What is?

[ThxOne Premium Member]

Your point? It’s up to Kyle Rittenhouse to be judge, jury and executioner?
I suppose you should be eliminated for smacking women around? You know, domestic assault, and all…

My point? I don't miss a drug addict/convicted ********* and I don't give a damn how you feel about it. Or the other criminal. That's MY point. To the point of Kyle, he wasn't there to be the Judge, Jury or Executioner of those criminals. Those people went after Kyle. I think Kyle should have aimed better for the cameras and made it more bloody. If that is a source of tension for you, I don't give a shit. These people weren't there to be peaceful and protest, they were there to destroy other peoples property with no consequences because of the anonymity that crowds offer. They were actually beginning to set shit on fire and cause destruction when Kyle stepped in making himself a target.

If Kyle was Black or defending a democratic gathering this would have never made the news. However, it fit the lefts narrative and agenda. White male with an "ASSAULT RIFLE" a Trump supporting "Domestic Terrorist". Yeah, he fell right in there didn't he. Because he fit the lefts vision you hop on board and join in while defending criminals and a ********* and you see nothing wrong with defending them. You try to call me a piece of shit. Look at you. You have no moral compass yet you try to look down on everyone who challenges you or disagrees with your leftest views. You're no American.

 

[Jimi77 Premium Member]

What did the courts say Rittenhouse did wrong? I don't remember them saying that he did anything wrong. They let him go and found him not guilty. Am I wrong?

You have no idea just how wrong you are.

 

[Jimi77 Premium Member]

He was a stupid kid...pretty sure I made my opinion of him pretty clear...

You did, but that doesn't fit into his narrative, so really we're calling Rittenhouse a hero and telling all teens to arm themselves and go shoot somebody.

 

[Jimi77 Premium Member]

Nope. The courts are telling me that. The courts showed that Rittenhouse did nothing wrong and is an angel. Tell my kid to protect himself if he feels threatened. Shoot now and figure it out later. Always claim self defense. After you flee the scene and go home of course. Even fleeing the scene of a shooting is ok in the courts mind.

Apparently perfectly acceptable when it's the police that order you to go home and you go home and turn yourself into your local precinct.

 

[Jimi77 Premium Member]

You are the one backing what Rittenhouse did not me. You have no problem with him shooting three people and going home.

Spokey never backed what Rittenhouse did. As a matter of fact he's condemned it. However, in the US you do have the right to keep and bear firearms and you have the right to defend yourself.

 

[Jimi77 Premium Member]

Either put a weapon on your kid and send them outside or stfu about it...

You the one doing that because you agree with the court's decision. As we speak millions of teens are arming themselves and just waiting for the next "peaceful protest," so they can go hunting.

 

[RobGMN Premium Member]

My point? I don't miss a drug addict/convicted ********* and I don't give a damn how you feel about it. Or the other criminal. That's MY point. To the point of Kyle, he wasn't there to be the Judge, Jury or Executioner of those criminals. Those people went after Kyle. I think Kyle should have aimed better for the cameras and made it more bloody. If that is a source of tension for you, I don't give a shit. These people weren't there to be peaceful and protest, they were there to destroy other peoples property with no consequences because of the anonymity that crowds offer. They were actually beginning to set shit on fire and cause destruction when Kyle stepped in making himself a target.

If Kyle was Black or defending a democratic gathering this would have never made the news. However, it fit the lefts narrative and agenda. White male with an "ASSAULT RIFLE" a Trump supporting "Domestic Terrorist". Yeah, he fell right in there didn't he. Because he fit the lefts vision you hop on board and join in while defending criminals and a ********* and you see nothing wrong with defending them. You try to call me a piece of shit. Look at you. You have no moral compass yet you try to look down on everyone who challenges you or disagrees with your leftest views. You're no American.

My moral compass is to look down at liars, criminals, false prophets. Considering that you think the quest for proof, facts, truth is a “leftist view” falls right in line with your continued support of a man who was POTUS and lied over 21,000 documented times to the public.
And I’m sure you ate up every lie.
Is it a “Right-wing view” to hit women, deny servicemembers recourse when the military has screwed them over, borrow valor from others, lie about Trump’s actions, lie about your abilities?
Hmmm, if I have to choose, I’ll take being a leftist. And I’ll even spell it right.

