Rittenhouse Trial - Not Guilty on All Counts

Avatar image for eoten
Eoten

8671

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 10

#1  Edited By Eoten
Member since 2020 • 8671 Posts

I've already mentioned in other threads that this trial would be ending soon. Rittenhouse will not be found guilty, there's no evidence to support that verdict and in fact, there's enough exculpatory evidence that was being sit on by the FBI, and others that say it should have never went to trial in the first place. Knowing this trial is nearing the conclusion, the prosecutor is even trying to force a mistrial to avoid acquittal. Scummy prosecutors like this are why there are innocent people in prison. Imagine how it could go if Rittenhouse didn't have the mountains of evidence in support of his innocence?

Mod Title Update*

Avatar image for vl4d_l3nin
vl4d_l3nin

3702

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 5

#2 vl4d_l3nin
Member since 2013 • 3702 Posts

The prosecutor has straight up made the case for the defense. That Tony Stark looking dude is the worst prosecutor ever.

If they have already tossed the curfew violation charge, I don't know how any others will stick. That seemed like it was the easiest one.

Avatar image for eoten
Eoten

8671

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 10

#3 Eoten
Member since 2020 • 8671 Posts

It seems they're telling the jury the trial will be concluded on Monday or Tuesday.

Avatar image for eoten
Eoten

8671

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 10

#6 Eoten
Member since 2020 • 8671 Posts

Prosecutors like that though are why there's little faith in fair treatment in the justice system. It's also come out that many people involved with the case are actually lawyers of the Kenosha mayor. With all the evidence that has come out, that the prosecutors have, this shouldn't even have gone to trial.

Avatar image for Solaryellow
Solaryellow

7035

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#7 Solaryellow
Member since 2013 • 7035 Posts

Lionel Hutz for the prosecution.

Avatar image for comp_atkins
comp_atkins

38701

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#9 comp_atkins
Member since 2005 • 38701 Posts

lol at defense arguing that an ipad used AI and "logarithms" to create detail when zooming in on a video

Avatar image for HoolaHoopMan
HoolaHoopMan

14724

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#10 HoolaHoopMan
Member since 2009 • 14724 Posts

Haven't seen much but I can't imagine that he'll be found guilty. Kid will walk away after bringing an AR-15 he didn't own across state lines, to protect stuff he didn't own, and put himself in a position which resulted in the deaths of several people. Little sh*ts like him deserve everything they get.

Avatar image for deactivated-622fe92f3678e
deactivated-622fe92f3678e

1836

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 11

User Lists: 5

#13 deactivated-622fe92f3678e
Member since 2021 • 1836 Posts

@HoolaHoopMan: Bet you if he was a left winger Eoten be screaming for life in prison.

Avatar image for sargentd
SargentD

8515

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#15 SargentD
Member since 2020 • 8515 Posts

Kyle didn't want to shoot anyone, the 3 who got shot wanted to pick a fight with a guy open carrying. Kyle is literally trying to get away from all 3 of them being chased...

Play stupid games win stupid prizes.

Avatar image for lundy86_4
lundy86_4

61555

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#16 lundy86_4
Member since 2003 • 61555 Posts

I've been watching and keeping up on the proceedings... The prosecution has been horrendous. It's actually been laughably bad, when their own witnesses tank their arguments, yet they try to soldier on. Shit, a witness basically stated prosecutorial misconduct with regards to attempting to coach a change of statement. Not only that, but the judge has felt the necessity to put the prosecution on blast and has had to remove the jury to do so.

Avatar image for eoten
Eoten

8671

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 10

#17 Eoten
Member since 2020 • 8671 Posts

@HoolaHoopMan said:

Haven't seen much but I can't imagine that he'll be found guilty. Kid will walk away after bringing an AR-15 he didn't own across state lines, to protect stuff he didn't own, and put himself in a position which resulted in the deaths of several people. Little sh*ts like him deserve everything they get.

And that's why you'll be disappointed and confused by the verdict... you know absolutely nothing about the facts in the case. The AR-15 wasn't brought against state lines, and it was only used to protect himself. What resulted in the deaths of two people was when one, which witnesses confirmed threatened to kill Rittenhouse if he ever got him alone, ambushed, chased Rittenhouse, and attempted to grab his gun. I am not sure why you people leave out those very important details. You're just setting yourself up for disappointment by believing, and circulating information that is patently false.

