A time line of kyle

[progressive hunter]

THe ow

He should have stayed home.

So should the antifa/blm joe biden voters who were burning, looting, beating and attacking people.........had they not been there they wouldn't have been shot.

It was not his responsibility to go there to provide justice.

That doesnt make it wrong or even a crime.

Vigilantism usually is a crime though. He and others went there to provide justice and protection without legal authorization and ultimately killed people by putting himself in a position where violence between him and others were inevitable.

Wrong.......he went there to stand guard over a business....and to render first aid. They attacked him...what about that isn't sinking in?

They chased him down, in all 3 shootings....what part of that is still not getting into your brain?

Stand guard over a business that wasn't his. Why that business? Render first aid? Why carry a rifle and not a medical kit? Was he there to fight or to render aid?

The owner of the business asked him to go and look after it. He did have a first aid kit. That's why he was wearing gloves.

A business owner can't effectively deputize a minor to defend his property with lethal force, plus the business owner (Car Source) has already said that they did not hire security. He simply just joined up with a militia group to take it upon themselves to defend businesses, vigilantism.

No one was deputized. There was no militia group. Have you ever been in a riot?

No-one was hired either. I have not been in a riot, I don't plan on going to find one so that I can participate in the violence either.

they dont need to be hired in a free country,, in fact they dont need the owners permission to defend his business if its getting destroyed,,

I'm just telling you what he claimed. He claimed he was hired as security which is why he said he was there except the business owner already said that he wasn't hired to be security or asked to help. So he lied. He traveled with a gun that he shouldn't have had to a state he doesnt live in to do a job that he wasn't hired to do and ended up being in the middle of chaos and killed two people.

so,, I wouldnt waste time worrying about it cause its a nothing burger either way,,

I'm not invested in this crime/incident either, but I just think it's worth knowing real truths about what happened and not just the emotional and political divide around it. I feel bad for him since he probably has ruined his life over this.

then why are you talking about non issues pertaining to the shootings???

whether he was asked or not is irrelevant,,

In a court room his credibility could be called into question and a good lawyer will now try and show that he was there to commit violence.

are you his lawyer???

Ugh, no, but you are defending him based on emotion. I'm just pointing out the problems he is going to have.

funny thing to focus on when its pretty clear he was defending himself and not the attacker,,,

 

[JordannaNY]

THe ow

He should have stayed home.

So should the antifa/blm joe biden voters who were burning, looting, beating and attacking people.........had they not been there they wouldn't have been shot.

It was not his responsibility to go there to provide justice.

That doesnt make it wrong or even a crime.

Vigilantism usually is a crime though. He and others went there to provide justice and protection without legal authorization and ultimately killed people by putting himself in a position where violence between him and others were inevitable.

Wrong.......he went there to stand guard over a business....and to render first aid. They attacked him...what about that isn't sinking in?

They chased him down, in all 3 shootings....what part of that is still not getting into your brain?

Stand guard over a business that wasn't his. Why that business? Render first aid? Why carry a rifle and not a medical kit? Was he there to fight or to render aid?

The owner of the business asked him to go and look after it. He did have a first aid kit. That's why he was wearing gloves.

A business owner can't effectively deputize a minor to defend his property with lethal force, plus the business owner (Car Source) has already said that they did not hire security. He simply just joined up with a militia group to take it upon themselves to defend businesses, vigilantism.

No one was deputized. There was no militia group. Have you ever been in a riot?