Kyle should not have been there. The history of the people who died has zero relevance to the big picture. Of course, you don’t think in the big picture. You just want Kyle to be a hero, and you’ll deny anything that shows otherwise.
And you’ll do it without having been an eyewitness, which is really weird since you demand to see a **** happen before you’d believe it happened. You know, “because people lie”.

You’re a living contradiction.

 

[spokey9 5,000+ posts]

Kyle should not have been there

It was a very stupid decision to go...but he had as much right to be there as you have to be anywhere else...rights don't cease to exist when think they should Rob...

 

[RobGMN Premium Member]

Spokey never backed what Rittenhouse did. As a matter of fact he's condemned it. However, in the US you do have the right to keep and bear firearms and you have the right to defend yourself.

Here’s a hypothetical to ponder: Person goes somewhere armed. His presence and actions are taken as a threat to the safety of the people there (i.e. It looks like he’s there to start shit). Someone sees this and says “if I’m going out, I’m going to at least TRY to stop this mo-fo” and they go after him.
He shoots and kills the person. Self defense?

Now, try it again as a crazy hypothetical: The guy goes into a school armed and takes hostages. Never threatens to kill, never points the gun at anyone. Teacher pulls gun and aims; hostage-taker draws, fires, kills teacher. Self defense?

 

[spokey9 5,000+ posts]

Here’s a hypothetical to ponder: Person goes somewhere armed. His presence and actions are taken as a threat to the safety of the people there (i.e. It looks like he’s there to start shit). Someone sees this and says “if I’m going out, I’m going to at least TRY to stop this mo-fo” and they go after him.
He shoots and kills the person. Self defense?

Now, try it again as a crazy hypothetical: The guy goes into a school armed and takes hostages. Never threatens to kill, never points the gun at anyone. Teacher pulls gun and aims; hostage-taker draws, fires, kills teacher. Self defense?

Neither one of those situations has anything to do with Rittenhouse...it's a deflection...

 

[RobGMN Premium Member]

It was a very stupid decision to go...but he had as much right to be there as you have to be anywhere else...rights don't cease to exist when think they should Rob...

You have the right to stand on the tracks with an oncoming train (technically you don’t, but roll with it).
Should you do it?

The only thing that saved his azz was a mistake in the law regarding the gun. Had that mistake not been there, the entire legal game would have been different. Think about it: Wannabe teen cop carrying a gun illegally in his non-home state kills three people while “defending” property. Propert that he was not hired or requested to protect.

A prosecutor’s field day.

 

[spokey9 5,000+ posts]

You have the right to stand on the tracks with an oncoming train (technically you don’t, but roll with it).
Should you do it?

The only thing that saved his azz was a mistake in the law regarding the gun. Had that mistake not been there, the entire legal game would have been different. Think about it: Wannabe teen cop carrying a gun illegally in his non-home state kills three people while “defending” property. Propert that he was not hired or requested to protect.

A prosecutor’s field day.

He was legal to carry that rifle...I know you obviously don't like scary black guns...but that doesn't change the facts...

 

[RobGMN Premium Member]

Neither one of those situations has anything to do with Rittenhouse...it's a deflection...

You didn’t answer them.
And they actually very well could. A rioter could have felt threatened and figured “if I’m going out, I’ll fight like hell”. Rittenhouse takes it as an attack and fights a shopping bag with a gun.
“our job is to protect this business, and part of my job is also to help people," -Rittenhouse
Who hired him for this “job”?

Which of the three shot presented an immediate and direct threat to Kyle’s life?

 

[spokey9 5,000+ posts]

You didn’t answer them.
And they actually very well could. A rioter could have felt threatened and figured “if I’m going out, I’ll fight like hell”. Rittenhouse takes it as an attack and fights a shopping bag with a gun.
“our job is to protect this business, and part of my job is also to help people," -Rittenhouse
Who hired him for this “job”?

Which of the three shot presented an immediate and direct threat to Kyle’s life?

That's not how the facts lined out...so no it has nothing to do with Rittenhouse...

 

[RobGMN Premium Member]

He was legal to carry that rifle...I know you obviously don't like scary black guns...but that doesn't change the facts...

He was legal due to a mistake in the law. What makes you think I don’t like guns? I carry one every time I walk out of my house.