. The narrative of she drove him there is a media talking point and not based on the known facts.
I was not aware of that, but I am neither shocked nor appalled. Of course, in this day and age, the media does not often concern itself with facts. Y'all go and debate this some more, but I'm done.
-
The "Well, he was asking for it" argument isn't valid.
You don't lose your right to defend yourself just because you went into some sketchy situation, or because someone disagrees with your motives. None of that negates your right to defend yourself. None of that gives other people legal right to assault or to kill you.
If a girl dresses in skimpy clothes and goes into a sketchy night club -- that is unwise -- but it still is not legal to molest her, and she doesn't lose her right to defend herself.
it's not the same thing. girls no matter what they wear have the right no say no. kyle didnt get molested. not the same thing. just like the other 3 hillbillies that killed the guy while chasing him in trucks. him shooting them would be self defense. them chasing him while saying I am gonna blow your head off is murder. they cant claim self defense. not the same thing as kyle, totally different, but not the same as the girl you mentioned.
semp
-
it's not the same thing. girls no matter what they wear have the right no say no. kyle didnt get molested. not the same thing. just like the other 3 hillbillies that killed the guy while chasing him in trucks. him shooting them would be self defense. them chasing him while saying I am gonna blow your head off is murder. they cant claim self defense. not the same thing as kyle, totally different, but not the same as the girl you mentioned.
semp
Who knows what that registered sex offender may have done. Also countries like the United Staes are not organic, I think you may have the the concept of nation and state slightly confused.
-
So what many of you are saying is I can shoot anyone that I feel is a threat to me or my family? Kinda frightening as the list of people out there who I see as a threat to the future of my family is long. I don't believe that is how this works, and I'm disappointed that somehow it was OK for a 17 year old kid from out of town to get away with walking around with an AR pretending to be the law and shoot three people, killing two. I see the BS excuse trying to justify it because of the history of one of the dead. Rittenhouse didn't know anything about that man. If that's a viable excuse I can shoot first and ask questions later anytime I want.
I'd have crucified my son if when he was 17 he went somewhere with an AR to play cop. It's not a toy. And before you tell me I have no clue, I had my first AR in 1979 and my son knew them inside and out. He also knew it was not for playing with and if he crossed the line, he would no longer be able to go to the range with an AR etc. It's idiots like Rittenhouse and all those basement commandos that walk around with there combat vests on with every last enhancement attached to their ARs, as they hang from their tactical slings so they can think they are Rambo, that have made the AR such a lightning rod for the gun debate.
-
Let the games begin....
Civil suits have a lot more flexibility. Ask O.J.
https://denver.cbslocal.com/2021/11/19/denver-attorney-files-civil-action-in-kyle-rittenhouse-shooting/ (https://denver.cbslocal.com/2021/11/19/denver-attorney-files-civil-action-in-kyle-rittenhouse-shooting/)
-
First of all, Kyle was well coordinated with a group who were hired to protect a store. His team left him to guard the store by himself. Then he began to get attacked and chased by "protestors". Protestors who were also very coordinated and part of a group. There are probably much deeper communications on both sides that we aren't seeing.
I guess my question to all of you is. Where were the forces that were suppose to be there to protect the city from hooligans at? Filming the whole thing in their drone? Really? Are you saying it's okay for a gang to March down the streets and burn the city down? Attacking anyone who guards those stores? Is that what you are saying? If there are no protective forces to protect the city? What do you expect people to do. Sit there and let them? Not take justice into your own hands? What country do you think we live in? This whole case is a disgrace.
Where where the authorities to protect the city? The society left it up to a 17 year old. We did that. Society did that.
-
The "Well, he was asking for it" argument isn't valid.
You don't lose your right to defend yourself just because you went into some sketchy situation, or because someone disagrees with your motives. None of that negates your right to defend yourself. None of that gives other people legal right to assault or to kill you.
If a girl dresses in skimpy clothes and goes into a sketchy night club -- that is unwise -- but it still is not legal to molest her, and she doesn't lose her right to defend herself.
you ask me what I thought. and responded why. that's what I believe, like I said I accept that he was found innocent. if you want to know if I would have myself shot, yes I would have. would I claim self defense, yes I would have. but it wasnt me, I would never put myself into a situation where I have to use a gun. that's not how it works. if somebody came into my house, I wouldnt hesitate to shoot. on the other hand, I wouldnt put myself into a situation where I have to use guns.
semp
-
First of all, Kyle was well coordinated with a group who were hired to protect a store. His team left him to guard the store by himself. Then he began to get attacked and chased by "protestors". Protestors who were also very coordinated and part of a group. There are probably much deeper communications on both sides that we aren't seeing.
I guess my question to all of you is. Where were the forces that were suppose to be there to protect the city from hooligans at? Filming the whole thing in their drone? Really? Are you saying it's okay for a gang to March down the streets and burn the city down? Attacking anyone who guards those stores? Is that what you are saying? If there are no protective forces to protect the city? What do you expect people to do. Sit there and let them? Not take justice into your own hands? What country do you think we live in? This whole case is a disgrace.
Where where the authorities
they werent hired, the guy said that in court. he never asked, he said that in court. stop with the bs.
semp
edit: and btw the shooting didnt happen next to the dealership.
another edit: just to add to your previous post that he was set up by the fbi. if he was with a well coordinated group of people, why they didnt ask him and dork stay here with us dont go there. so was that well coordinated group part of the fbi set up? you ever think by yourself?
-
they werent hired, the guy said that in court. he never asked, he said that in court. stop with the bs.
semp
edit: and btw the shooting didnt happen next to the dealership.
He was chased. Why is there even an argument? Are you saying people shouldn't be allowed to protect their stores from gangs when the police forces won't?
Again, I think the kid was set up from the start. But he also had some really solid training that he took seriously.
-
He was chased. Why is there even an argument? Are you saying people shouldn't be allowed to protect their stores from gangs when the police forces won't?
Again, I think the kid was set up from the start. But he also had some really solid training that he took seriously.
read above and dont contradict yourself.
semp
-
it's not the same thing.
You can delete the last paragraph of my post, and the point still stands.
You don't lose your rights because you went to the wrong place or because someone doesn't like your reasons for being in a place.
-
So what many of you are saying is I can shoot anyone that I feel is a threat to me or my family?
Don't know if this is directed at me or not, but, no, that's not the legal definition of self defense.
It varies state to state, but for Wisconsin:
939.48 Self-defense and defense of others.
https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/statutes/statutes/939/iii/48/1
-
good thing he didn't buy a beer or an alcohol.....
-
You can delete the last paragraph of my post, and the point still stands.
You don't lose your rights because you went to the wrong place or because someone doesn't like your reasons for being in a place.
when you have a gun, you have to have responsibility for it. you cant put yourself at risk then claim self defense. if I wore a hat saying mongol supporter and walk into a hell's angels bar and shot people who attacked me, I would expect to be attacked I created that situation. self defense is not at issue. would I shoot, yes, but I created that situation.
semp
-
You Americans get your world view from individuals such as James Corbyn a fat creepy Englishman.
No wonder the Russians and Chinese despise the US.
The US invested trillions of dollars in China and its the enemy?
:rofl :rofl :rofl
So you people are going to have a war with a country you have supported?
:rofl
Biden gives wirthers originals to kids in the park since jefferey Epstein was rumbled :rofl
It was warmer in the UK 600 years than now……fact
-
you cant put yourself at risk then claim self defense.
Sure you can. People willfully go into risky areas all the time. Doesn't mean they can't defend themselves there.
if I wore a hat saying mongol supporter and walk into a hell's angels bar and shot people who attacked me, I would expect to be attacked I created that situation. self defense is not at issue. would I shoot, yes, but I created that situation.
Here are the self-defense statutes in Wisconsin:
https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/statutes/statutes/939/iii/48/1
If you aren't doing anything illegal, you can provoke an attack, and still defend yourself. So, yes, you would be within the law in Wisconsin doing what you said. They don't have the right to attack or kill you because you are wearing a hat that offends them.
In Wisconsin, you can even be doing something illegal that is likely to provoke the attack, and as long as you try all other reasonable ways to avoid what you reasonably believe to be imminent death or serious harm, use lethal force to defend yourself. So, seemingly in Wisconsin, you could be stealing one of the bikes out front, try to run away but get cornered into an alley, and still be within your legal right to shoot your attackers. I'm not sure I like everything about this one.
Anyway, what you think the law says and what the law actually says are very different.
Disclaimer: I am not licensed to practice law and am not offering legal advice to anyone. The above are my opinions only.
-
You Americans get your world view from individuals such as James Corbyn a fat creepy Englishman.
I like Nigel better.
-
when you have a gun, you have to have responsibility for it. you cant put yourself at risk then claim self defense. if I wore a hat saying mongol supporter and walk into a hell's angels bar and shot people who attacked me, I would expect to be attacked I created that situation. self defense is not at issue. would I shoot, yes, but I created that situation.
semp
so you think the guy wearing the mongel hat in a bar where he knew there would be hells angels should be charged with murder for defending his self??
No. We all have a right to be in public without being assaulted.
-
Also your example is exactly like the rape scenario.
Person is assaulted because of the clothes the person is wearing. Person is assaulted for where the person is wearing the clothes.
Just put the word sexual in front of the word assaulted.
-
Not sure what is crazier..open carry for a 17 year old or calling murderous arsonist looting riots peaceful protests...
Please see these gang lootings as the path America is now on..they just gang up to overwhelming numbers and take what they want now..
I think that behavior will lead to more of the Ritterhouse behaviour...its not the other way around..
Sounds like some of you would rather of seen the kid killed by the rioters..or at least charged for their deaths..
I am glad he was not but fear much more of the same is on its way...fast.
Eagler
-
It's ok semp, at this point most people expect you to open your pie-hole and stick your foot in it. The comedy is that you never fail to entertain someone. Others just think what a pitifully decrepit soul you have shown yourself to be.
You've been caught in lie, exaggeration, lie, exaggeration, lie, exaggeration so many times that no one believes a word you say. They just string you along for the hell of it.
-
Not sure what is crazier..open carry for a 17 year old or calling murderous arsonist looting riots peaceful protests...
Please see these gang lootings as the path America is now on..they just gang up to overwhelming numbers and take what they want now..
I think that behavior will lead to more of the Ritterhouse behaviour...its not the other way around..
Sounds like some of you would rather of seen the kid killed by the rioters..or at least charged for their deaths..
I am glad he was not but fear much more of the same is on its way...fast.
Eagler
Combining to two to justify a 17 year old to be out there with an AR doesn't work. Note the Wisconsin National Guard was on standby for the end of the Rittenhouse trial. They should have been there to help when the rioting was going on. I despise idiots who look for excuses to destroy and loot places as much as I despise idiots who look for excuses to go out with their ARs and pretend to be the law. The powers that be should have done more to deal with the rioters.
I'd rather be complaining about the screw ups by the powers that be for not dealing with rioters with no people shot, than dealing with this situation where two people died and one was wounded.
There is no excuse for a 17 year old kid to be out on the streets carrying an AR playing cop.
-
So what many of you are saying is I can shoot anyone that I feel is a threat to me or my family? Kinda frightening as the list of people out there who I see as a threat to the future of my family is long. I don't believe that is how this works, and I'm disappointed that somehow it was OK for a 17 year old kid from out of town to get away with walking around with an AR pretending to be the law and shoot three people, killing two. I see the BS excuse trying to justify it because of the history of one of the dead. Rittenhouse didn't know anything about that man. If that's a viable excuse I can shoot first and ask questions later anytime I want.
I'd have crucified my son if when he was 17 he went somewhere with an AR to play cop. It's not a toy. And before you tell me I have no clue, I had my first AR in 1979 and my son knew them inside and out. He also knew it was not for playing with and if he crossed the line, he would no longer be able to go to the range with an AR etc. It's idiots like Rittenhouse and all those basement commandos that walk around with there combat vests on with every last enhancement attached to their ARs, as they hang from their tactical slings so they can think they are Rambo, that have made the AR such a lightning rod for the gun debate.
1st bold; No one is saying that you are playing reductio ad absurdum to poor effect.
2nd; It's much more complex then you present it, Kyle was seen providing first aid and putting out fires, cleaning up after rioters.
3rd; NO absolutely not, yet again reductio ad absurdum. But 1 less pedo in the world is a huge plus.
4th; He didn't treat it as a toy, he showed great restraint and intelligence in only using his firearm in self defence and only that. All footage shows this.
There has been so much reductio ad absurdum in play I'm getting annoyed spelling it i've got it on cntl v, but at least we are dealing with piss poor argumentation from Rittenhouse's detractors than the usual mud slinging contest it usually devolves into.
Any person of sound mind and thought, having viewed the footage, and seen the trial evidence can see that Rittenhouse was and is innocent of murder. There was only a trial to please the Mob. There shouldn't have even been a trial in my view, the footage made it open and shut.
Gaige was my favourite, sat under oath; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zI3yrcLbQvc go to 9min mark and watch to the end.
The state had only facts to fight it's case against Rittenhouse and lost. It's that simple. Facts and Justice won, God Bless America for that.
People want a Court system that works, and there is was, working absolutely morally correct.
-
Also your example is exactly like the rape scenario.
Person is assaulted because of the clothes the person is wearing. Person is assaulted for where the person is wearing the clothes.
Just put the word sexual in front of the word assaulted.
Since when have clothes been a threat to others like a gun can be seen as? A kid with an AR walks into a crowd of people and we are supposed to accept that? Again, I had a kid who at 17 knew ARs and AKs inside out. That was part of the deal in my allowing him to shoot them. He also knew that it wasn't a toy, and you don't go out and pretend to be Rambo with it. I'd have crucified him for that. He was able to enjoy the privilege because he understood the responsibility. If Rittenhouse had been trained as some folks claim, he'd have known it was not a place he should have been with an AR.
-
1st bold; No one is saying that you are playing reductio ad absurdum to poor effect.
2nd; It's much more complex then you present it, Kyle was seen providing first aid and putting out fires, cleaning up after rioters.
3rd; NO absolutely not, yet again reductio ad absurdum. But 1 less pedo in the world is a huge plus.
4th; He didn't treat it as a toy, he showed great restraint and intelligence in only using his firearm in self defence and only that. All footage shows this.
There has been so much reductio ad absurdum in play I'm getting annoyed spelling it i've got it on cntl v, but at least we are dealing with piss poor argumentation from Rittenhouse's detractors than the usual mud slinging contest it usually devolves into.
Any person of sound mind and thought, having viewed the footage, and seen the trial evidence can see that Rittenhouse was and is innocent of murder. There was only a trial to please the Mob. There shouldn't have even been a trial in my view, the footage made it open and shut.
Gaige was my favourite, sat under oath; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zI3yrcLbQvc go to 9min mark and watch to the end.
The state had only facts to fight it's case against Rittenhouse and lost. It's that simple. Facts and Justice won, God Bless America for that.
People want a Court system that works, and there is was, working absolutely morally correct.
Nothing would have stopped him from providing first aid and medical care. You are suggesting he would have been assaulted for that? Nothing justified him walking around with an AR. This conversation isn't happening if he hadn't been carrying a gun.
-
Nothing would have stopped him from providing first aid and medical care. You are suggesting he would have been assaulted for that? Nothing justified him walking around with an AR. This conversation isn't happening if he hadn't been carrying a gun.
Absolutely, they were rioting, rioters and mobs don't need a valid reason for assault, they began assaulting for putting out the dumpster fire by a gas station though.
I think Rioting and Mob Violence is as good justification for any self defence weaponry.
No, this conversation wouldn't be happening if protesters stay peaceful.
-
This conversation isn't happening if he hadn't been carrying a gun.
I am curious of your thoughts of the fellow he shot who pointed his illegally possessed Glock at KR's head?