No-one was hired either. I have not been in a riot, I don't plan on going to find one so that I can participate in the violence either.

they dont need to be hired in a free country,, in fact they dont need the owners permission to defend his business if its getting destroyed,,

I'm just telling you what he claimed. He claimed he was hired as security which is why he said he was there except the business owner already said that he wasn't hired to be security or asked to help. So he lied. He traveled with a gun that he shouldn't have had to a state he doesnt live in to do a job that he wasn't hired to do and ended up being in the middle of chaos and killed two people.

so,, I wouldnt waste time worrying about it cause its a nothing burger either way,,

I'm not invested in this crime/incident either, but I just think it's worth knowing real truths about what happened and not just the emotional and political divide around it. I feel bad for him since he probably has ruined his life over this.

then why are you talking about non issues pertaining to the shootings???

whether he was asked or not is irrelevant,,

In a court room his credibility could be called into question and a good lawyer will now try and show that he was there to commit violence.

are you his lawyer???

Ugh, no, but you are defending him based on emotion. I'm just pointing out the problems he is going to have.

funny thing to focus on when its pretty clear he was defending himself and not the attacker,,,

Clear as mud

 

[progressive hunter]

THe ow

He should have stayed home.

So should the antifa/blm joe biden voters who were burning, looting, beating and attacking people.........had they not been there they wouldn't have been shot.

It was not his responsibility to go there to provide justice.

That doesnt make it wrong or even a crime.

Vigilantism usually is a crime though. He and others went there to provide justice and protection without legal authorization and ultimately killed people by putting himself in a position where violence between him and others were inevitable.

Wrong.......he went there to stand guard over a business....and to render first aid. They attacked him...what about that isn't sinking in?

They chased him down, in all 3 shootings....what part of that is still not getting into your brain?

Stand guard over a business that wasn't his. Why that business? Render first aid? Why carry a rifle and not a medical kit? Was he there to fight or to render aid?

The owner of the business asked him to go and look after it. He did have a first aid kit. That's why he was wearing gloves.

A business owner can't effectively deputize a minor to defend his property with lethal force, plus the business owner (Car Source) has already said that they did not hire security. He simply just joined up with a militia group to take it upon themselves to defend businesses, vigilantism.

No one was deputized. There was no militia group. Have you ever been in a riot?

No-one was hired either. I have not been in a riot, I don't plan on going to find one so that I can participate in the violence either.

No one has to be hired. Just asked. I've been in several riots. There are not well organized.

He wasn't asked by the business owner either.

I dont think that matters.

It does matter since that's what he told police and that was his reason for supposedly traveling there.

thats not the reason why he traveled there,,,

he worked there and was there helping clean up the mess left by the rioters,,,

He didn't work there. He claimed he was hired to be security which the owner has denied. He doesnt even live in that state.

he worked in the town,,, and was there all day cleaning up,,

And he brought a rifle with him and used it

to defend himself against violent attackers,,,

That he went looking for since he wasn't really there at a business owners request. Lawyers will play these games.

let them,,, the facts about the attack are he was attacked and defended himself,,

if he didnt have the gun he would be dead or severely beaten,,

 

[Godboy]

THe ow

He should have stayed home.

So should the antifa/blm joe biden voters who were burning, looting, beating and attacking people.........had they not been there they wouldn't have been shot.

It was not his responsibility to go there to provide justice.

That doesnt make it wrong or even a crime.

Vigilantism usually is a crime though. He and others went there to provide justice and protection without legal authorization and ultimately killed people by putting himself in a position where violence between him and others were inevitable.

Wrong.......he went there to stand guard over a business....and to render first aid. They attacked him...what about that isn't sinking in?

They chased him down, in all 3 shootings....what part of that is still not getting into your brain?

Stand guard over a business that wasn't his. Why that business? Render first aid? Why carry a rifle and not a medical kit? Was he there to fight or to render aid?

The owner of the business asked him to go and look after it. He did have a first aid kit. That's why he was wearing gloves.

A business owner can't effectively deputize a minor to defend his property with lethal force, plus the business owner (Car Source) has already said that they did not hire security. He simply just joined up with a militia group to take it upon themselves to defend businesses, vigilantism.

No one was deputized. There was no militia group. Have you ever been in a riot?

No-one was hired either. I have not been in a riot, I don't plan on going to find one so that I can participate in the violence either.

