I agree, but he isn't indicted for aggravated idiocyPorteroso said:Wangchung said:
Any speak of his travel to the riots means nothing. He has as much right to be there guarding against the rioters as the rioters had to be there rioting. Period. He had every right to use deadly force against a violent man threatening to kill him and chasing him, grabbing for his gun in his final moments. He had every right to defend himself from the man who tried to hit him in the head with a skateboard. He had every right to shoot the armed rioter who was aiming his pistol at him. The kid should walk.
No but he didn't have any reason to be there. Whether he had the right to be flaunting an AR he didn't own, in another state, was an interesting legal discussion, but the guy is an idiot who was looking for trouble. Trouble may have found him before he started his own, but he's an idiot for being there at all.
Kyle Rittenhouse trial
54,478 Views |
970 Replies |
Last: 1 yr ago by boognish_bear
Porteroso said:Wangchung said:
Any speak of his travel to the riots means nothing. He has as much right to be there guarding against the rioters as the rioters had to be there rioting. Period. He had every right to use deadly force against a violent man threatening to kill him and chasing him, grabbing for his gun in his final moments. He had every right to defend himself from the man who tried to hit him in the head with a skateboard. He had every right to shoot the armed rioter who was aiming his pistol at him. The kid should walk.
No but he didn't have any reason to be there. Whether he had the right to be flaunting an AR he didn't own, in another state, was an interesting legal discussion, but the guy is an idiot who was looking for trouble. Trouble may have found him before he started his own, but he's an idiot for being there at all.
Edit: also wasn't he 17? Can we just agree that we wouldn't enjoy the results of a police force full of 17 year olds? That maybe policing should not be done by rando 17 year olds?
Play stupid games win stupid prizes.
I wonder how many posters are encouraging their kids and grandkids to go armed to violent protests. If so, great parenting.
It's insane how much the media spins this.
He had every reason to be there. He was there to protect property and lives. He shot some goons. Give him a medal already. The world has two less thugs in it. We are all better off.Porteroso said:Wangchung said:
Any speak of his travel to the riots means nothing. He has as much right to be there guarding against the rioters as the rioters had to be there rioting. Period. He had every right to use deadly force against a violent man threatening to kill him and chasing him, grabbing for his gun in his final moments. He had every right to defend himself from the man who tried to hit him in the head with a skateboard. He had every right to shoot the armed rioter who was aiming his pistol at him. The kid should walk.
No but he didn't have any reason to be there. Whether he had the right to be flaunting an AR he didn't own, in another state, was an interesting legal discussion, but the guy is an idiot who was looking for trouble. Trouble may have found him before he started his own, but he's an idiot for being there at all.
Edit: also wasn't he 17? Can we just agree that we wouldn't enjoy the results of a police force full of 17 year olds? That maybe policing should not be done by rando 17 year olds?
Your ideas are intriguing to me, and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.
It is. If you are burning down buildings and rioting for "social justice," expect to get shot. They got what they deserved.BearTruth13 said:Porteroso said:Wangchung said:
Any speak of his travel to the riots means nothing. He has as much right to be there guarding against the rioters as the rioters had to be there rioting. Period. He had every right to use deadly force against a violent man threatening to kill him and chasing him, grabbing for his gun in his final moments. He had every right to defend himself from the man who tried to hit him in the head with a skateboard. He had every right to shoot the armed rioter who was aiming his pistol at him. The kid should walk.
No but he didn't have any reason to be there. Whether he had the right to be flaunting an AR he didn't own, in another state, was an interesting legal discussion, but the guy is an idiot who was looking for trouble. Trouble may have found him before he started his own, but he's an idiot for being there at all.
Edit: also wasn't he 17? Can we just agree that we wouldn't enjoy the results of a police force full of 17 year olds? That maybe policing should not be done by rando 17 year olds?
Play stupid games win stupid prizes.
I wonder how many posters are encouraging their kids and grandkids to go armed to violent protests. If so, great parenting.
Your ideas are intriguing to me, and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.
