FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > Kyle Rittenhouse
Kyle Rittenhouse
Jump to: Newest in thread
| |||
 | |||
| |||
"beyond what's been on the news I don't know anything about him but he seems like a decent lad from what I've read about him. " He does seem like a nice lad when you read sources away from the sensationalism, those these sadly tend to dominate the discourse around him, and if you believe them, he's a monster who should be locked up for life. | |||
if anyone is wondering this was his Reddit handle it was read out in open court | |||
"beyond what's been on the news I don't know anything about him but he seems like a decent lad from what I've read about him. He does seem like a nice lad when you read sources away from the sensationalism, those these sadly tend to dominate the discourse around him, and if you believe them, he's a monster who should be locked up for life." I try not to put too much stock I to anything the media has to say tbh. He seems OK to me, but I've never met him so could be wrong. | |||
| |||
| |||
 . US gun rights activist? How is he for standing against racism? | |||
"4 door more whore
if anyone is wondering this was his Reddit handle it was read out in open court"Given its a pretty tame online handle, how does that reflect on his character? | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
 | |||
"Murderer?" Do you know something the jury didn't? | |||
"The guy that shot three people, killing two. That guy? I didn't know he was 'trending', but I don't like the company he seems to keep/is happy to be associated with/what he seems to stand for. But I'm sure he loves his Mum." You didn't explain the circumstances under which he shot anyone. it wasn't some random shooting..he acted within the law of his country, as decided by a jury of his peers. What do they know though eh?... | |||
"4 door more whore
if anyone is wondering this was his Reddit handle it was read out in open court
Given its a pretty tame online handle, how does that reflect on his character?"Indeed, teenaged boys tend to be a bit coarse, it's no different to if he'd called himself 'Master Ass Blaster' (though that would have been hilarious) | |||
"4 door more whore
if anyone is wondering this was his Reddit handle it was read out in open court
Given it’s a pretty tame online handle, how does that reflect on his character?"Form what I have seen his character isn’t that bad And I have seen stuff sort off away from the media But then again don’t know him personally Just seen him on a couple off gun tuber channels that I watch after it all happened | |||
"4 door more whore
if anyone is wondering this was his Reddit handle it was read out in open court
Given its a pretty tame online handle, how does that reflect on his character?
Indeed, teenaged boys tend to be a bit coarse, it's no different to if he'd called himself 'Master Ass Blaster' (though that would have been hilarious)"The eye roll is because I supriced someone hasn’t made a fab account name that I mean I had pussy slyer look at me last week | |||
"4 door more whore
if anyone is wondering this was his Reddit handle it was read out in open court
Given it’s a pretty tame online handle, how does that reflect on his character?
Form what I have seen his character isn’t that bad
And I have seen stuff sort off away from the media
But then again don’t know him personally
Just seen him on a couple off gun tuber channels that I watch after it all happened "Ah, I assumed you were suggesting his online handle might have been a negative reflection of his character. That's me getting the wrong end of the stick! | |||
| |||
| |||
"The guy that shot three people, killing two. That guy? I didn't know he was 'trending', but I don't like the company he seems to keep/is happy to be associated with/what he seems to stand for. But I'm sure he loves his Mum. You didn't explain the circumstances under which he shot anyone. it wasn't some random shooting..he acted within the law of his country, as decided by a jury of his peers. What do they know though eh?... " I have no problem with the jury, and didn't say he was a criminal. But the fact that he shot 3 people, two of whom died, is undisputed. | |||
" And not huge fans !!! and always the way they live in a total fanatasy land fed by whatever they are viewing on the internet and then ?? ......we had a version of him down here in Plymland .....small man with a big gun ... "Omg are you comparing a incel to someone that defended his life against a mob The said incel was a complete nut case And just to clear it up even more shouldn’t have been in possession of a firearm It was police failings that lead to him receiving back his shotgun license, his mother had begged for it to be revoked and was Then the police gave it back And before this becomes anti guns and goes off topic remember theirs a knife crime epidemic, cars being used to run people over Since the Plymouth shootings new legislation has been bought in to spot social media rants/dangerous extremists behaviour And rightfully so Mr | |||
 | |||
"Not a fan. In the slightest. " Me neither | |||
" And not huge fans !!! and always the way they live in a total fanatasy land fed by whatever they are viewing on the internet and then ?? ......we had a version of him down here in Plymland .....small man with a big gun ...
Omg are you comparing a incel to someone that defended his life against a mob
The said incel was a complete nut case
And just to clear it up even more shouldn’t have been in possession of a firearm
It was police failings that lead to him receiving back his shotgun license, his mother had begged for it to be revoked and was
Then the police gave it back
And before this becomes anti guns and goes off topic remember theirs a knife crime epidemic, cars being used to run people over
Since the Plymouth shootings new legislation has been bought in to spot social media rants/dangerous extremists behaviour
And rightfully so
Mr " after Michael Ryan,"we will have an inquiry to learn the lessons so it won't happen again",after Thomas Hamilton "we will have an inquiry...."same reason,Raoul Moat same,Plymouth shooter.Police failure to do the basics. | |||
| |||
| |||
"Never heard of him and not on Twitter either - am thinking I have made the right life choices there." I don’t do Twitter and all that stuff. I just remember it when it happened. Was a while ago | |||
| |||
"The lad never asked for it but he bad to react or be killed by the peaceful mob, he was also boycotted at ASU even though he had been acquitted." why was a "peaceful" mob on a "Peaceful" demo carrying handguns and threatening people.
Good lad Kyle. | |||
"The lad never asked for it but he bad to react or be killed by the peaceful mob, he was also boycotted at ASU even though he had been acquitted. why was a "peaceful" mob on a "Peaceful" demo carrying handguns and threatening people.
Good lad Kyle."I mean....the first guy he shot was unarmed and threw a plastic bag containing socks and underwear at him, so definitely a level playing field against an AR15.....
| |||
| |||
"I'm not an expert, but I reckon you could easily avoid a "rampaging mob" by staying home and not going out with your gun, especially if into a situation you thought/believed was volatile. Prevention better than cure and all that, but I guess it's an easy mistake to make." The police effectively stood down Is that fair ? I thought they have a duty to serve and protect in us The good people/business owners were left to the hands of a baying mob who were burning down buildings and destroying property Let that sink in a bit | |||
"I have no problems with the guy. He acted in self defence and is innocent as seen in a legal court of law. If someone was attacking my kid and he defended himself I would have zero reason to be angry at him. " I'd be furious if my 17yr old was running amok with a gun like a silly little twat, and murdered unarmed people | |||
"I'm not an expert, but I reckon you could easily avoid a "rampaging mob" by staying home and not going out with your gun, especially if into a situation you thought/believed was volatile. Prevention better than cure and all that, but I guess it's an easy mistake to make. The police effectively stood down Is that fair ? I thought they have a duty to serve and protect in us The good people/business owners were left to the hands of a baying mob who were burning down buildings and destroying property Let that sink in a bit " It's sunk in. I can't speak for the US police. I don't advocate any destruction of property. But I also don't advocate people deciding to take on the role of vigilante. Insurance will pay for the damage. The deaths are forever. | |||
"I'm not an expert, but I reckon you could easily avoid a "rampaging mob" by staying home and not going out with your gun, especially if into a situation you thought/believed was volatile. Prevention better than cure and all that, but I guess it's an easy mistake to make. The police effectively stood down Is that fair ? I thought they have a duty to serve and protect in us The good people/business owners were left to the hands of a baying mob who were burning down buildings and destroying property Let that sink in a bit " Odd. Because the police were there at the time, didn't realise he was the shooter and told him to leave the area......so he went home. To another state completely from the one he'd travelled to with his gun.  | |||
"The lad never asked for it but he bad to react or be killed by the peaceful mob, he was also boycotted at ASU even though he had been acquitted. why was a "peaceful" mob on a "Peaceful" demo carrying handguns and threatening people.
Good lad Kyle.
I mean....the first guy he shot was unarmed and threw a plastic bag containing socks and underwear at him, so definitely a level playing field against an AR15.....
"Who’s underwear? Remember he was a convicted sexual predator (of a child ) You failed to mention the other two attackers ! Ohh yeh and also kyle was acquitted of murder and decided in favour of self defence (remember different country different laws ) in one of the most high profile cases in USA for many years, they wanted his head on a plate Facts are facts  | |||
"I'm not an expert, but I reckon you could easily avoid a "rampaging mob" by staying home and not going out with your gun, especially if into a situation you thought/believed was volatile. Prevention better than cure and all that, but I guess it's an easy mistake to make. The police effectively stood down Is that fair ? I thought they have a duty to serve and protect in us The good people/business owners were left to the hands of a baying mob who were burning down buildings and destroying property Let that sink in a bit Odd. Because the police were there at the time, didn't realise he was the shooter and told him to leave the area......so he went home. To another state completely from the one he'd travelled to with his gun. "Correct but this is why prosecution was first bought and the reason he was potentially in deep trouble, I think it turned out his friend lent him the gun | |||
" ... The eye roll is because I supriced someone hasn’t made a fab account name that I mean I had pussy slyer look at me last week " Pussy slayer sounds like someone off Tom's catapult thread! | |||
"The lad never asked for it but he bad to react or be killed by the peaceful mob, he was also boycotted at ASU even though he had been acquitted. why was a "peaceful" mob on a "Peaceful" demo carrying handguns and threatening people.
Good lad Kyle.
I mean....the first guy he shot was unarmed and threw a plastic bag containing socks and underwear at him, so definitely a level playing field against an AR15.....
"And the second it was a skateboard | |||
"He's currently trending on Twitter. I'm curious as to what this forum's opinion is on this individual and how he came to be in the public eye, assuming you've heard of him?" Never heard of him | |||
"The guy that shot three people, killing two. That guy? I didn't know he was 'trending', but I don't like the company he seems to keep/is happy to be associated with/what he seems to stand for. But I'm sure he loves his Mum. You didn't explain the circumstances under which he shot anyone. it wasn't some random shooting..he acted within the law of his country, as decided by a jury of his peers. What do they know though eh?... I have no problem with the jury, and didn't say he was a criminal. But the fact that he shot 3 people, two of whom died, is undisputed." It is. But you didn't limit your comment to just that so as a whole, there was a little snark in there making it sound like you thought he'd done something wrong when he in fact hadn't. Just not liking him is fair game though. | |||
"The guy that shot three people, killing two. That guy? I didn't know he was 'trending', but I don't like the company he seems to keep/is happy to be associated with/what he seems to stand for. But I'm sure he loves his Mum. You didn't explain the circumstances under which he shot anyone. it wasn't some random shooting..he acted within the law of his country, as decided by a jury of his peers. What do they know though eh?... I have no problem with the jury, and didn't say he was a criminal. But the fact that he shot 3 people, two of whom died, is undisputed. It is. But you didn't limit your comment to just that so as a whole, there was a little snark in there making it sound like you thought he'd done something wrong when he in fact hadn't. Just not liking him is fair game though. " You think it's disputed the people are dead? | |||
"I'm not an expert, but I reckon you could easily avoid a "rampaging mob" by staying home and not going out with your gun, especially if into a situation you thought/believed was volatile. Prevention better than cure and all that, but I guess it's an easy mistake to make. The police effectively stood down Is that fair ? I thought they have a duty to serve and protect in us The good people/business owners were left to the hands of a baying mob who were burning down buildings and destroying property Let that sink in a bit " I’m pretty sure business were told/ encouraged to close because of expected protests? | |||
"The guy that shot three people, killing two. That guy? I didn't know he was 'trending', but I don't like the company he seems to keep/is happy to be associated with/what he seems to stand for. But I'm sure he loves his Mum. You didn't explain the circumstances under which he shot anyone. it wasn't some random shooting..he acted within the law of his country, as decided by a jury of his peers. What do they know though eh?... I have no problem with the jury, and didn't say he was a criminal. But the fact that he shot 3 people, two of whom died, is undisputed. It is. But you didn't limit your comment to just that so as a whole, there was a little snark in there making it sound like you thought he'd done something wrong when he in fact hadn't. Just not liking him is fair game though. " Hadn't done anything wrong? Legally or morally. | |||
"The guy that shot three people, killing two. That guy? I didn't know he was 'trending', but I don't like the company he seems to keep/is happy to be associated with/what he seems to stand for. But I'm sure he loves his Mum. You didn't explain the circumstances under which he shot anyone. it wasn't some random shooting..he acted within the law of his country, as decided by a jury of his peers. What do they know though eh?... I have no problem with the jury, and didn't say he was a criminal. But the fact that he shot 3 people, two of whom died, is undisputed. It is. But you didn't limit your comment to just that so as a whole, there was a little snark in there making it sound like you thought he'd done something wrong when he in fact hadn't. Just not liking him is fair game though. Hadn't done anything wrong? Legally or morally. "Depends on your moral line. This evidently lies in between ours. | |||
"I have no problems with the guy. He acted in self defence and is innocent as seen in a legal court of law. If someone was attacking my kid and he defended himself I would have zero reason to be angry at him. I'd be furious if my 17yr old was running amok with a gun like a silly little twat, and murdered unarmed people " He killed a nonce, a domestic abuser and others who wanted to kill him. Not his fault if those idiots wanted to bring a skateboard to a gunfight. He was actively running away. It was self defence. | |||
"I have no problems with the guy. He acted in self defence and is innocent as seen in a legal court of law. If someone was attacking my kid and he defended himself I would have zero reason to be angry at him. I'd be furious if my 17yr old was running amok with a gun like a silly little twat, and murdered unarmed people He killed a nonce, a domestic abuser and others who wanted to kill him. Not his fault if those idiots wanted to bring a skateboard to a gunfight. He was actively running away. It was self defence." His fault he decided to go there though, and his choice to take along a gun. We all make choices in life, his don't appear to have been very good. | |||
"I have no problems with the guy. He acted in self defence and is innocent as seen in a legal court of law. If someone was attacking my kid and he defended himself I would have zero reason to be angry at him. I'd be furious if my 17yr old was running amok with a gun like a silly little twat, and murdered unarmed people He killed a nonce, a domestic abuser and others who wanted to kill him. Not his fault if those idiots wanted to bring a skateboard to a gunfight. He was actively running away. It was self defence." So he knew exactly who those people were and their backgrounds at the moment he shot them?
Why isn't he in the police? He'd be great at solving crimes.
The first man threw a plastic bag at him. The second attacked him with a skateboard only after he'd shot the first. The only one who had a gun pointed it at him after he'd already shot two people.
Self defence in the UK only applies in cases where reasonable force is used. If you attacked someone here with a golf club because they'd thrown a crisp packet at you it would be viewed as excessive.
This is why 17 year olds with guns shouldn't be walking the streets in places where they don't live, have no family or business connections and quite frankly no need to be there in the first place. His presence did nothing to de-escalate the situation and his actions just caused more trouble.
Easily avoided by staying at home. | |||
"I have no problems with the guy. He acted in self defence and is innocent as seen in a legal court of law. If someone was attacking my kid and he defended himself I would have zero reason to be angry at him. I'd be furious if my 17yr old was running amok with a gun like a silly little twat, and murdered unarmed people He killed a nonce, a domestic abuser and others who wanted to kill him. Not his fault if those idiots wanted to bring a skateboard to a gunfight. He was actively running away. It was self defence. So he knew exactly who those people were and their backgrounds at the moment he shot them?
Why isn't he in the police? He'd be great at solving crimes.
The first man threw a plastic bag at him. The second attacked him with a skateboard only after he'd shot the first. The only one who had a gun pointed it at him after he'd already shot two people.
Self defence in the UK only applies in cases where reasonable force is used. If you attacked someone here with a golf club because they'd thrown a crisp packet at you it would be viewed as excessive.
This is why 17 year olds with guns shouldn't be walking the streets in places where they don't live, have no family or business connections and quite frankly no need to be there in the first place. His presence did nothing to de-escalate the situation and his actions just caused more trouble.
Easily avoided by staying at home. "Clearly not, but what other choice did he have? Die? Would you want an innocent 17 year old to die? I hate to break it to you but this story happened in the US, not the UK. They have different, and arguably better laws there. Why are you trying to view this through our laws? He was there to see his friend according to the internet. | |||
"I have no problems with the guy. He acted in self defence and is innocent as seen in a legal court of law. If someone was attacking my kid and he defended himself I would have zero reason to be angry at him. I'd be furious if my 17yr old was running amok with a gun like a silly little twat, and murdered unarmed people He killed a nonce, a domestic abuser and others who wanted to kill him. Not his fault if those idiots wanted to bring a skateboard to a gunfight. He was actively running away. It was self defence. So he knew exactly who those people were and their backgrounds at the moment he shot them?
Why isn't he in the police? He'd be great at solving crimes.
The first man threw a plastic bag at him. The second attacked him with a skateboard only after he'd shot the first. The only one who had a gun pointed it at him after he'd already shot two people.
Self defence in the UK only applies in cases where reasonable force is used. If you attacked someone here with a golf club because they'd thrown a crisp packet at you it would be viewed as excessive.
This is why 17 year olds with guns shouldn't be walking the streets in places where they don't live, have no family or business connections and quite frankly no need to be there in the first place. His presence did nothing to de-escalate the situation and his actions just caused more trouble.
Easily avoided by staying at home.
Clearly not, but what other choice did he have? Die? Would you want an innocent 17 year old to die?
I hate to break it to you but this story happened in the US, not the UK. They have different, and arguably better laws there. Why are you trying to view this through our laws?
He was there to see his friend according to the internet. "I'm well aware of the circumstances. And I'm well aware of the cultural and legal differences between the UK and the USA. I'd certainly not class them as in any way better. When I visit my friends I don't tend to take weapons of any kind either. He had a choice. The best one would have been to not be walking the streets with a gun during riots. The second best would have been to not shoot an unarmed man, which triggered everything that followed. His life wasn't in any danger until that point. | |||
"I have no problems with the guy. He acted in self defence and is innocent as seen in a legal court of law. If someone was attacking my kid and he defended himself I would have zero reason to be angry at him. I'd be furious if my 17yr old was running amok with a gun like a silly little twat, and murdered unarmed people He killed a nonce, a domestic abuser and others who wanted to kill him. Not his fault if those idiots wanted to bring a skateboard to a gunfight. He was actively running away. It was self defence. So he knew exactly who those people were and their backgrounds at the moment he shot them?
Why isn't he in the police? He'd be great at solving crimes.
The first man threw a plastic bag at him. The second attacked him with a skateboard only after he'd shot the first. The only one who had a gun pointed it at him after he'd already shot two people.
Self defence in the UK only applies in cases where reasonable force is used. If you attacked someone here with a golf club because they'd thrown a crisp packet at you it would be viewed as excessive.
This is why 17 year olds with guns shouldn't be walking the streets in places where they don't live, have no family or business connections and quite frankly no need to be there in the first place. His presence did nothing to de-escalate the situation and his actions just caused more trouble.
Easily avoided by staying at home.
Clearly not, but what other choice did he have? Die? Would you want an innocent 17 year old to die?
I hate to break it to you but this story happened in the US, not the UK. They have different, and arguably better laws there. Why are you trying to view this through our laws?
He was there to see his friend according to the internet. "He had the choice to not go out? To not take a gun with him? To not mistake real life for grand theft auto? To not have to spend the rest of his own life dealing with the mental repercussions that he killed two human beings? | |||
| |||
"I have no problems with the guy. He acted in self defence and is innocent as seen in a legal court of law. If someone was attacking my kid and he defended himself I would have zero reason to be angry at him. I'd be furious if my 17yr old was running amok with a gun like a silly little twat, and murdered unarmed people He killed a nonce, a domestic abuser and others who wanted to kill him. Not his fault if those idiots wanted to bring a skateboard to a gunfight. He was actively running away. It was self defence. So he knew exactly who those people were and their backgrounds at the moment he shot them?
Why isn't he in the police? He'd be great at solving crimes.
The first man threw a plastic bag at him. The second attacked him with a skateboard only after he'd shot the first. The only one who had a gun pointed it at him after he'd already shot two people.
Self defence in the UK only applies in cases where reasonable force is used. If you attacked someone here with a golf club because they'd thrown a crisp packet at you it would be viewed as excessive.
This is why 17 year olds with guns shouldn't be walking the streets in places where they don't live, have no family or business connections and quite frankly no need to be there in the first place. His presence did nothing to de-escalate the situation and his actions just caused more trouble.
Easily avoided by staying at home.
Clearly not, but what other choice did he have? Die? Would you want an innocent 17 year old to die?
I hate to break it to you but this story happened in the US, not the UK. They have different, and arguably better laws there. Why are you trying to view this through our laws?
He was there to see his friend according to the internet.
I'm well aware of the circumstances.
And I'm well aware of the cultural and legal differences between the UK and the USA. I'd certainly not class them as in any way better.
When I visit my friends I don't tend to take weapons of any kind either.
He had a choice. The best one would have been to not be walking the streets with a gun during riots. The second best would have been to not shoot an unarmed man, which triggered everything that followed. His life wasn't in any danger until that point.
"Just to widen this s little 1992 the LA riots broke out, total chaos ensued police lost control of certain areas just as happen with our present subject Now some of you may or may not know but LA hosts a fair amount of Koreans who own business and we’re highly successful, these became targets for the mob to ransack,loot and burn to the ground Until the said Koreans took up arms and went to the rooftops to defend their business,mostly ex military with firearms training and obviously in possession of firearms Funny how these men were viewed different Same situation, same violent mob Spot the difference | |||
"I have no problems with the guy. He acted in self defence and is innocent as seen in a legal court of law. If someone was attacking my kid and he defended himself I would have zero reason to be angry at him. I'd be furious if my 17yr old was running amok with a gun like a silly little twat, and murdered unarmed people He killed a nonce, a domestic abuser and others who wanted to kill him. Not his fault if those idiots wanted to bring a skateboard to a gunfight. He was actively running away. It was self defence. So he knew exactly who those people were and their backgrounds at the moment he shot them?
