Rittenhouse Trial
- Thread starter Xavier
- Start date
- Joined
- Dec 1, 2002
- Posts
- 22,057
Then it's a good thing there has been no evidence presented that he initiated a confrontation with anyone unless you count putting out a (literal) dumpster fire. Pissy mob didn't like that I guess.
And carrying a weapon is not instigating.
Federal surveillance video shows him retreating from the crowd until a shot is fired (by someone else), then the first numbnuts tries to reach for his gun.
He crossed state lines!
Edit: I should note to STK that I take no issue with the rest of his post which is why I cropped it out.
- Joined
- Dec 1, 2002
- Posts
- 22,057
The Trouble With Drinking In Singapore
In Singapore, extreme taxation of alcoholic beverages makes it nearly impossible to get woozy without going broke.
- Joined
- Oct 12, 2003
- Posts
- 26,974
Traveling a great distance armed, open carrying a rifle to a place full of people you're announcing you are against is instigating by any rational standard. Like walking into a temple wearing an SS uniform and brandishing a Luger. You're provoking.
I will agree with people saying he had no choice but to shoot when he did if he didn't want to end up in a coma or dead. But the fact he purposely put himself IN that position completely by his own choice and for no good reason removes self defense as an excuse.
- Joined
- Oct 12, 2003
- Posts
- 26,974
You may live to see it. But with any luck you and I will only see it on tv.
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2000
- Posts
- 6,300
I 100% agree with this. It was indeed self defense so while that's going to get thrown out, he needs to account for the other stupid shit he did like actually being there with an assault rifle.
- Joined
- Dec 21, 2010
- Posts
- 5,616
this thing was like the concluding match in Asshole Wimbledon where hordes of dirtbags compete fiercely to one-up each other and take home the king retard championship ring.
although tragic for all involved especially the family members of the departed and the perpetrator, this was inevitable.
although tragic for all involved especially the family members of the departed and the perpetrator, this was inevitable.
- Joined
- Mar 14, 2001
- Posts
- 1,795
I do like drugs…
Here in Belgium if you shoot a person with a gun you going to jail. Doesn’t matter if he was going to buttfuck you with that penis sword from Se7en. If you kill somebody your going down to the jailhouse. Even if your are copper. The last guy who went on a shooting spree was shot in the stomach by a cop. So not to kill him. The only guys who don’t get a jail pass are muslim terrorists. They get a instant headshot when caught.
- Joined
- Dec 1, 2002
- Posts
- 22,057
By this logic, the woman that got run down in Charlottesville had it coming. She was there to confront and provoke right wingers holding their own 'protest'. No one requires anyone else's permission to somewhere in public. You can't say he had no choice to shoot but simultaneously say that self defense is not an allowable defense because of the decision to be there. It's nonsensical.
Also, again, this great distance, crossing state lines thing is just misdirection. He was in his own town.
Antioch, il to Kenosha, wi - Google Search
www.google.com
To your example, there is no evidence that he 'brandished' his weapon before the point of using it. Again, carrying in and of itself is not a threat. Something more people in this country may have to get used to after upcoming SCOTUS decisions.
You're welcome to say he could have easily avoided being in that situation and that's true. But so could have the guys he shot. But your version of justice is coming off a bit perverse. You're crying tears for three convicted felons, a burglar, an abuser/rapist, and a child rapist that all tried to kill a 17 year old kid. I'm not glad two of them are dead, but I'm hardly going to lose any sleep.
- Joined
- Oct 12, 2003
- Posts
- 26,974
Did she bring a gun? Come on, don't straw man me here.
And for the record, I'm not crying for anyone involved.
- Joined
- Oct 12, 2003
- Posts
- 26,974
You just described some of the most heroic men who ever lived, fighting in WW2, as animals. Great job thinking that through, shithead.
- Joined
- Dec 14, 2001
- Posts
- 8,240
You know what? You're pretty good at trying to circumvent topics....I bet you believe Alec Baldwin should not be held accountable for his actions either...
BB
- Joined
- Apr 25, 2002
- Posts
- 5,139
The Black Lives Matter people appeared to be several streets away from the Jews will not replace us people.
Also they were not following them around wearing tactical gear and carrying an AR15.
