News of the Day III

[Donnie D]

The verdict in the Kyle Rittenhouse case was totally predictable. We have a gun culture where an out of state 17 year-old self styled Rambo can legally walk the streets with a loaded AK-47.

The job to protect us from gun violence is in the hands of legislators, who continue to fail us at every turn. The judge also failed us, refusing to allow into evidence Rittenhouse’s previous violent acts, his association with the proud boys and white supremacy, and his appearance in a bar where he wore a t-shirt that celebrated his killing of 2 people.

The consequences for the future are ominous. Be prepared for more, and more violent, armed acts at civil protest.

I’ve seen multiple posts celebrating him for killing 2 libs. Because right and wrong no longer matter. Fair and free elections no longer matter. All that matters is owning the libs.

The streets of Kenosha, that night, were akin to Beirut at its worst. Hundreds of cars subject to arson. A flaccid police response. Laws that encouraged an armed citizenry. Chaos. By design. Chaotic consequences. Unavoidable. And, so was the verdict.

There were no winners. There are worse days ahead. Violent ones.

[Donnie D]

Rittenhouse fled a mob and was still dropkicked and smacked in the face by a skateboard. If there are some people who think that is equitable to initiating a fight, then the verdict didn’t matter to them to begin with and they would rationalize a reason to kill

Yeah an unarmed mob (of 1) attacked a guy with an AK-47, who had no business being there, after he murdered 1 person. And the “kid” then bragged about killing them a month later. He’s a hero.

[Donnie D]

You can watch your boy on Fucker Carlson Monday night.

Hopefully he says something stupid that will hurt him in the civil trial.

[RSchmitz]

Yeah an unarmed mob (of 1) attacked a guy with an AK-47, who had no business being there, after he murdered 1 person. And the “kid” then bragged about killing them a month later. He’s a hero.

You have a trial and plenty of video evidence to go off of. It takes minimal effort to check for yourself that what you are spewing isn't accurate.

Also, do you have a shred of credible evidence that he bragged, or are you just perpetuating BS that you've heard?

[RSchmitz]

The verdict in the Kyle Rittenhouse case was totally predictable. We have a gun culture where an out of state 17 year-old self styled Rambo can legally walk the streets with a loaded AK-47.

The job to protect us from gun violence is in the hands of legislators, who continue to fail us at every turn. The judge also failed us, refusing to allow into evidence Rittenhouse’s previous violent acts, his association with the proud boys and white supremacy, and his appearance in a bar where he wore a t-shirt that celebrated his killing of 2 people.

The consequences for the future are ominous. Be prepared for more, and more violent, armed acts at civil protest.

I’ve seen multiple posts celebrating him for killing 2 libs. Because right and wrong no longer matter. Fair and free elections no longer matter. All that matters is owning the libs.

The streets of Kenosha, that night, were akin to Beirut at its worst. Hundreds of cars subject to arson. A flaccid police response. Laws that encouraged an armed citizenry. Chaos. By design. Chaotic consequences. Unavoidable. And, so was the verdict.

There were no winners. There are worse days ahead. Violent ones.

Wearing a shirt that says “free as fuck” after posting bail means he is celebrating the killing of people? Right. You remind me of someone that tried to argue with me that carrying a gun means premeditation to murder people. What a bunch of loons

[Puckhead]

Nah...You carry a gun into a protest with an idea to cause trouble. If you are interested in "self defense", you get the fuck out or just stay away.

This sets a dangerous precedent for future "protests", no matter the issue. As I said, there are thousands of "loons" just itching for an opportunity to "use their guns".

[RSchmitz]

Nah...You carry a gun into a protest with an idea to cause trouble. If you are interested in "self defense", you get the fuck out or just stay away.

This sets a dangerous precedent for future "protests", no matter the issue. As I said, there are thousands of "loons" just itching for an opportunity to "use their guns".

I have absolutely zero issue with people protecting property from "protestors" by a show of force, that's a basic American right. Sorry that you don't like the precedent, don't attack people protecting themselves and you won't get shot.

[BurnTHalO]

Yikes man. You don't have any issue with untrained teenagers walking around with assault rifles to keep some windows from being broken? You must love Draco.

[RSchmitz]

Yikes man. You don't have any issue with untrained teenagers walking around with assault rifles to keep some windows from being broken? You must love Draco.

So if Rittenhouse was 25 years old and ex-military everything would be ok? Not a strawman argument at all.

[the_narrow_way]

Rittenhouse fled a mob and was still dropkicked and smacked in the face by a skateboard.

He was chased because he shot somebody and the 'mob' thought he was a threat and they were putting themselves in the line of fire to potentially save others. If there were any heroes that day it sure as hell wasn't Rittenhouse.

[the_narrow_way]

I have absolutely zero issue with people protecting property from "protestors" by a show of force, that's a basic American right. Sorry that you don't like the precedent, don't attack people protecting themselves and you won't get shot.

It. Wasn't. His. Property. He had zero right to defend it.

[RSchmitz]

It. Wasn't. His. Property. He had zero right to defend it.

If this were actually true security would not exist. One of the arguments from the defense at trial was that the owners of the car lot asked for protection.

[RSchmitz]

He was chased because he shot somebody and the 'mob' thought he was a threat and they were putting themselves in the line of fire to potentially save others. If there were any heroes that day it sure as hell wasn't Rittenhouse.

They were putting themselves in the line of fire by chasing down and beating on somebody who was not actively shooting anyone and running away? Sounds like vigilantes to me. The prosecutor tried to argue that same logic in court, right after he argued that wanting to shoot people in Call of Duty meant that you wanted to shoot people in real life.

Not sure where you all are getting the hero bit from, probably something you are slurping up from the media shills. Calling anybody heroes that night is just pandering to morons. You don't have to put Rittenhouse on a pedestal or think everything he did that night was great to think he was in the right defending himself.

[Bolthed]

we are very close to a situation where the public gun toters are going to come up against LEO’s or ordinary citizens. The next couple of years will be determitive

Rittenhouse came upon LEOs. They gave him a bottle of water and encouragement.

[Puckhead]

Rittenhouse came upon LEOs. They gave him a bottle of water and encouragement.

Yes, amazingly true.

The Milwaukee Journal posted an opinion piece on the verdict. The newspaper also raised an interesting puzzle: If “two people openly carry guns and point them at each other, whose self-defense claim takes priority?” And therein lies a large measure of confusion doesn’t it? Shoot first, ask questions later, and claim “self defense”?