Why isn't he in the police? He'd be great at solving crimes.
The first man threw a plastic bag at him. The second attacked him with a skateboard only after he'd shot the first. The only one who had a gun pointed it at him after he'd already shot two people.
Self defence in the UK only applies in cases where reasonable force is used. If you attacked someone here with a golf club because they'd thrown a crisp packet at you it would be viewed as excessive.
This is why 17 year olds with guns shouldn't be walking the streets in places where they don't live, have no family or business connections and quite frankly no need to be there in the first place. His presence did nothing to de-escalate the situation and his actions just caused more trouble.
Easily avoided by staying at home.
Clearly not, but what other choice did he have? Die? Would you want an innocent 17 year old to die?
I hate to break it to you but this story happened in the US, not the UK. They have different, and arguably better laws there. Why are you trying to view this through our laws?
He was there to see his friend according to the internet.
I'm well aware of the circumstances.
And I'm well aware of the cultural and legal differences between the UK and the USA. I'd certainly not class them as in any way better.
When I visit my friends I don't tend to take weapons of any kind either.
He had a choice. The best one would have been to not be walking the streets with a gun during riots. The second best would have been to not shoot an unarmed man, which triggered everything that followed. His life wasn't in any danger until that point.
Just to widen this s little
1992 the LA riots broke out, total chaos ensued police lost control of certain areas just as happen with our present subject
Now some of you may or may not know but LA hosts a fair amount of Koreans who own business and we’re highly successful, these became targets for the mob to ransack,loot and burn to the ground
Until the said Koreans took up arms and went to the rooftops to defend their business,mostly ex military with firearms training and obviously in possession of firearms
Funny how these men were viewed different
Same situation, same violent mob
Spot the difference "Ok. I can spot one major difference. They were men protecting their own businesses in their own neighbourhoods. Unlike the then 17 year old in question. | |||
"I have no problems with the guy. He acted in self defence and is innocent as seen in a legal court of law. If someone was attacking my kid and he defended himself I would have zero reason to be angry at him. I'd be furious if my 17yr old was running amok with a gun like a silly little twat, and murdered unarmed people He killed a nonce, a domestic abuser and others who wanted to kill him. Not his fault if those idiots wanted to bring a skateboard to a gunfight. He was actively running away. It was self defence. So he knew exactly who those people were and their backgrounds at the moment he shot them?
Why isn't he in the police? He'd be great at solving crimes.
The first man threw a plastic bag at him. The second attacked him with a skateboard only after he'd shot the first. The only one who had a gun pointed it at him after he'd already shot two people.
Self defence in the UK only applies in cases where reasonable force is used. If you attacked someone here with a golf club because they'd thrown a crisp packet at you it would be viewed as excessive.
This is why 17 year olds with guns shouldn't be walking the streets in places where they don't live, have no family or business connections and quite frankly no need to be there in the first place. His presence did nothing to de-escalate the situation and his actions just caused more trouble.
Easily avoided by staying at home.
Clearly not, but what other choice did he have? Die? Would you want an innocent 17 year old to die?
I hate to break it to you but this story happened in the US, not the UK. They have different, and arguably better laws there. Why are you trying to view this through our laws?
He was there to see his friend according to the internet.
I'm well aware of the circumstances.
And I'm well aware of the cultural and legal differences between the UK and the USA. I'd certainly not class them as in any way better.
When I visit my friends I don't tend to take weapons of any kind either.
He had a choice. The best one would have been to not be walking the streets with a gun during riots. The second best would have been to not shoot an unarmed man, which triggered everything that followed. His life wasn't in any danger until that point.
Just to widen this s little
1992 the LA riots broke out, total chaos ensued police lost control of certain areas just as happen with our present subject
Now some of you may or may not know but LA hosts a fair amount of Koreans who own business and we’re highly successful, these became targets for the mob to ransack,loot and burn to the ground
Until the said Koreans took up arms and went to the rooftops to defend their business,mostly ex military with firearms training and obviously in possession of firearms
Funny how these men were viewed different
Same situation, same violent mob
Spot the difference
Ok. I can spot one major difference.
They were men protecting their own businesses in their own neighbourhoods.
Unlike the then 17 year old in question. "Who was protecting his life from a mob. | |||
"I have no problems with the guy. He acted in self defence and is innocent as seen in a legal court of law. If someone was attacking my kid and he defended himself I would have zero reason to be angry at him. I'd be furious if my 17yr old was running amok with a gun like a silly little twat, and murdered unarmed people He killed a nonce, a domestic abuser and others who wanted to kill him. Not his fault if those idiots wanted to bring a skateboard to a gunfight. He was actively running away. It was self defence. So he knew exactly who those people were and their backgrounds at the moment he shot them?
Why isn't he in the police? He'd be great at solving crimes.
The first man threw a plastic bag at him. The second attacked him with a skateboard only after he'd shot the first. The only one who had a gun pointed it at him after he'd already shot two people.
Self defence in the UK only applies in cases where reasonable force is used. If you attacked someone here with a golf club because they'd thrown a crisp packet at you it would be viewed as excessive.
This is why 17 year olds with guns shouldn't be walking the streets in places where they don't live, have no family or business connections and quite frankly no need to be there in the first place. His presence did nothing to de-escalate the situation and his actions just caused more trouble.
Easily avoided by staying at home.
Clearly not, but what other choice did he have? Die? Would you want an innocent 17 year old to die?
I hate to break it to you but this story happened in the US, not the UK. They have different, and arguably better laws there. Why are you trying to view this through our laws?
He was there to see his friend according to the internet.
I'm well aware of the circumstances.
And I'm well aware of the cultural and legal differences between the UK and the USA. I'd certainly not class them as in any way better.
When I visit my friends I don't tend to take weapons of any kind either.
He had a choice. The best one would have been to not be walking the streets with a gun during riots. The second best would have been to not shoot an unarmed man, which triggered everything that followed. His life wasn't in any danger until that point.
Just to widen this s little
1992 the LA riots broke out, total chaos ensued police lost control of certain areas just as happen with our present subject
Now some of you may or may not know but LA hosts a fair amount of Koreans who own business and we’re highly successful, these became targets for the mob to ransack,loot and burn to the ground
Until the said Koreans took up arms and went to the rooftops to defend their business,mostly ex military with firearms training and obviously in possession of firearms
Funny how these men were viewed different
Same situation, same violent mob
Spot the difference
Ok. I can spot one major difference.
They were men protecting their own businesses in their own neighbourhoods.
Unlike the then 17 year old in question.
Who was protecting his life from a mob."His life wouldn't have needed any protection if he'd not travelled from another state with a gun to walk the streets during a riot that had nothing to do with him. And even then, his life wasn't in any danger til he'd shot someone. Having a plastic bag thrown at tou isn't life threatening. | |||
"I have no problems with the guy. He acted in self defence and is innocent as seen in a legal court of law. If someone was attacking my kid and he defended himself I would have zero reason to be angry at him. I'd be furious if my 17yr old was running amok with a gun like a silly little twat, and murdered unarmed people He killed a nonce, a domestic abuser and others who wanted to kill him. Not his fault if those idiots wanted to bring a skateboard to a gunfight. He was actively running away. It was self defence. So he knew exactly who those people were and their backgrounds at the moment he shot them?
Why isn't he in the police? He'd be great at solving crimes.
The first man threw a plastic bag at him. The second attacked him with a skateboard only after he'd shot the first. The only one who had a gun pointed it at him after he'd already shot two people.
Self defence in the UK only applies in cases where reasonable force is used. If you attacked someone here with a golf club because they'd thrown a crisp packet at you it would be viewed as excessive.
This is why 17 year olds with guns shouldn't be walking the streets in places where they don't live, have no family or business connections and quite frankly no need to be there in the first place. His presence did nothing to de-escalate the situation and his actions just caused more trouble.
Easily avoided by staying at home.
Clearly not, but what other choice did he have? Die? Would you want an innocent 17 year old to die?
I hate to break it to you but this story happened in the US, not the UK. They have different, and arguably better laws there. Why are you trying to view this through our laws?
He was there to see his friend according to the internet.
I'm well aware of the circumstances.
And I'm well aware of the cultural and legal differences between the UK and the USA. I'd certainly not class them as in any way better.
When I visit my friends I don't tend to take weapons of any kind either.
He had a choice. The best one would have been to not be walking the streets with a gun during riots. The second best would have been to not shoot an unarmed man, which triggered everything that followed. His life wasn't in any danger until that point.
Just to widen this s little
1992 the LA riots broke out, total chaos ensued police lost control of certain areas just as happen with our present subject
Now some of you may or may not know but LA hosts a fair amount of Koreans who own business and we’re highly successful, these became targets for the mob to ransack,loot and burn to the ground
Until the said Koreans took up arms and went to the rooftops to defend their business,mostly ex military with firearms training and obviously in possession of firearms
Funny how these men were viewed different
Same situation, same violent mob
Spot the difference
Ok. I can spot one major difference.
They were men protecting their own businesses in their own neighbourhoods.
Unlike the then 17 year old in question. "Radio Korea (in America) was used to call on fellow Koreans to take up arms and protect their fellow Korean citizen business after the rooftop Koreans engaged the mobs in gun battles and repealed their attacks Well trained ex military men fighting gangbangers and rampaging mobs I’d know who my moneys on So again how’s this differ apart from Kyle being inexperienced and becoming separated He showed the same heart to protect and like it or not the use of firearms to defend themselves and property stopping the mob dead | |||
"I have no problems with the guy. He acted in self defence and is innocent as seen in a legal court of law. If someone was attacking my kid and he defended himself I would have zero reason to be angry at him. I'd be furious if my 17yr old was running amok with a gun like a silly little twat, and murdered unarmed people He killed a nonce, a domestic abuser and others who wanted to kill him. Not his fault if those idiots wanted to bring a skateboard to a gunfight. He was actively running away. It was self defence. So he knew exactly who those people were and their backgrounds at the moment he shot them?
Why isn't he in the police? He'd be great at solving crimes.
The first man threw a plastic bag at him. The second attacked him with a skateboard only after he'd shot the first. The only one who had a gun pointed it at him after he'd already shot two people.
Self defence in the UK only applies in cases where reasonable force is used. If you attacked someone here with a golf club because they'd thrown a crisp packet at you it would be viewed as excessive.
This is why 17 year olds with guns shouldn't be walking the streets in places where they don't live, have no family or business connections and quite frankly no need to be there in the first place. His presence did nothing to de-escalate the situation and his actions just caused more trouble.
Easily avoided by staying at home.
Clearly not, but what other choice did he have? Die? Would you want an innocent 17 year old to die?
I hate to break it to you but this story happened in the US, not the UK. They have different, and arguably better laws there. Why are you trying to view this through our laws?
He was there to see his friend according to the internet.
I'm well aware of the circumstances.
And I'm well aware of the cultural and legal differences between the UK and the USA. I'd certainly not class them as in any way better.
When I visit my friends I don't tend to take weapons of any kind either.
He had a choice. The best one would have been to not be walking the streets with a gun during riots. The second best would have been to not shoot an unarmed man, which triggered everything that followed. His life wasn't in any danger until that point.
Just to widen this s little
1992 the LA riots broke out, total chaos ensued police lost control of certain areas just as happen with our present subject
Now some of you may or may not know but LA hosts a fair amount of Koreans who own business and we’re highly successful, these became targets for the mob to ransack,loot and burn to the ground
Until the said Koreans took up arms and went to the rooftops to defend their business,mostly ex military with firearms training and obviously in possession of firearms
Funny how these men were viewed different
Same situation, same violent mob
Spot the difference
Ok. I can spot one major difference.
They were men protecting their own businesses in their own neighbourhoods.
Unlike the then 17 year old in question.
Radio Korea (in America) was used to call on fellow Koreans to take up arms and protect their fellow Korean citizen business after the rooftop Koreans engaged the mobs in gun battles and repealed their attacks
Well trained ex military men fighting gangbangers and rampaging mobs I’d know who my moneys on
So again how’s this differ apart from Kyle being inexperienced and becoming separated
He showed the same heart to protect and like it or not the use of firearms to defend themselves and property stopping the mob dead "OK. My last input on this. The rooftop Koreans were local residents and business owners. This wasn't some national call to arms requesting help from outside the state, where anyone with a gun could rock up claiming to want to help. It was organised by the business owners to specifically protect property. And guess how many people were killed by them. None. The car dealership that Rittenhouse claims to have travelled to protect already had local gangs on site, despite the dealership denying in court that they asked then to be there. Again there was zero need for him to be anywhere near, given he didn't have connections to the business or live in the state. During the course of the entire riots there were 2 deaths and one other person shot. All by the same out of state visitor. | |||
"I have no problems with the guy. He acted in self defence and is innocent as seen in a legal court of law. If someone was attacking my kid and he defended himself I would have zero reason to be angry at him. I'd be furious if my 17yr old was running amok with a gun like a silly little twat, and murdered unarmed people He killed a nonce, a domestic abuser and others who wanted to kill him. Not his fault if those idiots wanted to bring a skateboard to a gunfight. He was actively running away. It was self defence. So he knew exactly who those people were and their backgrounds at the moment he shot them?
Why isn't he in the police? He'd be great at solving crimes.
The first man threw a plastic bag at him. The second attacked him with a skateboard only after he'd shot the first. The only one who had a gun pointed it at him after he'd already shot two people.
Self defence in the UK only applies in cases where reasonable force is used. If you attacked someone here with a golf club because they'd thrown a crisp packet at you it would be viewed as excessive.
This is why 17 year olds with guns shouldn't be walking the streets in places where they don't live, have no family or business connections and quite frankly no need to be there in the first place. His presence did nothing to de-escalate the situation and his actions just caused more trouble.
Easily avoided by staying at home.
Clearly not, but what other choice did he have? Die? Would you want an innocent 17 year old to die?
I hate to break it to you but this story happened in the US, not the UK. They have different, and arguably better laws there. Why are you trying to view this through our laws?
He was there to see his friend according to the internet.
I'm well aware of the circumstances.
And I'm well aware of the cultural and legal differences between the UK and the USA. I'd certainly not class them as in any way better.
When I visit my friends I don't tend to take weapons of any kind either.
He had a choice. The best one would have been to not be walking the streets with a gun during riots. The second best would have been to not shoot an unarmed man, which triggered everything that followed. His life wasn't in any danger until that point.
Just to widen this s little
1992 the LA riots broke out, total chaos ensued police lost control of certain areas just as happen with our present subject
Now some of you may or may not know but LA hosts a fair amount of Koreans who own business and we’re highly successful, these became targets for the mob to ransack,loot and burn to the ground
Until the said Koreans took up arms and went to the rooftops to defend their business,mostly ex military with firearms training and obviously in possession of firearms
Funny how these men were viewed different
Same situation, same violent mob
Spot the difference
Ok. I can spot one major difference.
They were men protecting their own businesses in their own neighbourhoods.
Unlike the then 17 year old in question.
Radio Korea (in America) was used to call on fellow Koreans to take up arms and protect their fellow Korean citizen business after the rooftop Koreans engaged the mobs in gun battles and repealed their attacks
Well trained ex military men fighting gangbangers and rampaging mobs I’d know who my moneys on
So again how’s this differ apart from Kyle being inexperienced and becoming separated
He showed the same heart to protect and like it or not the use of firearms to defend themselves and property stopping the mob dead
OK. My last input on this.
The rooftop Koreans were local residents and business owners. This wasn't some national call to arms requesting help from outside the state, where anyone with a gun could rock up claiming to want to help. It was organised by the business owners to specifically protect property.
And guess how many people were killed by them.
None.
The car dealership that Rittenhouse claims to have travelled to protect already had local gangs on site, despite the dealership denying in court that they asked then to be there.
Again there was zero need for him to be anywhere near, given he didn't have connections to the business or live in the state.
During the course of the entire riots there were 2 deaths and one other person shot.
All by the same out of state visitor. "The use of a radio station suggests otherwise! It was just by chance no one was killed as the Koreans actively engaged the mob and gun battles ensued | |||
"I have no problems with the guy. He acted in self defence and is innocent as seen in a legal court of law. If someone was attacking my kid and he defended himself I would have zero reason to be angry at him. I'd be furious if my 17yr old was running amok with a gun like a silly little twat, and murdered unarmed people He killed a nonce, a domestic abuser and others who wanted to kill him. Not his fault if those idiots wanted to bring a skateboard to a gunfight. He was actively running away. It was self defence. So he knew exactly who those people were and their backgrounds at the moment he shot them?
Why isn't he in the police? He'd be great at solving crimes.
The first man threw a plastic bag at him. The second attacked him with a skateboard only after he'd shot the first. The only one who had a gun pointed it at him after he'd already shot two people.
Self defence in the UK only applies in cases where reasonable force is used. If you attacked someone here with a golf club because they'd thrown a crisp packet at you it would be viewed as excessive.
This is why 17 year olds with guns shouldn't be walking the streets in places where they don't live, have no family or business connections and quite frankly no need to be there in the first place. His presence did nothing to de-escalate the situation and his actions just caused more trouble.
Easily avoided by staying at home.
Clearly not, but what other choice did he have? Die? Would you want an innocent 17 year old to die?
I hate to break it to you but this story happened in the US, not the UK. They have different, and arguably better laws there. Why are you trying to view this through our laws?
He was there to see his friend according to the internet.
I'm well aware of the circumstances.
And I'm well aware of the cultural and legal differences between the UK and the USA. I'd certainly not class them as in any way better.
When I visit my friends I don't tend to take weapons of any kind either.
He had a choice. The best one would have been to not be walking the streets with a gun during riots. The second best would have been to not shoot an unarmed man, which triggered everything that followed. His life wasn't in any danger until that point.
Just to widen this s little
1992 the LA riots broke out, total chaos ensued police lost control of certain areas just as happen with our present subject
Now some of you may or may not know but LA hosts a fair amount of Koreans who own business and we’re highly successful, these became targets for the mob to ransack,loot and burn to the ground
Until the said Koreans took up arms and went to the rooftops to defend their business,mostly ex military with firearms training and obviously in possession of firearms
Funny how these men were viewed different
Same situation, same violent mob
Spot the difference
Ok. I can spot one major difference.
They were men protecting their own businesses in their own neighbourhoods.
Unlike the then 17 year old in question.
Radio Korea (in America) was used to call on fellow Koreans to take up arms and protect their fellow Korean citizen business after the rooftop Koreans engaged the mobs in gun battles and repealed their attacks
Well trained ex military men fighting gangbangers and rampaging mobs I’d know who my moneys on
So again how’s this differ apart from Kyle being inexperienced and becoming separated
He showed the same heart to protect and like it or not the use of firearms to defend themselves and property stopping the mob dead
OK. My last input on this.
The rooftop Koreans were local residents and business owners. This wasn't some national call to arms requesting help from outside the state, where anyone with a gun could rock up claiming to want to help. It was organised by the business owners to specifically protect property.
And guess how many people were killed by them.
None.
The car dealership that Rittenhouse claims to have travelled to protect already had local gangs on site, despite the dealership denying in court that they asked then to be there.
Again there was zero need for him to be anywhere near, given he didn't have connections to the business or live in the state.
During the course of the entire riots there were 2 deaths and one other person shot.
All by the same out of state visitor.
The use of a radio station suggests otherwise!
It was just by chance no one was killed as the Koreans actively engaged the mob and gun battles ensued
"Amazing how some folk see the rioting mob as victims.  | |||
" Amazing how some folk see the rioting mob as victims. "They might have instigated they situation but they received punishment by death which is disproportionate. By the same logic he instigated his own “attacked by a mob” by turning up with a gun, so deserves anything that may happen to him. Wouldnt that invalidate the self defence line of thinking? (Talking morally here not legally, if the mobs punishment had been through a legal system it wouldnt have been death either) | |||
" Amazing how some folk see the rioting mob as victims.
They might have instigated they situation but they received punishment by death which is disproportionate.
By the same logic he instigated his own “attacked by a mob” by turning up with a gun, so deserves anything that may happen to him.
Wouldnt that invalidate the self defence line of thinking? (Talking morally here not legally, if the mobs punishment had been through a legal system it wouldnt have been death either) " bang on | |||
" Amazing how some folk see the rioting mob as victims.
They might have instigated they situation but they received punishment by death which is disproportionate.
By the same logic he instigated his own “attacked by a mob” by turning up with a gun, so deserves anything that may happen to him.