No one has to be hired. Just asked. I've been in several riots. There are not well organized.

He wasn't asked by the business owner either.

I dont think that matters.

It does matter since that's what he told police and that was his reason for supposedly traveling there.

What does that have to do with him shooting those people? Assuming youre right about him saying that, what difference does it make? All that matters is whats on the video.

Because you could now make the argument that his intent was not benevolent. If he lied about his reason for being there then what was the reason? A good lawyer can turn that lie into something pretty nefarious.

His intent is irrelevant. You clearly see him running away until the guy catches up to him and leaves him with no choice but to defend himself.

 

[progressive hunter]

THe ow

He should have stayed home.

So should the antifa/blm joe biden voters who were burning, looting, beating and attacking people.........had they not been there they wouldn't have been shot.

It was not his responsibility to go there to provide justice.

That doesnt make it wrong or even a crime.

Vigilantism usually is a crime though. He and others went there to provide justice and protection without legal authorization and ultimately killed people by putting himself in a position where violence between him and others were inevitable.

Wrong.......he went there to stand guard over a business....and to render first aid. They attacked him...what about that isn't sinking in?

They chased him down, in all 3 shootings....what part of that is still not getting into your brain?

Stand guard over a business that wasn't his. Why that business? Render first aid? Why carry a rifle and not a medical kit? Was he there to fight or to render aid?

The owner of the business asked him to go and look after it. He did have a first aid kit. That's why he was wearing gloves.

A business owner can't effectively deputize a minor to defend his property with lethal force, plus the business owner (Car Source) has already said that they did not hire security. He simply just joined up with a militia group to take it upon themselves to defend businesses, vigilantism.

No one was deputized. There was no militia group. Have you ever been in a riot?

No-one was hired either. I have not been in a riot, I don't plan on going to find one so that I can participate in the violence either.

they dont need to be hired in a free country,, in fact they dont need the owners permission to defend his business if its getting destroyed,,

I'm just telling you what he claimed. He claimed he was hired as security which is why he said he was there except the business owner already said that he wasn't hired to be security or asked to help. So he lied. He traveled with a gun that he shouldn't have had to a state he doesnt live in to do a job that he wasn't hired to do and ended up being in the middle of chaos and killed two people.

so,, I wouldnt waste time worrying about it cause its a nothing burger either way,,

I'm not invested in this crime/incident either, but I just think it's worth knowing real truths about what happened and not just the emotional and political divide around it. I feel bad for him since he probably has ruined his life over this.

then why are you talking about non issues pertaining to the shootings???

whether he was asked or not is irrelevant,,

In a court room his credibility could be called into question and a good lawyer will now try and show that he was there to commit violence.

are you his lawyer???

Ugh, no, but you are defending him based on emotion. I'm just pointing out the problems he is going to have.

funny thing to focus on when its pretty clear he was defending himself and not the attacker,,,

Clear as mud

to you,, maybe you should pull your head out of the mud and see the world as it spins around you,,,

 

[JordannaNY]

THe ow

He should have stayed home.

So should the antifa/blm joe biden voters who were burning, looting, beating and attacking people.........had they not been there they wouldn't have been shot.

It was not his responsibility to go there to provide justice.

That doesnt make it wrong or even a crime.

Vigilantism usually is a crime though. He and others went there to provide justice and protection without legal authorization and ultimately killed people by putting himself in a position where violence between him and others were inevitable.

Wrong.......he went there to stand guard over a business....and to render first aid. They attacked him...what about that isn't sinking in?

They chased him down, in all 3 shootings....what part of that is still not getting into your brain?

Stand guard over a business that wasn't his. Why that business? Render first aid? Why carry a rifle and not a medical kit? Was he there to fight or to render aid?

The owner of the business asked him to go and look after it. He did have a first aid kit. That's why he was wearing gloves.

A business owner can't effectively deputize a minor to defend his property with lethal force, plus the business owner (Car Source) has already said that they did not hire security. He simply just joined up with a militia group to take it upon themselves to defend businesses, vigilantism.

No one was deputized. There was no militia group. Have you ever been in a riot?

No-one was hired either. I have not been in a riot, I don't plan on going to find one so that I can participate in the violence either.

No one has to be hired. Just asked. I've been in several riots. There are not well organized.

He wasn't asked by the business owner either.

I dont think that matters.

It does matter since that's what he told police and that was his reason for supposedly traveling there.

thats not the reason why he traveled there,,,

he worked there and was there helping clean up the mess left by the rioters,,,

He didn't work there. He claimed he was hired to be security which the owner has denied. He doesnt even live in that state.

he worked in the town,,, and was there all day cleaning up,,

And he brought a rifle with him and used it

to defend himself against violent attackers,,,

That he went looking for since he wasn't really there at a business owners request. Lawyers will play these games.

let them,,, the facts about the attack are he was attacked and defended himself,,

if he didnt have the gun he would be dead or severely beaten,,

He probably wouldn't have even been there without the gun.

 

[JordannaNY]

THe ow

He should have stayed home.

So should the antifa/blm joe biden voters who were burning, looting, beating and attacking people.........had they not been there they wouldn't have been shot.

It was not his responsibility to go there to provide justice.

That doesnt make it wrong or even a crime.

Vigilantism usually is a crime though. He and others went there to provide justice and protection without legal authorization and ultimately killed people by putting himself in a position where violence between him and others were inevitable.

Wrong.......he went there to stand guard over a business....and to render first aid. They attacked him...what about that isn't sinking in?

They chased him down, in all 3 shootings....what part of that is still not getting into your brain?

Stand guard over a business that wasn't his. Why that business? Render first aid? Why carry a rifle and not a medical kit? Was he there to fight or to render aid?

The owner of the business asked him to go and look after it. He did have a first aid kit. That's why he was wearing gloves.

A business owner can't effectively deputize a minor to defend his property with lethal force, plus the business owner (Car Source) has already said that they did not hire security. He simply just joined up with a militia group to take it upon themselves to defend businesses, vigilantism.

No one was deputized. There was no militia group. Have you ever been in a riot?

No-one was hired either. I have not been in a riot, I don't plan on going to find one so that I can participate in the violence either.

No one has to be hired. Just asked. I've been in several riots. There are not well organized.

He wasn't asked by the business owner either.

I dont think that matters.

It does matter since that's what he told police and that was his reason for supposedly traveling there.

What does that have to do with him shooting those people? Assuming youre right about him saying that, what difference does it make? All that matters is whats on the video.

Because you could now make the argument that his intent was not benevolent. If he lied about his reason for being there then what was the reason? A good lawyer can turn that lie into something pretty nefarious.

His intent is irrelevant. You clearly see him running away until the guy catches up to him and leaves him with no choice but to defend himself.

The argument could be made that the people attacking him were doing it out of self defense since he was the one with the gun.

 

[2aguy]

THe ow

He should have stayed home.

So should the antifa/blm joe biden voters who were burning, looting, beating and attacking people.........had they not been there they wouldn't have been shot.

It was not his responsibility to go there to provide justice.

That doesnt make it wrong or even a crime.

Vigilantism usually is a crime though. He and others went there to provide justice and protection without legal authorization and ultimately killed people by putting himself in a position where violence between him and others were inevitable.

Wrong.......he went there to stand guard over a business....and to render first aid. They attacked him...what about that isn't sinking in?

They chased him down, in all 3 shootings....what part of that is still not getting into your brain?

Stand guard over a business that wasn't his. Why that business? Render first aid? Why carry a rifle and not a medical kit? Was he there to fight or to render aid?

The owner of the business asked him to go and look after it. He did have a first aid kit. That's why he was wearing gloves.