Ahh, blame the victims. Here is an idea, why not lock criminals up and keep those communities safe for the people that have to live there?BearTruth13 said:GrowlTowel said:clubhi said:Where do you live exactly? 1750?GrowlTowel said:BearTruth13 said:GrowlTowel said:BearTruth13 said:Wangchung said:
Any speak of his travel to the riots means nothing. He has as much right to be there guarding against the rioters as the rioters had to be there rioting. Period. He had every right to use deadly force against a violent man threatening to kill him and chasing him, grabbing for his gun in his final moments. He had every right to defend himself from the man who tried to hit him in the head with a skateboard. He had every right to shoot the armed rioter who was aiming his pistol at him. The kid should walk.
Made a dumb choice and put himself in a situation to only escalate violence. The likelihood he would be attacked and thereby shoot someone was high. And he purposefully put himself there anyways.
Don't think he should spend his life in jail but he shouldn't get off scot free.
He is on trial for a crime he didn't commit. Generally speaking, we put people jail for committing actual crimes.
If I had an illegally obtained weapon and was out in downtown and shot a few people, I would certainly be on trial and probably going to prison on at least a minor charge.
Good for you. Here in the real world we shoot criminals that commit, you know, violent crimes. Like the goons that got shot.
Houston. Murder rate up 20% thanks to people that think like you. Shoot criminals. It's win, win.
I'm down in Houston too. Not exactly quaking in my boots. Stay away from the parts of the city that have always been violent at midnight and you are fine.
Your ideas are intriguing to me, and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.
GrowlTowel said:Ahh, blame the victims. Here is an idea, why not lock criminals up and keep those communities safe for the people that have to live there?BearTruth13 said:GrowlTowel said:clubhi said:Where do you live exactly? 1750?GrowlTowel said:BearTruth13 said:GrowlTowel said:BearTruth13 said:Wangchung said:
Any speak of his travel to the riots means nothing. He has as much right to be there guarding against the rioters as the rioters had to be there rioting. Period. He had every right to use deadly force against a violent man threatening to kill him and chasing him, grabbing for his gun in his final moments. He had every right to defend himself from the man who tried to hit him in the head with a skateboard. He had every right to shoot the armed rioter who was aiming his pistol at him. The kid should walk.
Made a dumb choice and put himself in a situation to only escalate violence. The likelihood he would be attacked and thereby shoot someone was high. And he purposefully put himself there anyways.
Don't think he should spend his life in jail but he shouldn't get off scot free.
He is on trial for a crime he didn't commit. Generally speaking, we put people jail for committing actual crimes.
If I had an illegally obtained weapon and was out in downtown and shot a few people, I would certainly be on trial and probably going to prison on at least a minor charge.
Good for you. Here in the real world we shoot criminals that commit, you know, violent crimes. Like the goons that got shot.
Houston. Murder rate up 20% thanks to people that think like you. Shoot criminals. It's win, win.
I'm down in Houston too. Not exactly quaking in my boots. Stay away from the parts of the city that have always been violent at midnight and you are fine.
Let me know when you find a major city with zero crime. I'd love to travel there.
Sorry big ole Houston makes you nervous.
It doesn't. I carry. Lock criminals up.BearTruth13 said:GrowlTowel said:Ahh, blame the victims. Here is an idea, why not lock criminals up and keep those communities safe for the people that have to live there?BearTruth13 said:GrowlTowel said:clubhi said:Where do you live exactly? 1750?GrowlTowel said:BearTruth13 said:GrowlTowel said:BearTruth13 said:Wangchung said:
Any speak of his travel to the riots means nothing. He has as much right to be there guarding against the rioters as the rioters had to be there rioting. Period. He had every right to use deadly force against a violent man threatening to kill him and chasing him, grabbing for his gun in his final moments. He had every right to defend himself from the man who tried to hit him in the head with a skateboard. He had every right to shoot the armed rioter who was aiming his pistol at him. The kid should walk.
Made a dumb choice and put himself in a situation to only escalate violence. The likelihood he would be attacked and thereby shoot someone was high. And he purposefully put himself there anyways.
Don't think he should spend his life in jail but he shouldn't get off scot free.
He is on trial for a crime he didn't commit. Generally speaking, we put people jail for committing actual crimes.
If I had an illegally obtained weapon and was out in downtown and shot a few people, I would certainly be on trial and probably going to prison on at least a minor charge.
Good for you. Here in the real world we shoot criminals that commit, you know, violent crimes. Like the goons that got shot.