Wouldnt that invalidate the self defence line of thinking? (Talking morally here not legally, if the mobs punishment had been through a legal system it wouldnt have been death either) "Did any of the peaceful mob get their collar felt by the legal system. | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
"Didn't know so looked at wiki On August 25, 2020, when he was 17, Rittenhouse shot three men during the civil unrest in Kenosha, Wisconsin that followed the shooting of Jacob Blake by a police officer. Rittenhouse was armed with an AR-15 style rifle and had joined a group of armed citizens in Kenosha who had said they were there to protect local businesses.[7][8] Photographic evidence reveals that prior to unrest unfolding, Rittenhouse and others had participated in cleaning graffiti from a high school close to the Kenosha County Courthouse.[9][10] After a man chased him into a parking lot and grabbed the barrel of his rifle, Rittenhouse fatally shot him.[11][12][13] Rittenhouse fled and was pursued by a crowd. He then fatally shot a second man after the man struck Rittenhouse with a skateboard and tried to grab his rifle.[7][14][15] A third person approached Rittenhouse with his Glock pointed at him, but Rittenhouse shot and wounded the individual first.[14][16][17][18][19] As ex forces, I would give him a slow hand clap ... " | |||
"Didn't know so looked at wiki On August 25, 2020, when he was 17, Rittenhouse shot three men during the civil unrest in Kenosha, Wisconsin that followed the shooting of Jacob Blake by a police officer. Rittenhouse was armed with an AR-15 style rifle and had joined a group of armed citizens in Kenosha who had said they were there to protect local businesses.[7][8] Photographic evidence reveals that prior to unrest unfolding, Rittenhouse and others had participated in cleaning graffiti from a high school close to the Kenosha County Courthouse.[9][10] After a man chased him into a parking lot and grabbed the barrel of his rifle, Rittenhouse fatally shot him.[11][12][13] Rittenhouse fled and was pursued by a crowd. He then fatally shot a second man after the man struck Rittenhouse with a skateboard and tried to grab his rifle.[7][14][15] A third person approached Rittenhouse with his Glock pointed at him, but Rittenhouse shot and wounded the individual first.[14][16][17][18][19] As ex forces, I would give him a slow hand clap ... " ———————————————- Great story…. Shame a lot of it isn’t quite true So let’s point out like others did that he drove 2 hrs across state lines to “protect” a friends city, and he only got off the gun charges because his defence claimed somehow that the gun he had was for “hunting purposes “ and for that reason instead of age of ownership was 16 instead of 18 (a law no one apparently knew was still on the state books as it dated back to the 1800’s) .. and that loophole has been closed since | |||
"Didn't know so looked at wiki On August 25, 2020, when he was 17, Rittenhouse shot three men during the civil unrest in Kenosha, Wisconsin that followed the shooting of Jacob Blake by a police officer. Rittenhouse was armed with an AR-15 style rifle and had joined a group of armed citizens in Kenosha who had said they were there to protect local businesses.[7][8] Photographic evidence reveals that prior to unrest unfolding, Rittenhouse and others had participated in cleaning graffiti from a high school close to the Kenosha County Courthouse.[9][10] After a man chased him into a parking lot and grabbed the barrel of his rifle, Rittenhouse fatally shot him.[11][12][13] Rittenhouse fled and was pursued by a crowd. He then fatally shot a second man after the man struck Rittenhouse with a skateboard and tried to grab his rifle.[7][14][15] A third person approached Rittenhouse with his Glock pointed at him, but Rittenhouse shot and wounded the individual first.[14][16][17][18][19] As ex forces, I would give him a slow hand clap ... ———————————————- Great story…. Shame a lot of it isn’t quite true So let’s point out like others did that he drove 2 hrs across state lines to “protect” a friends city, and he only got off the gun charges because his defence claimed somehow that the gun he had was for “hunting purposes “ and for that reason instead of age of ownership was 16 instead of 18 (a law no one apparently knew was still on the state books as it dated back to the 1800’s) .. and that loophole has been closed since " Fabio doesn't like Kyle Rittenhouse...I'll file this one under my surprises of 24' | |||
"Didn't know so looked at wiki On August 25, 2020, when he was 17, Rittenhouse shot three men during the civil unrest in Kenosha, Wisconsin that followed the shooting of Jacob Blake by a police officer. Rittenhouse was armed with an AR-15 style rifle and had joined a group of armed citizens in Kenosha who had said they were there to protect local businesses.[7][8] Photographic evidence reveals that prior to unrest unfolding, Rittenhouse and others had participated in cleaning graffiti from a high school close to the Kenosha County Courthouse.[9][10] After a man chased him into a parking lot and grabbed the barrel of his rifle, Rittenhouse fatally shot him.[11][12][13] Rittenhouse fled and was pursued by a crowd. He then fatally shot a second man after the man struck Rittenhouse with a skateboard and tried to grab his rifle.[7][14][15] A third person approached Rittenhouse with his Glock pointed at him, but Rittenhouse shot and wounded the individual first.[14][16][17][18][19] As ex forces, I would give him a slow hand clap ... ———————————————- Great story…. Shame a lot of it isn’t quite true So let’s point out like others did that he drove 2 hrs across state lines to “protect” a friends city, and he only got off the gun charges because his defence claimed somehow that the gun he had was for “hunting purposes “ and for that reason instead of age of ownership was 16 instead of 18 (a law no one apparently knew was still on the state books as it dated back to the 1800’s) .. and that loophole has been closed since Fabio doesn't like Kyle Rittenhouse...I'll file this one under my surprises of 24' "Maybe because Mr rittenhouse is a republican. | |||
| |||
"Didn't know so looked at wiki On August 25, 2020, when he was 17, Rittenhouse shot three men during the civil unrest in Kenosha, Wisconsin that followed the shooting of Jacob Blake by a police officer. Rittenhouse was armed with an AR-15 style rifle and had joined a group of armed citizens in Kenosha who had said they were there to protect local businesses.[7][8] Photographic evidence reveals that prior to unrest unfolding, Rittenhouse and others had participated in cleaning graffiti from a high school close to the Kenosha County Courthouse.[9][10] After a man chased him into a parking lot and grabbed the barrel of his rifle, Rittenhouse fatally shot him.[11][12][13] Rittenhouse fled and was pursued by a crowd. He then fatally shot a second man after the man struck Rittenhouse with a skateboard and tried to grab his rifle.[7][14][15] A third person approached Rittenhouse with his Glock pointed at him, but Rittenhouse shot and wounded the individual first.[14][16][17][18][19] As ex forces, I would give him a slow hand clap ... ———————————————- Great story…. Shame a lot of it isn’t quite true So let’s point out like others did that he drove 2 hrs across state lines to “protect” a friends city, and he only got off the gun charges because his defence claimed somehow that the gun he had was for “hunting purposes “ and for that reason instead of age of ownership was 16 instead of 18 (a law no one apparently knew was still on the state books as it dated back to the 1800’s) .. and that loophole has been closed since Fabio doesn't like Kyle Rittenhouse...I'll file this one under my surprises of 24'
Maybe because Mr rittenhouse is a republican. "Actually no… there are many republicans that whilst I may disagree with them on their fundamental opinions, I do actually respect them…. | |||
"Didn't know so looked at wiki On August 25, 2020, when he was 17, Rittenhouse shot three men during the civil unrest in Kenosha, Wisconsin that followed the shooting of Jacob Blake by a police officer. Rittenhouse was armed with an AR-15 style rifle and had joined a group of armed citizens in Kenosha who had said they were there to protect local businesses.[7][8] Photographic evidence reveals that prior to unrest unfolding, Rittenhouse and others had participated in cleaning graffiti from a high school close to the Kenosha County Courthouse.[9][10] After a man chased him into a parking lot and grabbed the barrel of his rifle, Rittenhouse fatally shot him.[11][12][13] Rittenhouse fled and was pursued by a crowd. He then fatally shot a second man after the man struck Rittenhouse with a skateboard and tried to grab his rifle.[7][14][15] A third person approached Rittenhouse with his Glock pointed at him, but Rittenhouse shot and wounded the individual first.[14][16][17][18][19] As ex forces, I would give him a slow hand clap ... ———————————————- Great story…. Shame a lot of it isn’t quite true So let’s point out like others did that he drove 2 hrs across state lines to “protect” a friends city, and he only got off the gun charges because his defence claimed somehow that the gun he had was for “hunting purposes “ and for that reason instead of age of ownership was 16 instead of 18 (a law no one apparently knew was still on the state books as it dated back to the 1800’s) .. and that loophole has been closed since Fabio doesn't like Kyle Rittenhouse...I'll file this one under my surprises of 24'
Maybe because Mr rittenhouse is a republican. "Or maybe because he went to a protest with an assault rifle so he could shoot some people. Shrug emoji. | |||
"Didn't know so looked at wiki On August 25, 2020, when he was 17, Rittenhouse shot three men during the civil unrest in Kenosha, Wisconsin that followed the shooting of Jacob Blake by a police officer. Rittenhouse was armed with an AR-15 style rifle and had joined a group of armed citizens in Kenosha who had said they were there to protect local businesses.[7][8] Photographic evidence reveals that prior to unrest unfolding, Rittenhouse and others had participated in cleaning graffiti from a high school close to the Kenosha County Courthouse.[9][10] After a man chased him into a parking lot and grabbed the barrel of his rifle, Rittenhouse fatally shot him.[11][12][13] Rittenhouse fled and was pursued by a crowd. He then fatally shot a second man after the man struck Rittenhouse with a skateboard and tried to grab his rifle.[7][14][15] A third person approached Rittenhouse with his Glock pointed at him, but Rittenhouse shot and wounded the individual first.[14][16][17][18][19] As ex forces, I would give him a slow hand clap ... ———————————————- Great story…. Shame a lot of it isn’t quite true So let’s point out like others did that he drove 2 hrs across state lines to “protect” a friends city, and he only got off the gun charges because his defence claimed somehow that the gun he had was for “hunting purposes “ and for that reason instead of age of ownership was 16 instead of 18 (a law no one apparently knew was still on the state books as it dated back to the 1800’s) .. and that loophole has been closed since Fabio doesn't like Kyle Rittenhouse...I'll file this one under my surprises of 24'
Maybe because Mr rittenhouse is a republican.
Or maybe because he went to a protest with an assault rifle so he could shoot some people. Shrug emoji."Well it wasn't a wasted journey was it.  | |||
"Didn't know so looked at wiki On August 25, 2020, when he was 17, Rittenhouse shot three men during the civil unrest in Kenosha, Wisconsin that followed the shooting of Jacob Blake by a police officer. Rittenhouse was armed with an AR-15 style rifle and had joined a group of armed citizens in Kenosha who had said they were there to protect local businesses.[7][8] Photographic evidence reveals that prior to unrest unfolding, Rittenhouse and others had participated in cleaning graffiti from a high school close to the Kenosha County Courthouse.[9][10] After a man chased him into a parking lot and grabbed the barrel of his rifle, Rittenhouse fatally shot him.[11][12][13] Rittenhouse fled and was pursued by a crowd. He then fatally shot a second man after the man struck Rittenhouse with a skateboard and tried to grab his rifle.[7][14][15] A third person approached Rittenhouse with his Glock pointed at him, but Rittenhouse shot and wounded the individual first.[14][16][17][18][19] As ex forces, I would give him a slow hand clap ... ———————————————- Great story…. Shame a lot of it isn’t quite true So let’s point out like others did that he drove 2 hrs across state lines to “protect” a friends city, and he only got off the gun charges because his defence claimed somehow that the gun he had was for “hunting purposes “ and for that reason instead of age of ownership was 16 instead of 18 (a law no one apparently knew was still on the state books as it dated back to the 1800’s) .. and that loophole has been closed since Fabio doesn't like Kyle Rittenhouse...I'll file this one under my surprises of 24'
Maybe because Mr rittenhouse is a republican.
Or maybe because he went to a protest with an assault rifle so he could shoot some people. Shrug emoji.
Well it wasn't a wasted journey was it. "Because he killed some people? | |||
"Didn't know so looked at wiki On August 25, 2020, when he was 17, Rittenhouse shot three men during the civil unrest in Kenosha, Wisconsin that followed the shooting of Jacob Blake by a police officer. Rittenhouse was armed with an AR-15 style rifle and had joined a group of armed citizens in Kenosha who had said they were there to protect local businesses.[7][8] Photographic evidence reveals that prior to unrest unfolding, Rittenhouse and others had participated in cleaning graffiti from a high school close to the Kenosha County Courthouse.[9][10] After a man chased him into a parking lot and grabbed the barrel of his rifle, Rittenhouse fatally shot him.[11][12][13] Rittenhouse fled and was pursued by a crowd. He then fatally shot a second man after the man struck Rittenhouse with a skateboard and tried to grab his rifle.[7][14][15] A third person approached Rittenhouse with his Glock pointed at him, but Rittenhouse shot and wounded the individual first.[14][16][17][18][19] As ex forces, I would give him a slow hand clap ... ———————————————- Great story…. Shame a lot of it isn’t quite true So let’s point out like others did that he drove 2 hrs across state lines to “protect” a friends city, and he only got off the gun charges because his defence claimed somehow that the gun he had was for “hunting purposes “ and for that reason instead of age of ownership was 16 instead of 18 (a law no one apparently knew was still on the state books as it dated back to the 1800’s) .. and that loophole has been closed since Fabio doesn't like Kyle Rittenhouse...I'll file this one under my surprises of 24'
Maybe because Mr rittenhouse is a republican.
Or maybe because he went to a protest with an assault rifle so he could shoot some people. Shrug emoji.
Well it wasn't a wasted journey was it.
Because he killed some people?"Defending himself from a group who wanted to do him harm, you have not got to wait for the attack if you are being threatened with violence, you can defend yourself before they strike. Pre emptive strike it is called, even you have that right unless you wish to give tbat right up, move to a none common law jurisdictions you have that choice. | |||
"Didn't know so looked at wiki On August 25, 2020, when he was 17, Rittenhouse shot three men during the civil unrest in Kenosha, Wisconsin that followed the shooting of Jacob Blake by a police officer. Rittenhouse was armed with an AR-15 style rifle and had joined a group of armed citizens in Kenosha who had said they were there to protect local businesses.[7][8] Photographic evidence reveals that prior to unrest unfolding, Rittenhouse and others had participated in cleaning graffiti from a high school close to the Kenosha County Courthouse.[9][10] After a man chased him into a parking lot and grabbed the barrel of his rifle, Rittenhouse fatally shot him.[11][12][13] Rittenhouse fled and was pursued by a crowd. He then fatally shot a second man after the man struck Rittenhouse with a skateboard and tried to grab his rifle.[7][14][15] A third person approached Rittenhouse with his Glock pointed at him, but Rittenhouse shot and wounded the individual first.[14][16][17][18][19] As ex forces, I would give him a slow hand clap ... ———————————————- Great story…. Shame a lot of it isn’t quite true So let’s point out like others did that he drove 2 hrs across state lines to “protect” a friends city, and he only got off the gun charges because his defence claimed somehow that the gun he had was for “hunting purposes “ and for that reason instead of age of ownership was 16 instead of 18 (a law no one apparently knew was still on the state books as it dated back to the 1800’s) .. and that loophole has been closed since Fabio doesn't like Kyle Rittenhouse...I'll file this one under my surprises of 24'
Maybe because Mr rittenhouse is a republican.
Or maybe because he went to a protest with an assault rifle so he could shoot some people. Shrug emoji.
Well it wasn't a wasted journey was it.
Because he killed some people?
Defending himself from a group who wanted to do him harm, you have not got to wait for the attack if you are being threatened with violence, you can defend yourself before they strike.
Pre emptive strike it is called, even you have that right unless you wish to give tbat right up, move to a none common law jurisdictions you have that choice."He actively put himself in the situation. It's like someone getting in a car with a d*unk driver, and then being surprised that they crash it | |||
"Didn't know so looked at wiki On August 25, 2020, when he was 17, Rittenhouse shot three men during the civil unrest in Kenosha, Wisconsin that followed the shooting of Jacob Blake by a police officer. Rittenhouse was armed with an AR-15 style rifle and had joined a group of armed citizens in Kenosha who had said they were there to protect local businesses.[7][8] Photographic evidence reveals that prior to unrest unfolding, Rittenhouse and others had participated in cleaning graffiti from a high school close to the Kenosha County Courthouse.[9][10] After a man chased him into a parking lot and grabbed the barrel of his rifle, Rittenhouse fatally shot him.[11][12][13] Rittenhouse fled and was pursued by a crowd. He then fatally shot a second man after the man struck Rittenhouse with a skateboard and tried to grab his rifle.[7][14][15] A third person approached Rittenhouse with his Glock pointed at him, but Rittenhouse shot and wounded the individual first.[14][16][17][18][19] As ex forces, I would give him a slow hand clap ... ———————————————- Great story…. Shame a lot of it isn’t quite true So let’s point out like others did that he drove 2 hrs across state lines to “protect” a friends city, and he only got off the gun charges because his defence claimed somehow that the gun he had was for “hunting purposes “ and for that reason instead of age of ownership was 16 instead of 18 (a law no one apparently knew was still on the state books as it dated back to the 1800’s) .. and that loophole has been closed since Fabio doesn't like Kyle Rittenhouse...I'll file this one under my surprises of 24'
Maybe because Mr rittenhouse is a republican.
Or maybe because he went to a protest with an assault rifle so he could shoot some people. Shrug emoji.
Well it wasn't a wasted journey was it.
Because he killed some people?
Defending himself from a group who wanted to do him harm, you have not got to wait for the attack if you are being threatened with violence, you can defend yourself before they strike.
Pre emptive strike it is called, even you have that right unless you wish to give tbat right up, move to a none common law jurisdictions you have that choice.
He actively put himself in the situation. It's like someone getting in a car with a d*unk driver, and then being surprised that they crash it "Get over it, he was acquitted and he had the full weight of common law behind him. | |||
"Didn't know so looked at wiki On August 25, 2020, when he was 17, Rittenhouse shot three men during the civil unrest in Kenosha, Wisconsin that followed the shooting of Jacob Blake by a police officer. Rittenhouse was armed with an AR-15 style rifle and had joined a group of armed citizens in Kenosha who had said they were there to protect local businesses.[7][8] Photographic evidence reveals that prior to unrest unfolding, Rittenhouse and others had participated in cleaning graffiti from a high school close to the Kenosha County Courthouse.[9][10] After a man chased him into a parking lot and grabbed the barrel of his rifle, Rittenhouse fatally shot him.[11][12][13] Rittenhouse fled and was pursued by a crowd. He then fatally shot a second man after the man struck Rittenhouse with a skateboard and tried to grab his rifle.[7][14][15] A third person approached Rittenhouse with his Glock pointed at him, but Rittenhouse shot and wounded the individual first.[14][16][17][18][19] As ex forces, I would give him a slow hand clap ... ———————————————- Great story…. Shame a lot of it isn’t quite true So let’s point out like others did that he drove 2 hrs across state lines to “protect” a friends city, and he only got off the gun charges because his defence claimed somehow that the gun he had was for “hunting purposes “ and for that reason instead of age of ownership was 16 instead of 18 (a law no one apparently knew was still on the state books as it dated back to the 1800’s) .. and that loophole has been closed since Fabio doesn't like Kyle Rittenhouse...I'll file this one under my surprises of 24'
Maybe because Mr rittenhouse is a republican.
Or maybe because he went to a protest with an assault rifle so he could shoot some people. Shrug emoji.
Well it wasn't a wasted journey was it.
Because he killed some people?
Defending himself from a group who wanted to do him harm, you have not got to wait for the attack if you are being threatened with violence, you can defend yourself before they strike.
Pre emptive strike it is called, even you have that right unless you wish to give tbat right up, move to a none common law jurisdictions you have that choice.
He actively put himself in the situation. It's like someone getting in a car with a d*unk driver, and then being surprised that they crash it
Get over it, he was acquitted and he had the full weight of common law behind him. "Doesn't mean he isn't a thick cunt though | |||
"Didn't know so looked at wiki On August 25, 2020, when he was 17, Rittenhouse shot three men during the civil unrest in Kenosha, Wisconsin that followed the shooting of Jacob Blake by a police officer. Rittenhouse was armed with an AR-15 style rifle and had joined a group of armed citizens in Kenosha who had said they were there to protect local businesses.[7][8] Photographic evidence reveals that prior to unrest unfolding, Rittenhouse and others had participated in cleaning graffiti from a high school close to the Kenosha County Courthouse.[9][10] After a man chased him into a parking lot and grabbed the barrel of his rifle, Rittenhouse fatally shot him.[11][12][13] Rittenhouse fled and was pursued by a crowd. He then fatally shot a second man after the man struck Rittenhouse with a skateboard and tried to grab his rifle.[7][14][15] A third person approached Rittenhouse with his Glock pointed at him, but Rittenhouse shot and wounded the individual first.[14][16][17][18][19] As ex forces, I would give him a slow hand clap ... ———————————————- Great story…. Shame a lot of it isn’t quite true So let’s point out like others did that he drove 2 hrs across state lines to “protect” a friends city, and he only got off the gun charges because his defence claimed somehow that the gun he had was for “hunting purposes “ and for that reason instead of age of ownership was 16 instead of 18 (a law no one apparently knew was still on the state books as it dated back to the 1800’s) .. and that loophole has been closed since Fabio doesn't like Kyle Rittenhouse...I'll file this one under my surprises of 24'
Maybe because Mr rittenhouse is a republican.
Or maybe because he went to a protest with an assault rifle so he could shoot some people. Shrug emoji.
Well it wasn't a wasted journey was it.
Because he killed some people?
Defending himself from a group who wanted to do him harm, you have not got to wait for the attack if you are being threatened with violence, you can defend yourself before they strike.
Pre emptive strike it is called, even you have that right unless you wish to give tbat right up, move to a none common law jurisdictions you have that choice.
He actively put himself in the situation. It's like someone getting in a car with a d*unk driver, and then being surprised that they crash it
Get over it, he was acquitted and he had the full weight of common law behind him.
