Current Affairs The " another shooting in America " thread

[Prevenger17]

Come into the light Liam, let me see your face.

 

[Jimishorts]

I already know your previous banned usernames but perhaps you would prefer to confess at this point?

 

[summerisle]

Perfectly normal.

 

[Bishop Thumpety-Thump]

Why are you taking it so personally? I'm allowed to defend whoever I want. I don't need your permission. That we can't even agree on the facts is more alarming. They're so clear that the jury acquitted Rittenhouse. Why do you people keep ignoring this? Reports suggest the prosecution was a sham and the prosecution got mullered in the trial.

As for the most generous interpretation? Try this one. These racial protests burned down a police station which had the police fleeing for their lives, looted businesses, burned down family owned businesses which have never recovered in some of the poorest communities, they killed people in the streets, lit fires, destroyed cars and public infrastructure. These protesters, as you call them, are appalling. They deserve ridicule and condemnation. Do you not condemn riots?

If the politicians weren't aping a banana republic in the US these days by prosecuting political opponents, that city would have been defended properly. The rioters would have been in jail and people's livelihoods and jobs wouldn't have been ruined by thugs. Think of the economic damage done. It's Disgusting, yet go ahead and focus one of the youngest citizens who showed great qualities in terrible adversity when everyone else around him were losing their minds.

Rittenhouse killed two people in the street, yet you defend him?

 

[TN Toffee]

Why are you taking it so personally? I'm allowed to defend whoever I want. I don't need your permission. That we can't even agree on the facts is more alarming. They're so clear that the jury acquitted Rittenhouse. Why do you people keep ignoring this? Reports suggest the prosecution was a sham and the prosecution got mullered in the trial.

As for the most generous interpretation? Try this one. These racial protests burned down a police station which had the police fleeing for their lives, looted businesses, burned down family owned businesses which have never recovered in some of the poorest communities, they killed people in the streets, lit fires, destroyed cars and public infrastructure. These protesters, as you call them, are appalling. They deserve ridicule and condemnation. Do you not condemn riots?

If the politicians weren't aping a banana republic in the US these days by prosecuting political opponents, that city would have been defended properly. The rioters would have been in jail and people's livelihoods and jobs wouldn't have been ruined by thugs. Think of the economic damage done. It's Disgusting, yet go ahead and focus one of the youngest citizens who showed great qualities in terrible adversity when everyone else around him were losing their minds.

I’ll concede that by the letter of the law, his acquittal was probably correct. That still doesn’t make him blameless or make what he did right. US law doesn’t really allow for the fact that he went looking for trouble to be taken into account, only his actions during the very narrow moment of time once he found it. The bottom line though is that two people would still be alive today if he would have simply stayed at home where he belonged. He wasn’t a law enforcement officer, so he had no business showing up there.

The fact that he’s basically spent the past three years doing a public victory tour around the country kind of gives away the game as to his true mindset. He went there hoping he would at least get to shoot, and maybe kill protesters, and got exactly what he wanted. He’s a POS.

 

[verreauxi]

I’ll concede that by the letter of the law, his acquittal was probably correct. That still doesn’t make him blameless or make what he did right. US law doesn’t really allow for the fact that he went looking for trouble to be taken into account, only his actions during the very narrow moment of time once he found it. The bottom line though is that two people would still be alive today if he would have simply stayed at home where he belonged. He wasn’t a law enforcement officer, so he had no business showing up there.

The fact that he’s basically spent the past three years doing a public victory tour around the country kind of gives away the game as to his true mindset. He went there hoping he would at least get to shoot, and maybe kill protesters, and got exactly what he wanted. He’s a POS.

Seem to recall the judge overseeing that trial was kind of a weirdo.

 

[Amw79]

I’ll concede that by the letter of the law, his acquittal was probably correct. That still doesn’t make him blameless or make what he did right. US law doesn’t really allow for the fact that he went looking for trouble to be taken into account, only his actions during the very narrow moment of time once he found it. The bottom line though is that two people would still be alive today if he would have simply stayed at home where he belonged. He wasn’t a law enforcement officer, so he had no business showing up there.

The fact that he’s basically spent the past three years doing a public victory tour around the country kind of gives away the game as to his true mindset. He went there hoping he would at least get to shoot, and maybe kill protesters, and got exactly what he wanted. He’s a POS.

This is pretty much my position. It was self defence, IMO, and the acquittal was correct.

But, he went there wanting to be Billy Big B0llocks, and to cosplay as a right wing militia hero. His actions were inflammatory in an already inflamed situation, and his milking of his new found celebrity since then is grim in the extreme.

 

[Toffee_Loaf]

I’ll concede that by the letter of the law, his acquittal was probably correct. That still doesn’t make him blameless or make what he did right. US law doesn’t really allow for the fact that he went looking for trouble to be taken into account, only his actions during the very narrow moment of time once he found it. The bottom line though is that two people would still be alive today if he would have simply stayed at home where he belonged. He wasn’t a law enforcement officer, so he had no business showing up there.

The fact that he’s basically spent the past three years doing a public victory tour around the country kind of gives away the game as to his true mindset. He went there hoping he would at least get to shoot, and maybe kill protesters, and got exactly what he wanted. He’s a POS.

So the prosecution should never have been brought.

The authorities were in possession of all the relevant facts because he handed himself in and gave them a full account voluntarily! They actually had footage of what happened, yet they still brought a prosecution, costing the state millions and then made this young man a martyr as you say. What you seem to be implying is that Rittenhouse had some masterplan for getting this outcome, but that's not reasonable at all. Firstly, the state directly contributed to what made him a celebrity and there was no expectation that they would bring a prosecution when it was so obviously self defense. Secondly why would somebody that you claim 'hoped to shoot or kill protesters' risk firstly waiting for anarchists that he didn't know, to harm him (hitting him over the head with a skateboard) and then pointing concealed weapons at him at point blank range before shooting them? What you are suggesting isn't reasonable, it's crazy.