Houston. Murder rate up 20% thanks to people that think like you. Shoot criminals. It's win, win.
I'm down in Houston too. Not exactly quaking in my boots. Stay away from the parts of the city that have always been violent at midnight and you are fine.
Let me know when you find a major city with zero crime. I'd love to travel there.
Sorry big ole Houston makes you nervous.
Your ideas are intriguing to me, and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.
GrowlTowel said:It doesn't. I carry. Lock criminals up.BearTruth13 said:GrowlTowel said:Ahh, blame the victims. Here is an idea, why not lock criminals up and keep those communities safe for the people that have to live there?BearTruth13 said:GrowlTowel said:clubhi said:Where do you live exactly? 1750?GrowlTowel said:BearTruth13 said:GrowlTowel said:BearTruth13 said:Wangchung said:
Any speak of his travel to the riots means nothing. He has as much right to be there guarding against the rioters as the rioters had to be there rioting. Period. He had every right to use deadly force against a violent man threatening to kill him and chasing him, grabbing for his gun in his final moments. He had every right to defend himself from the man who tried to hit him in the head with a skateboard. He had every right to shoot the armed rioter who was aiming his pistol at him. The kid should walk.
Made a dumb choice and put himself in a situation to only escalate violence. The likelihood he would be attacked and thereby shoot someone was high. And he purposefully put himself there anyways.
Don't think he should spend his life in jail but he shouldn't get off scot free.
He is on trial for a crime he didn't commit. Generally speaking, we put people jail for committing actual crimes.
If I had an illegally obtained weapon and was out in downtown and shot a few people, I would certainly be on trial and probably going to prison on at least a minor charge.
Good for you. Here in the real world we shoot criminals that commit, you know, violent crimes. Like the goons that got shot.
Houston. Murder rate up 20% thanks to people that think like you. Shoot criminals. It's win, win.
I'm down in Houston too. Not exactly quaking in my boots. Stay away from the parts of the city that have always been violent at midnight and you are fine.
Let me know when you find a major city with zero crime. I'd love to travel there.
Sorry big ole Houston makes you nervous.
Did you find that mythical city in human history with zero crime?
It's just outside the mythical city in human history that thrived without police and with disarmed citizens.BearTruth13 said:GrowlTowel said:It doesn't. I carry. Lock criminals up.BearTruth13 said:GrowlTowel said:Ahh, blame the victims. Here is an idea, why not lock criminals up and keep those communities safe for the people that have to live there?BearTruth13 said:GrowlTowel said:clubhi said:Where do you live exactly? 1750?GrowlTowel said:BearTruth13 said:GrowlTowel said:BearTruth13 said:Wangchung said:
Any speak of his travel to the riots means nothing. He has as much right to be there guarding against the rioters as the rioters had to be there rioting. Period. He had every right to use deadly force against a violent man threatening to kill him and chasing him, grabbing for his gun in his final moments. He had every right to defend himself from the man who tried to hit him in the head with a skateboard. He had every right to shoot the armed rioter who was aiming his pistol at him. The kid should walk.
Made a dumb choice and put himself in a situation to only escalate violence. The likelihood he would be attacked and thereby shoot someone was high. And he purposefully put himself there anyways.
Don't think he should spend his life in jail but he shouldn't get off scot free.
He is on trial for a crime he didn't commit. Generally speaking, we put people jail for committing actual crimes.
If I had an illegally obtained weapon and was out in downtown and shot a few people, I would certainly be on trial and probably going to prison on at least a minor charge.
Good for you. Here in the real world we shoot criminals that commit, you know, violent crimes. Like the goons that got shot.
Houston. Murder rate up 20% thanks to people that think like you. Shoot criminals. It's win, win.
I'm down in Houston too. Not exactly quaking in my boots. Stay away from the parts of the city that have always been violent at midnight and you are fine.
Let me know when you find a major city with zero crime. I'd love to travel there.
Sorry big ole Houston makes you nervous.
Did you find that mythical city in human history with zero crime?
Our vibrations were getting nasty. But why? I was puzzled, frustrated... Had we deteriorated to the level of dumb beasts?
My God this is regime propaganda.Wangchung said:Truly, it's easy to see the msm is the enemy of all Americans. If we had an unbiased media the Republicans would rule.Jack Bauer said:SUPERCUT!