A business owner can't effectively deputize a minor to defend his property with lethal force, plus the business owner (Car Source) has already said that they did not hire security. He simply just joined up with a militia group to take it upon themselves to defend businesses, vigilantism. He also wasn't even legally old enough to carry that gun in that state. He should have never been there, he should have never had a gun on him. He pit himself into a violence and dangerous situation and he ended killing people.

He wasn't near the business when he was attacked........he was outside the police cordon around the area when he was violently attacked by the first felon. He was chased by that felon, then the felon assaulted him.

 

[progressive hunter]

THe ow

He should have stayed home.

So should the antifa/blm joe biden voters who were burning, looting, beating and attacking people.........had they not been there they wouldn't have been shot.

It was not his responsibility to go there to provide justice.

That doesnt make it wrong or even a crime.

Vigilantism usually is a crime though. He and others went there to provide justice and protection without legal authorization and ultimately killed people by putting himself in a position where violence between him and others were inevitable.

Wrong.......he went there to stand guard over a business....and to render first aid. They attacked him...what about that isn't sinking in?

They chased him down, in all 3 shootings....what part of that is still not getting into your brain?

Stand guard over a business that wasn't his. Why that business? Render first aid? Why carry a rifle and not a medical kit? Was he there to fight or to render aid?

The owner of the business asked him to go and look after it. He did have a first aid kit. That's why he was wearing gloves.

A business owner can't effectively deputize a minor to defend his property with lethal force, plus the business owner (Car Source) has already said that they did not hire security. He simply just joined up with a militia group to take it upon themselves to defend businesses, vigilantism.

No one was deputized. There was no militia group. Have you ever been in a riot?

No-one was hired either. I have not been in a riot, I don't plan on going to find one so that I can participate in the violence either.

No one has to be hired. Just asked. I've been in several riots. There are not well organized.

He wasn't asked by the business owner either.

I dont think that matters.

It does matter since that's what he told police and that was his reason for supposedly traveling there.

thats not the reason why he traveled there,,,

he worked there and was there helping clean up the mess left by the rioters,,,

He didn't work there. He claimed he was hired to be security which the owner has denied. He doesnt even live in that state.

he worked in the town,,, and was there all day cleaning up,,

And he brought a rifle with him and used it

to defend himself against violent attackers,,,

That he went looking for since he wasn't really there at a business owners request. Lawyers will play these games.

let them,,, the facts about the attack are he was attacked and defended himself,,

if he didnt have the gun he would be dead or severely beaten,,

He probably wouldn't have even been there without the gun.

so now youre a mind reader,,,

he was there all day without a gun,,,

 

[progressive hunter]

THe ow

He should have stayed home.

So should the antifa/blm joe biden voters who were burning, looting, beating and attacking people.........had they not been there they wouldn't have been shot.

It was not his responsibility to go there to provide justice.

That doesnt make it wrong or even a crime.

Vigilantism usually is a crime though. He and others went there to provide justice and protection without legal authorization and ultimately killed people by putting himself in a position where violence between him and others were inevitable.

Wrong.......he went there to stand guard over a business....and to render first aid. They attacked him...what about that isn't sinking in?

They chased him down, in all 3 shootings....what part of that is still not getting into your brain?

Stand guard over a business that wasn't his. Why that business? Render first aid? Why carry a rifle and not a medical kit? Was he there to fight or to render aid?

The owner of the business asked him to go and look after it. He did have a first aid kit. That's why he was wearing gloves.

A business owner can't effectively deputize a minor to defend his property with lethal force, plus the business owner (Car Source) has already said that they did not hire security. He simply just joined up with a militia group to take it upon themselves to defend businesses, vigilantism.

No one was deputized. There was no militia group. Have you ever been in a riot?

No-one was hired either. I have not been in a riot, I don't plan on going to find one so that I can participate in the violence either.