Avatar image for ratchetclank92
RatchetClank92

1361

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#18 RatchetClank92
Member since 2020 • 1361 Posts

This Incel kid went there knowing he would try to provoke an attack and get to use his gun on innocent people. Why else would he drive so far away to somewhere he thought “may be dangerous” to protect something that had nothing to do with him… he got what he was hoping for. I hope he gets a life sentence but I doubt he will knowing America’s idea of justice.

Avatar image for eoten
Eoten

8671

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 10

#19 Eoten
Member since 2020 • 8671 Posts
@girlusocrazy said:

I wonder if the defendant's words will make people take a hard look at gun laws. He can't legally buy a pistol, yet he can legally "take" an AR15 even though he admits to not knowing much about them or using them or how far bullets go etc.

It already has. The fourth circuit court of appeals ruled in July that the 21-year limitation is a violation of the Second Amendment rights of 18-20 year olds.

As Judge Julius Richardson wrote for the three-judge panel . . .

When do constitutional rights vest? At 18 or 21? 16 or 25? Why not 13 or 33? In the law, a line must sometimes be drawn. But there must be a reason why constitutional rights cannot be enjoyed until a certain age. Our nation’s most cherished constitutional rights vest no later than 18. And the Second Amendment’s right to keep and bear arms is no different.

Avatar image for eoten
Eoten

8671

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 10

#20  Edited By Eoten
Member since 2020 • 8671 Posts
@ratchetclank92 said:

This Incel kid went there knowing he would try to provoke an attack and get to use his gun on innocent people. Why else would he drive so far away to somewhere he thought “may be dangerous” to protect something that had nothing to do with him… he got what he was hoping for. I hope he gets a life sentence but I doubt he will knowing America’s idea of justice.

If that were true, there were several others he could have killed and gotten away with it. He showed restraint, and only shot the three people who were immediate threats to himself. I am not sure why you guys think it's okay for Rosenbaum to threaten to kill people before attacking them, or that it's okay for Grosskreutz to point a gun at him before taking a shot himself.

Some of you people may want to actually watch the trial and see the evidence presented rather than waiting for CNN's opinion on the matter. You'll be less disappointed when the correct verdict is reached next week.

Avatar image for lundy86_4
lundy86_4

61555

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#21 lundy86_4
Member since 2003 • 61555 Posts

@ratchetclank92 said:

This Incel kid went there knowing he would try to provoke an attack and get to use his gun on innocent people. Why else would he drive so far away to somewhere he thought “may be dangerous” to protect something that had nothing to do with him… he got what he was hoping for. I hope he gets a life sentence but I doubt he will knowing America’s idea of justice.

I'mma advise you to watch the trial and read up. The prosecution is floundering, and rightly so.

Avatar image for eoten
Eoten

8671

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 10

#23 Eoten
Member since 2020 • 8671 Posts

@girlusocrazy said:

@eoten: Ok? I'm not sure how that applies to future considerations...

Well it means in all likeliness the age to buy handguns will be lowered.

Avatar image for firedrakes
firedrakes

4394

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#24 firedrakes
Member since 2004 • 4394 Posts

@eoten said:
@ratchetclank92 said:

This Incel kid went there knowing he would try to provoke an attack and get to use his gun on innocent people. Why else would he drive so far away to somewhere he thought “may be dangerous” to protect something that had nothing to do with him… he got what he was hoping for. I hope he gets a life sentence but I doubt he will knowing America’s idea of justice.

If that were true, there were several others he could have killed and gotten away with it. He showed restraint, and only shot the three people who were immediate threats to himself. I am not sure why you guys think it's okay for Rosenbaum to threaten to kill people before attacking them, or that it's okay for Grosskreutz to point a gun at him before taking a shot himself.

Some of you people may want to actually watch the trial and see the evidence presented rather than waiting for CNN's opinion on the matter. You'll be less disappointed when the correct verdict is reached next week.

reported 1 of the people he shot. was a dam paramedic.

there no legs to stand on this. a fking emt person. klye shot.

Avatar image for sargentd
SargentD

8515

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#25 SargentD
Member since 2020 • 8515 Posts

@firedrakes: the guy trying to beat him over the head with a skateboard?

Avatar image for MirkoS77
MirkoS77

17713

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#26  Edited By MirkoS77
Member since 2011 • 17713 Posts
@eoten said:
@ratchetclank92 said:

This Incel kid went there knowing he would try to provoke an attack and get to use his gun on innocent people. Why else would he drive so far away to somewhere he thought “may be dangerous” to protect something that had nothing to do with him… he got what he was hoping for. I hope he gets a life sentence but I doubt he will knowing America’s idea of justice.