— Tom Elliott (@tomselliott) November 9, 2021
Media: Why do reporting when we already know Rittenhouse is a terrorist? pic.twitter.com/abebdPyiIs
This is Pravda level reporting.
The results seem good to me; two dead violent rioters and one maimed rioter who won't be out trying to shoot people ever again. I know I know, "but she was dressed like a **** in a bad part of town so her rape is her own fault" and all that, but at worst Kyle held a borrowed gun. Thankfully he had a gun, because we have seen what BLM mobs do to people armed with less who dare to protect property and lives from rioters.Porteroso said:Wangchung said:
Any speak of his travel to the riots means nothing. He has as much right to be there guarding against the rioters as the rioters had to be there rioting. Period. He had every right to use deadly force against a violent man threatening to kill him and chasing him, grabbing for his gun in his final moments. He had every right to defend himself from the man who tried to hit him in the head with a skateboard. He had every right to shoot the armed rioter who was aiming his pistol at him. The kid should walk.
No but he didn't have any reason to be there. Whether he had the right to be flaunting an AR he didn't own, in another state, was an interesting legal discussion, but the guy is an idiot who was looking for trouble. Trouble may have found him before he started his own, but he's an idiot for being there at all.
Edit: also wasn't he 17? Can we just agree that we wouldn't enjoy the results of a police force full of 17 year olds? That maybe policing should not be done by rando 17 year olds?
Our vibrations were getting nasty. But why? I was puzzled, frustrated... Had we deteriorated to the level of dumb beasts?
Redbrickbear said:My God this is regime propaganda.Wangchung said:Truly, it's easy to see the msm is the enemy of all Americans. If we had an unbiased media the Republicans would rule.Jack Bauer said:SUPERCUT!
— Tom Elliott (@tomselliott) November 9, 2021
Media: Why do reporting when we already know Rittenhouse is a terrorist? pic.twitter.com/abebdPyiIs
This is Pravda level reporting.
I see Nick Sandman type lawsuits toward NBC and TYT for Rittenhouse.
Our vibrations were getting nasty. But why? I was puzzled, frustrated... Had we deteriorated to the level of dumb beasts?
Not that there are 100 examples / day, but this definitely is top 10 media "narrative" vs. "truth" coverage.
Did the pedo or the other felon that he shot have a good reason to be there? Did Gaige have a good reason to pull a gun on him or to be there at all? All 3 of the people that he shot were from other states and most likely paid to go there and start trouble.Porteroso said:Wangchung said:
Any speak of his travel to the riots means nothing. He has as much right to be there guarding against the rioters as the rioters had to be there rioting. Period. He had every right to use deadly force against a violent man threatening to kill him and chasing him, grabbing for his gun in his final moments. He had every right to defend himself from the man who tried to hit him in the head with a skateboard. He had every right to shoot the armed rioter who was aiming his pistol at him. The kid should walk.
No but he didn't have any reason to be there. Whether he had the right to be flaunting an AR he didn't own, in another state, was an interesting legal discussion, but the guy is an idiot who was looking for trouble. Trouble may have found him before he started his own, but he's an idiot for being there at all.
Edit: also wasn't he 17? Can we just agree that we wouldn't enjoy the results of a police force full of 17 year olds? That maybe policing should not be done by rando 17 year olds?
Rosenbaum was a disturbed, mentally ill, bipolar, suicidal, pedophile.muddybrazos said:Did the pedo or the other felon that he shot have a good reason to be there? Did Gaige have a good reason to pull a gun on him or to be there at all? All 3 of the people that he shot were from other states and most likely paid to go there and start trouble.Porteroso said:Wangchung said:
Any speak of his travel to the riots means nothing. He has as much right to be there guarding against the rioters as the rioters had to be there rioting. Period. He had every right to use deadly force against a violent man threatening to kill him and chasing him, grabbing for his gun in his final moments. He had every right to defend himself from the man who tried to hit him in the head with a skateboard. He had every right to shoot the armed rioter who was aiming his pistol at him. The kid should walk.