Doesn't mean he isn't a thick cunt though "Why would you say that? | |||
"Didn't know so looked at wiki On August 25, 2020, when he was 17, Rittenhouse shot three men during the civil unrest in Kenosha, Wisconsin that followed the shooting of Jacob Blake by a police officer. Rittenhouse was armed with an AR-15 style rifle and had joined a group of armed citizens in Kenosha who had said they were there to protect local businesses.[7][8] Photographic evidence reveals that prior to unrest unfolding, Rittenhouse and others had participated in cleaning graffiti from a high school close to the Kenosha County Courthouse.[9][10] After a man chased him into a parking lot and grabbed the barrel of his rifle, Rittenhouse fatally shot him.[11][12][13] Rittenhouse fled and was pursued by a crowd. He then fatally shot a second man after the man struck Rittenhouse with a skateboard and tried to grab his rifle.[7][14][15] A third person approached Rittenhouse with his Glock pointed at him, but Rittenhouse shot and wounded the individual first.[14][16][17][18][19] As ex forces, I would give him a slow hand clap ... ———————————————- Great story…. Shame a lot of it isn’t quite true So let’s point out like others did that he drove 2 hrs across state lines to “protect” a friends city, and he only got off the gun charges because his defence claimed somehow that the gun he had was for “hunting purposes “ and for that reason instead of age of ownership was 16 instead of 18 (a law no one apparently knew was still on the state books as it dated back to the 1800’s) .. and that loophole has been closed since Fabio doesn't like Kyle Rittenhouse...I'll file this one under my surprises of 24'
Maybe because Mr rittenhouse is a republican.
Or maybe because he went to a protest with an assault rifle so he could shoot some people. Shrug emoji.
Well it wasn't a wasted journey was it.
Because he killed some people?
Defending himself from a group who wanted to do him harm, you have not got to wait for the attack if you are being threatened with violence, you can defend yourself before they strike.
Pre emptive strike it is called, even you have that right unless you wish to give tbat right up, move to a none common law jurisdictions you have that choice.
He actively put himself in the situation. It's like someone getting in a car with a d*unk driver, and then being surprised that they crash it
Get over it, he was acquitted and he had the full weight of common law behind him.
Doesn't mean he isn't a thick cunt though
Why would you say that?"Genuinely?  | |||
"Didn't know so looked at wiki On August 25, 2020, when he was 17, Rittenhouse shot three men during the civil unrest in Kenosha, Wisconsin that followed the shooting of Jacob Blake by a police officer. Rittenhouse was armed with an AR-15 style rifle and had joined a group of armed citizens in Kenosha who had said they were there to protect local businesses.[7][8] Photographic evidence reveals that prior to unrest unfolding, Rittenhouse and others had participated in cleaning graffiti from a high school close to the Kenosha County Courthouse.[9][10] After a man chased him into a parking lot and grabbed the barrel of his rifle, Rittenhouse fatally shot him.[11][12][13] Rittenhouse fled and was pursued by a crowd. He then fatally shot a second man after the man struck Rittenhouse with a skateboard and tried to grab his rifle.[7][14][15] A third person approached Rittenhouse with his Glock pointed at him, but Rittenhouse shot and wounded the individual first.[14][16][17][18][19] As ex forces, I would give him a slow hand clap ... ———————————————- Great story…. Shame a lot of it isn’t quite true So let’s point out like others did that he drove 2 hrs across state lines to “protect” a friends city, and he only got off the gun charges because his defence claimed somehow that the gun he had was for “hunting purposes “ and for that reason instead of age of ownership was 16 instead of 18 (a law no one apparently knew was still on the state books as it dated back to the 1800’s) .. and that loophole has been closed since Fabio doesn't like Kyle Rittenhouse...I'll file this one under my surprises of 24'
Maybe because Mr rittenhouse is a republican.
Or maybe because he went to a protest with an assault rifle so he could shoot some people. Shrug emoji.
Well it wasn't a wasted journey was it.
Because he killed some people?
Defending himself from a group who wanted to do him harm, you have not got to wait for the attack if you are being threatened with violence, you can defend yourself before they strike.
Pre emptive strike it is called, even you have that right unless you wish to give tbat right up, move to a none common law jurisdictions you have that choice.
He actively put himself in the situation. It's like someone getting in a car with a d*unk driver, and then being surprised that they crash it
Get over it, he was acquitted and he had the full weight of common law behind him.
Doesn't mean he isn't a thick cunt though "Oh dear. | |||
"Didn't know so looked at wiki On August 25, 2020, when he was 17, Rittenhouse shot three men during the civil unrest in Kenosha, Wisconsin that followed the shooting of Jacob Blake by a police officer. Rittenhouse was armed with an AR-15 style rifle and had joined a group of armed citizens in Kenosha who had said they were there to protect local businesses.[7][8] Photographic evidence reveals that prior to unrest unfolding, Rittenhouse and others had participated in cleaning graffiti from a high school close to the Kenosha County Courthouse.[9][10] After a man chased him into a parking lot and grabbed the barrel of his rifle, Rittenhouse fatally shot him.[11][12][13] Rittenhouse fled and was pursued by a crowd. He then fatally shot a second man after the man struck Rittenhouse with a skateboard and tried to grab his rifle.[7][14][15] A third person approached Rittenhouse with his Glock pointed at him, but Rittenhouse shot and wounded the individual first.[14][16][17][18][19] As ex forces, I would give him a slow hand clap ... ———————————————- Great story…. Shame a lot of it isn’t quite true So let’s point out like others did that he drove 2 hrs across state lines to “protect” a friends city, and he only got off the gun charges because his defence claimed somehow that the gun he had was for “hunting purposes “ and for that reason instead of age of ownership was 16 instead of 18 (a law no one apparently knew was still on the state books as it dated back to the 1800’s) .. and that loophole has been closed since Fabio doesn't like Kyle Rittenhouse...I'll file this one under my surprises of 24'
Maybe because Mr rittenhouse is a republican.
Or maybe because he went to a protest with an assault rifle so he could shoot some people. Shrug emoji.
Well it wasn't a wasted journey was it.
Because he killed some people?
Defending himself from a group who wanted to do him harm, you have not got to wait for the attack if you are being threatened with violence, you can defend yourself before they strike.
Pre emptive strike it is called, even you have that right unless you wish to give tbat right up, move to a none common law jurisdictions you have that choice.
He actively put himself in the situation. It's like someone getting in a car with a d*unk driver, and then being surprised that they crash it
Get over it, he was acquitted and he had the full weight of common law behind him.
Doesn't mean he isn't a thick cunt though
Why would you say that?
Genuinely? "Absolutely genuine question | |||
"Didn't know so looked at wiki On August 25, 2020, when he was 17, Rittenhouse shot three men during the civil unrest in Kenosha, Wisconsin that followed the shooting of Jacob Blake by a police officer. Rittenhouse was armed with an AR-15 style rifle and had joined a group of armed citizens in Kenosha who had said they were there to protect local businesses.[7][8] Photographic evidence reveals that prior to unrest unfolding, Rittenhouse and others had participated in cleaning graffiti from a high school close to the Kenosha County Courthouse.[9][10] After a man chased him into a parking lot and grabbed the barrel of his rifle, Rittenhouse fatally shot him.[11][12][13] Rittenhouse fled and was pursued by a crowd. He then fatally shot a second man after the man struck Rittenhouse with a skateboard and tried to grab his rifle.[7][14][15] A third person approached Rittenhouse with his Glock pointed at him, but Rittenhouse shot and wounded the individual first.[14][16][17][18][19] As ex forces, I would give him a slow hand clap ... ———————————————- Great story…. Shame a lot of it isn’t quite true So let’s point out like others did that he drove 2 hrs across state lines to “protect” a friends city, and he only got off the gun charges because his defence claimed somehow that the gun he had was for “hunting purposes “ and for that reason instead of age of ownership was 16 instead of 18 (a law no one apparently knew was still on the state books as it dated back to the 1800’s) .. and that loophole has been closed since Fabio doesn't like Kyle Rittenhouse...I'll file this one under my surprises of 24'
Maybe because Mr rittenhouse is a republican.
Or maybe because he went to a protest with an assault rifle so he could shoot some people. Shrug emoji.
Well it wasn't a wasted journey was it.
Because he killed some people?
Defending himself from a group who wanted to do him harm, you have not got to wait for the attack if you are being threatened with violence, you can defend yourself before they strike.
Pre emptive strike it is called, even you have that right unless you wish to give tbat right up, move to a none common law jurisdictions you have that choice.
He actively put himself in the situation. It's like someone getting in a car with a d*unk driver, and then being surprised that they crash it
Get over it, he was acquitted and he had the full weight of common law behind him.
Doesn't mean he isn't a thick cunt though
Why would you say that?
Genuinely?
Absolutely genuine question"Because he shouldn't have been there in the first place. He put himself in that position, he wasn't there as part of law enforcement, nor the army. He's a dumb kid who thought it'd be 'cool', and clearly an opportunity to get out there waving a gun around. The fact that he was acquitted only sets a precident that the next dumb kid, who does something equally dumb. Will think they'll get away with it too, and maybe they will? And at what point is the line drawn. | |||
"Didn't know so looked at wiki On August 25, 2020, when he was 17, Rittenhouse shot three men during the civil unrest in Kenosha, Wisconsin that followed the shooting of Jacob Blake by a police officer. Rittenhouse was armed with an AR-15 style rifle and had joined a group of armed citizens in Kenosha who had said they were there to protect local businesses.[7][8] Photographic evidence reveals that prior to unrest unfolding, Rittenhouse and others had participated in cleaning graffiti from a high school close to the Kenosha County Courthouse.[9][10] After a man chased him into a parking lot and grabbed the barrel of his rifle, Rittenhouse fatally shot him.[11][12][13] Rittenhouse fled and was pursued by a crowd. He then fatally shot a second man after the man struck Rittenhouse with a skateboard and tried to grab his rifle.[7][14][15] A third person approached Rittenhouse with his Glock pointed at him, but Rittenhouse shot and wounded the individual first.[14][16][17][18][19] As ex forces, I would give him a slow hand clap ... ———————————————- Great story…. Shame a lot of it isn’t quite true So let’s point out like others did that he drove 2 hrs across state lines to “protect” a friends city, and he only got off the gun charges because his defence claimed somehow that the gun he had was for “hunting purposes “ and for that reason instead of age of ownership was 16 instead of 18 (a law no one apparently knew was still on the state books as it dated back to the 1800’s) .. and that loophole has been closed since Fabio doesn't like Kyle Rittenhouse...I'll file this one under my surprises of 24'
Maybe because Mr rittenhouse is a republican.
Or maybe because he went to a protest with an assault rifle so he could shoot some people. Shrug emoji.
Well it wasn't a wasted journey was it.
Because he killed some people?
Defending himself from a group who wanted to do him harm, you have not got to wait for the attack if you are being threatened with violence, you can defend yourself before they strike.
Pre emptive strike it is called, even you have that right unless you wish to give tbat right up, move to a none common law jurisdictions you have that choice.
He actively put himself in the situation. It's like someone getting in a car with a d*unk driver, and then being surprised that they crash it
Get over it, he was acquitted and he had the full weight of common law behind him.
Doesn't mean he isn't a thick cunt though
Why would you say that?
Genuinely?
Absolutely genuine question
Because he shouldn't have been there in the first place. He put himself in that position, he wasn't there as part of law enforcement, nor the army. He's a dumb kid who thought it'd be 'cool', and clearly an opportunity to get out there waving a gun around. The fact that he was acquitted only sets a precident that the next dumb kid, who does something equally dumb. Will think they'll get away with it too, and maybe they will? And at what point is the line drawn. "It is obvious you do not understand the law of the land. Would you remove common law.? | |||
"Didn't know so looked at wiki On August 25, 2020, when he was 17, Rittenhouse shot three men during the civil unrest in Kenosha, Wisconsin that followed the shooting of Jacob Blake by a police officer. Rittenhouse was armed with an AR-15 style rifle and had joined a group of armed citizens in Kenosha who had said they were there to protect local businesses.[7][8] Photographic evidence reveals that prior to unrest unfolding, Rittenhouse and others had participated in cleaning graffiti from a high school close to the Kenosha County Courthouse.[9][10] After a man chased him into a parking lot and grabbed the barrel of his rifle, Rittenhouse fatally shot him.[11][12][13] Rittenhouse fled and was pursued by a crowd. He then fatally shot a second man after the man struck Rittenhouse with a skateboard and tried to grab his rifle.[7][14][15] A third person approached Rittenhouse with his Glock pointed at him, but Rittenhouse shot and wounded the individual first.[14][16][17][18][19] As ex forces, I would give him a slow hand clap ... ———————————————- Great story…. Shame a lot of it isn’t quite true So let’s point out like others did that he drove 2 hrs across state lines to “protect” a friends city, and he only got off the gun charges because his defence claimed somehow that the gun he had was for “hunting purposes “ and for that reason instead of age of ownership was 16 instead of 18 (a law no one apparently knew was still on the state books as it dated back to the 1800’s) .. and that loophole has been closed since Fabio doesn't like Kyle Rittenhouse...I'll file this one under my surprises of 24'
Maybe because Mr rittenhouse is a republican.
Or maybe because he went to a protest with an assault rifle so he could shoot some people. Shrug emoji.
Well it wasn't a wasted journey was it.
Because he killed some people?
Defending himself from a group who wanted to do him harm, you have not got to wait for the attack if you are being threatened with violence, you can defend yourself before they strike.
Pre emptive strike it is called, even you have that right unless you wish to give tbat right up, move to a none common law jurisdictions you have that choice."He went there specifically to kill some people. Not sure what the rest of your waffle is about. Still, he killed some lefties. Well done. | |||
"Didn't know so looked at wiki On August 25, 2020, when he was 17, Rittenhouse shot three men during the civil unrest in Kenosha, Wisconsin that followed the shooting of Jacob Blake by a police officer. Rittenhouse was armed with an AR-15 style rifle and had joined a group of armed citizens in Kenosha who had said they were there to protect local businesses.[7][8] Photographic evidence reveals that prior to unrest unfolding, Rittenhouse and others had participated in cleaning graffiti from a high school close to the Kenosha County Courthouse.[9][10] After a man chased him into a parking lot and grabbed the barrel of his rifle, Rittenhouse fatally shot him.[11][12][13] Rittenhouse fled and was pursued by a crowd. He then fatally shot a second man after the man struck Rittenhouse with a skateboard and tried to grab his rifle.[7][14][15] A third person approached Rittenhouse with his Glock pointed at him, but Rittenhouse shot and wounded the individual first.[14][16][17][18][19] As ex forces, I would give him a slow hand clap ... ———————————————- Great story…. Shame a lot of it isn’t quite true So let’s point out like others did that he drove 2 hrs across state lines to “protect” a friends city, and he only got off the gun charges because his defence claimed somehow that the gun he had was for “hunting purposes “ and for that reason instead of age of ownership was 16 instead of 18 (a law no one apparently knew was still on the state books as it dated back to the 1800’s) .. and that loophole has been closed since Fabio doesn't like Kyle Rittenhouse...I'll file this one under my surprises of 24'
Maybe because Mr rittenhouse is a republican.
Or maybe because he went to a protest with an assault rifle so he could shoot some people. Shrug emoji.
Well it wasn't a wasted journey was it.
Because he killed some people?
Defending himself from a group who wanted to do him harm, you have not got to wait for the attack if you are being threatened with violence, you can defend yourself before they strike.
Pre emptive strike it is called, even you have that right unless you wish to give tbat right up, move to a none common law jurisdictions you have that choice.
He went there specifically to kill some people. Not sure what the rest of your waffle is about. Still, he killed some lefties. Well done."Well he knew some thick punt would try it and he got acquitted, clever man. | |||
| |||
"Didn't know so looked at wiki On August 25, 2020, when he was 17, Rittenhouse shot three men during the civil unrest in Kenosha, Wisconsin that followed the shooting of Jacob Blake by a police officer. Rittenhouse was armed with an AR-15 style rifle and had joined a group of armed citizens in Kenosha who had said they were there to protect local businesses.[7][8] Photographic evidence reveals that prior to unrest unfolding, Rittenhouse and others had participated in cleaning graffiti from a high school close to the Kenosha County Courthouse.[9][10] After a man chased him into a parking lot and grabbed the barrel of his rifle, Rittenhouse fatally shot him.[11][12][13] Rittenhouse fled and was pursued by a crowd. He then fatally shot a second man after the man struck Rittenhouse with a skateboard and tried to grab his rifle.[7][14][15] A third person approached Rittenhouse with his Glock pointed at him, but Rittenhouse shot and wounded the individual first.[14][16][17][18][19] As ex forces, I would give him a slow hand clap ... ———————————————- Great story…. Shame a lot of it isn’t quite true So let’s point out like others did that he drove 2 hrs across state lines to “protect” a friends city, and he only got off the gun charges because his defence claimed somehow that the gun he had was for “hunting purposes “ and for that reason instead of age of ownership was 16 instead of 18 (a law no one apparently knew was still on the state books as it dated back to the 1800’s) .. and that loophole has been closed since Fabio doesn't like Kyle Rittenhouse...I'll file this one under my surprises of 24'
Maybe because Mr rittenhouse is a republican.
Or maybe because he went to a protest with an assault rifle so he could shoot some people. Shrug emoji.
Well it wasn't a wasted journey was it.
Because he killed some people?
Defending himself from a group who wanted to do him harm, you have not got to wait for the attack if you are being threatened with violence, you can defend yourself before they strike.
Pre emptive strike it is called, even you have that right unless you wish to give tbat right up, move to a none common law jurisdictions you have that choice.
He actively put himself in the situation. It's like someone getting in a car with a d*unk driver, and then being surprised that they crash it
Get over it, he was acquitted and he had the full weight of common law behind him.
Doesn't mean he isn't a thick cunt though
Why would you say that?
Genuinely?
Absolutely genuine question
Because he shouldn't have been there in the first place. He put himself in that position, he wasn't there as part of law enforcement, nor the army. He's a dumb kid who thought it'd be 'cool', and clearly an opportunity to get out there waving a gun around. The fact that he was acquitted only sets a precident that the next dumb kid, who does something equally dumb. Will think they'll get away with it too, and maybe they will? And at what point is the line drawn. "None of the people should have been there. If you look at this from his view point, he was standing up against what he believed to be wrong, rioting and looting. At that time, the US was suffering from extremism, violence and civil unrest that threatened to spill over into wider state conflicts. He took a stand as did those that were there for opposing reasons. Those events were not the first of the kind and wont be the last, people will fall into 2 camps, stand up for what you believe in or do nothing and hope it goes away. I don't understand why this makes him wrong, they were all wrong. | |||
"Didn't know so looked at wiki On August 25, 2020, when he was 17, Rittenhouse shot three men during the civil unrest in Kenosha, Wisconsin that followed the shooting of Jacob Blake by a police officer. Rittenhouse was armed with an AR-15 style rifle and had joined a group of armed citizens in Kenosha who had said they were there to protect local businesses.[7][8] Photographic evidence reveals that prior to unrest unfolding, Rittenhouse and others had participated in cleaning graffiti from a high school close to the Kenosha County Courthouse.[9][10] After a man chased him into a parking lot and grabbed the barrel of his rifle, Rittenhouse fatally shot him.[11][12][13] Rittenhouse fled and was pursued by a crowd. He then fatally shot a second man after the man struck Rittenhouse with a skateboard and tried to grab his rifle.[7][14][15] A third person approached Rittenhouse with his Glock pointed at him, but Rittenhouse shot and wounded the individual first.[14][16][17][18][19] As ex forces, I would give him a slow hand clap ... ———————————————- Great story…. Shame a lot of it isn’t quite true So let’s point out like others did that he drove 2 hrs across state lines to “protect” a friends city, and he only got off the gun charges because his defence claimed somehow that the gun he had was for “hunting purposes “ and for that reason instead of age of ownership was 16 instead of 18 (a law no one apparently knew was still on the state books as it dated back to the 1800’s) .. and that loophole has been closed since Fabio doesn't like Kyle Rittenhouse...I'll file this one under my surprises of 24'
Maybe because Mr rittenhouse is a republican.
Or maybe because he went to a protest with an assault rifle so he could shoot some people. Shrug emoji.
Well it wasn't a wasted journey was it.
Because he killed some people?
Defending himself from a group who wanted to do him harm, you have not got to wait for the attack if you are being threatened with violence, you can defend yourself before they strike.
Pre emptive strike it is called, even you have that right unless you wish to give tbat right up, move to a none common law jurisdictions you have that choice.
He went there specifically to kill some people. Not sure what the rest of your waffle is about. Still, he killed some lefties. Well done.
Well he knew some thick punt would try it and he got acquitted, clever man."If you admire someone who gets away with killing people because of his privileged position. Then fair play to you. But you can't be surprised that some folks didn't think it's cool. | |||
"Didn't know so looked at wiki On August 25, 2020, when he was 17, Rittenhouse shot three men during the civil unrest in Kenosha, Wisconsin that followed the shooting of Jacob Blake by a police officer. Rittenhouse was armed with an AR-15 style rifle and had joined a group of armed citizens in Kenosha who had said they were there to protect local businesses.[7][8] Photographic evidence reveals that prior to unrest unfolding, Rittenhouse and others had participated in cleaning graffiti from a high school close to the Kenosha County Courthouse.[9][10] After a man chased him into a parking lot and grabbed the barrel of his rifle, Rittenhouse fatally shot him.[11][12][13] Rittenhouse fled and was pursued by a crowd. He then fatally shot a second man after the man struck Rittenhouse with a skateboard and tried to grab his rifle.[7][14][15] A third person approached Rittenhouse with his Glock pointed at him, but Rittenhouse shot and wounded the individual first.[14][16][17][18][19] As ex forces, I would give him a slow hand clap ... ———————————————- Great story…. Shame a lot of it isn’t quite true So let’s point out like others did that he drove 2 hrs across state lines to “protect” a friends city, and he only got off the gun charges because his defence claimed somehow that the gun he had was for “hunting purposes “ and for that reason instead of age of ownership was 16 instead of 18 (a law no one apparently knew was still on the state books as it dated back to the 1800’s) .. and that loophole has been closed since Fabio doesn't like Kyle Rittenhouse...I'll file this one under my surprises of 24'
Maybe because Mr rittenhouse is a republican.