-
When the choice is open carry and what goes with that or this...I'll take civilians trying to keep the animals under control if the law is too scared or prevented from doing their jobs.
https://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2021/11/22/it-was-insane-dozens-of-looters-ransack-walnut-creek-nordstrom-store/
Eagler
-
The whole thing should have never happened because gangs should not have been rioting and burning down private property in the first place. The media and officials allowed this to happen. Unfortunately it did happen, and some of the savages got what they deserved messing with the wrong guy. Martin Luther King is rolling in his grave what the cowards have allowed in this country.
-
I am curious of your thoughts of the fellow he shot who pointed his illegally possessed Glock at KR's head?
Again, missing the point. Rittenhouse should never have been there as a 17 year old carrying an AR. I would have crucified my kid when he was 17 had he taken an AR and tried to play cop, and as mentioned my kid had access to ARs and understood they aren't toys.
The court did it's thing and he was acquitted. I'm angry that between his parents and himself, Rittenhouse was there at all and by carrying a weapon upped the ante which resulted in the deaths of two people. Had I been there and seen a kid walking around with a gun, odds are I'd have not seen him as a good guy, and because I would not want him to kill people, I may have tried to take it away. Clearly not a cop so why would I assume he was a good guy?
So once again, let me be clear. I'm pissed off that anything happened at all because a kid with an AR was someplace he should never have been. Remove the AR and his wanting to help by providing medical care or first aid is fine. He'd be going knowing that there is a risk. Now, because of his stupidity, you can bet the house that anytime there is a protest of any kind, and protesting is covered by the 1st Amendment, there will be a bunch of wannabe commandos there with their weapons. It is the police and government officials job to deal with riots etc. Not some kid with an AR. Based on the logic folks are trying to use, we might as well give all our kids a gun when they start at school, so if there is a disturbance, they can protect themselves. Sound OK to you?
-
Nothing would have stopped him from providing first aid and medical care. You are suggesting he would have been assaulted for that? Nothing justified him walking around with an AR. This conversation isn't happening if he hadn't been carrying a gun.
You did not watch the actual trial have you? I suggest you do so. For example, pedodwarf was repeatedly provoking people and multiple witnesses testified that among the threats he repeated many times was that if he ever caught any of the people there, the ones putting out the fires pedodwarf was lighting, alone, he would kill them. He caught Kyle alone as Kyle came over to put out another fire that pedodwarf and the two Ziminski's set. Kyle ran away and Pedodwarf ran him down and got shot screaming "F you" as he dove for Kyle. pedodwarf was close enough at the time that he had powder burns.
In short, you assessment is speculation and contradicted by the known facts. Pedodwarf assaulted Kyle after telling him he was going to kill him despite Kyle having the rifle. Even having the rifle was not deterrent enough to dissuade the attack.
-
You did not watch the actual trial have you? I suggest you do so. For example, pedodwarf was repeatedly provoking people and multiple witnesses testified that among the threats he repeated many times was that if he ever caught any of the people there, the ones putting out the fires pedodwarf was lighting, alone, he would kill them. He caught Kyle alone as Kyle came over to put out another fire that pedodwarf and the two Ziminski's set. Kyle ran away and Pedodwarf ran him down and got shot screaming "F you" as he dove for Kyle. pedodwarf was close enough at the time that he had powder burns.
In short, you assessment is speculation and contradicted by the known facts. Pedodwarf assaulted Kyle after telling him he was going to kill him despite Kyle having the rifle. Even having the rifle was not deterrent enough to dissuade the attack.
What part of I'm angry that he was there at all as a 17 year old with an AR are you missing? Are you suggesting the first guy he shot was angry at him for being there? Or was he angry at a kid carrying a gun?
-
I get it Guppy, you're scared. Many people fit in to that category after the Rittenhouse trial.
But uninformed comments on a forum will not assuage that fear.
-
To be fair, the first guy he shot in self defense, based on other footage from throughout the night, seemed angry at the world, shouting racial slurs at anyone and everyone, getting in people's faces, having to be restrained, and just generally being very aggressive.
There were multiple other people there that had full-size rifles also. What if he were 18 rather than 17 at the time? Does that make it OK? Regardless, he was technically legal in carrying the firearm and OC is legal in WI (dumb to me, but is what it is).
I agree that he shouldn't have been there and is a moron, but he wasn't on trial for being a moron.
I agree that it doesn't bode well for future protests/riots, but this case was pretty clear cut, and there very well may be wannabes in the future who try to pull the same defense, but it likely won't turn out well in their favor.
-
What part of I'm angry that he was there at all as a 17 year old with an AR are you missing? Are you suggesting the first guy he shot was angry at him for being there? Or was he angry at a kid carrying a gun?
You said there is no way he would been subject to physical threat if he wasn't carrying the rifle correct?
Here are your words. Did I missread them?
"Nothing would have stopped him from providing first aid and medical care. You are suggesting he would have been assaulted for that? Nothing justified him walking around with an AR. This conversation isn't happening if he hadn't been carrying a gun."
Pedodwarf was repeatedly threatening everyone who was there putting out fires and cleaning up that he would kill them. It's safe to say that since he tried to kill Kyle despite having the rifle, Kyle would likely be dead if he did not have it.
Do you know the history of pedodwarf, the first guy he shot? He spent 15 years for raping 5 young boys repeatedly. In prison he was punished 40 times for assault but still got released days before the riots. That night, he just got released from a mental hospital but was not on his meds. It's safe to say a guy like that is more than willing to follow through on repeated death threats.
-
Sound OK to you?
Your posts are nothing more than Reductio ad Absurdum. That is not ok to me.
To use your style of argument...
I breathe air for oxygen, therefore it is my air.
Guppy stop stealing my air! You are an oxygen thief!
-
I get it Guppy, you're scared. Many people fit in to that category after the Rittenhouse trial.
But uninformed comments on a forum will not assuage that fear.
This from a guy with Lets Go Brandon in his sig. Talk about uninformed. If I was in a position where I could have gone and helped, I would have. This isn't about fear. I've been in the people business a long time and have dealt with violent teenagers on more occasions than I care to remember. During those years I was lucky enough to have to deal with a situation where a gun was involved, only one time. Had I been carrying a gun as well, it would have upped the ante. By keeping my cool and talking my way out of it, no one was hurt. My knees shook after the fact, but because of the situation I had to use my smarts to not escalate things. I had no choice at that point about being there, as I was a house parent in a shelter for abused and runaway teens. This man I faced was looking for his daughter, who he had been abusing for a long time. It would have broken your heart to see all the scars on that kids back and the damage he'd done to her soul. I knew that before he barged in with his gun looking for her. So like many folks in this thread, you'd say I'd have been justified to shoot that man if I had a gun? I own a number of guns. Would that solve it?
Again, a kid with a gun should never have been there.
-
To be fair, the first guy he shot in self defense, based on other footage from throughout the night, seemed angry at the world, shouting racial slurs at anyone and everyone, getting in people's faces, having to be restrained, and just generally being very aggressive.
There were multiple other people there that had full-size rifles also. What if he were 18 rather than 17 at the time? Does that make it OK? Regardless, he was technically legal in carrying the firearm and OC is legal in WI (dumb to me, but is what it is).
I agree that he shouldn't have been there and is a moron, but he wasn't on trial for being a moron.
I agree that it doesn't bode well for future protests/riots, but this case was pretty clear cut, and there very well may be wannabes in the future who try to pull the same defense, but it likely won't turn out well in their favor.
He wasn't 18. He was 17. I was 19 when I owned my first AR. In looking back, I had it cause it was 'cool'. A military history junkie, I was reading at the time a number of books on Vietnam and wondered what it was like to shoot. A Colt SP1 was my answer and it was fun to shoot. But even at 19 I would never have believed it was OK to go out and play cop. Again having had a son go through the teenage years with ARs around, I had no problem as long as he understood it wasn't a toy that he could go to the range with me and shoot. Cause they are fun to shoot. But never, in a million years would I have agreed to have him go to the scene of a protest carrying one of them. As his parent, if anyone was to go, it would have been me, because I wasn't a kid anymore. Protecting him is my job, and letting him get into a situation where he could get hurt would not have ever been OK.
I get it. The jury acquitted him. That doesn't let him off the hook or his parents for allowing him get into that situation to begin with. The screwed up bigtime. That there are folks seeing him as a hero speaks loudly at how stupid some people are becoming.
-
Your posts are nothing more than Reductio ad Absurdum. That is not ok to me.
To use your style of argument...
I breathe air for oxygen, therefore it is my air.
Guppy stop stealing my air! You are an oxygen thief!
Talk about wasting your breath... :aok
With that, I'm out. You guys win. Hope you find a nice riot to take your guns
-
Given how you simply seem to be thrashing around emotionally despite the factual counterpoints others are trying to help you with, I sincerely think this is the best move for you.
-
Talk about wasting your breath... :aok
With that, I'm out. You guys win. Hope you find a nice riot to take your guns
Indeed. :rolleyes:
-
Those riots were called peaceful protests by the local liberal government and the bias media..
To me it was a display of a new mental illness we now call social justice to get away with breaking the law/ trying to change history/cancel dissenting viewpoints...nothing stranger than a black nfl millionaire football player with end racism on the back of his helmet that if that were the case he would not be wearing....
Sadly this was just a piece of a truly screwed up 2020 and to look at it in a vacuum warps the entire event
Yes if they don't want more of all of this please arrest the violent looters and arsonist before the over stressed public takes it into their own hands again
Eagler
-
He's about to sue the living crap out of a lot of people. Kid will walk away with 100s of millions more than likely after he deals with these media clowns. He has hired the same Lawyer as Nick Sandman. Going to be glorious.
People wouldn't have died if they wouldn't have attacked. It's a simple concept. I have 0 sympathy for anyone in that riot and the ones who attacked Kyle got what they deserved. The officials should have done their job to protect the city and they didn't. Whose fault is that, who controls those forces in the city? There's your sign.
-
He's about to sue the living crap out of a lot of people. Kid will walk away with 100s of millions more than likely after he deals with these media clowns. He has hired the same Lawyer as Nick Sandman. Going to be glorious.
People wouldn't have died if they wouldn't have attacked. It's a simple concept. I have 0 sympathy for anyone in that riot and the ones who attacked Kyle got what they deserved. The officials should have done their job to protect the city and they didn't. Whose fault is that, who controls those forces in the city? There's your sign.
big difference between sandman and kyle. sandman actually didn't do anything. Kyle did.
only ones who are gonna make money are those who want to use him for ratings and political contributions.
semp
-
He's about to sue the living crap out of a lot of people. Kid will walk away with 100s of millions more than likely after he deals with these media clowns.
Filed in the folder along side...
Less that 100 dead from Covid total...the whole thing over by end of March 2020.
:rolleyes:
-
or calling murderous arsonist looting riots peaceful protests...
"Mostly" peaceful, as you can see:
(https://cdn.summit.news/2020/08/270820cnn.jpg)
-
"Mostly" peaceful, as you can see:
(https://cdn.summit.news/2020/08/270820cnn.jpg)
You’d think as a CM you wouldn’t be so disrespectful to blatantly disregard the forum rules.
-
You’d think as a CM you wouldn’t be so disrespectful to blatantly disregard the forum rules.
What forum rule do you feel I'm disregarding, TheBug?
-
What forum rule do you feel I'm disregarding, TheBug?
How dare you mock their corruption, Brooke!
-
Since when have clothes been a threat to others like a gun can be seen as? A kid with an AR walks into a crowd of people and we are supposed to accept that? Again, I had a kid who at 17 knew ARs and AKs inside out. That was part of the deal in my allowing him to shoot them. He also knew that it wasn't a toy, and you don't go out and pretend to be Rambo with it. I'd have crucified him for that. He was able to enjoy the privilege because he understood the responsibility. If Rittenhouse had been trained as some folks claim, he'd have known it was not a place he should have been with an AR.
Semp wrote that the rape example didn’t compare to Kyle situation and then he compared the Kyle situation to his hells angels example not realizing the rape example and the biker example are exactly the same.
No disrespect but you keep going on about your family history with rifles and it’s completely irrelevant to the argument. The argument being did Kyle commit murder or not. You and semp seem to be saying that Kyle is guilty of exercising rights that you don’t think he should have and breaking laws that you think should exist.
The crazy guy who was just released from America’s dismal mental health system that day, didn’t think Kyle should have the right to walk around in public with a rifle. So he tried to take both away from him. That’s exactly why we have the second amendment. To stop those who would use violence to deny us our rights. Kyle’s discipline and discernment in a desperate life and death situation was exemplary, and that’s why he’s alive and free today. Moreover it can be argued that it was kyle’s civic responsibility to stop people from destroying America, just as it’s every citizen’s responsibility. That’s what rioters were doing btw, literally, physically destroying part of our country.
-
big difference between sandman and kyle. sandman actually didn't do anything. Kyle did.
only ones who are gonna make money are those who want to use him for ratings and political contributions.
semp
What law did Kyle violate?
Btw how weird is it that kids can’t own rifles in some parts of the country? What American boy never received a rifle as a gift before the age of 17? The gubmit will give all kinds of squeakin weapons to a 17y/o 20 years ago but won’t allow him to personally possess a semi auto rifle.
Anybody else notice the absurd irony of labeling Kyle a vigilante? Who were those chasing him? Anti-vigilante vigilantes?
-
The argument being did Kyle commit murder or not. You and semp seem to be saying that Kyle is guilty of exercising rights that you don’t think he should have and breaking laws that you think should exist.
That’s exactly why we have the second amendment. To stop those who would use violence to deny us our rights. Kyle’s discipline and discernment in a desperate life and death situation was exemplary, and that’s why he’s alive and free today. Moreover it can be argued that it was kyle’s civic responsibility to stop people from destroying America, just as it’s every citizen’s responsibility. That’s what rioters were doing btw, literally, physically destroying part of our country.
:aok
Well done & articulated!
-
What law did Kyle violate?
Btw how weird is it that kids can’t own rifles in some parts of the country? What American boy never received a rifle as a gift before the age of 17? The gubmit will give all kinds of squeakin weapons to a 17y/o 20 years ago but won’t allow him to personally possess a semi auto rifle.
Anybody else notice the absurd irony of labeling Kyle a vigilante? Who were those chasing him? Anti-vigilante vigilantes?
he didnt get a gift. he paid somebody else to buy it for him. that other person, is probably going to jail. btw I didnt get a rifle at 17, I got one when I joined the marines. havent touched a rifle since I left. i do have handguns.
semp
-
Nobody said his rifle was a gift.
Your mention of hand guns reminded me that Kyle wasn’t allowed by law to have a hand gun. A hand gun would’ve been preferable for his said intent as it would’ve been less conspicuous. A more discreet gun possibly would not have triggered the mentally ill to attack him.
-
Nobody said his rifle was a gift.
Your mention of hand guns reminded me that Kyle wasn’t allowed by law to have a hand gun. A hand gun would’ve been preferable for his said intent as it would’ve been less conspicuous. A more discreet gun possibly would not have triggered the mentally ill to attack him.
i was just responding to your post that every american boy got a rifle as a gift at 17. i know many american boys that never got a gun or a rifle at 17 or before or after. when time came they bought their own. if they wanted too.
semp
-
What forum rule do you feel I'm disregarding, TheBug?
Being a fatty and stealing women’s underwear of out of washing baskets before they are washed :)
CNN and Don Lemon are the benchmark of American culture :rofl
The Perisian Empire 3000 years
The Roman Empire 2000 years
The British Empire 400 years
The American empire 79 years
China is our enemy even those the US invested trillions in said country :rofl
SUCKERS :)
-
and now the money fight starts, over who gets the 2 million dollars of his bail. :cheers: :cheers:
semp
edit: isnt it funny how your defenders fight for the money raised. cant wait for the results :x :x :x
-
and now the money fight starts, over who gets the 2 million dollars of his bail. :cheers: :cheers:
semp
edit: isnt it funny how your defenders fight for the money raised. cant wait for the results :x :x :x
And that is relevant how???
-
Filed in the folder along side...
Less that 100 dead from Covid total...the whole thing over by end of March 2020.