No but he didn't have any reason to be there. Whether he had the right to be flaunting an AR he didn't own, in another state, was an interesting legal discussion, but the guy is an idiot who was looking for trouble. Trouble may have found him before he started his own, but he's an idiot for being there at all.
Edit: also wasn't he 17? Can we just agree that we wouldn't enjoy the results of a police force full of 17 year olds? That maybe policing should not be done by rando 17 year olds?
He had less reason to be at that location than Rittenhouse.
Oh come on, we can't hold those trivial things against him! He was out rioting in the name of a violent criminal who fought police and went for a knife and ended up shot for his troubles! That's a free pass to do whatever you want and if your victims fight back we just say they were in the wrong place! Justice!Jack Bauer said:Rosenbaum was a disturbed, mentally ill, bipolar, suicidal, pedophile.muddybrazos said:Did the pedo or the other felon that he shot have a good reason to be there? Did Gaige have a good reason to pull a gun on him or to be there at all? All 3 of the people that he shot were from other states and most likely paid to go there and start trouble.Porteroso said:Wangchung said:
Any speak of his travel to the riots means nothing. He has as much right to be there guarding against the rioters as the rioters had to be there rioting. Period. He had every right to use deadly force against a violent man threatening to kill him and chasing him, grabbing for his gun in his final moments. He had every right to defend himself from the man who tried to hit him in the head with a skateboard. He had every right to shoot the armed rioter who was aiming his pistol at him. The kid should walk.
No but he didn't have any reason to be there. Whether he had the right to be flaunting an AR he didn't own, in another state, was an interesting legal discussion, but the guy is an idiot who was looking for trouble. Trouble may have found him before he started his own, but he's an idiot for being there at all.
Edit: also wasn't he 17? Can we just agree that we wouldn't enjoy the results of a police force full of 17 year olds? That maybe policing should not be done by rando 17 year olds?
He had less reason to be at that location than Rittenhouse.
Our vibrations were getting nasty. But why? I was puzzled, frustrated... Had we deteriorated to the level of dumb beasts?
"shot while attending a racial justice protest" is how the media is framing it.Wangchung said:Oh come on, we can't hold those trivial things against him! He was out rioting in the name of a violent criminal who fought police and went for a knife and ended up shot for his troubles! That's a free pass to do whatever you want and if your victims fight back we just say they were in the wrong place! Justice!Jack Bauer said:Rosenbaum was a disturbed, mentally ill, bipolar, suicidal, pedophile.muddybrazos said:Did the pedo or the other felon that he shot have a good reason to be there? Did Gaige have a good reason to pull a gun on him or to be there at all? All 3 of the people that he shot were from other states and most likely paid to go there and start trouble.Porteroso said:Wangchung said:
Any speak of his travel to the riots means nothing. He has as much right to be there guarding against the rioters as the rioters had to be there rioting. Period. He had every right to use deadly force against a violent man threatening to kill him and chasing him, grabbing for his gun in his final moments. He had every right to defend himself from the man who tried to hit him in the head with a skateboard. He had every right to shoot the armed rioter who was aiming his pistol at him. The kid should walk.
No but he didn't have any reason to be there. Whether he had the right to be flaunting an AR he didn't own, in another state, was an interesting legal discussion, but the guy is an idiot who was looking for trouble. Trouble may have found him before he started his own, but he's an idiot for being there at all.
Edit: also wasn't he 17? Can we just agree that we wouldn't enjoy the results of a police force full of 17 year olds? That maybe policing should not be done by rando 17 year olds?
He had less reason to be at that location than Rittenhouse.
Never forget this pic.twitter.com/lAN1orBXt4
— Jack Posobiec 🇺🇸 (@JackPosobiec) November 9, 2021
#unityJack Bauer said:Never forget this pic.twitter.com/lAN1orBXt4
— Jack Posobiec 🇺🇸 (@JackPosobiec) November 9, 2021
Wow this is all they have...case dismissed
One of the men fatally shot by Kyle Rittenhouse was in a “horizontal” position, a forensic pathologist told Wisconsin jurors, suggesting the victim wasn't a threat when he was gunned down. https://t.co/wE1KI3fzwg
— MSNBC (@MSNBC) November 9, 2021
President Poopy Pants already labeled and convicted him no?
muddybrazos said:Did the pedo or the other felon that he shot have a good reason to be there? Did Gaige have a good reason to pull a gun on him or to be there at all? All 3 of the people that he shot were from other states and most likely paid to go there and start trouble.Porteroso said:Wangchung said:
Any speak of his travel to the riots means nothing. He has as much right to be there guarding against the rioters as the rioters had to be there rioting. Period. He had every right to use deadly force against a violent man threatening to kill him and chasing him, grabbing for his gun in his final moments. He had every right to defend himself from the man who tried to hit him in the head with a skateboard. He had every right to shoot the armed rioter who was aiming his pistol at him. The kid should walk.