If that were true, there were several others he could have killed and gotten away with it. He showed restraint, and only shot the three people who were immediate threats to himself. I am not sure why you guys think it's okay for Rosenbaum to threaten to kill people before attacking them, or that it's okay for Grosskreutz to point a gun at him before taking a shot himself.

Some of you people may want to actually watch the trial and see the evidence presented rather than waiting for CNN's opinion on the matter. You'll be less disappointed when the correct verdict is reached next week.

He showed no restraint.

Rittenhouse willingly walked into an emotionally turbulent situation with a deadly weapon he had no authority to use, and people ended up dead whereas if he hadn’t, they’d still be alive. That is a fact, and the fact that HE took the initial initiative in creating a situation that led to lethal outcomes means the culpability lies with him. I’m not sure why you guys are ok with this. Oh yeah, the only justification is a statement of principle: “because he had the right to”. There’s not a single thing you can claim otherwise in giving a good reason for his actions, as that’s not even a good one. All else is rationalized behind the exclusive lens of a law that hones in on a technicality, disregarding the absolute imbecility of the broader discretion.

Thenation is spot on: if Rittenhouse were a Leftist, you’d be singing quite a different tune, precisely because it wouldn’t be Leftists and rioters (who you’ve repeatedly expressed your contempt and disgust towards) who lost their lives. Don’t attempt to pretend that your (or anyone else’s) support of this chump has anything to do with the rationality, legality, or reasonability of his actions instead of the partisan outcome you heavily favor from them.

He may get off, and we’re going to see future Rittenhouses marching armed into chaos, predictably killing someone, crying “self-defense!”, to be heralded and idolized as heroes by those on respective sides of the isle. We mine as well resort to full-on, outright anarchy if that ends up the case, left to be sorted out by the courts after the smoke clears.

Pathetic. People are dead, and they needn’t be.

Avatar image for sargentd
SargentD

8515

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#27  Edited By SargentD
Member since 2020 • 8515 Posts

@MirkoS77: your reasoning blows my mind, I disagree with you so much I wouldn't even know where to start.

You speak as if Kyle was some how an aggressor for simply existing. You give an absolute pass to a man in his 30s threatening to kill a 16 year old while chasing him through a parking lot. Side note this adult was a convicted child molester of 12 year old boys.

You give the other guy a pass for trying to chase down this teenager and trying to beat him over the head with a skateboard.

You give the 3rd guy a pass who pulled out a Glock on the kid while tripped up on the ground . This guy also is a convicted felon who shouldn't have a gun.

Why do you demonize the 16 year old who was running for his life the entire night from these deranged psychopaths. Because he existed? Because he was there he deserved it?

Avatar image for firedrakes
firedrakes

4394

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#29 firedrakes
Member since 2004 • 4394 Posts

@sargentd said:

@firedrakes: the guy trying to beat him over the head with a skateboard?

that was not the emt person. seeing emt had a camera on him.

Avatar image for MirkoS77
MirkoS77

17713

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#30  Edited By MirkoS77
Member since 2011 • 17713 Posts
@sargentd said:

@MirkoS77: your reasoning blows my mind, I disagree with you so much I wouldn't even know where to start.

You speak as if Kyle was some how an aggressor for simply existing. You give an absolute pass to a man in his 30s threatening to kill a 16 year old while chasing him through a parking lot. Side note this adult was a convicted child molester of 12 year old boys.

You give the other guy a pass for trying to chase down this teenager and trying to beat him over the head with a skateboard.

You give the 3rd guy a pass who pulled out a Glock on the kid while tripped up on the ground . This guy also is a convicted felon who shouldn't have a gun.

Why do you demonize the 16 year old who was running for his life the entire night from these deranged psychopaths. Because he existed? Because he was there he deserved it?

Well, the feeling is very mutual. The defense of Rittenhouse is so asinine it’s mind-boggling to me.

