Why are lefties such doormats?

I'm not the one who mentioned this, learn to read ffs.

More violent? Data shows otherwise, there is some violence done in the name of the left, but the left is actually underrepresented in political violence. https://www.csis.org/analysis/escalating-terrorism-problem-united-states

Psychotic worldview? You just justified the fact above "Not surprised given that leftist violence is not tracked by the government and other agencies.". You deny facts using a conspiracy theory to back up your own denial...

Also, arent you a Tim Pool fan? The guy is unironically arguing for that Squid Game isn't anti-capitalist.

This is as psychotic as it gets.

Didn't the Democrats lose across the country in an off election year. Also The Democrats damn near lost the house when Biden won the Presidency and have a tie in the senate that is not a Republican loss. The Democrats have woken a sleeping giant that is going to eat their lunch.

@MirkoS77: I'm reminded of the scenario where if you're driving and someone pulls out in front of you, and you hit them, but you could have stopped and consciously did not, then you are at fault.

That might vary by state but from what I've gathered it's pretty common where even if the other party wasn't entirely blameless, if you could have prevented it then you are at fault. It's why they always look for rubber marks on the road, to confirm that you made the attempt to stop or not.

Anyway, the point: no doubt Rittenhouse was technically within his legal rights, but I just wonder if there's something similar to the thing where if they can prove he went there to cause trouble he will be found guilty of at least conspiracy to murder or some other charge.

I'm afraid lacking common sense isn't illegal. This is the modern right in a nutshell: winning is more important than being correct. Technicalities are the best kind of victories. Abuse and exploit the law.

@JimB: So it's kinda like when Republicans woke a sleeping giant that made Trump be one of the few to lose reelection, house and Senate?

You mean like the first guy he murdered was unarmed? Have you paid attention to that?

There’s something seriously wrong with this country when openly carrying a rifle into the streets in the midst of chaos is pardoned as acceptable behavior, and we are concerning ourselves over whether or not he had the right to defend himself with deadly force when tensions explode and things, predictably, go south. I’d like to hear a single reason as to why an assault rifle should be brought to a riot scene by those not in LE, because “it’s his right!” is akin to saying, “because he/she exists!”. It’s not a defense, and it’s not a valid reason. It explains nothing. It’s worthless.

I guess this frustrates me so as I’m a gun owner and supporter of the 2nd, yet only within the realm of reasonability and common sense. It’s lala-land territory we’ve entered when some loon runs out to a car armed (as just happened in TX, IIRC) and ends up killing a kid chilling in his car because in his paranoid mind frame, he sees his cell phone as an Uzi. And then to top off the circus show, he cries “self-defense!!” and people seriously grant him the benefit of the doubt.

I mean….wha…?

I often wonder if we‘re far too fearful a society for gun rights to even exist. If you bring a rifle to a riot, as far as I’m concerned, you’re carrying gallons of gasoline into a forest fire. You are an idiot. There is NOTHING good coming from it.

@eoten: Chill. I never said you did, i said you are trying to hijack this thread..Which you are.

@MirkoS77: you have the rifle to protect your loved ones and property from the assholes burning and breaking everything where you live. A riot is actually a great example of a situation where you should be armed. Look up gun sales after the BLM riots.

rooftop Koreans get it, but you don't.

@sargentd: I dont fear riots. BLM protests are mostly peaceful, until provoked. Some are just bad actors. Not sure what this has to do with the left being wimps.

No, a riot is a perfect example of a situation where you shouldn’t be armed. Not when it‘s not your job to be, your property, or loved ones under direct threat. He was there in support of the police; he had no personal investment otherwise. He had no authority whatsoever to use deadly force in the protection of property or the restoration of order. So why did he bring a rifle?

Oh yeah…..”Because it’s his right”.

Now he has the right to be in prison. He was an idiotic, impressionable kid who had an infatuation with firearms, fantasies of being a cop, and who’d been playing too much CoD and watching too many movies…..and people ended up dead.

@MirkoS77: Have you not been paying attention to this trial at all??? Clear self defense, all 3 he shot were attacking him. Kyle will walk. You aren't paying attention.

SargentD is right. Rittenhouse won't be found guilty. The video evidence that has been submitted in all three shootings has exonerated him. You show me a law that says someone cannot be armed for self defense during a riot. No such law exists. Whether or not you think he should or shouldn't do something is irrelevant. This is a legal matter, it matters what the law says and no law says a person cannot be armed to protect themselves just because of a riot.

All Americans have a right to defend themselves when people are attacking him.

This trial is over.

Its almost like you didn't even bother reading what he actually said.

Tension and heightened passions were readily apparent long before he ever arrived. People can cling onto the technicalities of the law in the micro to cower behind and try to excuse acts of irresponsibility and exceptionally poor judgement in the macro, but it’s laughable and indicative of such imbecility that we even reach a point where we are resorting to the strict lines of the law to absolve people from the ramifications of their own rampant stupidity. I’m not one for victim blaming, but I don’t view one a victim who willingly injects themselves and potential of deadly consequence they had no authority to use into a volatile situation where tensions are boiling over, and then portrays themselves as the poor, persecuted victim when things go south to deadly outcomes that wouldn’t have been able to HAD THEY THEMSELVES NOT BROUGHT SUCH POTENTIAL TO BEAR IN THE FIRST PLACE. I’d nearly forgotten how the “party of personal responsibility” operates nowadays, a principle seemingly cast aside as long as liberals are left bleeding and dying in the streets, huh?

Will Rittenhouse get off clean? Possibly, which will be nothing more than a sad punctuation on the insanity this country continues to descend into. Personally, I hope the kid gets the book thrown at him, if for nothing more to dissuade future wannabe posers from their infantile fantasies of heroism and pseudo-manhood they’ve delusionally nurtured who end up getting people unnecessarily killed. To only then be disgustingly defended by toxically partisan-enabled rationalizations by those who’ve abandoned their own sense of common sense and responsibility in order to feed their own emotional desires simply because they strongly believe those rioters deserved it.

ROFLMAO, yeah, you may want to re-read it yourself.