Maybe people forgot or don't know an AR-15 is a weapon of war designed to inflict large amounts of causalities.
If he was just there to defend himself a concealable weapon would've been a much better choice.
Much better in close quarters because the other person needs to be 18" + closer to you to try and grab it also much easier to maneuver around in that situation. Also less likely to go through them and into another person or a couple hundred meters into a house down the street with some child sleeping in it.
A lot of people deleting or editing comments
Yea OK he didn't go down there to pick a fight.
Another inadmissible video in the trial.
It does show his state of mind and intent though.
-The people he killed were criminals balh blah, good riddance -
So that means they deserve to be killed?
When somebody is incarcerated and gets out they've paid their debt to society right?
We believe redemption and second chances in this country and our religious beliefs right?
No we don't.
Anyways they aren't on trial here they're dead.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Dec 21, 2010
- Posts
- 5,616
yea these antifa douchebags aren't the lost generation lmao
- Joined
- Dec 21, 2010
- Posts
- 5,616
here's what we know
guy number one was running around screaming "shoot me *racial epithet*" and grabbed the rifle
guy number two attacked with blunt object and actually connected
guy number three was creeping up with handgun in hand
guy number one was running around screaming "shoot me *racial epithet*" and grabbed the rifle
guy number two attacked with blunt object and actually connected
guy number three was creeping up with handgun in hand
- Joined
- Dec 25, 2002
- Posts
- 46,782
Open Carrying a rifle in public is a bad idea.
Every responsible gun owners knows that.
It is, however, completely legal in the overwhelming majority of the country.
I think it’s a big stretch to say Rittenhouse engaged in provocation and fighting words simply by being present and exercising his rights.
Every responsible gun owners knows that.
It is, however, completely legal in the overwhelming majority of the country.
I think it’s a big stretch to say Rittenhouse engaged in provocation and fighting words simply by being present and exercising his rights.
- Joined
- Dec 21, 2010
- Posts
- 5,616
I'd say douchebag #3 wins the king retard championship because
1) he actually survived
2) he gets a purple heart awarded by like-minded idiots
3) every one knows which hand he jacks it with from now until eternity
its a win no matter how you look at it
1) he actually survived
2) he gets a purple heart awarded by like-minded idiots
3) every one knows which hand he jacks it with from now until eternity
its a win no matter how you look at it
- Joined
- Dec 25, 2002
- Posts
- 46,782
Guys, you don’t want the mere presence of a firearm to be considered hostile intent or some kind of assumption of assault.
American Police kill countless individuals simply because they “had a gun.” Often times they didn’t have a gun and whatever object they had wasn’t even pointed at the police.
Don’t back the cops on this one.
As I said earlier: Everyone that night fucked around and found out.
Two people will never be able to rethink their decisions, I hope the other two do.
American Police kill countless individuals simply because they “had a gun.” Often times they didn’t have a gun and whatever object they had wasn’t even pointed at the police.
Don’t back the cops on this one.
As I said earlier: Everyone that night fucked around and found out.
Two people will never be able to rethink their decisions, I hope the other two do.
- Joined
- Apr 25, 2002
- Posts
- 5,139
What's it's best utility?
Home defense
Personal safety
Hunting
Law Enforcement day to day
Riot Control
Sniper Rifle
I mean sure you could use it for those things but it's not the best choice or what it was made for.
It's made for making big piles of dead bodies real quick.
Is that better?
- Joined
- Dec 25, 2002
- Posts
- 46,782
Of course guns are for killing people.
Don’t be stupid.
The problem is the selective use of the term “weapons of war” - most all firearms are descended from designs made for or used in war.
It’s a meaningless distinction designed to drum up an emotional response.
It’s a code phrase, a dog whistle.
The statists want to ban semi-automatic rifles with detachable magazines.
Calling them assault weapons didn’t work so they switched to calling them “weapons of war.”
More people were beaten to death last year in America than were killed by rifles.
Handguns still represent the overwhelming majority of firearm fatalities in America.
But all we hear about are the “weapons of war” - semi-automatic rifles.
The anti-gun lobby is entirely disingenuous and does not care about reducing harm.
Call them what they are: “firearms.”
Last edited: