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
And apparently a skateboard can never be used as a weapon like a clubAmal Shuq-Up said:
Note: In Kenosha, a foot is not a weapon even if that foot is kicking someone in the face.
It is not illegal to be stupid.Porteroso said:GrowlTowel said: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?
I don't really know much, that's true. I'm not following this guy like he's George Washington's reincarnation.
Can you answer my question? How far away was he from the business he was protecting? I guess I could Google it too.
Edit: so at some point he left the dealership he was "protecting" and police barred him from returning there. 6 minutes later, he was in the middle of rioters, and killed a few.
I think I'm right. Crazy that you don't need to intimately follow the case of a 17 year old mingling with the rioters he's trying to police, with an AR, to know he's an absolute imbecile.
I'm not saying he did anything illegal. I'm fine with letting the court figure that out. I'm simply saying he's stupid. We have many freedoms in this country that are ridiculous, and I love it, but with that comes responsibility, and this guy put himself in a really, really, really stupid situation.br53 said:It is not illegal to be stupid.Porteroso said:GrowlTowel said: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?
I don't really know much, that's true. I'm not following this guy like he's George Washington's reincarnation.
Can you answer my question? How far away was he from the business he was protecting? I guess I could Google it too.
Edit: so at some point he left the dealership he was "protecting" and police barred him from returning there. 6 minutes later, he was in the middle of rioters, and killed a few.
I think I'm right. Crazy that you don't need to intimately follow the case of a 17 year old mingling with the rioters he's trying to police, with an AR, to know he's an absolute imbecile.
Porteroso said:I'm not saying he did anything illegal. I'm fine with letting the court figure that out. I'm simply saying he's stupid. We have many freedoms in this country that are ridiculous, and I love it, but with that comes responsibility, and this guy put himself in a really, really, really stupid situation.br53 said:It is not illegal to be stupid.Porteroso said:GrowlTowel said: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?
I don't really know much, that's true. I'm not following this guy like he's George Washington's reincarnation.
Can you answer my question? How far away was he from the business he was protecting? I guess I could Google it too.
Edit: so at some point he left the dealership he was "protecting" and police barred him from returning there. 6 minutes later, he was in the middle of rioters, and killed a few.
I think I'm right. Crazy that you don't need to intimately follow the case of a 17 year old mingling with the rioters he's trying to police, with an AR, to know he's an absolute imbecile.
How do the two of you feel about the young people killed and injured at the Travis Scott concert? How do you feel about their parents?Jack Bauer said:Porteroso said:I'm not saying he did anything illegal. I'm fine with letting the court figure that out. I'm simply saying he's stupid. We have many freedoms in this country that are ridiculous, and I love it, but with that comes responsibility, and this guy put himself in a really, really, really stupid situation.br53 said:It is not illegal to be stupid.Porteroso said:GrowlTowel said: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?
I don't really know much, that's true. I'm not following this guy like he's George Washington's reincarnation.
Can you answer my question? How far away was he from the business he was protecting? I guess I could Google it too.
Edit: so at some point he left the dealership he was "protecting" and police barred him from returning there. 6 minutes later, he was in the middle of rioters, and killed a few.
I think I'm right. Crazy that you don't need to intimately follow the case of a 17 year old mingling with the rioters he's trying to police, with an AR, to know he's an absolute imbecile.
Agreed. You think this Mom is realizing this now as he is getting grilled on the stand. He should have been at home playing Call of Duty.
If his Mom/Dad allowed him to go, they are terrible parents.
br53 said:How do the two of you feel about the young people killed and injured at the Travis Scott concert? How do you feel about their parents?Jack Bauer said:Porteroso said:I'm not saying he did anything illegal. I'm fine with letting the court figure that out. I'm simply saying he's stupid. We have many freedoms in this country that are ridiculous, and I love it, but with that comes responsibility, and this guy put himself in a really, really, really stupid situation.br53 said:It is not illegal to be stupid.Porteroso said:GrowlTowel said: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?
I don't really know much, that's true. I'm not following this guy like he's George Washington's reincarnation.
Can you answer my question? How far away was he from the business he was protecting? I guess I could Google it too.
Edit: so at some point he left the dealership he was "protecting" and police barred him from returning there. 6 minutes later, he was in the middle of rioters, and killed a few.
I think I'm right. Crazy that you don't need to intimately follow the case of a 17 year old mingling with the rioters he's trying to police, with an AR, to know he's an absolute imbecile.