As for looking for trouble? It appears that the trigger point for the trouble was that Rittenhouse ... extinguished a series of fires lit. Is that looking for trouble?

Rittenhouse deserves his status. It was a political prosecution, deploying the full resources of the state against an 18 year old boy who is the only person that had any regard to the law that night.

 

[JimmyJeffers]

So the prosecution should never have been brought.

The authorities were in possession of all the relevant facts because he handed himself in and gave them a full account voluntarily! They actually had footage of what happened, yet they still brought a prosecution, costing the state millions and then made this young man a martyr as you say. What you seem to be implying is that Rittenhouse had some masterplan for getting this outcome, but that's not reasonable at all. Firstly, the state directly contributed to what made him a celebrity and there was no expectation that they would bring a prosecution when it was so obviously self defense. Secondly why would somebody that you claim 'hoped to shoot or kill protesters' risk firstly waiting for anarchists that he didn't know, to harm him (hitting him over the head with a skateboard) and then pointing concealed weapons at him at point blank range before shooting them? What you are suggesting isn't reasonable, it's crazy.

As for looking for trouble? It appears that the trigger point for the trouble was that Rittenhouse ... extinguished a series of fires lit. Is that looking for trouble?

Rittenhouse deserves his status. It was a political prosecution, deploying the full resources of the state against an 18 year old boy who is the only person that had any regard to the law that night.

Sorry get really confused these days but are you the lad that went onto Barcelona forums to ask about the best position to play Sergio Roberto?

 

[toffee82]

Sorry get really confused these days but are you the lad that went onto Barcelona forums to ask about the best position to play Sergio Roberto?

Right wing I imagine.

 

[Prevenger17]

So the prosecution should never have been brought.

The authorities were in possession of all the relevant facts because he handed himself in and gave them a full account voluntarily! They actually had footage of what happened, yet they still brought a prosecution, costing the state millions and then made this young man a martyr as you say. What you seem to be implying is that Rittenhouse had some masterplan for getting this outcome, but that's not reasonable at all. Firstly, the state directly contributed to what made him a celebrity and there was no expectation that they would bring a prosecution when it was so obviously self defense. Secondly why would somebody that you claim 'hoped to shoot or kill protesters' risk firstly waiting for anarchists that he didn't know, to harm him (hitting him over the head with a skateboard) and then pointing concealed weapons at him at point blank range before shooting them? What you are suggesting isn't reasonable, it's crazy.

As for looking for trouble? It appears that the trigger point for the trouble was that Rittenhouse ... extinguished a series of fires lit. Is that looking for trouble?

Rittenhouse deserves his status. It was a political prosecution, deploying the full resources of the state against an 18 year old boy who is the only person that had any regard to the law that night.

Lol

 

[Prevenger17]

Took him a day of deliberation, but he's just going to white-knuckle it folks. Pretend he hasn't been outed and press on. Respect it

 

[tsubaki]

I’ll concede that by the letter of the law, his acquittal was probably correct. That still doesn’t make him blameless or make what he did right. US law doesn’t really allow for the fact that he went looking for trouble to be taken into account, only his actions during the very narrow moment of time once he found it. The bottom line though is that two people would still be alive today if he would have simply stayed at home where he belonged. He wasn’t a law enforcement officer, so he had no business showing up there.

The fact that he’s basically spent the past three years doing a public victory tour around the country kind of gives away the game as to his true mindset. He went there hoping he would at least get to shoot, and maybe kill protesters, and got exactly what he wanted. He’s a POS.

TBF the first shooting was probably self-defence, but the second and third were much less certain.

Had Grosskreutz (the third victim) shot and killed Rittenhouse instead of being shot by him, no jury in the world would have convicted him of Rittenhouse's murder because of what he honestly believed (that Rittenhouse was an active shooter). Had one of the cops shot Rittenhouse, it would have been a "good shoot".

 

[Ruairi77]

This is pretty much my position. It was self defence, IMO, and the acquittal was correct.

But, he went there wanting to be Billy Big B0llocks, and to cosplay as a right wing militia hero. His actions were inflammatory in an already inflamed situation, and his milking of his new found celebrity since then is grim in the extreme.

I mean can you really claim self defense when you walk in to the middle of a riot with an illegaly held semi automatic weapon.
Someone threatened the kid with a skateboard.
He was hopped up on adrenaline and had no idea how to use the gun he stole and smuggled across the state line
A real GOP patriot!

 

[LostLegend]

Rittenhouse deserves his status. It was a political prosecution, deploying the full resources of the state against an 18 year old boy who is the only person that had any regard to the law that night.

He was 17 at the time, therefore a minor.

I think Rittenhouse is a role model for young men, the kind of citizen I would love my young boy to grow up to be like.

When your boy turns 17, would you give him a semi automatic rifle, drive him into the middle of a large protest to which you are both opposed and leave him there on his own to 'dispense justice'?

If you can't see the where the issue lies here, then you are as brainwashed as the rest of these blurts, Adversus... oops sorry, I mean "Toffee_Loaf"

Using the lack of a prosecution as some sort of get-out clause for his actions is foolish also. You don't get to be immune from criticism and indeed private law suites (as young Master Rittenhouse is currently finding out) just because you haven't directly broken any law. You are still responsible for the outcome of your own actions.