:rolleyes:
2 weeks to slow the spread in Bill Gates liberal back yard all ran by liberals when I posted that, has now turned into 3 jabs or lose your job, all mandated by liberals. What a shocker.
-
havent touched a rifle since I left. i do have handguns.
I always find this an oddity with American gun culture, handguns are OK but rifles are bad. But in the meantime the bulk of your gun crime, murders, and even mass shootings are committed with handguns.
-
I always find this an oddity with American gun culture, handguns are OK but rifles are bad. But in the meantime the bulk of your gun crime, murders, and even mass shootings are committed with handguns.
no I don't own a rifle because I don't need one. if i needed one I would buy one.
semp
-
I always find this an oddity with American gun culture, handguns are OK but rifles are bad. But in the meantime the bulk of your gun crime, murders, and even mass shootings are committed with handguns.
Exactly.
Also Hollywood & US TV shows have been glorifying firearms since their beginning. They still are, yet the large majority of them don’t want us to have our 2nd Amendment anymore. :headscratch:
-
Exactly.
Also Hollywood & US TV shows have been glorifying firearms since their beginning. They still are, yet the large majority of them don’t want us to have our 2nd Amendment anymore. :headscratch:
just a myth. some of the biggest stars say it but majority of actors mostly don't care to say anything either way.
most of my friends are on the right, I know more on the left who own guns than on the right. a couple of the louder voices who always yelling my 2nd amendment rights are violated because legally aren't aloud to own guns. I find that amusing.
semp
-
just a myth. some of the biggest stars say it but majority of actors mostly don't care to say anything either way.
semp
:rofl
Seriously Semp, do some research. I can and will post link after link (if necessary) that contradicts your statement.
Here’s some reading material -
https://newyorkcityguns.com/the-anti-gun-list-do-not-support-them-they-hate-you/
I know you’re already going to go for the well it come from the NRA…are they biased, of course, but who would know their enemies better, the NRA or you?
-
The biggest killer in the US is being fat….fact
Ban over eating it will save millions :)
-
just a myth. some of the biggest stars say it but majority of actors mostly don't care to say anything either way.
most of my friends are on the right, I know more on the left who own guns than on the right. a couple of the louder voices who always yelling my 2nd amendment rights are violated because legally aren't aloud to own guns. I find that amusing.
semp
Should I point out how you spelled "allowed"? Lol
Eagler
-
no I don't own a rifle because I don't need one. if i needed one I would buy one.
semp
So why do you own a handgun?
-
:rofl
Seriously Semp, do some research. I can and will post link after link (if necessary) that contradicts your statement.
Here’s some reading material -
https://newyorkcityguns.com/the-anti-gun-list-do-not-support-them-they-hate-you/
I know you’re already going to go for the well it come from the NRA…are they biased, of course, but who would know their enemies better, the NRA or you?
to get rid of the second amendment is a bit more complicated than donating for gun control.
moved here in 79, was a member of the nra thru the 80s. then got tired of the they're coming for our guns scare. not wishing to argue with you over this. that's just what I think.
semp
-
So why do you own a handgun?
same reason I bought the second one. which is different than why I don't own a rifle.
but I'll tell you exactly why I don't own a rifle. I don't hunt or target shoot with it, did that enough in the marines. as for personal protection in my case a rifle would not be appropriate. have nothing personal about rifle. just I don't need one.
semp
-
Should I point out how you spelled "allowed"? Lol
Eagler
that was my phone auto correct. martial and Marshall for some reason my phone doesn't auto correct.
semp
-
I guess as an outside (non-US) looking in I do wonder why the obsession with him having a rifle. I mean if he had a pistol would the end result have been all that different?
-
I guess as an outside (non-US) looking in I do wonder why the obsession with him having a rifle. I mean if he had a pistol would the end result have been all that different?
Because people with rifles are scawy to a government cabal trying to take over the world. They have better accuracy and shoot longer distances with bigger bullets.
-
Because people with rifles are scawy to a government cabal trying to take over the world. They have better accuracy and shoot longer distances with bigger bullets.
Just pointing this out for the uninformed ;
Kyle's rifle is .223 and is smaller than the .45 in a 1911
-
Just pointing this out for the uninformed ;
Kyle's rifle is .223 and is smaller than the .45 in a 1911
The key difference between rifle and pistol caliber rounds is the speed of the round not the diameter. For that matter, rifle caliber rounds tend to run smaller in diameter but longer. Rifle rounds are in general traveling twice as fast as pistol caliber rounds.
-
Well its a mixture of diameter, mass and speed. And if you hunt you do get into weirdness such as some bullets tend not to impart their energy as well dependent on range. For example I like my 300BLK over my 243 as the 300BLK tends to impart all of it's energy. And even weirder stuff where below some speeds rifle bullets do not expand. So you get into situations where at close range a handgun bullet is likely to do more damage than a rifle bullet because the handgun bullet is bigger, heavier and more likely to expand. (please note this is heavily simplified and I don't pretend to be a ballistics expert)
-
Just pointing this out for the uninformed ;
Kyle's rifle is .223 and is smaller than the .45 in a 1911
The .223 has initial muzzle energy of ~1754 Jules with a 62 grain bullet
The .45acp has initial muzzle energy of ~510 Jules with a 230 grain bullet
-
The key difference between rifle and pistol caliber rounds is the speed of the round not the diameter. For that matter, rifle caliber rounds tend to run smaller in diameter but longer. Rifle rounds are in general traveling twice as fast as pistol caliber rounds.
At the ranges involved in this discussion, the big difference is that it is much easier to hit a target with a rifle than it is with a pistol. Whether .45ACP, 5.56, really doesn't matter much at six feet in terms of impact. But you do have to hit the target.
- oldman
-
I would've thought a 223 at 6 feet would go straight through. Any idea what kind of ammo he was using?
-
I would've thought a 223 at 6 feet would go straight through. Any idea what kind of ammo he was using?
Standard FMJ rounds I believe
-
:rofl
Seriously Semp, do some research. I can and will post link after link (if necessary) that contradicts your statement.
Here’s some reading material -
https://newyorkcityguns.com/the-anti-gun-list-do-not-support-them-they-hate-you/
I know you’re already going to go for the well it come from the NRA…are they biased, of course, but who would know their enemies better, the NRA or you?
one more thing to add, my wife was a nurse for many years, know many doctor's, nurses, people in the medical profession that cant wait to go hunt or target shooting whatever they feel like doing. they own guns, treat people with gunshots coming into er. they believe in the second amendment. just because their group donates for gun control doesnt mean you dont believe in the second amendment. what gun control is, I dont know, they dont know. perhaps they wish they didnt have to treat people with gunshots, then again, they also wish nobody would come in and see them die.
semp
-
I guess as an outside (non-US) looking in I do wonder why the obsession with him having a rifle. I mean if he had a pistol would the end result have been all that different?
As a non-US you have sold out your right to self defence for the price of a Chinese made iPhone and the ability to choose if you want to be a women on Wednesday and a box of candles on a Friday.
You agree with bending the knee when instructed to by your betters.
The US may be full of fat people who can just about read but at least they have a country and a culture.
China and Russia despise the European and you can see why
-
What is different here is the weapon was used in self defense and not creating a crime..what the 2nd is all about
Most legally owned guns are not used in gun crimes..most are illegal which means more gun control would do squat for reducing criminal gun violence
Pretty sure we just need to evolve past guns but by the looks of things that is no time soon...
Eagler
-
i agree. It meets all of the requirements for a self defense 'defense' in Georgia, but I think there's a level of irresponsibility involved in this case. Taking a rifle of that type to a politically charged atmosphere is almost criminal negligence. As an investigator, my question would have been "If you thought it was so dangerous that you needed a gun, then why did you go?"
In another forum, not a gaming forum, mind you, I made the comment that quite often when people want 'justice' what they want is 'revenge' enacted by the government. I also said that, no matter the verdict, half the people were going to be mad about it, it just depended on which half. I can tell you this, though, if he'd been found guilty, the possibility of riots would be practically zero.
Politically charged? Evidently, but more of a societal issue than a political one, imho.
The difference between criminals backing criminals and the law abiding backing the law abiding.
-
I would've thought a 223 at 6 feet would go straight through. Any idea what kind of ammo he was using?
No idea of the ammo, but the .223 commonly fires a 55 grain bullet. It also has a very high rotational velocity so it fragments when it hits just about anything. Before gel blocks came along, we used to do ballistic tests with wet newspaper, which allegedly simulated 'solid meat.' A 55 grain .223 would penetrate about three inches, If I recall correctly, but that was the lead core, not the copper jacket.
-
Stepping back in with a question. I've tried to make it clear that what has me angry was that a 17 year old kid was walking the streets with an AR at all.
Basically what I'm seeing from folks is they are OK with a kid walking around with an AR under those circumstances.
Now I'm an old white guy and my oldest son was white. Are you saying that had similar circumstances existed when my oldest was 17, that I should have been OK with him taking one of my ARs and going out on the street to a volatile situation on his own to try and 'help"?
If so, would that also apply to my youngest son, the fighter pilot in my avatar, who happens to be black, when he turns 17 and a similar instance arises? I should lend him my AR and send him on his way to 'help". And if so, and he runs into a situation where someone seeing him with an AR walking the streets in a volatile and unsafe setting, tries to come for his AR, it would be OK for him to pull the trigger to defend himself?
And if so do you think, as a young black man he'd be praised as a hero by folks on the far right? Would Tucker Carlson would do a documentary on his experience in support of my youngest?
Does a parent's responsibility for their kids disappear when they are 17?
Just curious as to what you folks think.
No intention of debating it, just curious as to what folks think. Stepping back out now.
-
Stepping back in with a question. I've tried to make it clear that what has me angry was that a 17 year old kid was walking the streets with an AR at all.
Basically what I'm seeing from folks is they are OK with a kid walking around with an AR under those circumstances.
Now I'm an old white guy and my oldest son was white. Are you saying that had similar circumstances existed when my oldest was 17, that I should have been OK with him taking one of my ARs and going out on the street to a volatile situation on his own to try and 'help"?
If so, would that also apply to my youngest son, the fighter pilot in my avatar, who happens to be black, when he turns 17 and a similar instance arises? I should lend him my AR and send him on his way to 'help". And if so, and he runs into a situation where someone seeing him with an AR walking the streets in a volatile and unsafe setting, tries to come for his AR, it would be OK for him to pull the trigger to defend himself?
And if so do you think, as a young black man he'd be praised as a hero by folks on the far right? Would Tucker Carlson would do a documentary on his experience in support of my youngest?
Does a parent's responsibility for their kids disappear when they are 17?
Just curious as to what you folks think.
No intention of debating it, just curious as to what folks think. Stepping back out now.
There is another story where a man and his daughter, who is younger than the 17 year old you are talking about, took to the streets carrying their rifles to protect a group of about 75 people that were protesting. No one had a problem with them doing that and they are black.
My kid would not be walking around all those criminals breaking the law. Folks who let their kids go and destroy property need to understand that there are also folks who will let their kids go and protect it. The safest bet is to not break the law. Don't destroy other people's property.
I think the whole issue is when folks try to make everything about color instead of people. All three folks shot by the 17 year old were not people of color. They were just people who decided to chase the kid down and attack him. Questionable behavior for any intelligent individual.... more so when they all knew he was armed. Of course these are the same folks destroying public property and other people's personal property... they were obviously not too bright to start with.
Just my 2 cents.
-
Shuffler one of the dumbest posts I saw on fox after the verdict went something along these lines
so did we white people riot after the verdict because 3 white men got killed?
so 3 white men were rioting and got killed, good portion of people they were not of color.
but the scary thought is mention blm and good portion think all black. not many races included.
semp
-
No idea of the ammo, but the .223 commonly fires a 55 grain bullet. It also has a very high rotational velocity so it fragments when it hits just about anything. Before gel blocks came along, we used to do ballistic tests with wet newspaper, which allegedly simulated 'solid meat.' A 55 grain .223 would penetrate about three inches, If I recall correctly, but that was the lead core, not the copper jacket.
Oh I know what a 223 does, I hunted with one for a few years. Then I went to 243, then to a 300BLK. I like the 300 as it does significantly less broad meat damage (hydrostatic damage) than the 243. For me a 223 would penetrate more than 3 inches at typical shooting ranges (100-200 yards)
-
Stepping back in with a question. I've tried to make it clear that what has me angry was that a 17 year old kid was walking the streets with an AR at all.
Basically what I'm seeing from folks is they are OK with a kid walking around with an AR under those circumstances.
Now I'm an old white guy and my oldest son was white. Are you saying that had similar circumstances existed when my oldest was 17, that I should have been OK with him taking one of my ARs and going out on the street to a volatile situation on his own to try and 'help"?
If so, would that also apply to my youngest son, the fighter pilot in my avatar, who happens to be black, when he turns 17 and a similar instance arises? I should lend him my AR and send him on his way to 'help". And if so, and he runs into a situation where someone seeing him with an AR walking the streets in a volatile and unsafe setting, tries to come for his AR, it would be OK for him to pull the trigger to defend himself?
And if so do you think, as a young black man he'd be praised as a hero by folks on the far right? Would Tucker Carlson would do a documentary on his experience in support of my youngest?
Does a parent's responsibility for their kids disappear when they are 17?
Just curious as to what you folks think.
No intention of debating it, just curious as to what folks think. Stepping back out now.
Just be happy your 18 year old wasn't forced to go Vietnam to fight someone else's war without the parents being able to have any say in the matter. Those government officials were never held accountable and a lot of good kids lives were over before the age of 19.
Now our military can't even defend its own country from radical communist. Amazing.
-
Just be happy your 18 year old wasn't forced to go Vietnam to fight someone else's war without the parents being able to have any say in the matter. Those government officials were never held accountable and a lot of good kids lives were over before the age of 19.
Now our military can't even defend its own country from radical communist. Amazing.
if you never held a rifle and took an oath to protect this country, shut up about something you know nothing about except for your misguided q affected mind.
you are insulting those who protect your right to say stupid crap.
semp
-
if you never held a rifle and took an oath to protect this country, shut up about something you know nothing about except for your misguided q affected mind.
you are insulting those who protect your right to say stupid crap.
semp
Misguided? Even a blind man can see whats going on. What's insulting is watching 10k good marines lose their careers over this BS mandate. Only a communist would think that's "better" for America.
-
Misguided? Even a blind man can see whats going on. What's insulting is watching 10k good marines lose their careers over this BS mandate. Only a communist would think that's "better" for America.
so you mean George Washington invented communism. because he ordered his troops to be vaccinated.
and before you go on a rant about unproven vaccines, remember all vaccines were at one time unproven.
when i joined the marines I was told to get lined up, both arms. don't even know which vaccines I took. it didn't violate my constitutional rights. I gave those up so people like you can speak bs. only rights i had were in a different book. my rights were protected by it. I believed it then and I believe it now. my only choice was follow my oath or be kicked out. I chose to follow my oath.
that's something you know nothing about. since you once said that you didn't join because you didn't want to be indoctrinated.
you want to fight communism take the oath and pick up a rifle. or you can keep reading about the q bs and whine . hope some day you'll think for yourself, perhaps joining will help you but most likely will get you kicked out.
semp
-
so you mean George Washington invented communism. because he ordered his troops to be vaccinated.
and before you go on a rant about unproven vaccines, remember all vaccines were at one time unproven.
when i joined the marines I was told to get lined up, both arms. don't even know which vaccines I took. it didn't violate my constitutional rights. I gave those up so people like you can speak bs. only rights i had were in a different book. my rights were protected by it. I believed it then and I believe it now. my only choice was follow my oath or be kicked out. I chose to follow my oath.
that's something you know nothing about. since you once said that you didn't join because you didn't want to be indoctrinated.
you want to fight communism take the oath and pick up a rifle. or you can keep reading about the q bs and whine . hope some day you'll think for yourself, perhaps joining will help you but most likely will get you kicked out.
semp
Comparing small pox to covid isn’t practical in terms of this thread. Small pox had the ability to completely ravage a 18th century army with an fatality rate approaching 20%. Covid on the other hand has a mortality rate amongst younger healthier people of about .025%. I personally think that all service members who’s contract took effect prior to Covid ought to be exempt from the vaccine. However, those same personal ought to be required to take the vaccine or any such covid counter measures prescribed by the DoD if they choose to re-enlist
-
so you mean George Washington invented communism. because he ordered his troops to be vaccinated.
and before you go on a rant about unproven vaccines, remember all vaccines were at one time unproven.
when i joined the marines I was told to get lined up, both arms. don't even know which vaccines I took. it didn't violate my constitutional rights. I gave those up so people like you can speak bs. only rights i had were in a different book. my rights were protected by it. I believed it then and I believe it now. my only choice was follow my oath or be kicked out. I chose to follow my oath.
that's something you know nothing about. since you once said that you didn't join because you didn't want to be indoctrinated.
you want to fight communism take the oath and pick up a rifle. or you can keep reading about the q bs and whine . hope some day you'll think for yourself, perhaps joining will help you but most likely will get you kicked out.
semp
Exactly what Chris said. Though this "vaccine" is not a "vaccine" so I don't trust it and anyone with a brain can see its not stopping anything. If a bad batch hit our military, they would be toast. So why risk it? But again, Semp. Why do you want them to all leave?