Or maybe because he went to a protest with an assault rifle so he could shoot some people. Shrug emoji.
Well it wasn't a wasted journey was it.
Because he killed some people?
Defending himself from a group who wanted to do him harm, you have not got to wait for the attack if you are being threatened with violence, you can defend yourself before they strike.
Pre emptive strike it is called, even you have that right unless you wish to give tbat right up, move to a none common law jurisdictions you have that choice.
He actively put himself in the situation. It's like someone getting in a car with a d*unk driver, and then being surprised that they crash it
Get over it, he was acquitted and he had the full weight of common law behind him.
Doesn't mean he isn't a thick cunt though
Why would you say that?
Genuinely?
Absolutely genuine question
Because he shouldn't have been there in the first place. He put himself in that position, he wasn't there as part of law enforcement, nor the army. He's a dumb kid who thought it'd be 'cool', and clearly an opportunity to get out there waving a gun around. The fact that he was acquitted only sets a precident that the next dumb kid, who does something equally dumb. Will think they'll get away with it too, and maybe they will? And at what point is the line drawn.
None of the people should have been there.
If you look at this from his view point, he was standing up against what he believed to be wrong, rioting and looting. At that time, the US was suffering from extremism, violence and civil unrest that threatened to spill over into wider state conflicts.
He took a stand as did those that were there for opposing reasons. Those events were not the first of the kind and wont be the last, people will fall into 2 camps, stand up for what you believe in or do nothing and hope it goes away.
I don't understand why this makes him wrong, they were all wrong."Rioting and looting is wrong, but killing some people is cool? This part of fab never changes. Lol. | |||
"Didn't know so looked at wiki On August 25, 2020, when he was 17, Rittenhouse shot three men during the civil unrest in Kenosha, Wisconsin that followed the shooting of Jacob Blake by a police officer. Rittenhouse was armed with an AR-15 style rifle and had joined a group of armed citizens in Kenosha who had said they were there to protect local businesses.[7][8] Photographic evidence reveals that prior to unrest unfolding, Rittenhouse and others had participated in cleaning graffiti from a high school close to the Kenosha County Courthouse.[9][10] After a man chased him into a parking lot and grabbed the barrel of his rifle, Rittenhouse fatally shot him.[11][12][13] Rittenhouse fled and was pursued by a crowd. He then fatally shot a second man after the man struck Rittenhouse with a skateboard and tried to grab his rifle.[7][14][15] A third person approached Rittenhouse with his Glock pointed at him, but Rittenhouse shot and wounded the individual first.[14][16][17][18][19] As ex forces, I would give him a slow hand clap ... ———————————————- Great story…. Shame a lot of it isn’t quite true So let’s point out like others did that he drove 2 hrs across state lines to “protect” a friends city, and he only got off the gun charges because his defence claimed somehow that the gun he had was for “hunting purposes “ and for that reason instead of age of ownership was 16 instead of 18 (a law no one apparently knew was still on the state books as it dated back to the 1800’s) .. and that loophole has been closed since Fabio doesn't like Kyle Rittenhouse...I'll file this one under my surprises of 24'
Maybe because Mr rittenhouse is a republican.
Or maybe because he went to a protest with an assault rifle so he could shoot some people. Shrug emoji.
Well it wasn't a wasted journey was it.
Because he killed some people?
Defending himself from a group who wanted to do him harm, you have not got to wait for the attack if you are being threatened with violence, you can defend yourself before they strike.
Pre emptive strike it is called, even you have that right unless you wish to give tbat right up, move to a none common law jurisdictions you have that choice.
He actively put himself in the situation. It's like someone getting in a car with a d*unk driver, and then being surprised that they crash it
Get over it, he was acquitted and he had the full weight of common law behind him.
Doesn't mean he isn't a thick cunt though
Why would you say that?
Genuinely?
Absolutely genuine question
Because he shouldn't have been there in the first place. He put himself in that position, he wasn't there as part of law enforcement, nor the army. He's a dumb kid who thought it'd be 'cool', and clearly an opportunity to get out there waving a gun around. The fact that he was acquitted only sets a precident that the next dumb kid, who does something equally dumb. Will think they'll get away with it too, and maybe they will? And at what point is the line drawn.
None of the people should have been there.
If you look at this from his view point, he was standing up against what he believed to be wrong, rioting and looting. At that time, the US was suffering from extremism, violence and civil unrest that threatened to spill over into wider state conflicts.
He took a stand as did those that were there for opposing reasons. Those events were not the first of the kind and wont be the last, people will fall into 2 camps, stand up for what you believe in or do nothing and hope it goes away.
I don't understand why this makes him wrong, they were all wrong.
Rioting and looting is wrong, but killing some people is cool?
This part of fab never changes. Lol."25 People were killed by rioters / protestors in 2020, why is this 1 person wrong? | |||
"Didn't know so looked at wiki On August 25, 2020, when he was 17, Rittenhouse shot three men during the civil unrest in Kenosha, Wisconsin that followed the shooting of Jacob Blake by a police officer. Rittenhouse was armed with an AR-15 style rifle and had joined a group of armed citizens in Kenosha who had said they were there to protect local businesses.[7][8] Photographic evidence reveals that prior to unrest unfolding, Rittenhouse and others had participated in cleaning graffiti from a high school close to the Kenosha County Courthouse.[9][10] After a man chased him into a parking lot and grabbed the barrel of his rifle, Rittenhouse fatally shot him.[11][12][13] Rittenhouse fled and was pursued by a crowd. He then fatally shot a second man after the man struck Rittenhouse with a skateboard and tried to grab his rifle.[7][14][15] A third person approached Rittenhouse with his Glock pointed at him, but Rittenhouse shot and wounded the individual first.[14][16][17][18][19] As ex forces, I would give him a slow hand clap ... ———————————————- Great story…. Shame a lot of it isn’t quite true So let’s point out like others did that he drove 2 hrs across state lines to “protect” a friends city, and he only got off the gun charges because his defence claimed somehow that the gun he had was for “hunting purposes “ and for that reason instead of age of ownership was 16 instead of 18 (a law no one apparently knew was still on the state books as it dated back to the 1800’s) .. and that loophole has been closed since Fabio doesn't like Kyle Rittenhouse...I'll file this one under my surprises of 24'
Maybe because Mr rittenhouse is a republican.
Or maybe because he went to a protest with an assault rifle so he could shoot some people. Shrug emoji.
Well it wasn't a wasted journey was it.
Because he killed some people?
Defending himself from a group who wanted to do him harm, you have not got to wait for the attack if you are being threatened with violence, you can defend yourself before they strike.
Pre emptive strike it is called, even you have that right unless you wish to give tbat right up, move to a none common law jurisdictions you have that choice.
He actively put himself in the situation. It's like someone getting in a car with a d*unk driver, and then being surprised that they crash it
Get over it, he was acquitted and he had the full weight of common law behind him.
Doesn't mean he isn't a thick cunt though
Why would you say that?
Genuinely?
Absolutely genuine question
Because he shouldn't have been there in the first place. He put himself in that position, he wasn't there as part of law enforcement, nor the army. He's a dumb kid who thought it'd be 'cool', and clearly an opportunity to get out there waving a gun around. The fact that he was acquitted only sets a precident that the next dumb kid, who does something equally dumb. Will think they'll get away with it too, and maybe they will? And at what point is the line drawn.
None of the people should have been there.
If you look at this from his view point, he was standing up against what he believed to be wrong, rioting and looting. At that time, the US was suffering from extremism, violence and civil unrest that threatened to spill over into wider state conflicts.
He took a stand as did those that were there for opposing reasons. Those events were not the first of the kind and wont be the last, people will fall into 2 camps, stand up for what you believe in or do nothing and hope it goes away.
I don't understand why this makes him wrong, they were all wrong.
Rioting and looting is wrong, but killing some people is cool?
This part of fab never changes. Lol.
25 People were killed by rioters / protestors in 2020, why is this 1 person wrong?"Because he killed some people. This one was an easy question. | |||
"Didn't know so looked at wiki On August 25, 2020, when he was 17, Rittenhouse shot three men during the civil unrest in Kenosha, Wisconsin that followed the shooting of Jacob Blake by a police officer. Rittenhouse was armed with an AR-15 style rifle and had joined a group of armed citizens in Kenosha who had said they were there to protect local businesses.[7][8] Photographic evidence reveals that prior to unrest unfolding, Rittenhouse and others had participated in cleaning graffiti from a high school close to the Kenosha County Courthouse.[9][10] After a man chased him into a parking lot and grabbed the barrel of his rifle, Rittenhouse fatally shot him.[11][12][13] Rittenhouse fled and was pursued by a crowd. He then fatally shot a second man after the man struck Rittenhouse with a skateboard and tried to grab his rifle.[7][14][15] A third person approached Rittenhouse with his Glock pointed at him, but Rittenhouse shot and wounded the individual first.[14][16][17][18][19] As ex forces, I would give him a slow hand clap ... ———————————————- Great story…. Shame a lot of it isn’t quite true So let’s point out like others did that he drove 2 hrs across state lines to “protect” a friends city, and he only got off the gun charges because his defence claimed somehow that the gun he had was for “hunting purposes “ and for that reason instead of age of ownership was 16 instead of 18 (a law no one apparently knew was still on the state books as it dated back to the 1800’s) .. and that loophole has been closed since Fabio doesn't like Kyle Rittenhouse...I'll file this one under my surprises of 24'
Maybe because Mr rittenhouse is a republican.
Or maybe because he went to a protest with an assault rifle so he could shoot some people. Shrug emoji.
Well it wasn't a wasted journey was it.
Because he killed some people?
Defending himself from a group who wanted to do him harm, you have not got to wait for the attack if you are being threatened with violence, you can defend yourself before they strike.
Pre emptive strike it is called, even you have that right unless you wish to give tbat right up, move to a none common law jurisdictions you have that choice.
He went there specifically to kill some people. Not sure what the rest of your waffle is about. Still, he killed some lefties. Well done.
Well he knew some thick punt would try it and he got acquitted, clever man.
If you admire someone who gets away with killing people because of his privileged position. Then fair play to you.
But you can't be surprised that some folks didn't think it's cool. "Privileged position please explain. | |||
"Didn't know so looked at wiki On August 25, 2020, when he was 17, Rittenhouse shot three men during the civil unrest in Kenosha, Wisconsin that followed the shooting of Jacob Blake by a police officer. Rittenhouse was armed with an AR-15 style rifle and had joined a group of armed citizens in Kenosha who had said they were there to protect local businesses.[7][8] Photographic evidence reveals that prior to unrest unfolding, Rittenhouse and others had participated in cleaning graffiti from a high school close to the Kenosha County Courthouse.[9][10] After a man chased him into a parking lot and grabbed the barrel of his rifle, Rittenhouse fatally shot him.[11][12][13] Rittenhouse fled and was pursued by a crowd. He then fatally shot a second man after the man struck Rittenhouse with a skateboard and tried to grab his rifle.[7][14][15] A third person approached Rittenhouse with his Glock pointed at him, but Rittenhouse shot and wounded the individual first.[14][16][17][18][19] As ex forces, I would give him a slow hand clap ... ———————————————- Great story…. Shame a lot of it isn’t quite true So let’s point out like others did that he drove 2 hrs across state lines to “protect” a friends city, and he only got off the gun charges because his defence claimed somehow that the gun he had was for “hunting purposes “ and for that reason instead of age of ownership was 16 instead of 18 (a law no one apparently knew was still on the state books as it dated back to the 1800’s) .. and that loophole has been closed since Fabio doesn't like Kyle Rittenhouse...I'll file this one under my surprises of 24'
Maybe because Mr rittenhouse is a republican.
Or maybe because he went to a protest with an assault rifle so he could shoot some people. Shrug emoji.
Well it wasn't a wasted journey was it.
Because he killed some people?
Defending himself from a group who wanted to do him harm, you have not got to wait for the attack if you are being threatened with violence, you can defend yourself before they strike.
Pre emptive strike it is called, even you have that right unless you wish to give tbat right up, move to a none common law jurisdictions you have that choice.
He went there specifically to kill some people. Not sure what the rest of your waffle is about. Still, he killed some lefties. Well done.
Well he knew some thick punt would try it and he got acquitted, clever man.
If you admire someone who gets away with killing people because of his privileged position. Then fair play to you.
But you can't be surprised that some folks didn't think it's cool.
Privileged position please explain."Put it this way, what do you think would have happened if a poor person who wasn't white, carried an assault rifle over a border and went and killed some people? | |||
"Didn't know so looked at wiki On August 25, 2020, when he was 17, Rittenhouse shot three men during the civil unrest in Kenosha, Wisconsin that followed the shooting of Jacob Blake by a police officer. Rittenhouse was armed with an AR-15 style rifle and had joined a group of armed citizens in Kenosha who had said they were there to protect local businesses.[7][8] Photographic evidence reveals that prior to unrest unfolding, Rittenhouse and others had participated in cleaning graffiti from a high school close to the Kenosha County Courthouse.[9][10] After a man chased him into a parking lot and grabbed the barrel of his rifle, Rittenhouse fatally shot him.[11][12][13] Rittenhouse fled and was pursued by a crowd. He then fatally shot a second man after the man struck Rittenhouse with a skateboard and tried to grab his rifle.[7][14][15] A third person approached Rittenhouse with his Glock pointed at him, but Rittenhouse shot and wounded the individual first.[14][16][17][18][19] As ex forces, I would give him a slow hand clap ... ———————————————- Great story…. Shame a lot of it isn’t quite true So let’s point out like others did that he drove 2 hrs across state lines to “protect” a friends city, and he only got off the gun charges because his defence claimed somehow that the gun he had was for “hunting purposes “ and for that reason instead of age of ownership was 16 instead of 18 (a law no one apparently knew was still on the state books as it dated back to the 1800’s) .. and that loophole has been closed since Fabio doesn't like Kyle Rittenhouse...I'll file this one under my surprises of 24'
Maybe because Mr rittenhouse is a republican.
Or maybe because he went to a protest with an assault rifle so he could shoot some people. Shrug emoji.
Well it wasn't a wasted journey was it.
Because he killed some people?
Defending himself from a group who wanted to do him harm, you have not got to wait for the attack if you are being threatened with violence, you can defend yourself before they strike.
Pre emptive strike it is called, even you have that right unless you wish to give tbat right up, move to a none common law jurisdictions you have that choice.
He went there specifically to kill some people. Not sure what the rest of your waffle is about. Still, he killed some lefties. Well done.
Well he knew some thick punt would try it and he got acquitted, clever man.
If you admire someone who gets away with killing people because of his privileged position. Then fair play to you.
But you can't be surprised that some folks didn't think it's cool.
Privileged position please explain.
Put it this way, what do you think would have happened if a poor person who wasn't white, carried an assault rifle over a border and went and killed some people?"Lol, you do know you reflect how you think, a true democrat poor people are black without voter Id. | |||
"Didn't know so looked at wiki On August 25, 2020, when he was 17, Rittenhouse shot three men during the civil unrest in Kenosha, Wisconsin that followed the shooting of Jacob Blake by a police officer. Rittenhouse was armed with an AR-15 style rifle and had joined a group of armed citizens in Kenosha who had said they were there to protect local businesses.[7][8] Photographic evidence reveals that prior to unrest unfolding, Rittenhouse and others had participated in cleaning graffiti from a high school close to the Kenosha County Courthouse.[9][10] After a man chased him into a parking lot and grabbed the barrel of his rifle, Rittenhouse fatally shot him.[11][12][13] Rittenhouse fled and was pursued by a crowd. He then fatally shot a second man after the man struck Rittenhouse with a skateboard and tried to grab his rifle.[7][14][15] A third person approached Rittenhouse with his Glock pointed at him, but Rittenhouse shot and wounded the individual first.[14][16][17][18][19] As ex forces, I would give him a slow hand clap ... ———————————————- Great story…. Shame a lot of it isn’t quite true So let’s point out like others did that he drove 2 hrs across state lines to “protect” a friends city, and he only got off the gun charges because his defence claimed somehow that the gun he had was for “hunting purposes “ and for that reason instead of age of ownership was 16 instead of 18 (a law no one apparently knew was still on the state books as it dated back to the 1800’s) .. and that loophole has been closed since Fabio doesn't like Kyle Rittenhouse...I'll file this one under my surprises of 24'
Maybe because Mr rittenhouse is a republican.
Or maybe because he went to a protest with an assault rifle so he could shoot some people. Shrug emoji.
Well it wasn't a wasted journey was it.
Because he killed some people?
Defending himself from a group who wanted to do him harm, you have not got to wait for the attack if you are being threatened with violence, you can defend yourself before they strike.
Pre emptive strike it is called, even you have that right unless you wish to give tbat right up, move to a none common law jurisdictions you have that choice.
He went there specifically to kill some people. Not sure what the rest of your waffle is about. Still, he killed some lefties. Well done.
Well he knew some thick punt would try it and he got acquitted, clever man.
If you admire someone who gets away with killing people because of his privileged position. Then fair play to you.
But you can't be surprised that some folks didn't think it's cool.
Privileged position please explain.
Put it this way, what do you think would have happened if a poor person who wasn't white, carried an assault rifle over a border and went and killed some people?
Lol, you do know you reflect how you think, a true democrat poor people are black without voter Id. "I'll be honest, I have absolutely zero clue what this incorrect assumption you've made about me has got to do with anything. | |||
"Didn't know so looked at wiki On August 25, 2020, when he was 17, Rittenhouse shot three men during the civil unrest in Kenosha, Wisconsin that followed the shooting of Jacob Blake by a police officer. Rittenhouse was armed with an AR-15 style rifle and had joined a group of armed citizens in Kenosha who had said they were there to protect local businesses.[7][8] Photographic evidence reveals that prior to unrest unfolding, Rittenhouse and others had participated in cleaning graffiti from a high school close to the Kenosha County Courthouse.[9][10] After a man chased him into a parking lot and grabbed the barrel of his rifle, Rittenhouse fatally shot him.[11][12][13] Rittenhouse fled and was pursued by a crowd. He then fatally shot a second man after the man struck Rittenhouse with a skateboard and tried to grab his rifle.[7][14][15] A third person approached Rittenhouse with his Glock pointed at him, but Rittenhouse shot and wounded the individual first.[14][16][17][18][19] As ex forces, I would give him a slow hand clap ... ———————————————- Great story…. Shame a lot of it isn’t quite true So let’s point out like others did that he drove 2 hrs across state lines to “protect” a friends city, and he only got off the gun charges because his defence claimed somehow that the gun he had was for “hunting purposes “ and for that reason instead of age of ownership was 16 instead of 18 (a law no one apparently knew was still on the state books as it dated back to the 1800’s) .. and that loophole has been closed since Fabio doesn't like Kyle Rittenhouse...I'll file this one under my surprises of 24'
Maybe because Mr rittenhouse is a republican.
Or maybe because he went to a protest with an assault rifle so he could shoot some people. Shrug emoji.
Well it wasn't a wasted journey was it.
Because he killed some people?
Defending himself from a group who wanted to do him harm, you have not got to wait for the attack if you are being threatened with violence, you can defend yourself before they strike.
Pre emptive strike it is called, even you have that right unless you wish to give tbat right up, move to a none common law jurisdictions you have that choice.
He went there specifically to kill some people. Not sure what the rest of your waffle is about. Still, he killed some lefties. Well done.
Well he knew some thick punt would try it and he got acquitted, clever man.
If you admire someone who gets away with killing people because of his privileged position. Then fair play to you.
But you can't be surprised that some folks didn't think it's cool.
Privileged position please explain.
Put it this way, what do you think would have happened if a poor person who wasn't white, carried an assault rifle over a border and went and killed some people?
Lol, you do know you reflect how you think, a true democrat poor people are black without voter Id.
I'll be honest, I have absolutely zero clue what this incorrect assumption you've made about me has got to do with anything."No mistake, you said it poor and not white, straight out of Mr Biden's handbook that is, there are videos of Mr biden saying the exact same thing. | |||
"Didn't know so looked at wiki On August 25, 2020, when he was 17, Rittenhouse shot three men during the civil unrest in Kenosha, Wisconsin that followed the shooting of Jacob Blake by a police officer. Rittenhouse was armed with an AR-15 style rifle and had joined a group of armed citizens in Kenosha who had said they were there to protect local businesses.[7][8] Photographic evidence reveals that prior to unrest unfolding, Rittenhouse and others had participated in cleaning graffiti from a high school close to the Kenosha County Courthouse.[9][10] After a man chased him into a parking lot and grabbed the barrel of his rifle, Rittenhouse fatally shot him.[11][12][13] Rittenhouse fled and was pursued by a crowd. He then fatally shot a second man after the man struck Rittenhouse with a skateboard and tried to grab his rifle.[7][14][15] A third person approached Rittenhouse with his Glock pointed at him, but Rittenhouse shot and wounded the individual first.[14][16][17][18][19] As ex forces, I would give him a slow hand clap ... ———————————————- Great story…. Shame a lot of it isn’t quite true So let’s point out like others did that he drove 2 hrs across state lines to “protect” a friends city, and he only got off the gun charges because his defence claimed somehow that the gun he had was for “hunting purposes “ and for that reason instead of age of ownership was 16 instead of 18 (a law no one apparently knew was still on the state books as it dated back to the 1800’s) .. and that loophole has been closed since Fabio doesn't like Kyle Rittenhouse...I'll file this one under my surprises of 24'
Maybe because Mr rittenhouse is a republican.