No one has to be hired. Just asked. I've been in several riots. There are not well organized.

He wasn't asked by the business owner either.

I dont think that matters.

It does matter since that's what he told police and that was his reason for supposedly traveling there.

What does that have to do with him shooting those people? Assuming youre right about him saying that, what difference does it make? All that matters is whats on the video.

Because you could now make the argument that his intent was not benevolent. If he lied about his reason for being there then what was the reason? A good lawyer can turn that lie into something pretty nefarious.

His intent is irrelevant. You clearly see him running away until the guy catches up to him and leaves him with no choice but to defend himself.

The argument could be made that the people attacking him were doing it out of self defense since he was the one with the gun.

self defense doesnt work if youre the one chasing them,,

 

[Godboy]

THe ow

He should have stayed home.

So should the antifa/blm joe biden voters who were burning, looting, beating and attacking people.........had they not been there they wouldn't have been shot.

It was not his responsibility to go there to provide justice.

That doesnt make it wrong or even a crime.

Vigilantism usually is a crime though. He and others went there to provide justice and protection without legal authorization and ultimately killed people by putting himself in a position where violence between him and others were inevitable.

Wrong.......he went there to stand guard over a business....and to render first aid. They attacked him...what about that isn't sinking in?

They chased him down, in all 3 shootings....what part of that is still not getting into your brain?

Stand guard over a business that wasn't his. Why that business? Render first aid? Why carry a rifle and not a medical kit? Was he there to fight or to render aid?

The owner of the business asked him to go and look after it. He did have a first aid kit. That's why he was wearing gloves.

A business owner can't effectively deputize a minor to defend his property with lethal force, plus the business owner (Car Source) has already said that they did not hire security. He simply just joined up with a militia group to take it upon themselves to defend businesses, vigilantism.

No one was deputized. There was no militia group. Have you ever been in a riot?

No-one was hired either. I have not been in a riot, I don't plan on going to find one so that I can participate in the violence either.

No one has to be hired. Just asked. I've been in several riots. There are not well organized.

He wasn't asked by the business owner either.

I dont think that matters.

It does matter since that's what he told police and that was his reason for supposedly traveling there.

thats not the reason why he traveled there,,,

he worked there and was there helping clean up the mess left by the rioters,,,

He didn't work there. He claimed he was hired to be security which the owner has denied. He doesnt even live in that state.

he worked in the town,,, and was there all day cleaning up,,

And he brought a rifle with him and used it

to defend himself against violent attackers,,,

That he went looking for since he wasn't really there at a business owners request. Lawyers will play these games.

let them,,, the facts about the attack are he was attacked and defended himself,,

if he didnt have the gun he would be dead or severely beaten,,

He probably wouldn't have even been there without the gun.

I wouldnt recommend being there without a gun.

 

[2aguy]

THe ow

He should have stayed home.

So should the antifa/blm joe biden voters who were burning, looting, beating and attacking people.........had they not been there they wouldn't have been shot.

It was not his responsibility to go there to provide justice.

That doesnt make it wrong or even a crime.

Vigilantism usually is a crime though. He and others went there to provide justice and protection without legal authorization and ultimately killed people by putting himself in a position where violence between him and others were inevitable.

Wrong.......he went there to stand guard over a business....and to render first aid. They attacked him...what about that isn't sinking in?

They chased him down, in all 3 shootings....what part of that is still not getting into your brain?

Stand guard over a business that wasn't his. Why that business? Render first aid? Why carry a rifle and not a medical kit? Was he there to fight or to render aid?

The owner of the business asked him to go and look after it. He did have a first aid kit. That's why he was wearing gloves.

A business owner can't effectively deputize a minor to defend his property with lethal force, plus the business owner (Car Source) has already said that they did not hire security. He simply just joined up with a militia group to take it upon themselves to defend businesses, vigilantism.

No one was deputized. There was no militia group. Have you ever been in a riot?

