It's a perfect formula. One is allowed to protect property and one's safety with a gun if needed. Criminals no longer get to burn and pillage with impunity. The outcome was perfect. Two bad guys dead, and the good guy walks.
Originally posted by: Kevin Lewis
Our resident conservitards squeal their gun love and their starry-eyed admiration for a teenager who shot three people.
Not at all surprising.
The kid shot three criminals who attempted to hurt him. The punks got exactly what they deserved. Yes, I'm very happy when bad guys die and good guys walk.
When humans with guns threaten other humans with guns, somebody is going down.
I said earlier I guessed the kid would not be found guilty based on "threat." Apparently Wisconsin law addresses this in some fashion that the jury included in their decision making.
Also, apparently the kid was able to benefit from a loophole (inadequacy, etc.) in their laws concerning being underage to carry a weapon. Something about the length of his weapon being inside (or outside??) the requirement to convict on that point. Why the judge dismissed it from the final charges.
The videos were a mess....who could tell who was where, who was more 'threatening'? I suspect the verdict was the right one. Maybe just barely, but right by the law.
Candy
The aspect of being "underage" and the length of the weapon had/has nothing to do with what transpired - Rittenhouse was attacked by marauding thugs and he defended himself - a clear case of self defense. All of the lying media driven prosecution was found to be baseless.
Originally posted by: David Miller
The aspect of being "underage" and the length of the weapon had/has nothing to do with what transpired - Rittenhouse was attracked by marauding thugs and he defended himself. A clear case of self defense.
You got one word partially right..."attracked". The kid was attracted by the prospect of circulating among others who had no business doing what they were doing, to be a hero. He defended himself, yes, but it not just an isolated second in time. None were there to do any good, all were looking for trouble.
Candy
Just how positive are you that "all" were looking for trouble? I doubt that your statement is correct. Anyway, what I said about what transpired still stands - Rittenhouse was attacked and lawfully defended himself.
OK, a teenager grabs a gun, travels across state lines, and kills two people. We're all cool with that, I guess.
Now imagine that he's Black.
Originally posted by: Boilerman
It's a perfect formula. One is allowed to protect property and one's safety with a gun if needed. Criminals no longer get to burn and pillage with impunity. The outcome was perfect. Two bad guys dead, and the good guy walks.
Maybe so, but the Killer Kid wasn't defending his own property. Actually, he wasn't defending anything--he was just strutting around scowling at people.
I'm disgusted, but not surprised, at your statement that the people who were murdered were the "bad guys" and the murderer was the "good guy." I know you approve of gun love. Now, apparently, you approve of murder.
What an awful thing to be in favor of.
"OK, a teenager grabs a gun, travels across state lines, and kills two people. We're all cool with that, I guess." Another lie by kevin - it was proven in court that Rittenhouse did not travel across state lines with a gun. Secondly, the two who died were killed AFTER attacking Rittenhouse. Get your facts straight and quit making shit up to suit your twisted narrative. Christ, do you EVER tell the trurh?
Originally posted by: O2bnVegas
You got one word partially right..."attracked". The kid was attracted by the prospect of circulating among others who had no business doing what they were doing, to be a hero. He defended himself, yes, but it not just an isolated second in time. None were there to do any good, all were looking for trouble.
Candy
Of course. The Killer Kid wanted to be a manly man, which for some people, comes about when you have a big intimidating substitute penis, um, GUN and brandish it at people.
I absolutely cannot fathom how or why even the most rabid conservitard gun nuts are in favor of this. When everybody has a gun, shouting matches and fistfights turn into deadly gun battles, and people die. Towns in the Old West knew this and one of their first law and order measures was to prohibit people from carrying guns in town. Before such regulations were implemented, the town would be a bloodbath.
Despite all the "stand your ground" dogcrap, citizens have the obligation to avoid escalating tense situations. The Killer Kid made a bad situation much worse by bringing his manly man gun into the fray. People died.
Why is that something to cheer about??