Or maybe because he went to a protest with an assault rifle so he could shoot some people. Shrug emoji.
Well it wasn't a wasted journey was it.
Because he killed some people?
Defending himself from a group who wanted to do him harm, you have not got to wait for the attack if you are being threatened with violence, you can defend yourself before they strike.
Pre emptive strike it is called, even you have that right unless you wish to give tbat right up, move to a none common law jurisdictions you have that choice.
He went there specifically to kill some people. Not sure what the rest of your waffle is about. Still, he killed some lefties. Well done.
Well he knew some thick punt would try it and he got acquitted, clever man.
If you admire someone who gets away with killing people because of his privileged position. Then fair play to you.
But you can't be surprised that some folks didn't think it's cool.
Privileged position please explain.
Put it this way, what do you think would have happened if a poor person who wasn't white, carried an assault rifle over a border and went and killed some people?
Lol, you do know you reflect how you think, a true democrat poor people are black without voter Id.
I'll be honest, I have absolutely zero clue what this incorrect assumption you've made about me has got to do with anything.
No mistake, you said it poor and not white, straight out of Mr Biden's handbook that is, there are videos of Mr biden saying the exact same thing. "You just said "poor and not white". Does that mean you and Biden are the same? Or does using those words in different context mean that we're different to Biden? Anyway, what's all this nonsense got to do with the point I was making? | |||
"Didn't know so looked at wiki On August 25, 2020, when he was 17, Rittenhouse shot three men during the civil unrest in Kenosha, Wisconsin that followed the shooting of Jacob Blake by a police officer. Rittenhouse was armed with an AR-15 style rifle and had joined a group of armed citizens in Kenosha who had said they were there to protect local businesses.[7][8] Photographic evidence reveals that prior to unrest unfolding, Rittenhouse and others had participated in cleaning graffiti from a high school close to the Kenosha County Courthouse.[9][10] After a man chased him into a parking lot and grabbed the barrel of his rifle, Rittenhouse fatally shot him.[11][12][13] Rittenhouse fled and was pursued by a crowd. He then fatally shot a second man after the man struck Rittenhouse with a skateboard and tried to grab his rifle.[7][14][15] A third person approached Rittenhouse with his Glock pointed at him, but Rittenhouse shot and wounded the individual first.[14][16][17][18][19] As ex forces, I would give him a slow hand clap ... ———————————————- Great story…. Shame a lot of it isn’t quite true So let’s point out like others did that he drove 2 hrs across state lines to “protect” a friends city, and he only got off the gun charges because his defence claimed somehow that the gun he had was for “hunting purposes “ and for that reason instead of age of ownership was 16 instead of 18 (a law no one apparently knew was still on the state books as it dated back to the 1800’s) .. and that loophole has been closed since Fabio doesn't like Kyle Rittenhouse...I'll file this one under my surprises of 24'
Maybe because Mr rittenhouse is a republican.
Or maybe because he went to a protest with an assault rifle so he could shoot some people. Shrug emoji.
Well it wasn't a wasted journey was it.
Because he killed some people?
Defending himself from a group who wanted to do him harm, you have not got to wait for the attack if you are being threatened with violence, you can defend yourself before they strike.
Pre emptive strike it is called, even you have that right unless you wish to give tbat right up, move to a none common law jurisdictions you have that choice.
He went there specifically to kill some people. Not sure what the rest of your waffle is about. Still, he killed some lefties. Well done.
Well he knew some thick punt would try it and he got acquitted, clever man.
If you admire someone who gets away with killing people because of his privileged position. Then fair play to you.
But you can't be surprised that some folks didn't think it's cool.
Privileged position please explain.
Put it this way, what do you think would have happened if a poor person who wasn't white, carried an assault rifle over a border and went and killed some people?
Lol, you do know you reflect how you think, a true democrat poor people are black without voter Id.
I'll be honest, I have absolutely zero clue what this incorrect assumption you've made about me has got to do with anything.
No mistake, you said it poor and not white, straight out of Mr Biden's handbook that is, there are videos of Mr biden saying the exact same thing.
You just said "poor and not white". Does that mean you and Biden are the same? Or does using those words in different context mean that we're different to Biden?
Anyway, what's all this nonsense got to do with the point I was making?"What point was you making that he was white and got acquitted and if he was not white there would of been a different outcome the law is colour blind you do know that. | |||
"Didn't know so looked at wiki On August 25, 2020, when he was 17, Rittenhouse shot three men during the civil unrest in Kenosha, Wisconsin that followed the shooting of Jacob Blake by a police officer. Rittenhouse was armed with an AR-15 style rifle and had joined a group of armed citizens in Kenosha who had said they were there to protect local businesses.[7][8] Photographic evidence reveals that prior to unrest unfolding, Rittenhouse and others had participated in cleaning graffiti from a high school close to the Kenosha County Courthouse.[9][10] After a man chased him into a parking lot and grabbed the barrel of his rifle, Rittenhouse fatally shot him.[11][12][13] Rittenhouse fled and was pursued by a crowd. He then fatally shot a second man after the man struck Rittenhouse with a skateboard and tried to grab his rifle.[7][14][15] A third person approached Rittenhouse with his Glock pointed at him, but Rittenhouse shot and wounded the individual first.[14][16][17][18][19] As ex forces, I would give him a slow hand clap ... ———————————————- Great story…. Shame a lot of it isn’t quite true So let’s point out like others did that he drove 2 hrs across state lines to “protect” a friends city, and he only got off the gun charges because his defence claimed somehow that the gun he had was for “hunting purposes “ and for that reason instead of age of ownership was 16 instead of 18 (a law no one apparently knew was still on the state books as it dated back to the 1800’s) .. and that loophole has been closed since Fabio doesn't like Kyle Rittenhouse...I'll file this one under my surprises of 24'
Maybe because Mr rittenhouse is a republican.
Or maybe because he went to a protest with an assault rifle so he could shoot some people. Shrug emoji.
Well it wasn't a wasted journey was it.
Because he killed some people?
Defending himself from a group who wanted to do him harm, you have not got to wait for the attack if you are being threatened with violence, you can defend yourself before they strike.
Pre emptive strike it is called, even you have that right unless you wish to give tbat right up, move to a none common law jurisdictions you have that choice.
He actively put himself in the situation. It's like someone getting in a car with a d*unk driver, and then being surprised that they crash it
Get over it, he was acquitted and he had the full weight of common law behind him.
Doesn't mean he isn't a thick cunt though
Why would you say that?
Genuinely?
Absolutely genuine question
Because he shouldn't have been there in the first place. He put himself in that position, he wasn't there as part of law enforcement, nor the army. He's a dumb kid who thought it'd be 'cool', and clearly an opportunity to get out there waving a gun around. The fact that he was acquitted only sets a precident that the next dumb kid, who does something equally dumb. Will think they'll get away with it too, and maybe they will? And at what point is the line drawn.
None of the people should have been there.
If you look at this from his view point, he was standing up against what he believed to be wrong, rioting and looting. At that time, the US was suffering from extremism, violence and civil unrest that threatened to spill over into wider state conflicts.
He took a stand as did those that were there for opposing reasons. Those events were not the first of the kind and wont be the last, people will fall into 2 camps, stand up for what you believe in or do nothing and hope it goes away.
I don't understand why this makes him wrong, they were all wrong."That would be like me travelling from London to Bristol to then put himself in that situation bearing in mind that this was not the first night of trouble in Kenosha after the Jacob Blake shooting (let’s not forget…. 7 bullets in his back physically walking away from a police officer!) If you deliberately put yourself in a situation that could cause harm and then plead self defence with a gun you were not legally supposed to have been holding in either Illinois or Wisconsin…. Then I am sorry, the sympathy I have is not with you. | |||
"Didn't know so looked at wiki On August 25, 2020, when he was 17, Rittenhouse shot three men during the civil unrest in Kenosha, Wisconsin that followed the shooting of Jacob Blake by a police officer. Rittenhouse was armed with an AR-15 style rifle and had joined a group of armed citizens in Kenosha who had said they were there to protect local businesses.[7][8] Photographic evidence reveals that prior to unrest unfolding, Rittenhouse and others had participated in cleaning graffiti from a high school close to the Kenosha County Courthouse.[9][10] After a man chased him into a parking lot and grabbed the barrel of his rifle, Rittenhouse fatally shot him.[11][12][13] Rittenhouse fled and was pursued by a crowd. He then fatally shot a second man after the man struck Rittenhouse with a skateboard and tried to grab his rifle.[7][14][15] A third person approached Rittenhouse with his Glock pointed at him, but Rittenhouse shot and wounded the individual first.[14][16][17][18][19] As ex forces, I would give him a slow hand clap ... ———————————————- Great story…. Shame a lot of it isn’t quite true So let’s point out like others did that he drove 2 hrs across state lines to “protect” a friends city, and he only got off the gun charges because his defence claimed somehow that the gun he had was for “hunting purposes “ and for that reason instead of age of ownership was 16 instead of 18 (a law no one apparently knew was still on the state books as it dated back to the 1800’s) .. and that loophole has been closed since Fabio doesn't like Kyle Rittenhouse...I'll file this one under my surprises of 24'
Maybe because Mr rittenhouse is a republican.
Or maybe because he went to a protest with an assault rifle so he could shoot some people. Shrug emoji.
Well it wasn't a wasted journey was it.
Because he killed some people?
Defending himself from a group who wanted to do him harm, you have not got to wait for the attack if you are being threatened with violence, you can defend yourself before they strike.
Pre emptive strike it is called, even you have that right unless you wish to give tbat right up, move to a none common law jurisdictions you have that choice.
He actively put himself in the situation. It's like someone getting in a car with a d*unk driver, and then being surprised that they crash it
Get over it, he was acquitted and he had the full weight of common law behind him.
Doesn't mean he isn't a thick cunt though
Why would you say that?
Genuinely?
Absolutely genuine question
Because he shouldn't have been there in the first place. He put himself in that position, he wasn't there as part of law enforcement, nor the army. He's a dumb kid who thought it'd be 'cool', and clearly an opportunity to get out there waving a gun around. The fact that he was acquitted only sets a precident that the next dumb kid, who does something equally dumb. Will think they'll get away with it too, and maybe they will? And at what point is the line drawn.
None of the people should have been there.
If you look at this from his view point, he was standing up against what he believed to be wrong, rioting and looting. At that time, the US was suffering from extremism, violence and civil unrest that threatened to spill over into wider state conflicts.
He took a stand as did those that were there for opposing reasons. Those events were not the first of the kind and wont be the last, people will fall into 2 camps, stand up for what you believe in or do nothing and hope it goes away.
I don't understand why this makes him wrong, they were all wrong.
That would be like me travelling from London to Bristol to then put himself in that situation bearing in mind that this was not the first night of trouble in Kenosha after the Jacob Blake shooting (let’s not forget…. 7 bullets in his back physically walking away from a police officer!)
If you deliberately put yourself in a situation that could cause harm and then plead self defence with a gun you were not legally supposed to have been holding in either Illinois or Wisconsin…. Then I am sorry, the sympathy I have is not with you."Do you believe they were all wrong r just this person? | |||
"Didn't know so looked at wiki On August 25, 2020, when he was 17, Rittenhouse shot three men during the civil unrest in Kenosha, Wisconsin that followed the shooting of Jacob Blake by a police officer. Rittenhouse was armed with an AR-15 style rifle and had joined a group of armed citizens in Kenosha who had said they were there to protect local businesses.[7][8] Photographic evidence reveals that prior to unrest unfolding, Rittenhouse and others had participated in cleaning graffiti from a high school close to the Kenosha County Courthouse.[9][10] After a man chased him into a parking lot and grabbed the barrel of his rifle, Rittenhouse fatally shot him.[11][12][13] Rittenhouse fled and was pursued by a crowd. He then fatally shot a second man after the man struck Rittenhouse with a skateboard and tried to grab his rifle.[7][14][15] A third person approached Rittenhouse with his Glock pointed at him, but Rittenhouse shot and wounded the individual first.[14][16][17][18][19] As ex forces, I would give him a slow hand clap ... ———————————————- Great story…. Shame a lot of it isn’t quite true So let’s point out like others did that he drove 2 hrs across state lines to “protect” a friends city, and he only got off the gun charges because his defence claimed somehow that the gun he had was for “hunting purposes “ and for that reason instead of age of ownership was 16 instead of 18 (a law no one apparently knew was still on the state books as it dated back to the 1800’s) .. and that loophole has been closed since Fabio doesn't like Kyle Rittenhouse...I'll file this one under my surprises of 24'
Maybe because Mr rittenhouse is a republican.
Or maybe because he went to a protest with an assault rifle so he could shoot some people. Shrug emoji.
Well it wasn't a wasted journey was it.
Because he killed some people?
Defending himself from a group who wanted to do him harm, you have not got to wait for the attack if you are being threatened with violence, you can defend yourself before they strike.
Pre emptive strike it is called, even you have that right unless you wish to give tbat right up, move to a none common law jurisdictions you have that choice.
He actively put himself in the situation. It's like someone getting in a car with a d*unk driver, and then being surprised that they crash it
Get over it, he was acquitted and he had the full weight of common law behind him.
Doesn't mean he isn't a thick cunt though
Why would you say that?
Genuinely?
Absolutely genuine question
Because he shouldn't have been there in the first place. He put himself in that position, he wasn't there as part of law enforcement, nor the army. He's a dumb kid who thought it'd be 'cool', and clearly an opportunity to get out there waving a gun around. The fact that he was acquitted only sets a precident that the next dumb kid, who does something equally dumb. Will think they'll get away with it too, and maybe they will? And at what point is the line drawn.
None of the people should have been there.
If you look at this from his view point, he was standing up against what he believed to be wrong, rioting and looting. At that time, the US was suffering from extremism, violence and civil unrest that threatened to spill over into wider state conflicts.
He took a stand as did those that were there for opposing reasons. Those events were not the first of the kind and wont be the last, people will fall into 2 camps, stand up for what you believe in or do nothing and hope it goes away.
I don't understand why this makes him wrong, they were all wrong.
That would be like me travelling from London to Bristol to then put himself in that situation bearing in mind that this was not the first night of trouble in Kenosha after the Jacob Blake shooting (let’s not forget…. 7 bullets in his back physically walking away from a police officer!)
If you deliberately put yourself in a situation that could cause harm and then plead self defence with a gun you were not legally supposed to have been holding in either Illinois or Wisconsin…. Then I am sorry, the sympathy I have is not with you.
Do you believe they were all wrong r just this person?"Do you believe that somebody losing their life is a balanced response to 'being in the wrong'? | |||
" None of the people should have been there. If you look at this from his view point, he was standing up against what he believed to be wrong, rioting and looting. At that time, the US was suffering from extremism, violence and civil unrest that threatened to spill over into wider state conflicts. He took a stand as did those that were there for opposing reasons. Those events were not the first of the kind and wont be the last, people will fall into 2 camps, stand up for what you believe in or do nothing and hope it goes away. I don't understand why this makes him wrong, they were all wrong. " This sounds like alot of words to say you support vigilantism | |||
" Do you believe they were all wrong r just this person?" Do you believe that somebody losing their life is a balanced response to 'being in the wrong'? " Completely this. Whats that saying … 2 wrongs dont make a right? But also this isn’t some equation where is one thing is positive the other must be negative Heading out with a gun to another state to deal with rioters - the rioters being wrong does not make him in the right. Likewise thinking kyle was in the wrong doesn’t equate to supporting the rioters. Surely people can acknowledge that death is a completely disproportionate consequence of the events. | |||
"Didn't know so looked at wiki On August 25, 2020, when he was 17, Rittenhouse shot three men during the civil unrest in Kenosha, Wisconsin that followed the shooting of Jacob Blake by a police officer. Rittenhouse was armed with an AR-15 style rifle and had joined a group of armed citizens in Kenosha who had said they were there to protect local businesses.[7][8] Photographic evidence reveals that prior to unrest unfolding, Rittenhouse and others had participated in cleaning graffiti from a high school close to the Kenosha County Courthouse.[9][10] After a man chased him into a parking lot and grabbed the barrel of his rifle, Rittenhouse fatally shot him.[11][12][13] Rittenhouse fled and was pursued by a crowd. He then fatally shot a second man after the man struck Rittenhouse with a skateboard and tried to grab his rifle.[7][14][15] A third person approached Rittenhouse with his Glock pointed at him, but Rittenhouse shot and wounded the individual first.[14][16][17][18][19] As ex forces, I would give him a slow hand clap ... ———————————————- Great story…. Shame a lot of it isn’t quite true So let’s point out like others did that he drove 2 hrs across state lines to “protect” a friends city, and he only got off the gun charges because his defence claimed somehow that the gun he had was for “hunting purposes “ and for that reason instead of age of ownership was 16 instead of 18 (a law no one apparently knew was still on the state books as it dated back to the 1800’s) .. and that loophole has been closed since Fabio doesn't like Kyle Rittenhouse...I'll file this one under my surprises of 24'
Maybe because Mr rittenhouse is a republican.
Or maybe because he went to a protest with an assault rifle so he could shoot some people. Shrug emoji.
Well it wasn't a wasted journey was it.
Because he killed some people?
Defending himself from a group who wanted to do him harm, you have not got to wait for the attack if you are being threatened with violence, you can defend yourself before they strike.
Pre emptive strike it is called, even you have that right unless you wish to give tbat right up, move to a none common law jurisdictions you have that choice.
He went there specifically to kill some people. Not sure what the rest of your waffle is about. Still, he killed some lefties. Well done.
Well he knew some thick punt would try it and he got acquitted, clever man.
If you admire someone who gets away with killing people because of his privileged position. Then fair play to you.
But you can't be surprised that some folks didn't think it's cool.
Privileged position please explain.
Put it this way, what do you think would have happened if a poor person who wasn't white, carried an assault rifle over a border and went and killed some people?
Lol, you do know you reflect how you think, a true democrat poor people are black without voter Id.
I'll be honest, I have absolutely zero clue what this incorrect assumption you've made about me has got to do with anything.
No mistake, you said it poor and not white, straight out of Mr Biden's handbook that is, there are videos of Mr biden saying the exact same thing.
You just said "poor and not white". Does that mean you and Biden are the same? Or does using those words in different context mean that we're different to Biden?
Anyway, what's all this nonsense got to do with the point I was making?
What point was you making that he was white and got acquitted and if he was not white there would of been a different outcome the law is colour blind you do know that."Lolz | |||
"Didn't know so looked at wiki On August 25, 2020, when he was 17, Rittenhouse shot three men during the civil unrest in Kenosha, Wisconsin that followed the shooting of Jacob Blake by a police officer. Rittenhouse was armed with an AR-15 style rifle and had joined a group of armed citizens in Kenosha who had said they were there to protect local businesses.[7][8] Photographic evidence reveals that prior to unrest unfolding, Rittenhouse and others had participated in cleaning graffiti from a high school close to the Kenosha County Courthouse.[9][10] After a man chased him into a parking lot and grabbed the barrel of his rifle, Rittenhouse fatally shot him.[11][12][13] Rittenhouse fled and was pursued by a crowd. He then fatally shot a second man after the man struck Rittenhouse with a skateboard and tried to grab his rifle.[7][14][15] A third person approached Rittenhouse with his Glock pointed at him, but Rittenhouse shot and wounded the individual first.[14][16][17][18][19] As ex forces, I would give him a slow hand clap ... ———————————————- Great story…. Shame a lot of it isn’t quite true So let’s point out like others did that he drove 2 hrs across state lines to “protect” a friends city, and he only got off the gun charges because his defence claimed somehow that the gun he had was for “hunting purposes “ and for that reason instead of age of ownership was 16 instead of 18 (a law no one apparently knew was still on the state books as it dated back to the 1800’s) .. and that loophole has been closed since Fabio doesn't like Kyle Rittenhouse...I'll file this one under my surprises of 24'
Maybe because Mr rittenhouse is a republican.
Or maybe because he went to a protest with an assault rifle so he could shoot some people. Shrug emoji.
Well it wasn't a wasted journey was it.
Because he killed some people?
Defending himself from a group who wanted to do him harm, you have not got to wait for the attack if you are being threatened with violence, you can defend yourself before they strike.
Pre emptive strike it is called, even you have that right unless you wish to give tbat right up, move to a none common law jurisdictions you have that choice.
He actively put himself in the situation. It's like someone getting in a car with a d*unk driver, and then being surprised that they crash it
Get over it, he was acquitted and he had the full weight of common law behind him.
Doesn't mean he isn't a thick cunt though
Why would you say that?
Genuinely?
Absolutely genuine question
Because he shouldn't have been there in the first place. He put himself in that position, he wasn't there as part of law enforcement, nor the army. He's a dumb kid who thought it'd be 'cool', and clearly an opportunity to get out there waving a gun around. The fact that he was acquitted only sets a precident that the next dumb kid, who does something equally dumb. Will think they'll get away with it too, and maybe they will? And at what point is the line drawn.
