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.
Status:
"I don't understand. But I don't care, so it works out."
(set 23 days ago)
35,722 posts, read 18,073,030 times
Reputation: 50773
Quote:
Originally Posted by hawk55732
Which is impossible to do.
It’s impossible to keep yourself completely safe but not impossible to avoid extremely dangerous situations where you don’t feel safe without carrying an AR15. Where you are basically going for an adventure.
It’s impossible to keep yourself completely safe but not impossible to avoid extremely dangerous situations where you don’t feel safe without carrying an AR15. Where you are basically going for an adventure.
Thankfully, Kyle Rittenhouse's choice to take a rifle in public is not what is on trial here. Some on this thread do speak as if it were.
It’s impossible to keep yourself completely safe but not impossible to avoid extremely dangerous situations where you don’t feel safe without carrying an AR15. Where you are basically going for an adventure.
If someone is attacking you will always feel unsafe.
Or do you think everyone should feel safe while being attacked and just take the beating like a good little citizen?
Status:
"I don't understand. But I don't care, so it works out."
(set 23 days ago)
35,722 posts, read 18,073,030 times
Reputation: 50773
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sprawling_Homeowner
Thankfully, Kyle Rittenhouse's choice to take a rifle in public is not what is on trial here. Some on this thread do speak as if it were.
He’s not on trial for that but it’s certainly up for discussion. And when the question arises about what you could do to protect yourself in a case where it’s not clear you’re entitled to use self defense in a court trial for murder (which is the case here) the question arises as to whether he was so reckless he can’t claim
Self defense.
The jury asked for written copies for each member of the jury instructions for a finding of self defense, so this exact issue may be the sticking point.
And after a ton of posts that point this out still pretend as if that is what's on trial.
It's like they want to intentionally promote a lie.
They project their subjective views and opinions on the facts.
I too have views and opinions. And however strongly I support the Second Amendment, I would tell a child of mine at 17 not to go to a city invaded by rioters, looters, arsonists, and all sorts of anarchists, leftists criminals, and other such depraved elements because these people don't have much of a moral fiber.
But if my 17-year-old child did it behind my back and ended up in the exact same situation as Kyle, in the same city, I'd be damn proud if my child shot and killed in self-defense exactly as Kyle did.
What is on trial is whether Kyle committed murder (which he didn't; the video footage which we who pay attention saw days after the incident made it clear).
Leftists have written and spoken for more than 1 year as if Kyle walked up to a crowd of peaceful protesters, deliberately aimed to kill, and fired at people who were peacefully and quietly minding their business.
They don't know the truth - and some don't want to.
He’s not on trial for that but it’s certainly up for discussion. And when the question arises about what you could do to protect yourself in a case where it’s not clear you’re entitled to use self defense in a court trial for murder (which is the case here) the question arises as to whether he was so reckless he can’t claim
Self defense.
Not in court, and if you want to discuss it, do so, but it has zero bearing on the facts of the case.
The facts state he wasn't reckless. He was RUNNING AWAY towards police, leftists chased after him, knocked him down, assaulted him with a skateboard, kicked his had, and pulled a firearm at him and pointed it at him BEFORE he fired at the pistol-wearing criminal.
What you want to be true is irrelevant to the facts of this case as presented during this trial.
If you've watched the video, and if you think Kyle was reckless, then I question your capacity to think rationally.
Status:
"I don't understand. But I don't care, so it works out."
(set 23 days ago)
35,722 posts, read 18,073,030 times
Reputation: 50773
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sprawling_Homeowner
Not in court, and if you want to discuss it, do so, but it has zero bearing on the facts of the case.
The facts state he wasn't reckless. He was RUNNING AWAY towards police, leftists chased after him, knocked him down, assaulted him with a skateboard, kicked his had, and pulled a firearm at him and pointed it at him BEFORE he fired at the pistol-wearing criminal.
What you want to be true is irrelevant to the facts of this case as presented during this trial.
If you've watched the video, and if you think Kyle was reckless, then I question your capacity to think rationally.
His decision to go into that riot at all, much less caring an AR15 is the very definition of reckless. Absolutely stupid.
His decision to go into that riot at all, much less caring an AR15 is the very definition of reckless. Absolutely stupid.
I wish your conviction over Kyle's lawful actions matched your condemnation of looters and rioters.
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.
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.
