Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I don’t think we need 17 year old kids carrying an AR15 at any protest, certainly raises the temperature and as we have seen the downside.
Three people who were unable to restrain themselves from attacking another individual caught bullets and their targeted victim made it home alive. I’m not seeing a downside here. Perhaps the next group of rioters will see that trying to attack someone carrying a firearm is catching bullets. That would be an upside.
Really-he has been protected and covered for throughout this whole joke of a circus trial. He was a violent criminal with a long criminal history-that attacked an innocent child trying to run away from a mob of attackers. In spite of this, the mainstream media has covered for him, refused to discuss his criminal acts and failed to mention his being there was against the law (curfew).
Doing otherwise would destroy the “Summer of Love” narrative. They can’t claim the riots were peaceful protests while admitting the rioters were violent criminals. They’d have to rewrite their rewritten history, and it’s getting harder for them to juggle all the stories.
Nonsense. Who has an assault rifle? In my world anyone carrying an AR15 is being aggressive. I guess if the aggressor had a 105mm recoiless rifle it would be different. But does that occur in reality,.
I have several of what you call “assault rifles”. Most of the people who go to my local range have at least one AR platform rifle, many have more than one. Owning or carrying a firearm does not make you an aggressor. Breaking the non aggression principle makes you an aggressor. For the class, can you tell us all who broke the non aggression principle in Kenosha on the night in question?
This is something that the leftist wokey tokey's choose to remain blissfully ignorant about. When I was instructing and doing a CCW qualification course the very first pat of the course (which was in a classroom environment) was the non aggression principal. in addition to the fact that it is just a VERY important topic it had the added benefit of helping me as the instructor to spot potential problem children.
If one has made the decision to arm themselves that means you grow a damn thick skin. As a hypothetical if you are leaving a restaurant with your significant other and some clown (or more than one) accosts you and makes disgusting sexual references directed at your SO and you are carrying you hit the ignore button and keep walking. Under no circumstances should you engage in a verbal confrontation with that person or people. You hold your tongue, pull your SO in close and ratchet up your situational awareness.
if your carrying concealed under no circumstances should you reveal that you are armed if you're carrying open you keep your hands away from your weapon. even if the person)s) follow you and continue to berate you you let the words roll off.
Push down your anger and keep iron control of yourself. I the aggressive entities close and lay hands on your SO or you that effects the landscape a bit. Depending on how those hands are laid on and how many varmints are dogging you and armed response may be required depending on how proficient you are with unarmed combat or if you have an LTL tool at your disposal. I do usually have some tool of the latter nature
OC spray, an electric shock stunner ,kubotan, all are good items to have. I have a bad leg so I have a cane usually even though I don't need it to walk. I am adjudicated as permanently disabled so I have a bit more latitude in the use of force both lethal and non lethal. But the simple point is that just because someone is armed does not grant carte blanche to escalate a verbal attack into a physical one. In Kyle Rittenhouse's case his assailants escalated the situation well past the point of no return But up until he was physically assaulted and attempts were made to gain control of his rifle he retreated and was purely defensive.
Even when he fired his rifle he was not doing so in an aggressive and offensive (as in initiating an attack) manner. He was defensive in all three situations with each subsequent assailant after Rosenbaum and with Rosenbaum initially. You nailed it JimRom. KR was NOT out actively looking for someone to kill as some here have slanderously claimed. The latter people are the ones who want to see a now 18 year old young man's life end to satisfy their seething hatred and malice. People who if I was their instructor in a CCW course I would fail them before we get out of the classroom due to their lack of self control and emotion driven reactions.
The organization that I instructed with was not a shake n bake operation. Instructors had full latitude to send a student to the administrator to get their course fees back and go find another school. And these types that are vehemently demanding Kyle Rittenhouse's life be over and that he should rot in prison as a cold blooded murderer fit the bill for dismissal on the grounds of lack of self control, absence of objective thinking a confrontational nature and a complete lack of rational and analytical thought process all of the preceding meaning the person exhibiting these traits would have no business being armed.
And that ladies and gentlemen is just the way it is.
Yup, a lot of private donations will be headed his way. George Zimmer had a massive payday after his trial.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.