None of the people should have been there.
If you look at this from his view point, he was standing up against what he believed to be wrong, rioting and looting. At that time, the US was suffering from extremism, violence and civil unrest that threatened to spill over into wider state conflicts.
He took a stand as did those that were there for opposing reasons. Those events were not the first of the kind and wont be the last, people will fall into 2 camps, stand up for what you believe in or do nothing and hope it goes away.
I don't understand why this makes him wrong, they were all wrong.
That would be like me travelling from London to Bristol to then put himself in that situation bearing in mind that this was not the first night of trouble in Kenosha after the Jacob Blake shooting (let’s not forget…. 7 bullets in his back physically walking away from a police officer!)
If you deliberately put yourself in a situation that could cause harm and then plead self defence with a gun you were not legally supposed to have been holding in either Illinois or Wisconsin…. Then I am sorry, the sympathy I have is not with you.
Do you believe they were all wrong r just this person?
Do you believe that somebody losing their life is a balanced response to 'being in the wrong'? "No, but I only hear remarks about this person and not the others who were part of death toll of 25, of which 1 was killed by police. The comments about he should not have been there sounds as if there is support for the rioters who terrorised, looted, killed and threatened people in their homes for days on end. You are possibly not recognising I'm asking where the balance is, possibly you are and you supported the rioters? | |||
" None of the people should have been there. If you look at this from his view point, he was standing up against what he believed to be wrong, rioting and looting. At that time, the US was suffering from extremism, violence and civil unrest that threatened to spill over into wider state conflicts. He took a stand as did those that were there for opposing reasons. Those events were not the first of the kind and wont be the last, people will fall into 2 camps, stand up for what you believe in or do nothing and hope it goes away. I don't understand why this makes him wrong, they were all wrong. This sounds like alot of words to say you support vigilantism " Which bit? They were all wrong? | |||
"Didn't know so looked at wiki On August 25, 2020, when he was 17, Rittenhouse shot three men during the civil unrest in Kenosha, Wisconsin that followed the shooting of Jacob Blake by a police officer. Rittenhouse was armed with an AR-15 style rifle and had joined a group of armed citizens in Kenosha who had said they were there to protect local businesses.[7][8] Photographic evidence reveals that prior to unrest unfolding, Rittenhouse and others had participated in cleaning graffiti from a high school close to the Kenosha County Courthouse.[9][10] After a man chased him into a parking lot and grabbed the barrel of his rifle, Rittenhouse fatally shot him.[11][12][13] Rittenhouse fled and was pursued by a crowd. He then fatally shot a second man after the man struck Rittenhouse with a skateboard and tried to grab his rifle.[7][14][15] A third person approached Rittenhouse with his Glock pointed at him, but Rittenhouse shot and wounded the individual first.[14][16][17][18][19] As ex forces, I would give him a slow hand clap ... ———————————————- Great story…. Shame a lot of it isn’t quite true So let’s point out like others did that he drove 2 hrs across state lines to “protect” a friends city, and he only got off the gun charges because his defence claimed somehow that the gun he had was for “hunting purposes “ and for that reason instead of age of ownership was 16 instead of 18 (a law no one apparently knew was still on the state books as it dated back to the 1800’s) .. and that loophole has been closed since Fabio doesn't like Kyle Rittenhouse...I'll file this one under my surprises of 24'
Maybe because Mr rittenhouse is a republican.
Or maybe because he went to a protest with an assault rifle so he could shoot some people. Shrug emoji.
Well it wasn't a wasted journey was it.
Because he killed some people?
Defending himself from a group who wanted to do him harm, you have not got to wait for the attack if you are being threatened with violence, you can defend yourself before they strike.
Pre emptive strike it is called, even you have that right unless you wish to give tbat right up, move to a none common law jurisdictions you have that choice.
He actively put himself in the situation. It's like someone getting in a car with a d*unk driver, and then being surprised that they crash it
Get over it, he was acquitted and he had the full weight of common law behind him.
Doesn't mean he isn't a thick cunt though
Why would you say that?
Genuinely?
Absolutely genuine question
Because he shouldn't have been there in the first place. He put himself in that position, he wasn't there as part of law enforcement, nor the army. He's a dumb kid who thought it'd be 'cool', and clearly an opportunity to get out there waving a gun around. The fact that he was acquitted only sets a precident that the next dumb kid, who does something equally dumb. Will think they'll get away with it too, and maybe they will? And at what point is the line drawn.
None of the people should have been there.
If you look at this from his view point, he was standing up against what he believed to be wrong, rioting and looting. At that time, the US was suffering from extremism, violence and civil unrest that threatened to spill over into wider state conflicts.
He took a stand as did those that were there for opposing reasons. Those events were not the first of the kind and wont be the last, people will fall into 2 camps, stand up for what you believe in or do nothing and hope it goes away.
I don't understand why this makes him wrong, they were all wrong.
That would be like me travelling from London to Bristol to then put himself in that situation bearing in mind that this was not the first night of trouble in Kenosha after the Jacob Blake shooting (let’s not forget…. 7 bullets in his back physically walking away from a police officer!)
If you deliberately put yourself in a situation that could cause harm and then plead self defence with a gun you were not legally supposed to have been holding in either Illinois or Wisconsin…. Then I am sorry, the sympathy I have is not with you.
Do you believe they were all wrong r just this person?
Do you believe that somebody losing their life is a balanced response to 'being in the wrong'?
No, but I only hear remarks about this person and not the others who were part of death toll of 25, of which 1 was killed by police.
The comments about he should not have been there sounds as if there is support for the rioters who terrorised, looted, killed and threatened people in their homes for days on end.
You are possibly not recognising I'm asking where the balance is, possibly you are and you supported the rioters? "Did the others who killed people get let off too? | |||
" None of the people should have been there. If you look at this from his view point, he was standing up against what he believed to be wrong, rioting and looting. At that time, the US was suffering from extremism, violence and civil unrest that threatened to spill over into wider state conflicts. He took a stand as did those that were there for opposing reasons. Those events were not the first of the kind and wont be the last, people will fall into 2 camps, stand up for what you believe in or do nothing and hope it goes away. I don't understand why this makes him wrong, they were all wrong. This sounds like alot of words to say you support vigilantism Which bit? They were all wrong?" “He was just standing up against what he believes to be wrong” (by travelling to the area with a gun) “I dont understand why that makes him wrong” (because thats the job of the police , not your average joe on the street let alone from out of state ) | |||
" None of the people should have been there. If you look at this from his view point, he was standing up against what he believed to be wrong, rioting and looting. At that time, the US was suffering from extremism, violence and civil unrest that threatened to spill over into wider state conflicts. He took a stand as did those that were there for opposing reasons. Those events were not the first of the kind and wont be the last, people will fall into 2 camps, stand up for what you believe in or do nothing and hope it goes away. I don't understand why this makes him wrong, they were all wrong. This sounds like alot of words to say you support vigilantism Which bit? They were all wrong? “He was just standing up against what he believes to be wrong” (by travelling to the area with a gun) “I dont understand why that makes him wrong” (because thats the job of the police , not your average joe on the street let alone from out of state ) " What you missed out was, "if you look at it from his view point", that is an important part to leave out.... The rioters had their views, he had his, both should not have been there. | |||
" None of the people should have been there. If you look at this from his view point, he was standing up against what he believed to be wrong, rioting and looting. At that time, the US was suffering from extremism, violence and civil unrest that threatened to spill over into wider state conflicts. He took a stand as did those that were there for opposing reasons. Those events were not the first of the kind and wont be the last, people will fall into 2 camps, stand up for what you believe in or do nothing and hope it goes away. I don't understand why this makes him wrong, they were all wrong. This sounds like alot of words to say you support vigilantism Which bit? They were all wrong? “He was just standing up against what he believes to be wrong” (by travelling to the area with a gun) “I dont understand why that makes him wrong” (because thats the job of the police , not your average joe on the street let alone from out of state ) What you missed out was, "if you look at it from his view point", that is an important part to leave out.... The rioters had their views, he had his, both should not have been there. " His point of view makes shouldn’t make a difference. Anyone who behaves like a vigilante is coming from a point of view that they are justified but it doesn’t make it right. At least we agree he shouldn’t have been there | |||
" None of the people should have been there. If you look at this from his view point, he was standing up against what he believed to be wrong, rioting and looting. At that time, the US was suffering from extremism, violence and civil unrest that threatened to spill over into wider state conflicts. He took a stand as did those that were there for opposing reasons. Those events were not the first of the kind and wont be the last, people will fall into 2 camps, stand up for what you believe in or do nothing and hope it goes away. I don't understand why this makes him wrong, they were all wrong. This sounds like alot of words to say you support vigilantism Which bit? They were all wrong? “He was just standing up against what he believes to be wrong” (by travelling to the area with a gun) “I dont understand why that makes him wrong” (because thats the job of the police , not your average joe on the street let alone from out of state ) What you missed out was, "if you look at it from his view point", that is an important part to leave out.... The rioters had their views, he had his, both should not have been there. " I don't think anyone is disagreeing with what you said there. People are disagreeing that his point of view, that he wants to go and kill some people, isn't a good point of view. | |||
"Didn't know so looked at wiki On August 25, 2020, when he was 17, Rittenhouse shot three men during the civil unrest in Kenosha, Wisconsin that followed the shooting of Jacob Blake by a police officer. Rittenhouse was armed with an AR-15 style rifle and had joined a group of armed citizens in Kenosha who had said they were there to protect local businesses.[7][8] Photographic evidence reveals that prior to unrest unfolding, Rittenhouse and others had participated in cleaning graffiti from a high school close to the Kenosha County Courthouse.[9][10] After a man chased him into a parking lot and grabbed the barrel of his rifle, Rittenhouse fatally shot him.[11][12][13] Rittenhouse fled and was pursued by a crowd. He then fatally shot a second man after the man struck Rittenhouse with a skateboard and tried to grab his rifle.[7][14][15] A third person approached Rittenhouse with his Glock pointed at him, but Rittenhouse shot and wounded the individual first.[14][16][17][18][19] As ex forces, I would give him a slow hand clap ... ———————————————- Great story…. Shame a lot of it isn’t quite true So let’s point out like others did that he drove 2 hrs across state lines to “protect” a friends city, and he only got off the gun charges because his defence claimed somehow that the gun he had was for “hunting purposes “ and for that reason instead of age of ownership was 16 instead of 18 (a law no one apparently knew was still on the state books as it dated back to the 1800’s) .. and that loophole has been closed since Fabio doesn't like Kyle Rittenhouse...I'll file this one under my surprises of 24'
Maybe because Mr rittenhouse is a republican.
Or maybe because he went to a protest with an assault rifle so he could shoot some people. Shrug emoji.
Well it wasn't a wasted journey was it.
Because he killed some people?
Defending himself from a group who wanted to do him harm, you have not got to wait for the attack if you are being threatened with violence, you can defend yourself before they strike.
Pre emptive strike it is called, even you have that right unless you wish to give tbat right up, move to a none common law jurisdictions you have that choice.
He actively put himself in the situation. It's like someone getting in a car with a d*unk driver, and then being surprised that they crash it
Get over it, he was acquitted and he had the full weight of common law behind him.
Doesn't mean he isn't a thick cunt though
Why would you say that?
Genuinely?
Absolutely genuine question
Because he shouldn't have been there in the first place. He put himself in that position, he wasn't there as part of law enforcement, nor the army. He's a dumb kid who thought it'd be 'cool', and clearly an opportunity to get out there waving a gun around. The fact that he was acquitted only sets a precident that the next dumb kid, who does something equally dumb. Will think they'll get away with it too, and maybe they will? And at what point is the line drawn.
None of the people should have been there.
If you look at this from his view point, he was standing up against what he believed to be wrong, rioting and looting. At that time, the US was suffering from extremism, violence and civil unrest that threatened to spill over into wider state conflicts.
He took a stand as did those that were there for opposing reasons. Those events were not the first of the kind and wont be the last, people will fall into 2 camps, stand up for what you believe in or do nothing and hope it goes away.
I don't understand why this makes him wrong, they were all wrong.
That would be like me travelling from London to Bristol to then put himself in that situation bearing in mind that this was not the first night of trouble in Kenosha after the Jacob Blake shooting (let’s not forget…. 7 bullets in his back physically walking away from a police officer!)
If you deliberately put yourself in a situation that could cause harm and then plead self defence with a gun you were not legally supposed to have been holding in either Illinois or Wisconsin…. Then I am sorry, the sympathy I have is not with you.
Do you believe they were all wrong r just this person?
Do you believe that somebody losing their life is a balanced response to 'being in the wrong'?
No, but I only hear remarks about this person and not the others who were part of death toll of 25, of which 1 was killed by police.
The comments about he should not have been there sounds as if there is support for the rioters who terrorised, looted, killed and threatened people in their homes for days on end.
You are possibly not recognising I'm asking where the balance is, possibly you are and you supported the rioters? "Nobody supports the rioters though do they? Nobody has even alluded to supporting them. The reason all the remarks about Kyle (either agreeing with his actions/or not). Are because the thread is about what he did, it's the title of the thread. You have your opinion, others have their own, as we're all entitled to. | |||
| |||
"Not gonna quote anyone as they're getting long enough as it is, but.... I'm curious about these 25 dead people? As far as I understand, during the Kenosha riots there were only two deaths. Both at the hands of Rittenhouse. Unless anyone knows otherwise, he was the only attendee on either side to have killed anyone. Not the rioters, not the police, not anyone else who lived in the area......just him "The riots post George Floyd as a whole. The point being, this case has become isolated and many others happened, and as I said prior, they were all wrong. The protests were ambushed by people only interested in causing damage or harm. | |||
"Not gonna quote anyone as they're getting long enough as it is, but.... I'm curious about these 25 dead people? As far as I understand, during the Kenosha riots there were only two deaths. Both at the hands of Rittenhouse. Unless anyone knows otherwise, he was the only attendee on either side to have killed anyone. Not the rioters, not the police, not anyone else who lived in the area......just him
The riots post George Floyd as a whole. The point being, this case has become isolated and many others happened, and as I said prior, they were all wrong.
The protests were ambushed by people only interested in causing damage or harm."Such as Kyle | |||
"Not gonna quote anyone as they're getting long enough as it is, but.... I'm curious about these 25 dead people? As far as I understand, during the Kenosha riots there were only two deaths. Both at the hands of Rittenhouse. Unless anyone knows otherwise, he was the only attendee on either side to have killed anyone. Not the rioters, not the police, not anyone else who lived in the area......just him
The riots post George Floyd as a whole. The point being, this case has become isolated and many others happened, and as I said prior, they were all wrong.
The protests were ambushed by people only interested in causing damage or harm.
Such as Kyle "Yes and others | |||
"Not gonna quote anyone as they're getting long enough as it is, but.... I'm curious about these 25 dead people? As far as I understand, during the Kenosha riots there were only two deaths. Both at the hands of Rittenhouse. Unless anyone knows otherwise, he was the only attendee on either side to have killed anyone. Not the rioters, not the police, not anyone else who lived in the area......just him
The riots post George Floyd as a whole. The point being, this case has become isolated and many others happened, and as I said prior, they were all wrong.
The protests were ambushed by people only interested in causing damage or harm.
Such as Kyle
Yes and others"Ah. OK. Was wondering where that figure came from. I've now seen a breakdown. Many of the deaths weren't gun related. Some involved police officers. Some involved mental illness. Couldn't see any others that involved teenage vigilantes though. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/oct/31/americans-killed-protests-political-unrest-acled | |||
"Not gonna quote anyone as they're getting long enough as it is, but.... I'm curious about these 25 dead people? As far as I understand, during the Kenosha riots there were only two deaths. Both at the hands of Rittenhouse. Unless anyone knows otherwise, he was the only attendee on either side to have killed anyone. Not the rioters, not the police, not anyone else who lived in the area......just him
The riots post George Floyd as a whole. The point being, this case has become isolated and many others happened, and as I said prior, they were all wrong.
The protests were ambushed by people only interested in causing damage or harm.
Such as Kyle
Yes and others
Ah. OK. Was wondering where that figure came from.
I've now seen a breakdown. Many of the deaths weren't gun related. Some involved police officers. Some involved mental illness.
Couldn't see any others that involved teenage vigilantes though.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/oct/31/americans-killed-protests-political-unrest-acled"Reading your link it seems to be a fair amount killed by shooting, some hit by cars, one set on fire during the riots / protests. | |||
"Not gonna quote anyone as they're getting long enough as it is, but.... I'm curious about these 25 dead people? As far as I understand, during the Kenosha riots there were only two deaths. Both at the hands of Rittenhouse. Unless anyone knows otherwise, he was the only attendee on either side to have killed anyone. Not the rioters, not the police, not anyone else who lived in the area......just him
The riots post George Floyd as a whole. The point being, this case has become isolated and many others happened, and as I said prior, they were all wrong.
The protests were ambushed by people only interested in causing damage or harm.
Such as Kyle
Yes and others"Which is a very predictable outcome. Often when there is some sort of riot, even if it started as a peaceful protest then escalated, it becomes an opportunity for thugs and looters to jump in and create havoc. Given the likliehood of that happening, it blows my mind that someone can elect to travel to that area with a gun, choose to throw themself in the middle of the situation and then claim self defence. I know the courts already decided and dont agree with me … but the courts position, common law or not, is something i struggle to get on board with in this scenario | |||
"Not gonna quote anyone as they're getting long enough as it is, but.... I'm curious about these 25 dead people? As far as I understand, during the Kenosha riots there were only two deaths. Both at the hands of Rittenhouse. Unless anyone knows otherwise, he was the only attendee on either side to have killed anyone. Not the rioters, not the police, not anyone else who lived in the area......just him
The riots post George Floyd as a whole. The point being, this case has become isolated and many others happened, and as I said prior, they were all wrong.
The protests were ambushed by people only interested in causing damage or harm.
Such as Kyle
Yes and others
Ah. OK. Was wondering where that figure came from.
I've now seen a breakdown. Many of the deaths weren't gun related. Some involved police officers. Some involved mental illness.
Couldn't see any others that involved teenage vigilantes though.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/oct/31/americans-killed-protests-political-unrest-acled
Reading your link it seems to be a fair amount killed by shooting, some hit by cars, one set on fire during the riots / protests.
"Yep. Also interesting that the bulk of victims appear to be protestors. Rather than protestors killing anyone else. | |||
"Not gonna quote anyone as they're getting long enough as it is, but.... I'm curious about these 25 dead people? As far as I understand, during the Kenosha riots there were only two deaths. Both at the hands of Rittenhouse. Unless anyone knows otherwise, he was the only attendee on either side to have killed anyone. Not the rioters, not the police, not anyone else who lived in the area......just him
The riots post George Floyd as a whole. The point being, this case has become isolated and many others happened, and as I said prior, they were all wrong.
The protests were ambushed by people only interested in causing damage or harm.
Such as Kyle
Yes and others
Ah. OK. Was wondering where that figure came from.
I've now seen a breakdown. Many of the deaths weren't gun related. Some involved police officers. Some involved mental illness.
Couldn't see any others that involved teenage vigilantes though.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/oct/31/americans-killed-protests-political-unrest-acled
Reading your link it seems to be a fair amount killed by shooting, some hit by cars, one set on fire during the riots / protests.
Yep.
Also interesting that the bulk of victims appear to be protestors. Rather than protestors killing anyone else. "I think that was the case until the start of protestor camps such as CHOP, that is when I believe it turned away from George Floyd to other agendas, and that is a totally different story | |||
"Didn't know so looked at wiki On August 25, 2020, when he was 17, Rittenhouse shot three men during the civil unrest in Kenosha, Wisconsin that followed the shooting of Jacob Blake by a police officer. Rittenhouse was armed with an AR-15 style rifle and had joined a group of armed citizens in Kenosha who had said they were there to protect local businesses.[7][8] Photographic evidence reveals that prior to unrest unfolding, Rittenhouse and others had participated in cleaning graffiti from a high school close to the Kenosha County Courthouse.[9][10] After a man chased him into a parking lot and grabbed the barrel of his rifle, Rittenhouse fatally shot him.[11][12][13] Rittenhouse fled and was pursued by a crowd. He then fatally shot a second man after the man struck Rittenhouse with a skateboard and tried to grab his rifle.[7][14][15] A third person approached Rittenhouse with his Glock pointed at him, but Rittenhouse shot and wounded the individual first.[14][16][17][18][19] As ex forces, I would give him a slow hand clap ... ———————————————- Great story…. Shame a lot of it isn’t quite true So let’s point out like others did that he drove 2 hrs across state lines to “protect” a friends city, and he only got off the gun charges because his defence claimed somehow that the gun he had was for “hunting purposes “ and for that reason instead of age of ownership was 16 instead of 18 (a law no one apparently knew was still on the state books as it dated back to the 1800’s) .. and that loophole has been closed since Fabio doesn't like Kyle Rittenhouse...I'll file this one under my surprises of 24'
Maybe because Mr rittenhouse is a republican.
Or maybe because he went to a protest with an assault rifle so he could shoot some people. Shrug emoji.
Well it wasn't a wasted journey was it.
Because he killed some people?
Defending himself from a group who wanted to do him harm, you have not got to wait for the attack if you are being threatened with violence, you can defend yourself before they strike.
Pre emptive strike it is called, even you have that right unless you wish to give tbat right up, move to a none common law jurisdictions you have that choice.