The kid willingly entered a volatile situation where people were irrational in hate and consumed with feelings of injustice, introducing a tool of deadly consequence he had no right to, and could not, use to the reasoning he slung it for. Why do you (and others) not question for one second whether it is justifiable to introduce lethal effect into situations of extreme emotional instability and turmoil? You act as if this is a given, a prudent decision that should be applauded, and are so consumed with focusing in on the micro and specifics of the engagement that it doesn’t even occur to you to pull back and think NONE of it would‘ve even held the possibility of actualization had the kid never grabbed a rifle before he stepped foot in the streets. Again, the only rationalization of Rittenhouse’s actions there I can get is, “it was his right”. Sorry, that doesn’t merit any weight when people end up dead. You can never predict how someone will react at seeing a firearm in times of heightened emotions (or even in calm ones). Some may see it as a threat and be intimidated, some may view it as a challenge and be emboldened. Some may run, some may run at you. Some may draw down. Which is (big shocker), precisely what happened.

This goes to a bigger issue I have that our country allows the carrying of such weapons in the streets simply as a statement of principle, which is just loony toons cartoonish, but this is another discussion entirely.

Realize that when I am determining the broader responsibility of a situation, I don't concern myself with the specifics, but instead pull back and examine the discretion of individuals in placing themselves into positions that led to the consequences. There are some exceptions to this obviously as specifics vary wildly in case-by-case basis, but in this instance, Rittenhouse was a goddamn naive, boneheaded dunce in that discretion, and any justifications of his actions post hoc that cost people their lives are irrelevant to the point that he brought a deadly weapon into the mix.

HE did that. HE initiated setting the table for lethal potential. There is responsibility there.

Avatar image for mrbojangles25
mrbojangles25

58624

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 11

User Lists: 0

#31  Edited By mrbojangles25
Member since 2005 • 58624 Posts

It's a lose-lose for society either way it turns out: dude is either going to go to prison and become a martyr which will inspire more death and destruction at the hands of the right; or be found not guilty and inspire every other weekend warrior with "tacticool" gear to go out looking for trouble, kill people, and then get away with it.

It's pretty nuts to live in a society where common sense and morality or so at odds with the law of the land. People would be alive today if Rittenhouse stayed home. Simple as that if you ask me. I know the law might say otherwise and if you want to make that argument and be correct on a technicality well good for you.

Really makes you wonder why we let a 200+-year-old document created by white slave-owning men from the musket era dictate so much of our lives.

Avatar image for mrbojangles25
mrbojangles25

58624

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 11

User Lists: 0

#32 mrbojangles25
Member since 2005 • 58624 Posts

@MirkoS77 said:

He showed no restraint.

Rittenhouse willingly walked into an emotionally turbulent situation with a deadly weapon he had no authority to use, and people ended up dead whereas if he hadn’t, they’d still be alive. That is a fact, and the fact that HE took the initial initiative in creating a situation that led to lethal outcomes means the culpability lies with him. I’m not sure why you guys are ok with this. Oh yeah, the only justification is a statement of principle: “because he had the right to”. There’s not a single thing you can claim otherwise in giving a good reason for his actions, as that’s not even a good one. All else is rationalized behind the exclusive lens of a law that hones in on a technicality, disregarding the absolute imbecility of the broader discretion.

Thenation is spot on: if Rittenhouse were a Leftist, you’d be singing quite a different tune, precisely because it wouldn’t be Leftists and rioters (who you’ve repeatedly expressed your contempt and disgust towards) who lost their lives. Don’t attempt to pretend that your (or anyone else’s) support of this chump has anything to do with the rationality, legality, or reasonability of his actions instead of the partisan outcome you heavily favor from them.

He may get off, and we’re going to see future Rittenhouses marching armed into chaos, predictably killing someone, crying “self-defense!”, to be heralded and idolized as heroes by those on respective sides of the isle. We mine as well resort to full-on, outright anarchy if that ends up the case, left to be sorted out by the courts after the smoke clears.

Pathetic. People are dead, and they needn’t be.

Pretty much all of this. 110%.

Especially the bolded.

Avatar image for sargentd
SargentD

8515

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#33 SargentD
Member since 2020 • 8515 Posts

@mrbojangles25: if none had assaulted him no one would have gotten shot. This idea that "well people are rioting so they are allowed to threaten and attack a teenager" is insane

Avatar image for JimB
JimB

3886

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

#34 JimB
Member since 2002 • 3886 Posts

@ratchetclank92 said:

This Incel kid went there knowing he would try to provoke an attack and get to use his gun on innocent people. Why else would he drive so far away to somewhere he thought “may be dangerous” to protect something that had nothing to do with him… he got what he was hoping for. I hope he gets a life sentence but I doubt he will knowing America’s idea of justice.