No-one was hired either. I have not been in a riot, I don't plan on going to find one so that I can participate in the violence either.

No one has to be hired. Just asked. I've been in several riots. There are not well organized.

He wasn't asked by the business owner either.

I dont think that matters.

It does matter since that's what he told police and that was his reason for supposedly traveling there.

What does that have to do with him shooting those people? Assuming youre right about him saying that, what difference does it make? All that matters is whats on the video.

Because you could now make the argument that his intent was not benevolent. If he lied about his reason for being there then what was the reason? A good lawyer can turn that lie into something pretty nefarious.

His intent is irrelevant. You clearly see him running away until the guy catches up to him and leaves him with no choice but to defend himself.

The argument could be made that the people attacking him were doing it out of self defense since he was the one with the gun.

He ran away from them............so it wasn't self defense since he was retreating from them and they pursued him.

 

[JordannaNY]

THe ow

He should have stayed home.

So should the antifa/blm joe biden voters who were burning, looting, beating and attacking people.........had they not been there they wouldn't have been shot.

It was not his responsibility to go there to provide justice.

That doesnt make it wrong or even a crime.

Vigilantism usually is a crime though. He and others went there to provide justice and protection without legal authorization and ultimately killed people by putting himself in a position where violence between him and others were inevitable.

Wrong.......he went there to stand guard over a business....and to render first aid. They attacked him...what about that isn't sinking in?

They chased him down, in all 3 shootings....what part of that is still not getting into your brain?

Stand guard over a business that wasn't his. Why that business? Render first aid? Why carry a rifle and not a medical kit? Was he there to fight or to render aid?

The owner of the business asked him to go and look after it. He did have a first aid kit. That's why he was wearing gloves.

A business owner can't effectively deputize a minor to defend his property with lethal force, plus the business owner (Car Source) has already said that they did not hire security. He simply just joined up with a militia group to take it upon themselves to defend businesses, vigilantism.

No one was deputized. There was no militia group. Have you ever been in a riot?

No-one was hired either. I have not been in a riot, I don't plan on going to find one so that I can participate in the violence either.

they dont need to be hired in a free country,, in fact they dont need the owners permission to defend his business if its getting destroyed,,

I'm just telling you what he claimed. He claimed he was hired as security which is why he said he was there except the business owner already said that he wasn't hired to be security or asked to help. So he lied. He traveled with a gun that he shouldn't have had to a state he doesnt live in to do a job that he wasn't hired to do and ended up being in the middle of chaos and killed two people.

so,, I wouldnt waste time worrying about it cause its a nothing burger either way,,

I'm not invested in this crime/incident either, but I just think it's worth knowing real truths about what happened and not just the emotional and political divide around it. I feel bad for him since he probably has ruined his life over this.

then why are you talking about non issues pertaining to the shootings???

whether he was asked or not is irrelevant,,

In a court room his credibility could be called into question and a good lawyer will now try and show that he was there to commit violence.

are you his lawyer???

Ugh, no, but you are defending him based on emotion. I'm just pointing out the problems he is going to have.

funny thing to focus on when its pretty clear he was defending himself and not the attacker,,,

Clear as mud

to you,, maybe you should pull your head out of the mud and see the world as it spins around you,,,

Courtrooms are muddy. You want to assume everyday in that courtroom sees it as you do then that's fine, but it doesn't take much effort to take one lie from this kid and turn it into a totally different case.

 

[JordannaNY]

THe ow

He should have stayed home.

So should the antifa/blm joe biden voters who were burning, looting, beating and attacking people.........had they not been there they wouldn't have been shot.

It was not his responsibility to go there to provide justice.

That doesnt make it wrong or even a crime.

Vigilantism usually is a crime though. He and others went there to provide justice and protection without legal authorization and ultimately killed people by putting himself in a position where violence between him and others were inevitable.