He went there specifically to kill some people. Not sure what the rest of your waffle is about. Still, he killed some lefties. Well done.
Well he knew some thick punt would try it and he got acquitted, clever man.
If you admire someone who gets away with killing people because of his privileged position. Then fair play to you.
But you can't be surprised that some folks didn't think it's cool.
Privileged position please explain.
Put it this way, what do you think would have happened if a poor person who wasn't white, carried an assault rifle over a border and went and killed some people?
Lol, you do know you reflect how you think, a true democrat poor people are black without voter Id.
I'll be honest, I have absolutely zero clue what this incorrect assumption you've made about me has got to do with anything.
No mistake, you said it poor and not white, straight out of Mr Biden's handbook that is, there are videos of Mr biden saying the exact same thing.
You just said "poor and not white". Does that mean you and Biden are the same? Or does using those words in different context mean that we're different to Biden?
Anyway, what's all this nonsense got to do with the point I was making?
What point was you making that he was white and got acquitted and if he was not white there would of been a different outcome the law is colour blind you do know that.
Lolz"Was that a nervous lol, You come across has a baiter of race. | |||
" What point was you making that he was white and got acquitted and if he was not white there would of been a different outcome the law is colour blind you do know that. Lolz" Was that a nervous lol, You come across has a baiter of race." I dont think there is any need to take this thread off in a tangent about race. But while the law as written down might be colour blind, application of the law is performed by people. Police officers, then judges and jurors. Those people are not colour blind and therefore racism can creep in. | |||
| |||
"Not gonna quote anyone as they're getting long enough as it is, but.... I'm curious about these 25 dead people? As far as I understand, during the Kenosha riots there were only two deaths. Both at the hands of Rittenhouse. Unless anyone knows otherwise, he was the only attendee on either side to have killed anyone. Not the rioters, not the police, not anyone else who lived in the area......just him
The riots post George Floyd as a whole. The point being, this case has become isolated and many others happened, and as I said prior, they were all wrong.
The protests were ambushed by people only interested in causing damage or harm.
Such as Kyle
Yes and others"No one is saying the "others" should also be excused of killing people in the same way. Glad to have cleared that up for you. | |||
"Didn't know so looked at wiki On August 25, 2020, when he was 17, Rittenhouse shot three men during the civil unrest in Kenosha, Wisconsin that followed the shooting of Jacob Blake by a police officer. Rittenhouse was armed with an AR-15 style rifle and had joined a group of armed citizens in Kenosha who had said they were there to protect local businesses.[7][8] Photographic evidence reveals that prior to unrest unfolding, Rittenhouse and others had participated in cleaning graffiti from a high school close to the Kenosha County Courthouse.[9][10] After a man chased him into a parking lot and grabbed the barrel of his rifle, Rittenhouse fatally shot him.[11][12][13] Rittenhouse fled and was pursued by a crowd. He then fatally shot a second man after the man struck Rittenhouse with a skateboard and tried to grab his rifle.[7][14][15] A third person approached Rittenhouse with his Glock pointed at him, but Rittenhouse shot and wounded the individual first.[14][16][17][18][19] As ex forces, I would give him a slow hand clap ... ———————————————- Great story…. Shame a lot of it isn’t quite true So let’s point out like others did that he drove 2 hrs across state lines to “protect” a friends city, and he only got off the gun charges because his defence claimed somehow that the gun he had was for “hunting purposes “ and for that reason instead of age of ownership was 16 instead of 18 (a law no one apparently knew was still on the state books as it dated back to the 1800’s) .. and that loophole has been closed since Fabio doesn't like Kyle Rittenhouse...I'll file this one under my surprises of 24'
Maybe because Mr rittenhouse is a republican.
Or maybe because he went to a protest with an assault rifle so he could shoot some people. Shrug emoji.
Well it wasn't a wasted journey was it.
Because he killed some people?
Defending himself from a group who wanted to do him harm, you have not got to wait for the attack if you are being threatened with violence, you can defend yourself before they strike.
Pre emptive strike it is called, even you have that right unless you wish to give tbat right up, move to a none common law jurisdictions you have that choice.
He went there specifically to kill some people. Not sure what the rest of your waffle is about. Still, he killed some lefties. Well done.
Well he knew some thick punt would try it and he got acquitted, clever man.
If you admire someone who gets away with killing people because of his privileged position. Then fair play to you.
But you can't be surprised that some folks didn't think it's cool.
Privileged position please explain.
Put it this way, what do you think would have happened if a poor person who wasn't white, carried an assault rifle over a border and went and killed some people?
Lol, you do know you reflect how you think, a true democrat poor people are black without voter Id.
I'll be honest, I have absolutely zero clue what this incorrect assumption you've made about me has got to do with anything.
No mistake, you said it poor and not white, straight out of Mr Biden's handbook that is, there are videos of Mr biden saying the exact same thing.
You just said "poor and not white". Does that mean you and Biden are the same? Or does using those words in different context mean that we're different to Biden?
Anyway, what's all this nonsense got to do with the point I was making?
What point was you making that he was white and got acquitted and if he was not white there would of been a different outcome the law is colour blind you do know that.
Lolz
Was that a nervous lol,
You come across has a baiter of race.
"No. This ridiculous tangent is not related to anything. Try to focus on the topic instead of lashing out at other posters please. | |||
| |||
"Didn't know so looked at wiki On August 25, 2020, when he was 17, Rittenhouse shot three men during the civil unrest in Kenosha, Wisconsin that followed the shooting of Jacob Blake by a police officer. Rittenhouse was armed with an AR-15 style rifle and had joined a group of armed citizens in Kenosha who had said they were there to protect local businesses.[7][8] Photographic evidence reveals that prior to unrest unfolding, Rittenhouse and others had participated in cleaning graffiti from a high school close to the Kenosha County Courthouse.[9][10] After a man chased him into a parking lot and grabbed the barrel of his rifle, Rittenhouse fatally shot him.[11][12][13] Rittenhouse fled and was pursued by a crowd. He then fatally shot a second man after the man struck Rittenhouse with a skateboard and tried to grab his rifle.[7][14][15] A third person approached Rittenhouse with his Glock pointed at him, but Rittenhouse shot and wounded the individual first.[14][16][17][18][19] As ex forces, I would give him a slow hand clap ... ———————————————- Great story…. Shame a lot of it isn’t quite true So let’s point out like others did that he drove 2 hrs across state lines to “protect” a friends city, and he only got off the gun charges because his defence claimed somehow that the gun he had was for “hunting purposes “ and for that reason instead of age of ownership was 16 instead of 18 (a law no one apparently knew was still on the state books as it dated back to the 1800’s) .. and that loophole has been closed since Fabio doesn't like Kyle Rittenhouse...I'll file this one under my surprises of 24'
Maybe because Mr rittenhouse is a republican.
Or maybe because he went to a protest with an assault rifle so he could shoot some people. Shrug emoji.
Well it wasn't a wasted journey was it.
Because he killed some people?
Defending himself from a group who wanted to do him harm, you have not got to wait for the attack if you are being threatened with violence, you can defend yourself before they strike.
Pre emptive strike it is called, even you have that right unless you wish to give tbat right up, move to a none common law jurisdictions you have that choice.
He went there specifically to kill some people. Not sure what the rest of your waffle is about. Still, he killed some lefties. Well done.
Well he knew some thick punt would try it and he got acquitted, clever man.
If you admire someone who gets away with killing people because of his privileged position. Then fair play to you.
But you can't be surprised that some folks didn't think it's cool.
Privileged position please explain.
Put it this way, what do you think would have happened if a poor person who wasn't white, carried an assault rifle over a border and went and killed some people?
Lol, you do know you reflect how you think, a true democrat poor people are black without voter Id.
I'll be honest, I have absolutely zero clue what this incorrect assumption you've made about me has got to do with anything.
No mistake, you said it poor and not white, straight out of Mr Biden's handbook that is, there are videos of Mr biden saying the exact same thing.
You just said "poor and not white". Does that mean you and Biden are the same? Or does using those words in different context mean that we're different to Biden?
Anyway, what's all this nonsense got to do with the point I was making?
What point was you making that he was white and got acquitted and if he was not white there would of been a different outcome the law is colour blind you do know that.
Lolz
Was that a nervous lol,
You come across has a baiter of race.
"I wrote down a whole post last night I decided not to post it… I actually find that last line really offensive… The problem here actually isn’t race… it is a problem of what can be defined in state laws as “self defence”…. In a lot of states now, the way “self defence “ is described is being in a situation where you fear for your life….it doesn’t take into consideration how you got yourself into that situation…. I would argue the only person with a gun was rittenhouse, he was under age to legally have one, and he travelled 2hrs across state lines to put himself in that situation… So … let’s go through other examples of where people have claimed self defence….. In “state a” a couple said they were in fear of their lives and shot at people in a demonstration going past their house… only problem was the house was a mansion with big gates, and not one person had trespassed on their property…. In “state b” a young kid was shot at after knocking on the wrong house whilst going to pick up his younger brother…. The person claimed self defence… the issue was the person opened the door and shot him immediately! when the kid was fleeing the person the took a few more shots at him The kids crime.. he went to an address on 116st, his mum had given him the wrong address.. it was supposed to be 116 ave. In “state c” 2 girls car had broken down on a street.. and they knocked on a door to see if they could get help… both of them were shot multiple times… the person claimed self defence! What security cameras opposite revealed is that he never opened his front door… he was shooting them up from an adjacent window! In “state d” 3 people shot a person dead after they noticed him running through a neighbourhood… they claimed self defence! The person was in fact new to town and was jogging through a almost finished estate, he had earplugs in so never heard them shouting… when he did finally notice they were following him they shot him in the back! In “state e” a kid was shot and killed visiting his mum over the summer holidays.. the person who did it was part of that area’s neighbourhood watch.. he rang the police and they explicitly told the person not to follow.. he ignored that… he claimed he feared for his life after he reached something in his pocket… he shot him to death… what the kid had in his pocket was a packet of skittles! The problem is “self defence” has literally become a get out of free card.. remember even in the George Floyd case, the police tried to use the self defence card…. | |||
"Didn't know so looked at wiki On August 25, 2020, when he was 17, Rittenhouse shot three men during the civil unrest in Kenosha, Wisconsin that followed the shooting of Jacob Blake by a police officer. Rittenhouse was armed with an AR-15 style rifle and had joined a group of armed citizens in Kenosha who had said they were there to protect local businesses.[7][8] Photographic evidence reveals that prior to unrest unfolding, Rittenhouse and others had participated in cleaning graffiti from a high school close to the Kenosha County Courthouse.[9][10] After a man chased him into a parking lot and grabbed the barrel of his rifle, Rittenhouse fatally shot him.[11][12][13] Rittenhouse fled and was pursued by a crowd. He then fatally shot a second man after the man struck Rittenhouse with a skateboard and tried to grab his rifle.[7][14][15] A third person approached Rittenhouse with his Glock pointed at him, but Rittenhouse shot and wounded the individual first.[14][16][17][18][19] As ex forces, I would give him a slow hand clap ... ———————————————- Great story…. Shame a lot of it isn’t quite true So let’s point out like others did that he drove 2 hrs across state lines to “protect” a friends city, and he only got off the gun charges because his defence claimed somehow that the gun he had was for “hunting purposes “ and for that reason instead of age of ownership was 16 instead of 18 (a law no one apparently knew was still on the state books as it dated back to the 1800’s) .. and that loophole has been closed since Fabio doesn't like Kyle Rittenhouse...I'll file this one under my surprises of 24'
Maybe because Mr rittenhouse is a republican.
Or maybe because he went to a protest with an assault rifle so he could shoot some people. Shrug emoji.
Well it wasn't a wasted journey was it.
Because he killed some people?
Defending himself from a group who wanted to do him harm, you have not got to wait for the attack if you are being threatened with violence, you can defend yourself before they strike.
Pre emptive strike it is called, even you have that right unless you wish to give tbat right up, move to a none common law jurisdictions you have that choice.
He went there specifically to kill some people. Not sure what the rest of your waffle is about. Still, he killed some lefties. Well done.
Well he knew some thick punt would try it and he got acquitted, clever man.
If you admire someone who gets away with killing people because of his privileged position. Then fair play to you.
But you can't be surprised that some folks didn't think it's cool.
Privileged position please explain.
Put it this way, what do you think would have happened if a poor person who wasn't white, carried an assault rifle over a border and went and killed some people?
Lol, you do know you reflect how you think, a true democrat poor people are black without voter Id.
I'll be honest, I have absolutely zero clue what this incorrect assumption you've made about me has got to do with anything.
No mistake, you said it poor and not white, straight out of Mr Biden's handbook that is, there are videos of Mr biden saying the exact same thing.
You just said "poor and not white". Does that mean you and Biden are the same? Or does using those words in different context mean that we're different to Biden?
Anyway, what's all this nonsense got to do with the point I was making?
What point was you making that he was white and got acquitted and if he was not white there would of been a different outcome the law is colour blind you do know that.
Lolz
Was that a nervous lol,
You come across has a baiter of race.
I wrote down a whole post last night
I decided not to post it…
I actually find that last line really offensive…
The problem here actually isn’t race… it is a problem of what can be defined in state laws as “self defence”….
In a lot of states now, the way “self defence “ is described is being in a situation where you fear for your life….it doesn’t take into consideration how you got yourself into that situation…. I would argue the only person with a gun was rittenhouse, he was under age to legally have one, and he travelled 2hrs across state lines to put himself in that situation…
So … let’s go through other examples of where people have claimed self defence…..
In “state a” a couple said they were in fear of their lives and shot at people in a demonstration going past their house… only problem was the house was a mansion with big gates, and not one person had trespassed on their property….
In “state b” a young kid was shot at after knocking on the wrong house whilst going to pick up his younger brother…. The person claimed self defence… the issue was the person opened the door and shot him immediately! when the kid was fleeing the person the took a few more shots at him
The kids crime.. he went to an address on 116st, his mum had given him the wrong address.. it was supposed to be 116 ave.
In “state c” 2 girls car had broken down on a street.. and they knocked on a door to see if they could get help… both of them were shot multiple times… the person claimed self defence! What security cameras opposite revealed is that he never opened his front door… he was shooting them up from an adjacent window!
In “state d” 3 people shot a person dead after they noticed him running through a neighbourhood… they claimed self defence! The person was in fact new to town and was jogging through a almost finished estate, he had earplugs in so never heard them shouting… when he did finally notice they were following him they shot him in the back!
In “state e” a kid was shot and killed visiting his mum over the summer holidays.. the person who did it was part of that area’s neighbourhood watch.. he rang the police and they explicitly told the person not to follow.. he ignored that… he claimed he feared for his life after he reached something in his pocket… he shot him to death… what the kid had in his pocket was a packet of skittles!
The problem is “self defence” has literally become a get out of free card.. remember even in the George Floyd case, the police tried to use the self defence card…."Why would you take offence on behalf of someone else? You say the problem isn't race but the poster was responding to someone who was indeed race-baiting. | |||
"Didn't know so looked at wiki On August 25, 2020, when he was 17, Rittenhouse shot three men during the civil unrest in Kenosha, Wisconsin that followed the shooting of Jacob Blake by a police officer. Rittenhouse was armed with an AR-15 style rifle and had joined a group of armed citizens in Kenosha who had said they were there to protect local businesses.[7][8] Photographic evidence reveals that prior to unrest unfolding, Rittenhouse and others had participated in cleaning graffiti from a high school close to the Kenosha County Courthouse.[9][10] After a man chased him into a parking lot and grabbed the barrel of his rifle, Rittenhouse fatally shot him.[11][12][13] Rittenhouse fled and was pursued by a crowd. He then fatally shot a second man after the man struck Rittenhouse with a skateboard and tried to grab his rifle.[7][14][15] A third person approached Rittenhouse with his Glock pointed at him, but Rittenhouse shot and wounded the individual first.[14][16][17][18][19] As ex forces, I would give him a slow hand clap ... ———————————————- Great story…. Shame a lot of it isn’t quite true So let’s point out like others did that he drove 2 hrs across state lines to “protect” a friends city, and he only got off the gun charges because his defence claimed somehow that the gun he had was for “hunting purposes “ and for that reason instead of age of ownership was 16 instead of 18 (a law no one apparently knew was still on the state books as it dated back to the 1800’s) .. and that loophole has been closed since Fabio doesn't like Kyle Rittenhouse...I'll file this one under my surprises of 24'
Maybe because Mr rittenhouse is a republican.
Or maybe because he went to a protest with an assault rifle so he could shoot some people. Shrug emoji.
Well it wasn't a wasted journey was it.
Because he killed some people?
Defending himself from a group who wanted to do him harm, you have not got to wait for the attack if you are being threatened with violence, you can defend yourself before they strike.
Pre emptive strike it is called, even you have that right unless you wish to give tbat right up, move to a none common law jurisdictions you have that choice.
He went there specifically to kill some people. Not sure what the rest of your waffle is about. Still, he killed some lefties. Well done.
Well he knew some thick punt would try it and he got acquitted, clever man.
If you admire someone who gets away with killing people because of his privileged position. Then fair play to you.
But you can't be surprised that some folks didn't think it's cool.
Privileged position please explain.
Put it this way, what do you think would have happened if a poor person who wasn't white, carried an assault rifle over a border and went and killed some people?
Lol, you do know you reflect how you think, a true democrat poor people are black without voter Id.
I'll be honest, I have absolutely zero clue what this incorrect assumption you've made about me has got to do with anything.
No mistake, you said it poor and not white, straight out of Mr Biden's handbook that is, there are videos of Mr biden saying the exact same thing.
You just said "poor and not white". Does that mean you and Biden are the same? Or does using those words in different context mean that we're different to Biden?
Anyway, what's all this nonsense got to do with the point I was making?
What point was you making that he was white and got acquitted and if he was not white there would of been a different outcome the law is colour blind you do know that.
Lolz
Was that a nervous lol,
You come across has a baiter of race.
I wrote down a whole post last night
I decided not to post it…
I actually find that last line really offensive…
The problem here actually isn’t race… it is a problem of what can be defined in state laws as “self defence”….
In a lot of states now, the way “self defence “ is described is being in a situation where you fear for your life….it doesn’t take into consideration how you got yourself into that situation…. I would argue the only person with a gun was rittenhouse, he was under age to legally have one, and he travelled 2hrs across state lines to put himself in that situation…
So … let’s go through other examples of where people have claimed self defence…..
In “state a” a couple said they were in fear of their lives and shot at people in a demonstration going past their house… only problem was the house was a mansion with big gates, and not one person had trespassed on their property….
In “state b” a young kid was shot at after knocking on the wrong house whilst going to pick up his younger brother…. The person claimed self defence… the issue was the person opened the door and shot him immediately! when the kid was fleeing the person the took a few more shots at him
The kids crime.. he went to an address on 116st, his mum had given him the wrong address.. it was supposed to be 116 ave.
In “state c” 2 girls car had broken down on a street.. and they knocked on a door to see if they could get help… both of them were shot multiple times… the person claimed self defence! What security cameras opposite revealed is that he never opened his front door… he was shooting them up from an adjacent window!
In “state d” 3 people shot a person dead after they noticed him running through a neighbourhood… they claimed self defence! The person was in fact new to town and was jogging through a almost finished estate, he had earplugs in so never heard them shouting… when he did finally notice they were following him they shot him in the back!
In “state e” a kid was shot and killed visiting his mum over the summer holidays.. the person who did it was part of that area’s neighbourhood watch.. he rang the police and they explicitly told the person not to follow.. he ignored that… he claimed he feared for his life after he reached something in his pocket… he shot him to death… what the kid had in his pocket was a packet of skittles!
The problem is “self defence” has literally become a get out of free card.. remember even in the George Floyd case, the police tried to use the self defence card….
Why would you take offence on behalf of someone else?
You say the problem isn't race but the poster was responding to someone who was indeed race-baiting. "I rest my case. | |||
| |||
"Actually if that is the point in repost that you (and _astandfeisty) make to my post, then I wish I had hit send on the reply last night, because I think the 48 hrs would have been worth it, rather than the more measured response….. Also… if that is your best response… then maybe have a think about why I kept the description of some of the people in the examples I gave deliberately vague " Don't rise to it. | |||
"Actually if that is the point in repost that you (and _astandfeisty) make to my post, then I wish I had hit send on the reply last night, because I think the 48 hrs would have been worth it, rather than the more measured response….. Also… if that is your best response… then maybe have a think about why I kept the description of some of the people in the examples I gave deliberately vague Don't rise to it." It was interesting because I don’t think buddy…. Or fast and feisty… know that even though the incident that sparked the Kenosha unrest was a black guy shot 7 times in the back walking away from a white police officer…. All of those people involved in the Kyle rittenhouse situation were white! | |||
"Actually if that is the point in repost that you (and _astandfeisty) make to my post, then I wish I had hit send on the reply last night, because I think the 48 hrs would have been worth it, rather than the more measured response….. Also… if that is your best response… then maybe have a think about why I kept the description of some of the people in the examples I gave deliberately vague Don't rise to it. It was interesting because I don’t think buddy…. Or fast and feisty… know that even though the incident that sparked the Kenosha unrest was a black guy shot 7 times in the back walking away from a white police officer…. All of those people involved in the Kyle rittenhouse situation were white! " Why do you keep speaking about me? I'm happy if you want to speak to me. How do you know what I do or don't know? I replied re. race baiting posts that you took offence to even though they weren't aimed at you. | |||
| |||