First of all, that's not what I said about joining, love how you always put words in my mouth. I said personal reasons. My entire family served for generations, one in Vietnam. Who do you think they all support? My contribution is outside of what the military is allowed, the information war. The voice of the citizen. But why do you tbink it'd smart to reduce the military by 10s of thousands?
Don't take offense at an American defending property from communist after we went to another country to take care of communist for them with Americans the same age. If our military doesn't stop the communist propaganda, subversion, riots, government corruption, of the current gambit. The American people will have no choice but to stop them ourselves. You better hope Q is military. In the spirit of George Washington and James Madison. We will not allow the NWO to take America. You can take that to the bank.
-
Comparing small pox to covid isn’t practical in terms of this thread. Small pox had the ability to completely ravage a 18th century army with an fatality rate approaching 20%. Covid on the other hand has a mortality rate amongst younger healthier people of about .025%. I personally think that all service members who’s contract took effect prior to Covid ought to be exempt from the vaccine. However, those same personal ought to be required to take the vaccine or any such covid counter measures prescribed by the DoD if they choose to re-enlist
come and help me care for my wife. she survived covid, but her mental ability is not the same. it's isnt about live or die, it affects other things.
when i joined the marines i took after boot camp vaccines that made me sick. but yet i took the oath. I'll do whatever it takes to defend this country. you think in terms of vaccines, I think in terms of bullets. oh no I wont take a jab, but sure I will take a bullet and die. you see the how stupid it sounds, I could get killed by enemy bullets, but no, the jab might kill me. I followed orders from above me, you think think i wanted to die?, hell no, but i knew that was the risk. that was the oath I took. follow orders from above, dont question do what it requires to do the job. you dont understand that. not really sure what to tell you. I am not a robot, I just did what my job required me to do. and I did it to be the best of my ability.
semp
-
that's something you guys will never understand. they order you take take whatever, hill, bunker, dont matter. you think some guys didnt think hell no, I would rather be home, drink a beer and get laid with my friends sister. you join, you got a job to do, you do it or get out.
when you understand that, come and talk to me
semp
-
It's not smart for 10K+ troops to be let go. Sounds like weakening the country is the main goal all around. The military either fights for the constitution or the NWO. It can't be both. Doing the bidding of the NWO global government is anti constitutional.
But my whole point was. If an 18 year old can go to Vietnam by force to fight communism. Then they can sure as hell fight communism that's infiltrated America.
-
Getting back to self defense...glad it went the other way in GA as that clearly wasn't self defense IMO
Eagler
-
Oh I know what a 223 does, I hunted with one for a few years. Then I went to 243, then to a 300BLK. I like the 300 as it does significantly less broad meat damage (hydrostatic damage) than the 243. For me a 223 would penetrate more than 3 inches at typical shooting ranges (100-200 yards)
I've known several people that scoffed at a 30/30 because it didn't have the 'power' to consistently kill a deer, and then migrated to a .223 for deer hunting. The .223 was adopted by the US Army on the 'more rounds per pound' theory, but I've heard a lot of people say that the .223 is designed to wound rather than kill. Headshots being an obvious exception. A wounded enemy soldier requires more attention than a dead one. In college, in ROTC, an old sergeant major who taught TTIS gave this demonstration. He passed around a .223 round and a 7.62x39 (AK37) round and said, "Gentlemen, this is one reason we failed in Vietnam. We were shooting beauty queens and Charlie was shooting peasants." I never questioned that old sergeant, but I've never done any research on the terminal ballistics of the 7.62x39 either.
-
I've known several people that scoffed at a 30/30 because it didn't have the 'power' to consistently kill a deer, and then migrated to a .223 for deer hunting. The .223 was adopted by the US Army on the 'more rounds per pound' theory, but I've heard a lot of people say that the .223 is designed to wound rather than kill. Headshots being an obvious exception. A wounded enemy soldier requires more attention than a dead one. In college, in ROTC, an old sergeant major who taught TTIS gave this demonstration. He passed around a .223 round and a 7.62x39 (AK37) round and said, "Gentlemen, this is one reason we failed in Vietnam. We were shooting beauty queens and Charlie was shooting peasants." I never questioned that old sergeant, but I've never done any research on the terminal ballistics of the 7.62x39 either.
I have both a Yugoslav SKS and a Ruger Mini-14, if the crap hit the fan the SKS would be my go to weapon.
-
I have both a Yugoslav SKS and a Ruger Mini-14, if the crap hit the fan the SKS would be my go to weapon.
Comrade Simonov smiles down from heaven.
-
It's not smart for 10K+ troops to be let go. Sounds like weakening the country is the main goal all around. The military either fights for the constitution or the NWO. It can't be both. Doing the bidding of the NWO global government is anti constitutional.
But my whole point was. If an 18 year old can go to Vietnam by force to fight communism. Then they can sure as hell fight communism that's infiltrated America.
that's what you dont understand, you can't pick and choose which orders to follow. if they're allowed to stay that send a signal that it's OK to refuse orders, that's what weakens the country.
semp
-
It's not smart for 10K+ troops to be let go. Sounds like weakening the country is the main goal all around. The military either fights for the constitution or the NWO. It can't be both. Doing the bidding of the NWO global government is anti constitutional.
But my whole point was. If an 18 year old can go to Vietnam by force to fight communism. Then they can sure as hell fight communism that's infiltrated America.
The vast majority of the so called communist/socialist/anti-fa ect in the US would not last a week in a Soviet style state. They have no skill and tend to run their mouths. It’s a perfect combination to create professional wood choppers in Siberia. In all honestly I have absolutely no idea what their end game is. They seem almost to be agents of chaos futility attempting to satisfy some void in their selves by wantonly grasping what ever non-sense that happens to give them self gratification.
-
that's what you dont understand, you can't pick and choose which orders to follow. if they're allowed to stay that send a signal that it's OK to refuse orders, that's what weakens the country.
semp
Meh I think the whole just following orders thing fell out of favor a while back.
-
Meh I think the whole just following orders thing fell out of favor a while back.
Really? If that's so, can we just disband the military and send them all home? $900B off the budget helps.
-
Really? If that's so, can we just disband the military and send them all home? $900B off the budget helps.
:noid
-
The vast majority of the so called communist/socialist/anti-fa ect in the US would not last a week in a Soviet style state. They have no skill and tend to run their mouths. It’s a perfect combination to create professional wood choppers in Siberia. In all honestly I have absolutely no idea what their end game is. They seem almost to be agents of chaos futility attempting to satisfy some void in their selves by wantonly grasping what ever non-sense that happens to give them self gratification.
Antifa is a loose conglomerate of socialists and anarchists. They don't see eye to eye but the socialists need the chaos and degradation of society that the Anarchists add. The Anarchists generally believe that if they can tear down this society and more just society will rise from the ashes naturally. The Socialists believe the Anarchists make good fodder and forward the cause of undermining society so they can seize power. Within the Socialists there are a number of factions who work together for the same reasons. Even though they would gladly kill each other as much as the "fascists", fascists being anyone who is not them, they kind of need the numbers of different Socialists factions and Anarchist now.
Pretty much like the international Socialist and the nationalist Socialists / Fascists worked together in the late 1920's and only turned on each other once the Nazis seized power from the other Socialists in Germany.
-
I could stop these so called radicals in a heart beat :old:
I would block their internet access :rofl
They would cry like babies
Its like people on AH crying about cartoon land.
Reality will always prevail :)
These’s clowns live’s are based on the non real internet.
-
Antifa is a loose conglomerate of socialists and anarchists. They don't see eye to eye but the socialists need the chaos and degradation of society that the Anarchists add. The Anarchists generally believe that if they can tear down this society and more just society will rise from the ashes naturally. The Socialists believe the Anarchists make good fodder and forward the cause of undermining society so they can seize power. Within the Socialists there are a number of factions who work together for the same reasons. Even though they would gladly kill each other as much as the "fascists", fascists being anyone who is not them, they kind of need the numbers of different Socialists factions and Anarchist now.
Pretty much like the international Socialist and the nationalist Socialists / Fascists worked together in the late 1920's and only turned on each other once the Nazis seized power from the other Socialists in Germany.
Quite interesting to me that you can pigeon-hole others without having a conversation with any of them. Apparently, you really aren't interested in anyone's grievances (unless they align with your grievances, maybe?)
This reeks of the same issues the Brits had during "the Troubles" in Northern Ireland and trying to solve that situation by force worked really well didn't it.
Oh and by the way, there are a lot socialist democracies in the world where the people seem to live happy productive lives.... ask any Swede or Canadian you might know.
-
Quite interesting to me that you can pigeon-hole others without having a conversation with any of them. Apparently, you really aren't interested in anyone's grievances (unless they align with your grievances, maybe?)
This reeks of the same issues the Brits had during "the Troubles" in Northern Ireland and trying to solve that situation by force worked really well didn't it.
Oh and by the way, there are a lot socialist democracies in the world where the people seem to live happy productive lives.... ask any Swede or Canadian you might know.
My opinion is based on reading a lot of their stuff and listening to those whose job it is to understand them. Antifa is clear about it's goals and their goals have nothing to do with the "social democrats" or Sweden or Canada.
-
Misguided? Even a blind man can see whats going on. What's insulting is watching 10k good marines lose their careers over this BS mandate. Only a communist would think that's "better" for America.
I take it you know no one who went through the Polio epidemic back in the late 40s early 50s?
-
There is another story where a man and his daughter, who is younger than the 17 year old you are talking about, took to the streets carrying their rifles to protect a group of about 75 people that were protesting. No one had a problem with them doing that and they are black.
My kid would not be walking around all those criminals breaking the law. Folks who let their kids go and destroy property need to understand that there are also folks who will let their kids go and protect it. The safest bet is to not break the law. Don't destroy other people's property.
I think the whole issue is when folks try to make everything about color instead of people. All three folks shot by the 17 year old were not people of color. They were just people who decided to chase the kid down and attack him. Questionable behavior for any intelligent individual.... more so when they all knew he was armed. Of course these are the same folks destroying public property and other people's personal property... they were obviously not too bright to start with.
Just my 2 cents.
Shuff, Hope you are having a great Thanksgiving. I saw the image of those two also. I'm just as angry about that. That being said, it's a direct result of the Rittenhouse case. The door has been opened now for just about anyone to carry an AR on the street. Gun sales will rise, and profits increase as both sides of the line will now arm up to 'protect' themselves. And at some point it will lead to a big gunfight between people both claiming self defense. The Rittenhouse is a hero side can't raise a fuss about the black father and daughter carrying ARs for the same reason Rittenhouse says he was. I think that parent is just as idiotic as Rittenhouse's parents for allowing their kids to be in such a situation.
But the ball is rolling now, and the basement commandos on both sides will be out in force to prove they are tough and have their favorite toy to prove it. Meanwhile gun sales and ammo sales will skyrocket as now both sides will want guns and any accessories to make them feel like they are tactical. It happens in waves all the time now and I'd bet the house the NRA folks and gun manufacturers are laughing all the way to the bank. To them this is even better than having a Democrat as president, the usual increase in prices and sales time for anything gun related. No doubt you've seen what I'm talking about first hand just like I have in the years since I got my first SP1 in 79. I ended up on a ton of mailing lists related to ARs when I was trying to build one to the same as I had my favorite that I sold after Andrew died. The advertising is playing into all of this pushing ammo and weapons. Anyone who can't see it is blind. And as I said, Rittenhouse being seen as a 2nd Amendment hero will only increase the cost for everyone else who now wants to be like him.
But again, the thing I am the angriest about is a 17 year old kid getting the green light to wander around with an AR and a parent who would allow it.
-
My opinion is based on reading a lot of their stuff and listening to those whose job it is to understand them. Antifa is clear about it's goals and their goals have nothing to do with the "social democrats" or Sweden or Canada.
All I know about Antifa is that it is a far-left, anti-fascist and anti-racist political movement in the United States. As a highly decentralized array of autonomous groups. Antifa uses both nonviolent and violent direct action to achieve its aims rather than using policy reform and as I suggested in my previous post, using violence in any debate will only lead to more violence.
-
For the sake of clarity, Fascist as defined by Antifa, is anyone who is not one of them.
-
For the sake of clarity, Fascist as defined by Antifa, is anyone who is not one of them.
Always seems to come down to "us" and "them" doesn't it; and in some way we (us) seem to perceive some threat from them.
-
<clipped>
But again, the thing I am the angriest about is a 17 year old kid getting the green light to wander around with an AR and a parent who would allow it.
I hear what your saying Guppy, but it all depends on where you were brought up, and how.
It seems this 17 year old was brought up to respect others and protect them and so he went out to HELP. That is the key he he was taught that way and responded that way and his parents believed it was the right thing to do even if it put their son in harms way to do it.
Here in New England I dont mess with guns, nor did I teach my sons about guns. I didnt teach them to stand up for others, but I did teach them to stand up for themselves. So if this had happened here my sons would have stayed home because it wasn't their fight.
In Chicago it would have been a whole different story, as it would have been in Kansas. Kids are brought up differently in the city, vs the suburbs, vs the country of the same state let alone across the country.
-
Oh and by the way, there are a lot socialist democracies in the world where the people seem to live happy productive lives.... ask any Swede or Canadian you might know.
Because of Orwellian muddying of definitions, there are lots of people who don't know that there is a difference between:
-- Democratic socialism. A subset of socialism (government ownership and control of production, no private companies, no open markets, no capitalism), and
-- Social democracy. Capitalist, with open markets and private ownership of companies, with higher taxes and welfare.
Socialist: North Korea, Venezuela, Cuba. (Or democratic socialist if they have elections.)
Not socialist: Sweden, Canada. They are capitalist, with open markets and private ownership of companies. Their governments don't own and control all the steel mills, shoe factories, farms, etc. The largest political party in Sweden is called the "Swedish Social Democratic Party". They are market economies with higher taxes to fund welfare.
Same for other Nordic countries, such as Denmark. "In 2015, Danish Prime Minister Lars Løkke Rasmussen told Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government, “I know that some people in the U.S. associate the Nordic model with some sort of socialism. Therefore, I would like to make one thing clear: Denmark is far from a socialist planned economy. Denmark is a market economy.””
There are certainly some people in favor of actual socialism (despite its history of horrendous failure and human tragedy). I suspect that there are lots more people who think they are in favor of socialism, but they are in fact in favor of nearly the opposite: social democracy (market economies with higher taxes and more welfare).
