Rittenhouse pleads 'Not Guilty'

Amishman44

Master
Rating - 100%
24   0   0
Dec 30, 2009
2,605
113
Woodburn
Then there are a lot of people that will try to use a deflected argument and that is if they were in Kyle's shoes they wouldn't have been there in the first place. They'll avoid the intended context of your question.
Yup...they dodge the question because the correct response is...'I would (probably) do exactly what Kyle Rittenhouse did, in protecting my life against valid and violent attackers!'
To say they would do anything different is to say they have an unrealistic viewpoint or response to an actual and active attack against their life!
 

Amishman44

Master
Rating - 100%
24   0   0
Dec 30, 2009
2,605
113
Woodburn
I was just going to reply with pretty much the same point. You beat me to it. I’ve had people say that exact thing. It still comes down to saying, “he shouldn’t have been there.”

When I ask if Grosskreutz should have driven 90 minutes all the way from Milwaukee with his gun, they kinda, Er, um, well, but, hem, haw, <make excuses for Grosskreutz which don’t apply to KR>. They won’t think about the possibility that they’re wrong.
Yup...ALWAYS a double standard when it comes to the left doing the same or similar things that those on the right do 'wrongly'...at least according to the left!
 

dusty88

Master
Local Business Supporter
Rating - 100%
2   0   0
Aug 11, 2014
3,120
63
United States
Yup...they dodge the question because the correct response is...'I would (probably) do exactly what Kyle Rittenhouse did, in protecting my life against valid and violent attackers!'
To say they would do anything different is to say they have an unrealistic viewpoint or response to an actual and active attack against their life!
maybe. My interpretation is they aren't willing to put an effort into preparing to defend themselves and they know it. It's easier to think negatively about people who carry guns than to admit they don't want to make the effort.
 

Blackhawk2001

Grandmaster
Rating - 100%
2   0   0
Jun 20, 2010
8,000
83
NW Indianapolis
From that journalistic giant Raven Smith at the journal of record: Vogue.
These are the folks that don't believe that ANY gun is anything but bad. They simultaneously want to neuter the police - except when their property or persons are involved. And they don't see the hypocrisy in that no matter how often it's pointed out to them.
 

DoggyDaddy

Grandmaster
Site Supporter
Rating - 100%
73   0   1
Aug 18, 2011
57,956
77
Southside Indy
From that journalistic giant Raven Smith at the journal of record: Vogue.
scale


Wait. Wrong Raven probably, huh? :):
 

jamil

Grandmaster
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Jul 17, 2011
47,211
113
Gtown-ish
maybe. My interpretation is they aren't willing to put an effort into preparing to defend themselves and they know it. It's easier to think negatively about people who carry guns than to admit they don't want to make the effort.
I think it’s more than just that. And I’m just drawing references from my own experience with fake lefty pacifists like my wife’s sister and her husband.

My SIL claims that she would not take a life even if it meant saving hers or her children’s. I don’t think that has anything to do with not wanting to prepare to defend herself. It has to do with what looks more to me like an irrational moral superiority complex. The way she frames her side of it always paints her position as the most moral, without regard to reality. Facts roll off her like water rolls off a duck’s ass. I think she and others like her imagine the selves being the most moral practitioner of life supported by all their fake friends on Facebook who mutually praise each other for their fake lives and fake morality.

I think she fails to imagine the world we actually live in where people are actually ****** on their own, and not just because they voted for Trump. It’s not that she is too lazy to prepare. Her ideology gives her a false sense of morality. That’s the thing she manifests most that is the god she worships.
 

KG1

Grandmaster
Rating - 100%
66   0   0
Jan 20, 2009
15,319
149
Came across a link for a defense fund for Kyle Rittenhouse's buddy Dominick Black.
It was posted by Rekieta law. I know some of you are familiar with their youtube coverage of the Rittenhouse trial.

Apparently the prosecutor in that case (T. Binger) is still pursuing charges against D. Black on two counts of giving the AR to Rittenhouse on the night of the self defense incident that lead to two deaths of which KR was acquitted.

T. Binger is an un-ethical politically motivated POS that is taking his loss in the Rittenhouse trial out on D. Black by refusing to drop the charges against Black after Rittenhouse was acquitted.

Here is the link if anyone is interested in donating. **** gofundme and **** T. Binger.

 
Last edited:

HoughMade

Grandmaster
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Oct 24, 2012
31,877
149
Valparaiso
As if we needed any more evidence that the NBC news operation is full of POSs

Body cam footage of the NBC goon trying to follow the jury bus and the not-able-to-competently-lie producer in New York on the phone.

 

Leadeye

Grandmaster
Rating - 100%
4   0   0
Jan 19, 2009
31,277
113
.
NBC really should fire everybody involved, but I doubt that happens. Might have been interesting if he had run into the back of the bus while tailing it and talking on the phone.
 

tackdriver

Marksman
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Apr 20, 2010
176
43
The looting will stop when store owners put armed security in their stores with full video coverage of all entry points. A programmed audio of "Stop, leave the building," is started when the entry is breached. The armed guards then shoot everyone who indicates, by entering the building, their intent to kill the guards and/or burn the store .
I've wondered about that for years. If you have a sign saying "if you proceed, I must assume you intend to inflict serious harm or death...", then one crosses the line, is this justification enough? I once took a training class in which, after getting the 'perp' on their belly, with hands and feet contorted in some pretzel configuration, we were told to state something like "I must assume you have a concealed weapon. If you attempt to get up or unlink your hands and feet, I will believe you intend to attack me, and will be forced to shoot you immediately to protect myself"... or some such.

The man doing the training was spot on about many other things, was a former cop, and his business was training both LE and private security all over the place. On this however, I raised an eyebrow. I could see telling myself "they may have a weapon, and if they try to get up, shoot.", but saying this seemed long, silly, and not likely to matter. Years later... Hmmm... I really do wonder about this concept.
 

Site Supporter

INGO Supporter

Forum statistics

Threads
493,690
Messages
8,935,967
Members
48,544
Latest member
Zmh95
Top Bottom