He lived 15 miles from where every thing took place.

Avatar image for JimB
JimB

3886

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

#35 JimB
Member since 2002 • 3886 Posts
@MirkoS77 said:
@eoten said:
@ratchetclank92 said:

This Incel kid went there knowing he would try to provoke an attack and get to use his gun on innocent people. Why else would he drive so far away to somewhere he thought “may be dangerous” to protect something that had nothing to do with him… he got what he was hoping for. I hope he gets a life sentence but I doubt he will knowing America’s idea of justice.

If that were true, there were several others he could have killed and gotten away with it. He showed restraint, and only shot the three people who were immediate threats to himself. I am not sure why you guys think it's okay for Rosenbaum to threaten to kill people before attacking them, or that it's okay for Grosskreutz to point a gun at him before taking a shot himself.

Some of you people may want to actually watch the trial and see the evidence presented rather than waiting for CNN's opinion on the matter. You'll be less disappointed when the correct verdict is reached next week.

He showed no restraint.

Rittenhouse willingly walked into an emotionally turbulent situation with a deadly weapon he had no authority to use, and people ended up dead whereas if he hadn’t, they’d still be alive. That is a fact, and the fact that HE took the initial initiative in creating a situation that led to lethal outcomes means the culpability lies with him. I’m not sure why you guys are ok with this. Oh yeah, the only justification is a statement of principle: “because he had the right to”. There’s not a single thing you can claim otherwise in giving a good reason for his actions, as that’s not even a good one. All else is rationalized behind the exclusive lens of a law that hones in on a technicality, disregarding the absolute imbecility of the broader discretion.

Thenation is spot on: if Rittenhouse were a Leftist, you’d be singing quite a different tune, precisely because it wouldn’t be Leftists and rioters (who you’ve repeatedly expressed your contempt and disgust towards) who lost their lives. Don’t attempt to pretend that your (or anyone else’s) support of this chump has anything to do with the rationality, legality, or reasonability of his actions instead of the partisan outcome you heavily favor from them.

He may get off, and we’re going to see future Rittenhouses marching armed into chaos, predictably killing someone, crying “self-defense!”, to be heralded and idolized as heroes by those on respective sides of the isle. We mine as well resort to full-on, outright anarchy if that ends up the case, left to be sorted out by the courts after the smoke clears.

Pathetic. People are dead, and they needn’t be.

They are dead because of their own actions. Two of three people shot were carrying concealed weapons and they were the rioters. During the summer of 2020 rioters killed 25 people which the media conveniently ignores.

Avatar image for tjandmia
tjandmia

3754

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#37 tjandmia
Member since 2017 • 3754 Posts

A not guilty verdict for this clown is going to be VERY dangerous for the country. His type of behavior has no place in a civilized society.

Avatar image for blaznwiipspman1
blaznwiipspman1

16630

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#38  Edited By blaznwiipspman1
Member since 2007 • 16630 Posts
@ratchetclank92 said:

This Incel kid went there knowing he would try to provoke an attack and get to use his gun on innocent people. Why else would he drive so far away to somewhere he thought “may be dangerous” to protect something that had nothing to do with him… he got what he was hoping for. I hope he gets a life sentence but I doubt he will knowing America’s idea of justice.

BLM was causing massive damage to businesses and homes while "protesting", and this was happening for years before the Rittenhouse thing even happened. In fact, I don't doubt that things will start up again after the holidays, sometime around march or so. Its like clockwork every year, and the government just stands by doing nothing. Only trump thought about bringing in the national guard and laying an ass whooping. Of course the scum in the white house told him it was a bad idea.

Avatar image for LJS9502_basic
LJS9502_basic

178895

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#39 LJS9502_basic
Member since 2003 • 178895 Posts

The case is political and the result a forgone conclusion. Not the best for the country, however. Any sane person should be disgusted with what he did.

Avatar image for Maxpowers_32
Maxpowers_32

995

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#40  Edited By Maxpowers_32
Member since 2006 • 995 Posts

@LJS9502_basic:

How dare he look at his neighborhood being burned to the ground by "fiery by mostly peaceful protestors" and people's homes and businesses destroyed which destorys their life work and decide he wants to go and put out fires and offer first aid to people affected by the Biden supporters laying waste to the town.