-
All I know about Antifa is that it is a far-left, anti-fascist and anti-racist political movement in the United States. As a highly decentralized array of autonomous groups. Antifa uses both nonviolent and violent direct action to achieve its aims rather than using policy reform and as I suggested in my previous post, using violence in any debate will only lead to more violence.
Go watch CNN
You should be ashamed of yourself
Read a book not fantastic hero’s a history book
No wonder China and Russia despise you people
They ARE fascist in their behaviour
I am reading AJP Taylor Origins of the Second World War a book made out of paper with words in it :rofl
What was the last book you actually read ? How to virtue signal in the non facebook world
-
Always seems to come down to "us" and "them" doesn't it; and in some way we (us) seem to perceive some threat from them.
The reason for most of the noise...
Keep us hating each other while those that put the rules and policies in place that has us at each other's throats sit back and laugh all the way to the next reelection
Eagler
-
Always seems to come down to "us" and "them" doesn't it; and in some way we (us) seem to perceive some threat from them.
Why is every response you make trying to bait me? The reality of Antifa is they are a cancer to functioning democracies. They are the ones who say anyone who isn't them is a "fascist" and that works fine with the media who spin it like they are actually against actual fascists.
Every person who cares about a functional republic should be against people who embrace any excuse to tear it down.
-
The reason for most of the noise...
Keep us hating each other while those that put the rules and policies in place that has us at each other's throats sit back and laugh all the way to the next reelection
Eagler
Yup, politics of today, especially Critical Theory and it's subsets to include Critical Race Theory, were specifically designed as logical and moral mousetraps. They are specifically designed to disrupt and tear down otherwise functioning societies by dividing people into groups and pitting them against each other.
The way a democratic republic survives these attacks to to talk openly about how following one path or another is going to end up. That's why Critical Theory is so heavily into cancel culture and destroying anyone who steps out of the party line.
So Busher, I'm 100% for free speech, having honest discussions and people putting their societies ahead of selfishness. I'm completely against dividing the country for political power.
-
Conservatives are also anti-racist and anti-fascist. If you believe otherwise. You are a product of MSM propaganda. Unless of your "anti-racism" really means "anti-white" and "antifascist really means "anti capitalism" because that's what I am seeing from the left today. Antifa is detriment to society. Nothing but losers trying to feel important because they didn't take their free high school seriously when they had the chance. The big tech and big pharma that are using Antifa are the real fascist and its jus such a shame that "antifa" doesn't get it. Or they do get it, but aren't admitting who is really funding them. Sure does make me wonder.
-
Conservatives are also anti-racist and anti-fascist. If you believe otherwise. You are a product of MSM propaganda. Unless of your "anti-racism" really means "anti-white" and "antifascist really means "anti capitalism" because that's what I am seeing from the left today. Antifa is detriment to society. Nothing but losers trying to feel important because they didn't take their free high school seriously when they had the chance. The big tech and big pharma that are using Antifa are the real fascist and its jus such a shame that "antifa" doesn't get it. Or they do get it, but aren't admitting who is really funding them. Sure does make me wonder.
isn't kkk and other such groups conservative?
semp
-
isn't kkk and other such groups conservative?
semp
No
-
isn't kkk and other such groups conservative?
semp
No they are not
They are radicals
-
isn't kkk and other such groups conservative?
semp
They are not but that doesn't stop the bias media and liberals from trying to say they are the same racist mindset
For those with a brain we can see through the manipulation but it seems many are missing that level of reasoning these days...
Eagler
-
isn't kkk and other such groups conservative?
semp
Hur Dur muh KKK. The klans been a non entity since the 80s, Panti-fa is actively up to mischief.
-
The Ministry of Truth works full time to redefine words and Rectify history. 1984 was an instruction manual after all.
Media tells people that socialism is what produces Sweden or Canada (which are not socialist) instead of North Korea or the Soviet Union (which are socialist).
Media tells people that fascism is right wing when it is in fact an offshoot of leftist socialism. "Nazi" is the abbreviation for "National Socialist German Workers' Party (Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei)". Mussolini formed the National Fascist Party after leaving the Italian Socialist Party over an argument about Italy entering WWI.
Media tells people that Antifa is antifascist, but it is highly similar to the fascist Italian Blackshirts.
Beware, fellow Americans, of being manipulated down a path by a group of people who, while they control the media and lots of other things, do not have your interests at heart, regardless of which side of the political spectrum you are on. We are pawns and cannon fodder to them.
Read stuff from both sides of the political spectrum, and people can start to see the whirlwind of lies and manipulation swirling in front of their faces.
-
that's something you guys will never understand. they order you take take whatever, hill, bunker, dont matter. you think some guys didnt think hell no, I would rather be home, drink a beer and get laid with my friends sister. you join, you got a job to do, you do it or get out.
when you understand that, come and talk to me
semp
Were you in 'Nam?
-
isn't kkk and other such groups conservative?
semp
I guess you are not aware of term Dixiecrat.
-
isn't kkk and other such groups conservative?
semp
There are a total of around 3000 people who are affiliated with KKK and it's spin offs in a country of 332 million people. The KKK and "white supremecist" groups are nothing of what they were 80 plus years ago and then they were Democrats. "White supremacy" is a non factor in the US and is only an issue as a bogey man for Marxist groups and media to validate their socialist power grab.
It's really low and pathetic of you to play that card. You know better.
-
There are a total of around 3000 people who are affiliated with KKK and it's spin offs in a country of 332 million people. The KKK and "white supremecist" groups are nothing of what they were 80 plus years ago and then they were Democrats. "White supremacy" is a non factor in the US and is only an issue as a bogey man for Marxist groups and media to validate their socialist power grab.
It's really low and pathetic of you to play that card. You know better.
100%. I cannot stand that the media has been allowed to play this card. This stuff is really the true division tactics they are pulling to guilt their side. I can't stand it. It makes me crazy that people fall for it.
BTW, I wonder when Gaige krosskunts, what a name, is going to be arrested for attempted murder with using a gun while he's a convicted felon... waiting for the lefts out cry in 3.2...
-
The Ministry of Truth works full time to redefine words and Rectify history. 1984 was an instruction manual after all.
Media tells people that socialism is what produces Sweden or Canada (which are not socialist) instead of North Korea or the Soviet Union (which are socialist).
Media tells people that fascism is right wing when it is in fact an offshoot of leftist socialism. "Nazi" is the abbreviation for "National Socialist German Workers' Party (Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei)". Mussolini formed the National Fascist Party after leaving the Italian Socialist Party over an argument about Italy entering WWI.
Media tells people that Antifa is antifascist, but it is highly similar to the fascist Italian Blackshirts.
Beware, fellow Americans, of being manipulated down a path by a group of people who, while they control the media and lots of other things, do not have your interests at heart, regardless of which side of the political spectrum you are on. We are pawns and cannon fodder to them.
Read stuff from both sides of the political spectrum, and people can start to see the whirlwind of lies and manipulation swirling in front of their faces.
Canada is not Socialist? Are you Canadian? Free Health Care... National Retirement Program.... National Cash Supplement for children + increasing subsidies for child care... I could go on.
North Korea and Russia define dictatorial Fascism.
-
Canada is not Socialist? Are you Canadian? Free Health Care... National Retirement Program.... National Cash Supplement for children + increasing subsidies for child care... I could go on.
No, welfare is not socialism. Taxes are not socialism.
Socialism is the government owning all the tractor factories, farms, markets, steel mills, etc.
Canada is a capitalist country. So are Sweden and Denmark.
North Korea and Russia define dictatorial Fascism.
North Korea is socialist, not fascist.
Russia? Sort of a cleptocracy, I guess.
-
Canada is not Socialist? Are you Canadian? Free Health Care... National Retirement Program.... National Cash Supplement for children + increasing subsidies for child care... I could go on.
North Korea and Russia define dictatorial Fascism.
Free lol. Oh you pay for it alright whether you need it or not.
A much higher income tax both at the federal and state level.
A federal sales tax along with a provincial sales tax.
Gas is twice as much, yet the roads are just as bad.
Everything is much more expensive, food, utilities, vices, ect.
My wife is Canadian, we at looked at moving up to either Orangeville or Ottawa back in 2015. At which point I built an aggregate cost of living spreadsheet comparing Sarasota Florida and the two previously listed Canadian cities. Basically, it would have costed us roughly 5000-7000$ a year extra to live in Canada vs Florida. Those calculations were based with us in Florida reaching our family health insurance deductible which has never happened.
-
Were you in 'Nam?
yes joined when I was 4 left when i was 11.
semp
-
The only place I would believe semp has ever served is a taco bell drive thru.
-
The only place I would believe semp has ever served is a taco bell drive thru.
I'm in the doubt it crew too given his behavior.
-
So the KKK isn't made up of conservatives? They are radical? Radical Right or Left? How bout the Proud Boys, Oath Keepers, Boogaloo boys? Conservatives or just radicals? If Antifa represents all liberals, don't those groups represent all conservatives? Or might Antifa be...wait for it....Radical?
When the Black Panthers protested on the steps of the California Capital armed with shotguns, pistols, carbines etc. Ronald Reagan and the crew at the time passed the Mulford Act prohibiting open carry. That was what started California down the road to where it's gun laws are now.
I don't recall any laws passed in Michigan after the open carrying bunch went into their capital? Wonder what the difference was? Funny how that works.
Speaking as a center left Democrat who doesn't believe in violence to solve problems. Am I now Antifa by default?
-
So the KKK isn't made up of conservatives? They are radical? Radical Right or Left? How bout the Proud Boys, Oath Keepers, Boogaloo boys? Conservatives or just radicals? If Antifa represents all liberals, don't those groups represent all conservatives? Or might Antifa be...wait for it....Radical?
When the Black Panthers protested on the steps of the California Capital armed with shotguns, pistols, carbines etc. Ronald Reagan and the crew at the time passed the Mulford Act prohibiting open carry. That was what started California down the road to where it's gun laws are now.
I don't recall any laws passed in Michigan after the open carrying bunch went into their capital? Wonder what the difference was? Funny how that works.
Speaking as a center left Democrat who doesn't believe in violence to solve problems. Am I now Antifa by default?
Have you ever considered that your own behavior is the cause of much of your problems. Why do you let emotions drive such judgmental and unreasoned behavior? To say the KKK has anything to do with "conservatives" is just as retarded as saying Antifa has anything to do with establishment Democrats.
-
They are not but that doesn't stop the bias media and liberals from trying to say they are the same racist mindset
For those with a brain we can see through the manipulation but it seems many are missing that level of reasoning these days...
Eagler
Ahh so it's media bias. And that's all from the evil left. None doing it from the right to manipulate the view of the left...umm...errr :rolleyes:
So you are acknowledging you have a brain but the rest of us don't. Funny how that works. One of the minimums I learned while earning that useless Liberal Arts Degree in history, that I needed at least three sources independent of each other to help me see what may have occurred. Even then I needed to keep in mind whatever bias I might have as well. So before commenting on things I dig for more info from all angles before I say anything as I know those who know everything won't want to listen anyway. But at least I've done the background work before commenting.
It's not hard to see which programs, websites, news sources etc have obvious bias. That doesn't stop me from forming my own view. But that's right. I don't have a brain :)
-
Have you ever considered that your own behavior is the cause of much of your problems. Why do you let emotions drive such judgmental and unreasoned behavior? To say the KKK has anything to do with "conservatives" is just as retarded as saying Antifa has anything to do with establishment Democrats.
LOL most folks can tell you I don't get real emotional about things, don't lose my cool, want things to be fair and equal etc. And what you said was exactly my point. Does that make it retarded that you didn't understand that?
-
LOL most folks can tell you I don't get real emotional about things, don't lose my cool, want things to be fair and equal etc. And what you said was exactly my point. Does that make it retarded that you didn't understand that?
I have read quite a bit of what you write and especially what you have written in this thread is judgmental and emotionally loaded. You consistently come to conclusions not consistent otherwise. I'm not attacking you, I'm kinda hoping you have the maturity to reconsider the thought processes that drive you to say the things you do. There are many ways to process how things are in the world.
-
Having worked in the social work field for 35+ years I kinda figured I’d been where you suggest I’m not. Having to deal with people who have anger issues or mental health issues tend to require I keep my cool and do what I can to help them get through their latest crisis.
I’m thinking this is an example of how sometimes it’s difficult to interpret written words in these discussions. For whatever reason you are seeing something that is not there.
So for the last time. What angers me as a parent and gun owner is how a 17 year old was in a situation he shouldn’t have been, carrying a weapon he shouldn’t have had. Now the door has been opened for others to do the same. And has shuff has pointed out, we have already see. It with the father and child walking side by side with thier ARs at a protest march
There is no excuse for that in my opinion. Blaming this, that or the other thing,as the excuse for a kid carrying an AR to a violent protest is pointless. He should not have been there. Again that is what I feel about what happened. All the residual excuses for it don’t work. If he was that fearful of what might happen that he had to take a gun, as a kid, and at 17 he is a kid, he should have stayed home. That his parents didn’t stop him makes it even worse to me. As I said, when my son was 17 he knew his way around ARs and we shot them often in safe settings. Had he done what Rittenhouse did I would have seen it as failure on my part. No excuses
-
So the KKK isn't made up of conservatives? They are radical? Radical Right or Left? How bout the Proud Boys, Oath Keepers, Boogaloo boys? Conservatives or just radicals? If Antifa represents all liberals, don't those groups represent all conservatives? Or might Antifa be...wait for it....Radical?
When the Black Panthers protested on the steps of the California Capital armed with shotguns, pistols, carbines etc. Ronald Reagan and the crew at the time passed the Mulford Act prohibiting open carry. That was what started California down the road to where it's gun laws are now.
I don't recall any laws passed in Michigan after the open carrying bunch went into their capital? Wonder what the difference was? Funny how that works.
Speaking as a center left Democrat who doesn't believe in violence to solve problems. Am I now Antifa by default?
The proud Boys only came about because of the actions of Antifa in Portland. It was a rather small group until the media Streisand effected it. The proud Boys has black and Hispanic members. Some people got tired of Antifa destroying the town with their "CHOP" zones. So they did something about it. Again, had nothing to do with race, like the media wants you to think.
Again though, all of those groups you mentioned have been infiltrated by the FBI. Even the proud Boys had about 5 members who were fbi. I haven't heard much from those groups lately, but I can you that they aren't lynching anyone, and aren't causing $2B in property damage.
One thing I notice is that I see most liberals defending Antifa rather than shun them, and that includes left government officials and media aswell. It's perfectly justified for them to destroy statues of George Washington and Thomas Jefferson, while then claiming to be "Proud Americans". The subversion is insane. It's clearly easy for me to see that the establishment on both sides has succumbed to the NWO controlled by global institutions run by crooks, but only conservatives recognize it and speak out against it. The democratic party does not, and will shun you for speaking about it. The NWO is anti constitutional but they are using media subversion and people's humanity to sneak UN policies for a global government. It's just unfortunate that democrats fight us over it instead of recognizing it and joining us.
-
The proud Boys only came about because of the actions of Antifa in Portland. It was a rather small group until the media Streisand effected it. The proud Boys has black and Hispanic members. Some people got tired of Antifa destroying the town with their "CHOP" zones. So they did something about it. Again, had nothing to do with race, like the media wants you to think.
Again though, all of those groups you mentioned have been infiltrated by the FBI. Even the proud Boys had about 5 members who were fbi. I haven't heard much from those groups lately, but I can you that they aren't lynching anyone, and aren't causing $2B in property damage.
One thing I notice is that I see most liberals defending Antifa rather than shun them, and that includes left government officials and media aswell. It's perfectly justified for them to destroy statues of George Washington and Thomas Jefferson, while then claiming to be "Proud Americans". The subversion is insane. It's clearly easy for me to see that the establishment on both sides has succumbed to the NWO controlled by global institutions run by crooks, but only conservatives recognize it and speak out against it. The democratic party does not, and will shun you for speaking about it. The NWO is anti constitutional but they are using media subversion and people's humanity to sneak UN policies for a global government. It's just unfortunate that democrats fight us over it instead of recognizing it and joining us.
sure and the lizard people exist.
semp
-
What angers me as a parent and gun owner is how a 17 year old was in a situation he shouldn’t have been, carrying a weapon he shouldn’t have had.