No but he didn't have any reason to be there. Whether he had the right to be flaunting an AR he didn't own, in another state, was an interesting legal discussion, but the guy is an idiot who was looking for trouble. Trouble may have found him before he started his own, but he's an idiot for being there at all.
Edit: also wasn't he 17? Can we just agree that we wouldn't enjoy the results of a police force full of 17 year olds? That maybe policing should not be done by rando 17 year olds?
So he's an idiot 17 year old that borrowed an AR and went to police a riot filled with idiots. Does that make you feel better?
They were doing something dumb so he did too? How old are you? That one hasn't worked for me in a long time, probably ever.
Some people claim being a cop is dumb because you can get shot. Some people think it's dumb to let people burn down cities while politicians hold back police and the national guard.Porteroso said:muddybrazos said:Did the pedo or the other felon that he shot have a good reason to be there? Did Gaige have a good reason to pull a gun on him or to be there at all? All 3 of the people that he shot were from other states and most likely paid to go there and start trouble.Porteroso said:Wangchung said:
Any speak of his travel to the riots means nothing. He has as much right to be there guarding against the rioters as the rioters had to be there rioting. Period. He had every right to use deadly force against a violent man threatening to kill him and chasing him, grabbing for his gun in his final moments. He had every right to defend himself from the man who tried to hit him in the head with a skateboard. He had every right to shoot the armed rioter who was aiming his pistol at him. The kid should walk.
No but he didn't have any reason to be there. Whether he had the right to be flaunting an AR he didn't own, in another state, was an interesting legal discussion, but the guy is an idiot who was looking for trouble. Trouble may have found him before he started his own, but he's an idiot for being there at all.
Edit: also wasn't he 17? Can we just agree that we wouldn't enjoy the results of a police force full of 17 year olds? That maybe policing should not be done by rando 17 year olds?
So he's an idiot 17 year old that borrowed an AR and went to police a riot filled with idiots. Does that make you feel better?
They were doing something dumb so he did too? How old are you? That one hasn't worked for me in a long time, probably ever.
Our vibrations were getting nasty. But why? I was puzzled, frustrated... Had we deteriorated to the level of dumb beasts?
Lmao
Rittenhouse prosecutors told a witness to change his statement. pic.twitter.com/F0TYqWjRlj
— Cernovich (@Cernovich) November 10, 2021
Porteroso said:muddybrazos said:Did the pedo or the other felon that he shot have a good reason to be there? Did Gaige have a good reason to pull a gun on him or to be there at all? All 3 of the people that he shot were from other states and most likely paid to go there and start trouble.Porteroso said:Wangchung said:
Any speak of his travel to the riots means nothing. He has as much right to be there guarding against the rioters as the rioters had to be there rioting. Period. He had every right to use deadly force against a violent man threatening to kill him and chasing him, grabbing for his gun in his final moments. He had every right to defend himself from the man who tried to hit him in the head with a skateboard. He had every right to shoot the armed rioter who was aiming his pistol at him. The kid should walk.
No but he didn't have any reason to be there. Whether he had the right to be flaunting an AR he didn't own, in another state, was an interesting legal discussion, but the guy is an idiot who was looking for trouble. Trouble may have found him before he started his own, but he's an idiot for being there at all.
Edit: also wasn't he 17? Can we just agree that we wouldn't enjoy the results of a police force full of 17 year olds? That maybe policing should not be done by rando 17 year olds?
So he's an idiot 17 year old that borrowed an AR and went to police a riot filled with idiots. Does that make you feel better?
They were doing something dumb so he did too? How old are you? That one hasn't worked for me in a long time, probably ever.