Do you think he should have allowed the democratic/Biden supporters to kill him like they did to the other Trump supporter?

https://nypost.com/2021/01/30/how-a-portland-radical-murdered-a-trump-supporter/

What's really bad is he played these games called "first person shooters". Anyone who plays a game where you go around with a gun shooting people or monsters must be a horrible person and deserves to go to jail without any evidence, right?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n68nIjW7rVU

Hope I never get questioned about how when I was little I'd simulate jumping on turtles and kicking their shells into other other animals.

Do you think Kyle should be singing a song like this from prison?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N4W4OQJKHtE

Avatar image for sargentd
SargentD

8515

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#41  Edited By SargentD
Member since 2020 • 8515 Posts

@Maxpowers_32: it just blows my mind how some think people rioting and burning down people's property is totally acceptable. Like they get an absolute pass on destroying the city and threatening people, even fighting people. But will argue it's horrible for anyone to defend themselves, thier property or city from such destruction.

What is this world where being a criminal lighting dumpsters on fire and trying to roll them into a gas pumps is acceptable. But being out there trying to mediate the damage with a fire extinguisher condemned.

I don't get these people. They believe these people have the right to destroy and attack with 0 repercussions...

Love seeing the hypocrisy of people complaining "he shouldn't have been there" but all these people coming into the city to destroy SHOULD be there. You have to be batshit crazy to follow that narrative.

Avatar image for LJS9502_basic
LJS9502_basic

178895

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#42 LJS9502_basic
Member since 2003 • 178895 Posts

@Maxpowers_32: He went there looking for trouble and broke some laws doing so. But the right has shown us laws don't apply to them so I'm not surprised you are an apologist.

Avatar image for sargentd
SargentD

8515

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#43 SargentD
Member since 2020 • 8515 Posts

@LJS9502_basic: the rioters went there looking for trouble

Avatar image for blaznwiipspman1
blaznwiipspman1

16630

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#45  Edited By blaznwiipspman1
Member since 2007 • 16630 Posts

@LJS9502_basic: the blm "peaceful" protestors were rioting, looting, causing massive amounts of damage, and killing people. 25 people died in the protests so far. These people aren't the protestors of the MLK generation, not the type of people that MLK would associate with or even support.

Avatar image for sargentd
SargentD

8515

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#46 SargentD
Member since 2020 • 8515 Posts

Anyone defending a convicted pedophile who was starting fires in the street and threatening to kill people while demonizing the teenager trying to run away from the deranged moron should be ashamed.

SHAME

Avatar image for Maxpowers_32
Maxpowers_32

995

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#47  Edited By Maxpowers_32
Member since 2006 • 995 Posts
@LJS9502_basic said:

@Maxpowers_32: He went there looking for trouble and broke some laws doing so. But the right has shown us laws don't apply to them so I'm not surprised you are an apologist.

Did the rioters go there looking for trouble or to try and improve the community?

I'm confused. Are the Biden supporters there peaceful, kind people or people who will attack someone putting out fires and offering first aid?

Do you think the fact that Kyle played Call of Duty means he is a violent person?

What laws did he break? How exactly does the right show the laws doesn't apply to them? Are they getting paid $450k up to $1M per family to break federal law or pushing bans on indoor dining without masks and then going to fancy restaurants and dinner parties without a mask?

Avatar image for LJS9502_basic
LJS9502_basic

178895

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#48 LJS9502_basic
Member since 2003 • 178895 Posts

@Maxpowers_32: That is the job of the police. Not vigilantes.

Avatar image for Steppy_76
Steppy_76

2857

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#49  Edited By Steppy_76
Member since 2005 • 2857 Posts

I personally don't think you get to go to a different state, to protect property you don't own, without sanction from those whose job it is too do those things, with a gun you don't own, and claim self defense.

Avatar image for Maxpowers_32
Maxpowers_32

995

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#50 Maxpowers_32
Member since 2006 • 995 Posts
@LJS9502_basic said:

@Maxpowers_32: That is the job of the police. Not vigilantes.

I thought calling the police if someone is breaking into your home comes from a place of privilege and is racist.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WHkPfD9qy2g

Democrats/media/Biden supporters were saying to defund the police and protecting property and yourself from BLM was racist

The police and fire department was not responding to the destruction caused by the Biden supporters.

This young man decided to go and help his neighbors whose lives were being ruined. If the BLM/Biden supporters are peaceful how is that looking for trouble? Do you think the communist and pedophile Biden supporters should have been there?