How do you know what his parents knew about his trip to Kenosha? And, why should he have not had the weapon?
You try and make the point that the kid should have not been there at all. Thats right! I couldn't agree more! But he was, and legally he could be so that was his choice alone.
He LEGALLY had the weapon, he broke no laws in that matter. I don't think it was a good idea at all for him to be there, but it was his right and also his choice to carry the AR.
So exactly why is it you seem so wrapped by it being an AR-15? What if had been a brick, a knife, a ball-bat, what about fireworks, how about a bag with shampoo bottles, a skateboard? What about it being a Glock .40cal pistol?
Are you going to condemn those sorts of weapons as well? Or will you excuse those......
-
How do you know what his parents knew about his trip to Kenosha? And, why should he have not had the weapon?
You try and make the point that the kid should have not been there at all. Thats right! I couldn't agree more! But he was, and legally he could be so that was his choice alone.
He LEGALLY had the weapon, he broke no laws in that matter. I don't think it was a good idea at all for him to be there, but it was his right and also his choice to carry the AR.
So exactly why is it you seem so wrapped by it being an AR-15? What if had been a brick, a knife, a ball-bat, what about fireworks, how about a bag with shampoo bottles, a skateboard? What about it being a Glock .40cal pistol?
Are you going to condemn those sorts of weapons as well? Or will you excuse those......
I'm going to ignore the last part. If you don't know the difference between a kid carrying an AR and a kid carrying a baseball bat, there is nothing I can do to clarify that.
As for the parenting part. Are you a parent? Did you raise teenagers and not know what they were doing and whether or not they were wandering around with firearms? I sure as heck knew when my 17 year old and his best friend would go up north with the ARs as did his best friend's dad who is a big gun guy. Any of the guns were purchased by me and he knew well that it was a privilege he got because he was very responsible with them. Not being responsible would have cost him that. When he was old enough to buy his own and I was not his legal guardian he would be on his own, but until then no way does he wander with an AR into a dangerous setting.
I'm not arguing the court case at this point. The trial did what it did.
As for why the AR15 is such a big issue for me is because it's idiots wandering around pretending to be Rambo that have made it a lightning rod in the gun debate. Without those folks thinking they are going to go 'tactical' all the time, it would not be the lightning rod it is. They make it harder for those who enjoy shooting, whether it be for fun, for target competitions or 'varmint' hunting etc. Personally I think if you need a 30 round mag to go hunting, it speaks loudly about your aim, but that's beside the point. None of that makes it unsafe for people and if that's where ARs had stayed, the conversation would not be taking place. I've always enjoy them and as I said I got my first in 1979 when I was old enough to buy one. $400 bucks for a Colt SP1. Those were the days. I still have a couple. I'm into the simple versions, A1 uppers, no scopes, rails, laser sites, fake M203 launchers, tactical slings etc. Light and fun to shoot. But then again I don't see myself ever going tactical in to a dangerous situation either. As a kid growing up when we had plastic Tommy guns that we could go shoot each other it was one thing. The rule was you had to count to twenty and you could get up again. But by the time I had my first AR I'd grown out of that.
-
So the KKK isn't made up of conservatives? They are radical? Radical Right or Left? How bout the Proud Boys, Oath Keepers, Boogaloo boys? Conservatives or just radicals? If Antifa represents all liberals, don't those groups represent all conservatives? Or might Antifa be...wait for it....Radical?
When the Black Panthers protested on the steps of the California Capital armed with shotguns, pistols, carbines etc. Ronald Reagan and the crew at the time passed the Mulford Act prohibiting open carry. That was what started California down the road to where it's gun laws are now.
I don't recall any laws passed in Michigan after the open carrying bunch went into their capital? Wonder what the difference was? Funny how that works.
Speaking as a center left Democrat who doesn't believe in violence to solve problems. Am I now Antifa by default?
Centre left Democrat
You are willing to admit to that?
Clinton Obama Biden and their race baiting filth?
Lets see how liberal you are when the Biden inflation has kicked in
Inflation? You have no idea at all have you?
-
sure and the lizard people exist.
semp
Here I am trying to bring sides together, and you just mock me. It was Beetlejuice the Mayor of Chicago, on tape proclaiming that it's up to her and them to "Choose people who pledge allegiance to the New World Order". She said it. So how can you be a proud American supporting people who pledge allegiance to the UN agenda 30 and not America? Why do you pretend like their is no agenda? One thing I can stand about the current left.
-
No, welfare is not socialism. Taxes are not socialism.
Socialism is the government owning all the tractor factories, farms, markets, steel mills, etc.
Canada is a capitalist country. So are Sweden and Denmark.
North Korea is socialist, not fascist.
Russia? Sort of a cleptocracy, I guess.
In practice pretty much correct though in general usage Socialism is governmental ownership OR control of industry.
So, one could reasonably say the US has Socialist elements with Welfare or Social Security. The "Progressive Socialists" want more of these systems in place while tolerating the rise of Authoritarianism to get there.
-
Are you a parent? Did you raise teenagers and not know what they were doing and whether or not they were wandering around with firearms?
Yeah I am a parent. I raised 5 men that I am extremely proud of, and yes each one of them mis-led me about their intentions at some point or another. That is a part of raising children to adulthood. Each one of my sons have weapons and I would SUPPORT them if they made a hard decision for the right reasons. The rest of the world be damned.
I'm going to ignore the last part. If you don't know the difference between a kid carrying an AR and a kid carrying a baseball bat, there is nothing I can do to clarify that.
That is the most telling statement you have made to date. The similarity is that both the AR and the baseball bat can be weapons. Both were used in that sort of manner during the Kenosha riots. To quote my earlier post "What if had been a brick, a knife, a ball-bat, what about fireworks, how about a bag with shampoo bottles, a skateboard? What about it being a Glock .40cal pistol?" Each item I listed there was used as a weapon of some sort during the Kenosha riots and others across the nation. 3 of those I listed were used by the instigators of the Rittenhouse trial. If you are so informed, please feel free to tell me where I am wrong? Yet, for the sake of your argument, you will make statements that deny reality.
-
So for the last time. What angers me as a parent and gun owner is how a 17 year old was in a situation he shouldn’t have been, carrying a weapon he shouldn’t have had. Now the door has been opened for others to do the same. And has shuff has pointed out, we have already see. It with the father and child walking side by side with thier ARs at a protest march
There is no excuse for that in my opinion. Blaming this, that or the other thing,as the excuse for a kid carrying an AR to a violent protest is pointless. He should not have been there. Again that is what I feel about what happened. All the residual excuses for it don’t work. If he was that fearful of what might happen that he had to take a gun, as a kid, and at 17 he is a kid, he should have stayed home. That his parents didn’t stop him makes it even worse to me. As I said, when my son was 17 he knew his way around ARs and we shot them often in safe settings. Had he done what Rittenhouse did I would have seen it as failure on my part. No excuses
In what way do you blame his mother? I'm pretty sure you said she drove him there?
-
Guppy
If you can't separate conservative pov from your Democrat based kkk then yes you are missing some basic reasoning skills..not sure when I have seen them looting and rioting while the media calls it mainly peaceful protests...just another bias media based double standard.
Just skip over the word conservative and go right to the real attack which is faith based..
Eagler
-
Here I am trying to bring sides together, and you just mock me. It was Beetlejuice the Mayor of Chicago, on tape proclaiming that it's up to her and them to "Choose people who pledge allegiance to the New World Order". She said it. So how can you be a proud American supporting people who pledge allegiance to the UN agenda 30 and not America? Why do you pretend like their is no agenda? One thing I can stand about the current left.
Nope.
https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-factcheck-chicago-mayor-conspiracy/fact-check-chicago-mayor-lori-lightfoot-did-not-advocate-selecting-leaders-who-are-part-of-a-new-world-order-conspiracy-idUSKBN23329E (https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-factcheck-chicago-mayor-conspiracy/fact-check-chicago-mayor-lori-lightfoot-did-not-advocate-selecting-leaders-who-are-part-of-a-new-world-order-conspiracy-idUSKBN23329E)
TLDR version:
In context, Lightfoot used the term “new world order” to reference a dramatic change in power in the political culture of Chicago, not as an allusion to the conspiracy of a totalitarian world government (often referred to as “New World Order”).
VERDICT
False. Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot did not advocate choosing leaders who are part of a “New World Order” conspiracy. Her remarks were taken out of context.
-
Centre left Democrat
You are willing to admit to that?
Clinton Obama Biden and their race baiting filth?
Lets see how liberal you are when the Biden inflation has kicked in
Inflation? You have no idea at all have you?
Zack I'd really like to believe you are smarter than your post suggests. I'll give you credit however for showing why there is no point to these conversations.
-
Nope.
https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-factcheck-chicago-mayor-conspiracy/fact-check-chicago-mayor-lori-lightfoot-did-not-advocate-selecting-leaders-who-are-part-of-a-new-world-order-conspiracy-idUSKBN23329E (https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-factcheck-chicago-mayor-conspiracy/fact-check-chicago-mayor-lori-lightfoot-did-not-advocate-selecting-leaders-who-are-part-of-a-new-world-order-conspiracy-idUSKBN23329E)
TLDR version:
In context, Lightfoot used the term “new world order” to reference a dramatic change in power in the political culture of Chicago, not as an allusion to the conspiracy of a totalitarian world government (often referred to as “New World Order”).
VERDICT
False. Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot did not advocate choosing leaders who are part of a “New World Order” conspiracy. Her remarks were taken out of context.
:rofl love the mental gymnastics.... "this is what she really meant when she said "bring on people who pledge allegiance to the NWO." Yeah, okay buddy. Remember though, George H W Bush was the first one to mention New World Order in his speech about UN partnership, obviously conservatives at the time didn't understand what that truely meant. HW was a founding member of Skull n Bones out of Yale. Part of the founding of the CIA. He is the literal definition of establishment. I'm also pretty sure another AUS health official used the term recently. You can beat around the bush but agenda 30 is the truth and all you have to do is look it up on their site to see how the democrats are following it to a T. Don't forget the "World" economic forum and their goals. I'm still trying to figure out who this "world government" I didn't elect is forcing a global tax on corporations. Are you truely so oblivious to the agenda?
-
Here I am trying to bring sides together, and you just mock me. It was Beetlejuice the Mayor of Chicago, on tape proclaiming that it's up to her and them to "Choose people who pledge allegiance to the New World Order". She said it. So how can you be a proud American supporting people who pledge allegiance to the UN agenda 30 and not America? Why do you pretend like their is no agenda? One thing I can stand about the current left.
dude you hate reptilian people, that makes you a racist. was even worst you hate a race that doesn't exist.
semp
-
dude you hate reptilian people, that makes you a racist. was even worst you hate a race that doesn't exist.
semp
This post adds as much value to the conversation as pretty much every other conversation you feel compelled to participate in. With thread cancer like this, there is little wonder why this forum sees so little use. That's a damn shame because I remember the days when it was one of the best I have known.
-
(https://i.postimg.cc/DzFBJVSy/mark-zuckerberg-my-sense-of-humor-cop-stop-you-cant-post-that.jpg)
-
A few of you are stuck on he shouldn’t have been there and that he was 17.
Why shouldn’t he have been there, but all the other people there were ok?
He was charged as an adult so in the eyes of the law his actions were viewed as that of an adult.
-
A few of you are stuck on he shouldn’t have been there and that he was 17.
Why shouldn’t he have been there, but all the other people there were ok?
He was charged as an adult so in the eyes of the law his actions were viewed as that of an adult.
:aok
-
A few of you are stuck on he shouldn’t have been there and that he was 17.
Why shouldn’t he have been there, but all the other people there were ok?
He was charged as an adult so in the eyes of the law his actions were viewed as that of an adult.
Here’s my problem. If you go around looking for toejame that’s exactly what your going find. There is plenty enough to go around without having to look for more. Do I lament the passing of pedo and pal, no I don’t, the world is probably better off. I do however lament the social consequences of such events especially when they are easily avoidable. This country is already polarized enough.
-
Long ago I had a criminology teacher that was a retired state trooper. His favorite saying was that "Ignorance has no place in the eyes of the law".
He was right on so many levels.....
Many in this thread have proven that saying so very true.
-
When did looting and burning become peaceful protests?
When did resisting arrest become a viable option?
If you removed number 2 in 2020 , number one would not have had an excuse to happen
If number two is not fix, number one will increase and with it cases like this one..
When Blake's shooting was politicized by the opposing party candidates in an attempt to get the black vote, justice was being manipulated from that point on..
Eagler
-
Mr. Obvious say's the jury of his peer's found the facts shown Mr. Rittenhouse innocent, :aok. Now lets get the real baddies like those terrorist parents at school board meetings
https://justthenews.com/government/security/doj-whistleblower-challenges-garland-testimony-says-fbi-counterterrorism-tool (https://justthenews.com/government/security/doj-whistleblower-challenges-garland-testimony-says-fbi-counterterrorism-tool)
-
Mr. Obvious say's the jury of his peer's found the facts shown Mr. Rittenhouse innocent, :aok. Now lets get the real baddies like those terrorist parents at school board meetings
https://justthenews.com/government/security/doj-whistleblower-challenges-garland-testimony-says-fbi-counterterrorism-tool (https://justthenews.com/government/security/doj-whistleblower-challenges-garland-testimony-says-fbi-counterterrorism-tool)
ever seen videos of some of those meetings? if you and me did some of that same stuff, we would be in jail for making terrorist threats.
not saying all parents are like t that but, dam.
semp
-
ever seen videos of some of those meetings? if you and me did some of that same stuff, we would be in jail for making terrorist threats.
not saying all parents are like t that but, dam.
semp
I'll call bull 4 letter word on that statement right now. Counter terrorism on parents by the DOJ, Prove it or retract it.
-
I'll call bull 4 letter word on that statement right now. Counter terrorism on parents by the DOJ, Prove it or retract it.
counter terrorism? or investigating parents who made threats to school board members. two different things.
you made the statement that it isn't happening, you prove it. all I said look at youtube videos. board members are qetting harassed. they're quiting, teachers have been assaulted.
by the way making terrorist threats, you should really look up the definition.
semp
-
Zack I'd really like to believe you are smarter than your post suggests. I'll give you credit however for showing why there is no point to these conversations.
When the $4 trillion inflations bites the 1929 Wall Street crash will look like a picnic.
The lives of Michelle Obama and Hiliary Clinton in Main Stream television is all you need to know.
Toxic masculinity, Trans issues , Race issues , unconscious bias.
That’s the Democrat for you … fact
Don Lemon is your benchmark of political dialog
Opera Whinfrey is your hero for race baiting
James Baldwin or George Orwell ?
Books made from paper will writing in them.
Not gibberish from Baffoon comedians
Go watch your sports ,paid mercenaries who play for the highest bidder.
-
isn't kkk and other such groups conservative?
sImp
And the soviets were anti fascists buddy
-
And the soviets were anti fascists buddy
you can also argue they were conservatives. but does that have to do with kkk or other such groups?
semp
-
About as much as you being sober, coherent or capable of honesty.
-
About as much as you being sober, coherent or capable of honesty.
or you having a sense of humor. don't worry I don't let the little things bother me : :cheers:
semp
-
And, it goes off the rails......just like that...............
-
And, it goes off the rails......just like that...............
you really think so? this is what sim just sent me in a pm.
" know humor very well.
But I don't have to be a lair to get a laugh. Nor am I a drunk, yet I enjoy a beer/wine.
But you are a wasted piece of humanity. You lie at every opportunity and you try to twist comments to fit "your" meaning.
I can't help but wonder if you even have a wife, and if you do whether she is in the dire straits you claim.
You served in the USMC? At this point I call roadkill on your claim. Once again, you're just a worthless liar at best.