He set out to literally serve and protect innocent people from violent criminals. God pity the country that needs heroes. God d@m n the country that demonizes them.
That's a gross mischaracterization of why he was there. He didn't just hear about some planned demonstration and show up to bust some heads. He was asked to be there to help protect a business. I'm not surprised though. What time is your MSNBC show? I wouldn't want to miss it this week.Porteroso said:muddybrazos said:Did the pedo or the other felon that he shot have a good reason to be there? Did Gaige have a good reason to pull a gun on him or to be there at all? All 3 of the people that he shot were from other states and most likely paid to go there and start trouble.Porteroso said:Wangchung said:
Any speak of his travel to the riots means nothing. He has as much right to be there guarding against the rioters as the rioters had to be there rioting. Period. He had every right to use deadly force against a violent man threatening to kill him and chasing him, grabbing for his gun in his final moments. He had every right to defend himself from the man who tried to hit him in the head with a skateboard. He had every right to shoot the armed rioter who was aiming his pistol at him. The kid should walk.
No but he didn't have any reason to be there. Whether he had the right to be flaunting an AR he didn't own, in another state, was an interesting legal discussion, but the guy is an idiot who was looking for trouble. Trouble may have found him before he started his own, but he's an idiot for being there at all.
Edit: also wasn't he 17? Can we just agree that we wouldn't enjoy the results of a police force full of 17 year olds? That maybe policing should not be done by rando 17 year olds?
So he's an idiot 17 year old that borrowed an AR and went to police a riot filled with idiots. Does that make you feel better?
They were doing something dumb so he did too? How old are you? That one hasn't worked for me in a long time, probably ever.
Malbec said:That's a gross mischaracterization of why he was there. He didn't just hear about some planned demonstration and show up to bust some heads. He was asked to be there to help protect a business. I'm not surprised though. What time is your MSNBC show? I wouldn't want to miss it this week.Porteroso said:muddybrazos said:Did the pedo or the other felon that he shot have a good reason to be there? Did Gaige have a good reason to pull a gun on him or to be there at all? All 3 of the people that he shot were from other states and most likely paid to go there and start trouble.Porteroso said:Wangchung said:
Any speak of his travel to the riots means nothing. He has as much right to be there guarding against the rioters as the rioters had to be there rioting. Period. He had every right to use deadly force against a violent man threatening to kill him and chasing him, grabbing for his gun in his final moments. He had every right to defend himself from the man who tried to hit him in the head with a skateboard. He had every right to shoot the armed rioter who was aiming his pistol at him. The kid should walk.
No but he didn't have any reason to be there. Whether he had the right to be flaunting an AR he didn't own, in another state, was an interesting legal discussion, but the guy is an idiot who was looking for trouble. Trouble may have found him before he started his own, but he's an idiot for being there at all.
Edit: also wasn't he 17? Can we just agree that we wouldn't enjoy the results of a police force full of 17 year olds? That maybe policing should not be done by rando 17 year olds?
So he's an idiot 17 year old that borrowed an AR and went to police a riot filled with idiots. Does that make you feel better?
They were doing something dumb so he did too? How old are you? That one hasn't worked for me in a long time, probably ever.
I bet they stream them on the internet now, if you need to catch up. Technology is crazy right?
Also I saw the video, and was not aware he was anywhere near a business. Where was this business he was protecting in the video? Seems he was out amongst the rioters, on the street. That's just what I remember from the video, I could be wrong, but seems "he was asked to protect a business" is a gross mischaracterization of what he did.
Obviously I am not in the courtroom but with the evidence that has been reported, I don't see how the prosecution survives directed verdict after it closes.
There is simply no need to subject the jury to harassment for their verdict. Judge should end the circus.
There is simply no need to subject the jury to harassment for their verdict. Judge should end the circus.
Your ideas are intriguing to me, and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.
