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.
And say stuff like,..why don't they stay and fight. Instead of having to pack up and come here.
If the people banded together and fought off the Taliban who are roaming the streets like gangs, people would cheer them on. Men, women , and children standing up to them.
Well,..here is an example of people fighting back.
Putting yourself in danger IS part and parcel to fighting back an angry mob.
He didn't feel like staying home and tweeting "Good Luck!"
If this can send a message that we're sick and tired of riots being allowed unabated then it was all worth it.
Seems altruistic if you ask me.
I love how stupid the prosecution team is… Yesterday, the fat and dumb one actually stated that there are times that you have to take an @zz beating, as a man. Seriously, in a riot, who is going to take an @zz beating by dozens of criminals?
That’s beyond stupid…. It’s so stupid, it’s criminal on the behalf of the prosecution.
First, I’d love to see fat boy take an @zz beating like a man cuz he appears to a less than manly man with zero fighting skills and I seriously doubt he could run one city block. I’m curious where the prosecution team got their law degrees from cuz I’m sure that nobody, on either sides of this issue has any faith in them or their abilities of understanding basic constitutional law.
I’m sure dumb and dumber are done after this case.
I’m glad that KB had received enough donations to hire a skilled defense team to protect his legal rights in count and I’m pretty sure that the prosecution was hoping that KB be assigned some overwork public defender, who would take the first deal that came across his desk, even a 15-20 year sentence, with a “chance” at parole in 10 years.
I don’t agree on what happened on the January 6th riots, but this case makes me wonder how many of those, who where arrested for criminal trespassing and other minor crimes will be sent to prison for not having a proper legal defense team in court with them… Yes, if you assaulted a cop or anybody else, you should go to prison… And this goes for all the rioters during the summer of love 2020.
The two things I’ve learned this week about this case is that KB acted in self defense and that the government’s prosecution team is trying to send an innocent kid to prison for life, purely for political reasons to appease a criminal mob.
Basically, we officially now have a two-tier justice system that’s not fair or just.
Sorry, but this is far bigger than KB. KB is only that “fall guy” and it’s the American people who are the ones actually being targeted here since a conviction hear would start the ball rolling to changing our current self defense laws, as well as pushing gun control forward by destroying one of the main purposes of owning firearms, under the 2A.
Status:
"I don't understand. But I don't care, so it works out."
(set 26 days ago)
35,751 posts, read 18,091,770 times
Reputation: 50812
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sprawling_Homeowner
I wish your conviction over Kyle's lawful actions matched your condemnation of looters and rioters.
I have spoken out many times against the looters and rioters. The difference there is there is no one here defending them so the need to condemn them doesn’t come up. Goes without saying.
His decision to go into that riot at all, much less caring an AR15 is the very definition of reckless. Absolutely stupid.
I cannot agree with you more. No doubt.
I am a responsible gun owner, and I have a proper, logical understanding of the law and self-defense, and I wouldn't go near a riot, armed or otherwise. If a riot rolled down my street, I have all the means available to make compelling arguments to leave my house alone, and really, leave my neighbors alone as well. But if that same riot happens elsewhere, that's on those people, not me, even if it is only 3-4 streets over.
You and I do not disagree on the stupid of the case. Never have. My arguments in this thread rest entirely on the rule of law and how a court should work.
All that said...Rittenhouse being in Kenosha and openly carrying an AR-15 wasn't illegal in any sense of the word according to the law as written. I always said it was the textbook definition of unnecessarily stupid, but that doesn't make it illegal. In a court, rule of law matters, not what I think is stupid.
I have spoken out many times against the looters and rioters. The difference there is there is no one here defending them so the need to condemn them doesn’t come up. Goes without saying.
He was there doing more than speaking out. Too bad you call it "reckless." His opposition to rioting and looting exceeded yours, and he went there to help local business owners protect their livelihoods - you know, so they could eat and their kids could eat.
The real recklessness here was demonstrated, in video footage (which I do wonder if you've seen) by Joseph D. Rosenbaum (who verbally and on camera threatened to kill Kyle), by Anthony Huber (who committed assault as he struck Kyle with a skateboard), and by Gaige P. Grosskreutz, who admitted on the stand that he pulled out a pistol and aimed it at Kyle BEFORE Kyle fired.
The real recklessness was also demonstrated by Rosenbaum, who committed forcible sodomy against several boys; by Huber, who had a history of assault and battery, domestic abuse, and illegal weapons possession; and, of course, by Grosskreutz, who was in illegal possession of a firearm on the night he committed felony assault* and was rightfully and rightly and lawfully shot at by Kyle in self-defense.
You want to talk about reckless? Talk about these miscreants first if you want to say something should be open for discussion.
Otherwise, let's focus on the facts of the case, not on your subjective opinions. You don't like it that some jurisdictions allow open carry? Vote.
*to point a firearm at another person outside of self-defense, even if the weapon is unloaded and even if it is done as a prank or as a joke, is FELONY ASSAULT. And if you've watched the video, you know that Grosskreutz was neither playing around nor joking and did this with the intent of firing at Kyle - whose face was a few feet away.
For Kyle to fire at Grosskreutz at that moment was anything but reckless; it was an example of self-control and marksmanship which men two or three times Kyle's age often fail to reach even after much firearms training. Were you at all familiar with guns and the use thereof, you might understand this.
His decision to go into that riot at all, much less caring an AR15 is the very definition of reckless. Absolutely stupid.
Stupid, yes but not illegal. I think you're trying to make a civil case argument for a legal one. In a civil case, Rittenhouse has a far greater chance of not succeeding because they assign culpability to person(s) in those cases. His choosing to go to Kenosha during a riot would be relevant; his basic idiocy of the choices he made would be relevant. However, in the legal criminal case, it is not. He didn't break the law carrying the weapon or attending the riots. The simple question is - from a criminal standpoint - was he justified to shoot them in self-defense? I think there's no question it was self-defense from a legal criminal standpoint.
Status:
"I don't understand. But I don't care, so it works out."
(set 26 days ago)
35,751 posts, read 18,091,770 times
Reputation: 50812
CNN is reporting the jury was allowed to use the empty courtroom to view the clearer video they requested on the large screen. Judge Schroeder cleared the courtroom and told them they could view it as long as they wanted to and could even move up close to the screen.
The defense objected to this for some reason. So much for complaining they didn’t have access to the clearer video. Hmmm
Wonder why they didn’t want the jury to be able to do this.
I have spoken out many times against the looters and rioters. The difference there is there is no one here defending them so the need to condemn them doesn’t come up. Goes without saying.
You are defending the rioters' actions every time you deny Rittenhouse used self defense.
All your posts support rioters' actions as acceptable. It's pretty clear you do not support self defense.
CNN is reporting the jury was allowed to use the empty courtroom to view the clearer video they requested on the large screen. Judge Schroeder cleared the courtroom and told them they could view it as long as they wanted to and could even move up close to the screen.
The defense objected to this for some reason. So much for complaining they didn’t have access to the clearer video. Hmmm
Wonder why they didn’t want the jury to be able to do this.
The defense has the right to cross examine after all evidence is presented.
His decision to go into that riot at all, much less caring an AR15 is the very definition of reckless. Absolutely stupid.
Trust me on this. The legal definition and jury instructions defining 'reckless' don't mention 'stupid.'
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.