Hell, you don't even know what all you've said in threads."
like i said, it doesn't bother me. I don't know him, so i find it funny.
semp
-
like i said, it doesn't bother me. I don't know him, so i find it funny.
It isn't funny.
- oldman
-
you can also argue they were conservatives. but does that have to do with kkk or other such groups?
semp
But what does the kkk and "other such groups" have to do with conservatives?
Its why most conservatives label democrats as communists, Its easier demonize and entire group of people by putting labels on them.
-
But what does the kkk and "other such groups" have to do with conservatives?
Its why most conservatives label democrats as communists, Its easier demonize and entire group of people by putting labels on them.
actually that was a serious question. like i said many or perhaps most of my friends are Republicans, some don't consider themselves conservative. some actually supremacists and not just whites, talking about a couple of other races that hate a different one just because. even though we all can sit at a table and they talk crap at other races then they turn and say but you are OK.
I normally would call them racists, but it's more than like supremacists. and I'm talking about just a few friends but different races. I think they're all idiots but whatever.
that's where i get confused. I think there's conservatives that are democrats or liberals. but idiots are on both sides. but I don't find any communists among my friends.
semp
edit: when I say supremacists, that also include democrats or liberals. not sure the difference.
-
It isn't funny.
- oldman
it is to me and my wife. when he sent the pm, I showed it to my wife, she just rolled her eyes and said well am I a blow up doll? i told her well you do have big boobs and if one of them punctures you will be flying around the room. she laughed so hard she almost fell out of the chair.
we were at the doctors office because we spend the weekend at my moms and she got up in the middle of the night to go to the bathroom. she got lost, slipped and broke her arm. the bathroom was right in front of our bedroom. took her to urgent care and got a sling. they referred us to our own doctor and that's when I read the pm.
hey if you cannot laugh at yourself then who can you laugh at. not sure what's the deal with sim and truthfully I dont care. just as simple as that. cant expect everybody to like you.
semp
-
Semp, you're embarrassing.
-
Pretty sure most are center slightly leaning left or right but can easily live with each other
The media and our politicians want/need us to think we are on the extreme ends
Eagler
-
Semp, you're embarrassing.
Your Welsh :rofl
-
Mr. Obvious say's the jury of his peer's found the facts shown Mr. Rittenhouse innocent, :aok. Now lets get the real baddies like those terrorist parents at school board meetings
https://justthenews.com/government/security/doj-whistleblower-challenges-garland-testimony-says-fbi-counterterrorism-tool (https://justthenews.com/government/security/doj-whistleblower-challenges-garland-testimony-says-fbi-counterterrorism-tool)
Teaching filth to kids when they should taught maths and English is the problem
-
Zack's countrymen Orwell and Huxley wrote instruction manuals for our age. Way more entertaining to read, too, than The Prince or The Communist Manifesto.
-
Orwell wrote about so called liberals in the 1930’s
Nothing has changed
The so called left wing liberal is a hypocrite to the bone…fact
Come the revolution you will do as your bloody told is never a true saying about left wing liberal
The KKK are as ridiculous as Neo Nazis….character-chores of a past ideology.
Today I will hurt some ones egg shell feelings :rofl
Majority of Americans actually think the American civil war was fought to free black people :rofl
No wonder the Russians and the US funded Chinese despise the US
As some one said the Americans have a American dream, the British dont they are awake :rofl
-
This whole situation is filled with foolishness all around.
We cannot account for the extent of protestors who were present with concealed weapons or devices intended to cause harm (for perceived self defense or a euphoric and misplaced sense of justice), never mind the actual rioters looting several businesses in the town. Rioting should never happen, alas it is typical behavior when a sense of collapse in civil order is perceived. There are many examples of this in the past and we can't account for the individual cases of each person who took part in this.
Overall, I completely agree within the grounds of the charges brought against him, that Rittenhouse was non-guilty.
But
In the case of his individual actions and choices, he was an absolute fool, young and dumb, for showing up there that day.
Remind yourselves of the fact that his older friend illegally purchased the AR15 for him, a minor, and consider if these guys ever give their choices much thought. His friend faces felony charges for this. Years in prison for what is pretty much a guaranteed guilty verdict. Well deserved.
We have all been 17 years old before, me much more recently compared to the lot of you and I know you all know the ignorant thought processes and aggrandized ego that leads you to believe you 100% know what you're doing, are a big, strong, capable adult, have little humility, and in a case like this, are a superhero in a big cape worthy of praise and attention in an otherwise desperate, hopeless situation.
These two kids at their tender age, thought it would be a good idea - with no formal weapon training, no others they personally knew who were a part of the armed civilian group, and had no connection to the business they claimed to be "protecting" - to place themselves in an area where civil unrest had recently broke out, where rioters and some protestors are guaranteed to have concealed weapons, while they carry long rifles?
Who in the F honestly thinks this would be a good idea? Remember that there were certainly rioters and protesters carrying weapons, who would put their friend, let alone someone this young in that situation? What carelessness!
I believe firmly that neither Rittenhouse nor Black had any solid reason to be there that day. I believe, that when these two hatched an idea to go to Kenosha to help "keep the peace" as part of a makeshift phony civilian defense group in which only one or several more men (and no more) are confirmed to have weapon experience, they knew that they were possibly going to get the chance to use their weapons. Disagree with this? Would you take a long rifle to an area where rioting had taken place the night before, and not consider the fairly great possibility that you might have the chance to use your weapon? What worse an individual to begin to see this possibility than a minor with no sense, just his ego and ignorance to lead him on this path?
Again I say, both Rittenhouse and his friend, Black, knew just what they were getting themselves into. First, the eldest of two years - Dominick Black, illegally purchased a firearm for a minor four months prior (events in Kenosha were unprecedented at this time; but still stupid as hell). They then decide for no solid reason to join a group of armed civilians they found online, with no personal connections within the group mind you, to head to an area of unrest with a semi-automatic rifle with a guaranteed knowledge that there may be a chance to prove themselves as "saviors" and "heroes" by defending local businesses owned by innocent people of that town. Their ignorance, foolishness, and overblown sense of self worth led them to believe they had a place there and would get a chance to play "big guy" for a day or two. Tell me this doesn't sum up a teenager's thought process, and that you may have recognized this behavior and thought process upon recollection of your youth? I'd hope so.
I wish he and his friend reckon this ignorance. He has gotten all smug after the acquittal, and I hope reality sets in for him soon, lives were lost. He had no real reason to be there, even if you could argue that the armed civilians were necessary (which they weren't) then Rittenhouse and his friend, as young as they were, should have stayed out, -2 people with guns won't make a difference.
Per the choice of one individual, in Rittenhouse's case, his absence there may have in a way avoided the death of 2 people; asides the one handsomehunk who fired a pistol into the air for no reason right before Rittenhouse shot Rosenbaum, Rittenhouse was the only one to fire shots that night in the whole damn town. Yes it was self-defense, but had he been absent, he would not have fired these shots into 3 people right? See where I'm coming from?
I weep for all loss of life, regardless of who took offense, death is not good. None of this should have happened, and I wish Rittenhouse pays the price in some form for realizing the loss of life was an unnecessary event, due to him stupidly deciding to be there. He will learn one way or the other, if he is lucky enough to mature.
-
This whole situation is filled with foolishness all around.
We cannot account for the extent of protestors who were present with concealed weapons or devices intended to cause harm (for perceived self defense or a euphoric and misplaced sense of justice), never mind the actual rioters looting several businesses in the town. Rioting should never happen, alas it is typical behavior when a sense of collapse in civil order is perceived. There are many examples of this in the past and we can't account for the individual cases of each person who took part in this.
Overall, I completely agree within the grounds of the charges brought against him, that Rittenhouse was non-guilty.
But
In the case of his individual actions and choices, he was an absolute fool, young and dumb, for showing up there that day.
Remind yourselves of the fact that his older friend illegally purchased the AR15 for him, a minor, and consider if these guys ever give their choices much thought. His friend faces felony charges for this. Years in prison for what is pretty much a guaranteed guilty verdict. Well deserved.
We have all been 17 years old before, me much more recently compared to the lot of you and I know you all know the ignorant thought processes and aggrandized ego that leads you to believe you 100% know what you're doing, are a big, strong, capable adult, have little humility, and in a case like this, are a superhero in a big cape worthy of praise and attention in an otherwise desperate, hopeless situation.
These two kids at their tender age, thought it would be a good idea - with no formal weapon training, no others they personally knew who were a part of the armed civilian group, and had no connection to the business they claimed to be "protecting" - to place themselves in an area where civil unrest had recently broke out, where rioters and some protestors are guaranteed to have concealed weapons, while they carry long rifles?
Who in the F honestly thinks this would be a good idea? Remember that there were certainly rioters and protesters carrying weapons, who would put their friend, let alone someone this young in that situation? What carelessness!
I believe firmly that neither Rittenhouse nor Black had any solid reason to be there that day. I believe, that when these two hatched an idea to go to Kenosha to help "keep the peace" as part of a makeshift phony civilian defense group in which only one or several more men (and no more) are confirmed to have weapon experience, they knew that they were possibly going to get the chance to use their weapons. Disagree with this? Would you take a long rifle to an area where rioting had taken place the night before, and not consider the fairly great possibility that you might have the chance to use your weapon? What worse an individual to begin to see this possibility than a minor with no sense, just his ego and ignorance to lead him on this path?
Again I say, both Rittenhouse and his friend, Black, knew just what they were getting themselves into. First, the eldest of two years - Dominick Black, illegally purchased a firearm for a minor four months prior (events in Kenosha were unprecedented at this time; but still stupid as hell). They then decide for no solid reason to join a group of armed civilians they found online, with no personal connections within the group mind you, to head to an area of unrest with a semi-automatic rifle with a guaranteed knowledge that there may be a chance to prove themselves as "saviors" and "heroes" by defending local businesses owned by innocent people of that town. Their ignorance, foolishness, and overblown sense of self worth led them to believe they had a place there and would get a chance to play "big guy" for a day or two. Tell me this doesn't sum up a teenager's thought process, and that you may have recognized this behavior and thought process upon recollection of your youth? I'd hope so.
I wish he and his friend reckon this ignorance. He has gotten all smug after the acquittal, and I hope reality sets in for him soon, lives were lost. He had no real reason to be there, even if you could argue that the armed civilians were necessary (which they weren't) then Rittenhouse and his friend, as young as they were, should have stayed out, -2 people with guns won't make a difference.
Per the choice of one individual, in Rittenhouse's case, his absence there may have in a way avoided the death of 2 people; asides the one handsomehunk who fired a pistol into the air for no reason right before Rittenhouse shot Rosenbaum, Rittenhouse was the only one to fire shots that night in the whole damn town. Yes it was self-defense, but had he been absent, he would not have fired these shots into 3 people right? See where I'm coming from?
I weep for all loss of life, regardless of who took offense, death is not good. None of this should have happened, and I wish Rittenhouse pays the price in some form for realizing the loss of life was an unnecessary event, due to him stupidly deciding to be there. He will learn one way or the other, if he is lucky enough to mature.
Woah, good to see you Anarchy. Been a while. You ever gonna come back to the game?
I agree with you on most parts. Yes, he shouldn't have been there. Yes he was too young, albeit we send kids to war just a year older. I do believe he was set up, that's why he ended up alone. I do believe he did have some kind of training. I do believe the police knew he was there and when Kyle turned himself in, they accepted him rather than tackle him to the ground and instantly arrest him. I think they knew what was up too. The FBI had drones there in the perfect spot. Too bad they weren't there in person to actually help to stop the rioting. Too bad no law enforcement did anything to stop the rioting.That's typical of our grand FBI these days. They can sure go raid an old man's home at 6am though and feel badass. Unfortunately we have no comms from either side to understand what was being said. The only thing I disagree with is being sad over this loss of life. These men were complete scumbags and child sexual abusers, as I find most Antifa are. They took it upon themselves to attack a man with a rifle and got what they deserved. They got what they had coming for them, and if Kyle didn't shoot, the other FELON who illegally had a gun would have killed him, and he would have gotten away with it because that's how Fkd up the left is in this country. No one cares about Gaige, even though he should be on trial for attempted murder with an illegal weapon. Funny how the media just shrugs that off. Because they are they are being paid off by the same people pushing antifa and violent anarchy in the city. It's a huge racket.
-
Society is declining IMO
Flash mob gang robberies are a sure sign as is the media getting behind causes that promote resisting arrest and siding with criminals over law and order..golden caskets televised like they were world leaders..
As more of that happens, more citizens will take to the streets to protect society from these animals
This trial might serve as a how to manual for some
Eagler
-
Let me just show you how sick and demented the left is and why everyone should stay away from this ideology.
(https://i.ibb.co/kSLySzm/Screenshot-20211201-082830-Chrome.jpg) (https://ibb.co/XCn4C6Y)
-
Heck they had a GoFundMe page for 5 million dollars to try to post bail for what seems to be a racists nutbag who plowed into the parade..
Eagler
-
China and Russia are the enemy :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl
Its what happens when the masses have no religion,country or work ethic
Jane Fonda still not apologised yet for supporting the Vietnamese communists, the writing was on the wall then.
Apparently fat people should not be shamed is that an American idea?
Fatties
-
Jane Fonda still not apologised yet for supporting the Vietnamese communists, the writing was on the wall then.
Me and some friends from various age groups are waiting for the day she dies to pay a visit to her grave with our piss
-
Woah, good to see you Anarchy. Been a while. You ever gonna come back to the game?
I agree with you on most parts. Yes, he shouldn't have been there. Yes he was too young, albeit we send kids to war just a year older. I do believe he was set up, that's why he ended up alone. I do believe he did have some kind of training. I do believe the police knew he was there and when Kyle turned himself in, they accepted him rather than tackle him to the ground and instantly arrest him. I think they knew what was up too. The FBI had drones there in the perfect spot. Too bad they weren't there in person to actually help to stop the rioting. Too bad no law enforcement did anything to stop the rioting.That's typical of our grand FBI these days. They can sure go raid an old man's home at 6am though and feel badass. Unfortunately we have no comms from either side to understand what was being said. The only thing I disagree with is being sad over this loss of life. These men were complete scumbags and child sexual abusers, as I find most Antifa are. They took it upon themselves to attack a man with a rifle and got what they deserved. They got what they had coming for them, and if Kyle didn't shoot, the other FELON who illegally had a gun would have killed him, and he would have gotten away with it because that's how Fkd up the left is in this country. No one cares about Gaige, even though he should be on trial for attempted murder with an illegal weapon. Funny how the media just shrugs that off. Because they are they are being paid off by the same people pushing antifa and violent anarchy in the city. It's a huge racket.
What’s up man! How’re you doing? No plans to come back yet, but I’ve been wanting to get at least one month in sometime soon, but I’ve been busy lately so I haven’t put anything into action.
When it comes to the police/FBI knowing Rittenhouse personally would be there? I dunno if they did, but they did know about the armed civilians yeah. I never even saw Rittenhouse’s arrest on camera (if it is) so I don’t know how that appeared. Either way I do agree that the officials did a piss poor job overall and should have swept the entire town from the protestors to the armed civilians, perhaps they thought a curfew was enough to get that to happen?
I understand how you aren’t sad about those guys dying but even if someone “deserved” it, it’s not something I would be really praise. Death is something I’m tired of dealing with personally and I have learned how significant it is recently. I didn’t know about Huber until recently, but Rosenbaum, the guy that initially chased Rittenhouse and was shot first, I’m pretty certain that dude was suicidal. I actually don’t think he was armed. I learned that he had recently been discharged from a mental hospital. You can see him on film yelling into an armed man “shoot me! Shoot me!” And when Rittenhouse runs down the street for no reason we can tell, this guy chases him for no reason at full speed with an obvious aggressive stance, he was trying to get shot. I really think that guy was suicidal and trying to die, that’s just not good. I won’t even get started about why Huber thought it was a good idea to attack someone holding an AR15 with a skateboard.