Agreed. You think this Mom is realizing this now as he is getting grilled on the stand. He should have been at home playing Call of Duty.
If his Mom/Dad allowed him to go, they are terrible parents.
Are you comparing these 2 situations?br53 said:How do the two of you feel about the young people killed and injured at the Travis Scott concert? How do you feel about their parents?Jack Bauer said:Porteroso said:I'm not saying he did anything illegal. I'm fine with letting the court figure that out. I'm simply saying he's stupid. We have many freedoms in this country that are ridiculous, and I love it, but with that comes responsibility, and this guy put himself in a really, really, really stupid situation.br53 said:It is not illegal to be stupid.Porteroso said:GrowlTowel said: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?
I don't really know much, that's true. I'm not following this guy like he's George Washington's reincarnation.
Can you answer my question? How far away was he from the business he was protecting? I guess I could Google it too.
Edit: so at some point he left the dealership he was "protecting" and police barred him from returning there. 6 minutes later, he was in the middle of rioters, and killed a few.
I think I'm right. Crazy that you don't need to intimately follow the case of a 17 year old mingling with the rioters he's trying to police, with an AR, to know he's an absolute imbecile.
Agreed. You think this Mom is realizing this now as he is getting grilled on the stand. He should have been at home playing Call of Duty.
If his Mom/Dad allowed him to go, they are terrible parents.
Wangchung said:
His dad lives in Kenosha. Kyle lives 20 minutes from Kenosha. Let's stop pretending he trekked cross country to go shoot protesters.
I'm sure Kyle could have put down the gun and had a civil discussion, right?Amal Shuq-Up said:
Note: In Kenosha, a foot is not a weapon even if that foot is kicking someone in the face.
It's craziness. Like letting your kids go riot in the name of some excrement for brains violent criminal that got himself shot by police. Like voting for leaders that hold back police and national guard so rioters can burn down their cities. Like not recognizing the false narrative of police being racist serial killers was all to incite these riots, to the point of the now Vice President chipping in for their bail money, in order to make Trump look bad and wrest power back into leftist hands. It's crazy like watching your city burn for days and the police sitting back doing little to nothing and all you do is change the channel.Jack Bauer said:Wangchung said:
His dad lives in Kenosha. Kyle lives 20 minutes from Kenosha. Let's stop pretending he trekked cross country to go shoot protesters.
Would anyone on this board let their 17 year old go to a hotbed of tension strapped with an AR-15 unsupervised?
Parents that understand gun laws should be wary of sending their young children across state lines with borrowed guns to open carry police a riot. I'm not talking about him traveling far, just the legality of doing what he did. That's a red flag to most parents.Wangchung said:
His dad lives in Kenosha. Kyle lives 20 minutes from Kenosha. Let's stop pretending he trekked cross country to go shoot protesters.
I am not going to judge the parents without knowing what they knew at the time. He did not leave the house with the gun, so they may not have known: 1) where he was going; 2) that he would be armed.Porteroso said:Parents that understand gun laws should be wary of sending their young children across state lines with borrowed guns to open carry police a riot. I'm not talking about him traveling far, just the legality of doing what he did. That's a red flag to most parents.Wangchung said:
His dad lives in Kenosha. Kyle lives 20 minutes from Kenosha. Let's stop pretending he trekked cross country to go shoot protesters.
That is not what happened. Have you followed this story at all in the past year?Porteroso said:Parents that understand gun laws should be wary of sending their young children across state lines with borrowed gunsWangchung said:
His dad lives in Kenosha. Kyle lives 20 minutes from Kenosha. Let's stop pretending he trekked cross country to go shoot protesters.
"Sending your son to a riot in another state…" is so dramatic. It was a 20 minute drive. His father lives there. I grew up in Houston and 20 minutes of driving wouldn't even get you downtown. It's framed the way you did on purpose but as always, it's not so big a deal when we look closer. What folks here can't seem to understand is he had the same right to be there as the rioters. That means his decision making can't be scrutinized if we aren't going to condemn everyone who showed up to the 3rd night of politician-approved riots, even his attackers. He showed up to be a positive impact. His attackers showed up to destroy and cause mayhem, and maybe rape some children if they had time and access.Porteroso said:Parents that understand gun laws should be wary of sending their young children across state lines with borrowed guns to open carry police a riot. I'm not talking about him traveling far, just the legality of doing what he did. That's a red flag to most parents.Wangchung said:
His dad lives in Kenosha. Kyle lives 20 minutes from Kenosha. Let's stop pretending he trekked cross country to go shoot protesters.