Porteroso said:Malbec said:That's a gross mischaracterization of why he was there. He didn't just hear about some planned demonstration and show up to bust some heads. He was asked to be there to help protect a business. I'm not surprised though. What time is your MSNBC show? I wouldn't want to miss it this week.Porteroso said:muddybrazos said:Did the pedo or the other felon that he shot have a good reason to be there? Did Gaige have a good reason to pull a gun on him or to be there at all? All 3 of the people that he shot were from other states and most likely paid to go there and start trouble.Porteroso said:Wangchung said:
Any speak of his travel to the riots means nothing. He has as much right to be there guarding against the rioters as the rioters had to be there rioting. Period. He had every right to use deadly force against a violent man threatening to kill him and chasing him, grabbing for his gun in his final moments. He had every right to defend himself from the man who tried to hit him in the head with a skateboard. He had every right to shoot the armed rioter who was aiming his pistol at him. The kid should walk.
No but he didn't have any reason to be there. Whether he had the right to be flaunting an AR he didn't own, in another state, was an interesting legal discussion, but the guy is an idiot who was looking for trouble. Trouble may have found him before he started his own, but he's an idiot for being there at all.
Edit: also wasn't he 17? Can we just agree that we wouldn't enjoy the results of a police force full of 17 year olds? That maybe policing should not be done by rando 17 year olds?
So he's an idiot 17 year old that borrowed an AR and went to police a riot filled with idiots. Does that make you feel better?
They were doing something dumb so he did too? How old are you? That one hasn't worked for me in a long time, probably ever.
I bet they stream them on the internet now, if you need to catch up. Technology is crazy right?
Also I saw the video, and was not aware he was anywhere near a business. Where was this business he was protecting in the video? Seems he was out amongst the rioters, on the street. That's just what I remember from the video, I could be wrong, but seems "he was asked to protect a business" is a gross mischaracterization of what he did.
You don't seem to know much about this case. Why offer opinions on it?
Your ideas are intriguing to me, and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.
They wanted to disarm him because his presence was interfering with their malicious (not just dumb) conduct.Porteroso said:Malbec said:That's a gross mischaracterization of why he was there. He didn't just hear about some planned demonstration and show up to bust some heads. He was asked to be there to help protect a business. I'm not surprised though. What time is your MSNBC show? I wouldn't want to miss it this week.Porteroso said:muddybrazos said:Did the pedo or the other felon that he shot have a good reason to be there? Did Gaige have a good reason to pull a gun on him or to be there at all? All 3 of the people that he shot were from other states and most likely paid to go there and start trouble.Porteroso said:Wangchung said:
Any speak of his travel to the riots means nothing. He has as much right to be there guarding against the rioters as the rioters had to be there rioting. Period. He had every right to use deadly force against a violent man threatening to kill him and chasing him, grabbing for his gun in his final moments. He had every right to defend himself from the man who tried to hit him in the head with a skateboard. He had every right to shoot the armed rioter who was aiming his pistol at him. The kid should walk.
No but he didn't have any reason to be there. Whether he had the right to be flaunting an AR he didn't own, in another state, was an interesting legal discussion, but the guy is an idiot who was looking for trouble. Trouble may have found him before he started his own, but he's an idiot for being there at all.
Edit: also wasn't he 17? Can we just agree that we wouldn't enjoy the results of a police force full of 17 year olds? That maybe policing should not be done by rando 17 year olds?
So he's an idiot 17 year old that borrowed an AR and went to police a riot filled with idiots. Does that make you feel better?
They were doing something dumb so he did too? How old are you? That one hasn't worked for me in a long time, probably ever.
I bet they stream them on the internet now, if you need to catch up. Technology is crazy right?
Also I saw the video, and was not aware he was anywhere near a business. Where was this business he was protecting in the video? Seems he was out amongst the rioters, on the street. That's just what I remember from the video, I could be wrong, but seems "he was asked to protect a business" is a gross mischaracterization of what he did.
I jumped in late on the trial and had a hard time telling whose presentation I was looking at. You know it's not going well when the news says you're cross-examining a witness, and it's your own witness. The prosecutor must have thought this was a slam dunk and just figured out it's far from.
False. He did not go looking for trouble. He was there to help. The attackers he had to defend himself were looking for trouble and attacked him. he defended himself. He needs a statue not Floyd.RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:
The kid needs to serve a little time in prison for what he has done. He went looking for trouble in a town twenty miles away from home with a firearm he was not legally allowed to own at 17. He shot three people. Two died.
Should he not be punished whatsoever, he will be George Zimmerman 2.0 and we will hear about him again soon (not in a good way). Just my opinion.
That being said, I am a staunch 2nd amendment advocate.