I don’t know exactly about Huber’s criminal history if true (just saying because I haven’t read up yet, don’t have the energy now lol), but it still is not ideal for someone to die for that. Even that Nikolas Cruz who murdered 17 people at Marjorie Stoneman Douglass 4 years ago, I know this may sound strange to some, but I can’t, I just can’t be on a jury and sentence him to sway without some feeling telling me how F’ed up it is to do that. Many people don’t take the moral high ground and just want to kill as revenge or sense of justice, this does not work.
When it comes to antifa I literally know so little about them, just another group soon to be gone in the next generations, just like Proud Boys or whoever else. I do agree that MSM gets carried away with their agenda but both the left and right are a mess. I don’t care for neither.
-
:)
Good
-
China and Russia are the enemy :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl
Its what happens when the masses have no religion,country or work ethic
Jane Fonda still not apologised yet for supporting the Vietnamese communists, the writing was on the wall then.
Apparently fat people should not be shamed is that an American idea?
Fatties
They should be shamed often and with extreme prejudice.
-
Me and some friends from various age groups are waiting for the day she dies to pay a visit to her grave with our piss
Reminds me of the urinal cakes that the Navy used... had a picture of Jane Fonda.... aka Hanoi Jane.....rofl
-
What’s up man! How’re you doing? No plans to come back yet, but I’ve been wanting to get at least one month in sometime soon, but I’ve been busy lately so I haven’t put anything into action.
When it comes to the police/FBI knowing Rittenhouse personally would be there? I dunno if they did, but they did know about the armed civilians yeah. I never even saw Rittenhouse’s arrest on camera (if it is) so I don’t know how that appeared. Either way I do agree that the officials did a piss poor job overall and should have swept the entire town from the protestors to the armed civilians, perhaps they thought a curfew was enough to get that to happen?
I understand how you aren’t sad about those guys dying but even if someone “deserved” it, it’s not something I would be really praise. Death is something I’m tired of dealing with personally and I have learned how significant it is recently. I didn’t know about Huber until recently, but Rosenbaum, the guy that initially chased Rittenhouse and was shot first, I’m pretty certain that dude was suicidal. I actually don’t think he was armed. I learned that he had recently been discharged from a mental hospital. You can see him on film yelling into an armed man “shoot me! Shoot me!” And when Rittenhouse runs down the street for no reason we can tell, this guy chases him for no reason at full speed with an obvious aggressive stance, he was trying to get shot. I really think that guy was suicidal and trying to die, that’s just not good. I won’t even get started about why Huber thought it was a good idea to attack someone holding an AR15 with a skateboard.
I don’t know exactly about Huber’s criminal history if true (just saying because I haven’t read up yet, don’t have the energy now lol), but it still is not ideal for someone to die for that. Even that Nikolas Cruz who murdered 17 people at Marjorie Stoneman Douglass 4 years ago, I know this may sound strange to some, but I can’t, I just can’t be on a jury and sentence him to sway without some feeling telling me how F’ed up it is to do that. Many people don’t take the moral high ground and just want to kill as revenge or sense of justice, this does not work.
When it comes to antifa I literally know so little about them, just another group soon to be gone in the next generations, just like Proud Boys or whoever else. I do agree that MSM gets carried away with their agenda but both the left and right are a mess. I don’t care for neither.
Yeah, Rittenhouse walked right up to the police, hands up, turned himself in, almost like those police knew him. I do find it strange that the FBI had a drone right on target. Not sure what they knew about Rittenhouse or the other guys. Could have been a pure coincidence, but who knows what the FBI knows. Shoddy that the prosecution would use unclear video evidence. Not sure if FBIs fault or prosecutions fault.
The left uses crazy mentally ill people to do their bidding. So I'm sure that guy was paid and probably off his meds. Not sure exactly who he was with and why he was there. He probably did want to die. He probably was mentally crazy. If he would have killed Rittenhouse. You'd never hear about him again, he was probably being used by the people who run antifa out there.
I personally have no sympathy for evil people who abuse children, then come attack us as fascist nazis and be shown a hero by the MSM. I can't stand em. They get what's coming to them. Sorry about your own personal death experiences, but don't get them lined in the same capacity as these scumbags. They were responsible for their own actions.
I've looked deep into Nicolas Cruz. You know he was about to receive 800k inheritance from his dead father? You know he was also mentally ill, and had lots of therapy and councilors? You know the family that was watching him, the new dad was in intelligence? The kid was used to push a sick agenda. Strange how none of the therapy worked ehh? I bet he was in the hands of very sick people. Where did he get the gun? Why only shoot one random classroom? How do you change clothes in the bathroom, go talk to a girl, then walk right out easily like nothing happened? You got the crew that came out after with their social justice thing, they all looked like pawns being used. Just so many strange things about Cruz that the media doesn't tell you about. You always have to look deeper into these people rather than just follow the outside narrative.
Again, in all of these events, we never get to see any communications with anyone. I always find that interesting.
Antifa is funded by people like George Soros thru NGOs so it doesn't directly tie to him and his minions. We have yet to see comms from antifa. I'd recon some government officials are very involved with it, which is why they promote it. Proud Boys was a small group who got tired of antifa destroying Portland and stood up to them. Note how proud Boys were labeled the bad guys. Funny enough, Proud Boys only became popular thanks to MSM Streisand effect. Proud Boys also was infiltrated by the FBI. Antifa type groups have been around for atleast a hundred years now. Look at what made soviet Russia, look at antifa in Germany. Look at weather underground in the 70s. These are all groups sponsored by evil people to destabilize society. They are all being used as pawns because they are all mentally weak who didn't take free highschool seriously and can be used to pretend they are doing something good for society when in reality most of them are trouble makers and losers. You havent seen a real conservative rebellion yet... Jan 6 was close. But over a million people marched peacefully, they won't tell you that. From a government perspective, both Republicans and Dems are controlled by soviets and the global UN. However, the American conservative people are fully aware of how unconstitutional this is and fight against it, they are labeled the anti Americans while the people burning the flag, tearing down founding fathers statues, and burning cities, are labeled the pro Americans. It's a backward world, but that is what happens when they want to destabilize America for the world government and the Dem Americans citizens just don't get it.
-
A few of you are stuck on he shouldn’t have been there and that he was 17.
Why shouldn’t he have been there, but all the other people there were ok?
He was charged as an adult so in the eyes of the law his actions were viewed as that of an adult.
Guess this needs to be posted again.
Technically no one should have been there as a curfew was instituted.
When the mayhem started the law enforcement should have tear gassed the entire area and arrested all who would not leave.
When the police won’t do their job (because of stand down order or they are overwhelmed) civilians must - or anarchy then becomes encouraged.
-
Yeah, Rittenhouse walked right up to the police, hands up, turned himself in, almost like those police knew him. I do find it strange that the FBI had a drone right on target. Not sure what they knew about Rittenhouse or the other guys. Could have been a pure coincidence, but who knows what the FBI knows. Shoddy that the prosecution would use unclear video evidence. Not sure if FBIs fault or prosecutions fault.
The way I understand it, based on his interview, was that he tried to surrender to the police immediately after it happened, but the officers he talked to advised him that there weren't making arrests and told him to surrender at one of the precincts away from the center of the riots. What he did was go home and surrender to his local police. They contacted the Kenosha police and they came and got him.
I've been wrong before, but that's my understanding.
-
The way I understand it, based on his interview, was that he tried to surrender to the police immediately after it happened, but the officers he talked to advised him that there weren't making arrests and told him to surrender at one of the precincts away from the center of the riots. What he did was go home and surrender to his local police. They contacted the Kenosha police and they came and got him.
I've been wrong before, but that's my understanding.
Ahh yes, that's right. What a guy.
-
If there any riots planned pleased let me know.
I need a new pair of trainers and a orange squeezer.
-
Guess this needs to be posted again.
Technically no one should have been there as a curfew was instituted.
Kinda, maybe? The charge of being there after curfew was dropped because the prosecution made no attempt to show that a lawful curfew was ever enacted. It seems there is a legal process that needed to be followed but wasn't thus someone saying there is a curfew does not make it so.
That was my understanding from watching that part of the trial.
So, yes, no one should have been there but they were. It seems like a tough moral argument to say it's OK for rioters and looters to be there but no one else should which is what those who say that about Kyle are doing.
-
If no one was there... no one would have died. The guy who was shot and survived admitted to pointing a gun at him. People died from the poor choice made that night.
If it comes down to people losing their lives, I prefer the ones looting and burning... no matter who they are.
-
Looting is a form of shopping
-
If no one was there... no one would have died. The guy who was shot and survived admitted to pointing a gun at him. People died from the poor choice made that night.
If it comes down to people losing their lives, I prefer the ones looting and burning... no matter who they are.
I've been pondering that question, the guy that pointed the gun at him, if he had fired, what would have been the outcome.
ptsd sucks. I know that for a fact. the whole situation is just a mess. kyle will be used and I think he understands a bit of it. but years down the line, I hope he gets help. he was just a dumb kid.
semp
-
I've been pondering that question, the guy that pointed the gun at him, if he had fired, what would have been the outcome.
We know mistyarm was trying to murder him so there is not a lot to ponder there. The media would proclaim him a hero for "stopping an active shooter" even though he wasn't. That's the game these days when facts don't matter nearly as much as the narrative.
ptsd sucks. I know that for a fact.
semp
You said others don't know what it's like charging hills in Nam and others asked for some authentication which did not happen. It's reasonable for people to ask that question given what you write.
-
If you post more than 4 paragraphs you are an arrogant Baffoon and have nothing to say except look at my intellectual prowess.
Lots of paragraphs discussing dirty crimminal rioters is comedy
I tossed and turned all night worrying about a child rapists running amok at a riot and then getting shot :rofl
Made my day…fact
Another dirty crimminal killing 6 people by running them over is now complaining about his rights….that’s the US for you :rofl :rofl
-
If Blake hadn't tried to stab the cop in the first place none of this would have happened...
Or back it up a bit more and if Blake hadn't broken the law numerous times the police would not have tried to serve the warrant where he then tried to stab the cop...
What a screwed up world
Eagler
-
When the people who should be protecting the public state bs like this...do you think that calms a rational persons nerves?
https://youtu.be/d9k8WdPZVP4
Stupid statements like this will lead to more of all of this crazy not less
Eagler
-
We know mistyarm was trying to murder him so there is not a lot to ponder there. The media would proclaim him a hero for "stopping an active shooter" even though he wasn't. That's the game these days when facts don't matter nearly as much as the narrative.
You said others don't know what it's like charging hills in Nam and others asked for some authentication which did not happen. It's reasonable for people to ask that question given what you write.
I don't recall ever saying I was in Vietnam. I do know lots of vets that were in Vietnam. I was born in 64? I did mentioned some time ago that my father was in Vietnam.
I saw a post when I mentioned about you follow orders or get out. was asked if i was in nam. I sarcastically talked that I joined at age 2 and got out at age 11.
but I have never claimed I was there during the war.
semp
-
Kinda, maybe? The charge of being there after curfew was dropped because the prosecution made no attempt to show that a lawful curfew was ever enacted. It seems there is a legal process that needed to be followed but wasn't thus someone saying there is a curfew does not make it so.
That was my understanding from watching that part of the trial.
So, yes, no one should have been there but they were. It seems like a tough moral argument to say it's OK for rioters and looters to be there but no one else should which is what those who say that about Kyle are doing.
My point is: a curfew was in place yet the law enforcement did not make people leave. Because of this lack of enforcing the law things then got out of hand.
If anyone going to this “protest” figured they may not have the support of the police and also likely be harassed or attacked for having a different point of view, they certainly have every right to protect themselves from thugs. They have every right to use lethal force when lethal force is being used upon them.
Antifa, BLM and others have proved themselves to encourage and participate in violence and destruction of public and private property in nearly every “protest” they put together.
-
I don't recall ever saying I was in Vietnam. I do know lots of vets that were in Vietnam. I was born in 64? I did mentioned some time ago that my father was in Vietnam.
I saw a post when I mentioned about you follow orders or get out. was asked if i was in nam. I sarcastically talked that I joined at age 2 and got out at age 11.
but I have never claimed I was there during the war.
semp
Fair enough, here is the offending post:
"that's something you guys will never understand. they order you take take whatever, hill, bunker, dont matter. you think some guys didnt think hell no, I would rather be home, drink a beer and get laid with my friends sister. you join, you got a job to do, you do it or get out.
when you understand that, come and talk to me"
Given the words and tone, one might think you were implying that you were speaking from experience, that others are lesser men who could not understand what you did since you were in those situations. The reality is, no man can sincerely make those types of claims until he did. Talk it self is a lot cheaper than deeds.
So I think we can both see how that came about. So you served in the Marines for an 4 year tour during peacetime then? I'm simply trying to be clear so people don't assume things. Assuming does no good for anyone.
-
still don't understand how it relates to vietnam. I served during the first gulf War. I have mentioned that many times.
I guess when i made that comment I was angry at the suggestion that we could refuse orders by not taking the vaccine. trust me I didn't want to go, most of those around didn't want to go. but we did. that's our job.
the other thing that's hard for me to understand is that it violates my religious beliefs. you join you train to kill, but a vaccine violates that? I was a 7th day adventist Saturday was the sabbath, we supposed to rest, but if I had duty, I did it.
semp
-
When the people who should be protecting the public state bs like this...do you think that calms a rational persons nerves?
https://youtu.be/d9k8WdPZVP4
Stupid statements like this will lead to more of all of this crazy not less
Eagler
So funny you posted that. I almost did. It's quite frankly outrageous that she said that. What a complete ignoramus.
-
So funny you posted that. I almost did. It's quite frankly outrageous that she said that. What a complete ignoramus.
first time I agree with you, that was a stupid comment. then again she didnt invent alternative facts.
semp
-
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.foxnews.com/politics/gofundme-removes-page-supporting-army-sergeant-shot-killed-armed-black-lives-matter-protester.amp
These people don't respect our military. Not sure why any vet would defend the left. The left never defends them.
-
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.foxnews.com/politics/gofundme-removes-page-supporting-army-sergeant-shot-killed-armed-black-lives-matter-protester.amp
These people don't respect our military. Not sure why any vet would defend the left. The left never defends them.
because he's accused of murder. tos say that clearly. I had to laugh, not familiar of the specifics but this has to be one of the dumbest comments you have made.
veterans don't get a free pass. and charging one doesn't mean you hate veterans.
semp
-
because he's accused of murder. tos say that clearly. I had to laugh, not familiar of the specifics but this has to be one of the dumbest comments you have made.
veterans don't get a free pass. and charging one doesn't mean you hate veterans.
semp
Obviously you didn’t read the article or you have a reading comprehension problem.
Two sides to every story, of course. However, there is a pattern easily seen since 2008 if not longer.
It’s clearly stated that GoFundMe let others accused of a violent crime(s) have used their site, but in this case he shot a BLM “member”…
-
Obviously you didn’t read the article or you have a reading comprehension problem.
Two sides to every story, of course. However, there is a pattern easily seen since 2008 if not longer.
It’s clearly stated that GoFundMe let others accused of a violent crime(s) have used their site, but in this case he shot a BLM “member”…
as fast as i know if you have been cleared of a crime then you can use it. but not while you are being accused.
there's other sites that will allow it. lots of money to be made on that.
semp
-
as fast as i know if you have been cleared of a crime then you can use it. but not while you are being accused.
there's other sites that will allow it. lots of money to be made on that.
semp
They routinely let BLM and Antifa members use it when accused of crimes including serious ones while canceling fundraising by not of the "proper" political views to include people not accused of a crime.
-
A double standard in many places these days..
For another watch this comedy of justice ..
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2021/12/02/us/jussie-smollett-trial/index.html
This wacko doodle should be sent to a mental hospital at least if not prison for trying to start a race war ... you know the main actor from blackish still believes this pile of lying horse dung?
My guess he will walk with zero repercussions
Eagler