If the T-shirts were reversed, the "fact checkers" would label the "crossing state lines" hysteria as "missing context."Wangchung said:"Sending your son to a riot in another state…" is so dramatic. It was a 20 minute drive. His father lives there. I grew up in Houston and 20 minutes of driving wouldn't even get you downtown. It's framed the way you did on purpose but as always, it's not so big a deal when we look closer. What folks here can't seem to understand is he had the same right to be there as the rioters. That means his decision making can't be scrutinized if we aren't going to condemn everyone who showed up to the 3rd night of politician-approved riots, even his attackers. He showed up to be a positive impact. His attackers showed up to destroy and cause mayhem, and maybe rape some children if they had time and access.Porteroso said:Parents that understand gun laws should be wary of sending their young children across state lines with borrowed guns to open carry police a riot. I'm not talking about him traveling far, just the legality of doing what he did. That's a red flag to most parents.Wangchung said:
His dad lives in Kenosha. Kyle lives 20 minutes from Kenosha. Let's stop pretending he trekked cross country to go shoot protesters.
Where was even presented that his parents "sent him" anywhere with a gun to police a riot?Porteroso said:Parents that understand gun laws should be wary of sending their young children across state lines with borrowed guns to open carry police a riot. I'm not talking about him traveling far, just the legality of doing what he did. That's a red flag to most parents.Wangchung said:
His dad lives in Kenosha. Kyle lives 20 minutes from Kenosha. Let's stop pretending he trekked cross country to go shoot protesters.
Wangchung said:
His dad lives in Kenosha. Kyle lives 20 minutes from Kenosha. Let's stop pretending he trekked cross country to go shoot protesters.
Actually the testimony (seized on by the prosecutor in an effort to portray Rittenhouse as a lawbreaker) was that he wasn't even staying with his mother, but rather with his friend (the one that bought the gun) in Kenosha. The prosecutor used the fact that Rittenhouse was mostly driven around by his friend (in whose home he was staying) except to go to and from work in his own car, without a driver's license.Rawhide said:Where was even presented that his parents "sent him" anywhere with a gun to police a riot?Porteroso said:Parents that understand gun laws should be wary of sending their young children across state lines with borrowed guns to open carry police a riot. I'm not talking about him traveling far, just the legality of doing what he did. That's a red flag to most parents.Wangchung said:
His dad lives in Kenosha. Kyle lives 20 minutes from Kenosha. Let's stop pretending he trekked cross country to go shoot protesters.
Stop making crap up. You're acting like his parents told him to go there, here's a gun and shoot people that get in your way.
The prosecutor in the Rittenhouse trial clearly didn’t do due diligence before making the decision to prosecute. This tragedy never would have happened if the government carried out its responsibilities to protect the safety, lives and property of innocent people. pic.twitter.com/BFEOyRbvcj
— Tulsi Gabbard 🌺 (@TulsiGabbard) November 11, 2021
She reads sic'em365?riflebear said:The prosecutor in the Rittenhouse trial clearly didn’t do due diligence before making the decision to prosecute. This tragedy never would have happened if the government carried out its responsibilities to protect the safety, lives and property of innocent people. pic.twitter.com/BFEOyRbvcj
— Tulsi Gabbard 🌺 (@TulsiGabbard) November 11, 2021
riflebear said:The prosecutor in the Rittenhouse trial clearly didn’t do due diligence before making the decision to prosecute. This tragedy never would have happened if the government carried out its responsibilities to protect the safety, lives and property of innocent people. pic.twitter.com/BFEOyRbvcj
— Tulsi Gabbard 🌺 (@TulsiGabbard) November 11, 2021
riflebear said:The prosecutor in the Rittenhouse trial clearly didn’t do due diligence before making the decision to prosecute. This tragedy never would have happened if the government carried out its responsibilities to protect the safety, lives and property of innocent people. pic.twitter.com/BFEOyRbvcj
— Tulsi Gabbard 🌺 (@TulsiGabbard) November 11, 2021
She is the Anti-Mazie!Redbrickbear said:riflebear said:The prosecutor in the Rittenhouse trial clearly didn’t do due diligence before making the decision to prosecute. This tragedy never would have happened if the government carried out its responsibilities to protect the safety, lives and property of innocent people. pic.twitter.com/BFEOyRbvcj
— Tulsi Gabbard 🌺 (@TulsiGabbard) November 11, 2021
Our pineapple island princess.
She is too good for both parties.