Wrong.......he went there to stand guard over a business....and to render first aid. They attacked him...what about that isn't sinking in?

They chased him down, in all 3 shootings....what part of that is still not getting into your brain?

Stand guard over a business that wasn't his. Why that business? Render first aid? Why carry a rifle and not a medical kit? Was he there to fight or to render aid?

The owner of the business asked him to go and look after it. He did have a first aid kit. That's why he was wearing gloves.

A business owner can't effectively deputize a minor to defend his property with lethal force, plus the business owner (Car Source) has already said that they did not hire security. He simply just joined up with a militia group to take it upon themselves to defend businesses, vigilantism.

No one was deputized. There was no militia group. Have you ever been in a riot?

No-one was hired either. I have not been in a riot, I don't plan on going to find one so that I can participate in the violence either.

No one has to be hired. Just asked. I've been in several riots. There are not well organized.

He wasn't asked by the business owner either.

I dont think that matters.

It does matter since that's what he told police and that was his reason for supposedly traveling there.

thats not the reason why he traveled there,,,

he worked there and was there helping clean up the mess left by the rioters,,,

He didn't work there. He claimed he was hired to be security which the owner has denied. He doesnt even live in that state.

he worked in the town,,, and was there all day cleaning up,,

And he brought a rifle with him and used it

to defend himself against violent attackers,,,

That he went looking for since he wasn't really there at a business owners request. Lawyers will play these games.

let them,,, the facts about the attack are he was attacked and defended himself,,

if he didnt have the gun he would be dead or severely beaten,,

He probably wouldn't have even been there without the gun.

so now youre a mind reader,,,

he was there all day without a gun,,,

Not a mind reader, just realistic.

 

[JordannaNY]

THe ow

He should have stayed home.

So should the antifa/blm joe biden voters who were burning, looting, beating and attacking people.........had they not been there they wouldn't have been shot.

It was not his responsibility to go there to provide justice.

That doesnt make it wrong or even a crime.

Vigilantism usually is a crime though. He and others went there to provide justice and protection without legal authorization and ultimately killed people by putting himself in a position where violence between him and others were inevitable.

Wrong.......he went there to stand guard over a business....and to render first aid. They attacked him...what about that isn't sinking in?

They chased him down, in all 3 shootings....what part of that is still not getting into your brain?

Stand guard over a business that wasn't his. Why that business? Render first aid? Why carry a rifle and not a medical kit? Was he there to fight or to render aid?

The owner of the business asked him to go and look after it. He did have a first aid kit. That's why he was wearing gloves.

A business owner can't effectively deputize a minor to defend his property with lethal force, plus the business owner (Car Source) has already said that they did not hire security. He simply just joined up with a militia group to take it upon themselves to defend businesses, vigilantism.

No one was deputized. There was no militia group. Have you ever been in a riot?

No-one was hired either. I have not been in a riot, I don't plan on going to find one so that I can participate in the violence either.

No one has to be hired. Just asked. I've been in several riots. There are not well organized.

He wasn't asked by the business owner either.

I dont think that matters.

It does matter since that's what he told police and that was his reason for supposedly traveling there.

What does that have to do with him shooting those people? Assuming youre right about him saying that, what difference does it make? All that matters is whats on the video.

Because you could now make the argument that his intent was not benevolent. If he lied about his reason for being there then what was the reason? A good lawyer can turn that lie into something pretty nefarious.

His intent is irrelevant. You clearly see him running away until the guy catches up to him and leaves him with no choice but to defend himself.

The argument could be made that the people attacking him were doing it out of self defense since he was the one with the gun.

He ran away from them............so it wasn't self defense since he was retreating from them and they pursued him.

or according to the lawyers of the victims maybe he ran away from the victims just enough to have enough room to have a better aim to shoot them?

 

[progressive hunter]

THe ow

He should have stayed home.

So should the antifa/blm joe biden voters who were burning, looting, beating and attacking people.........had they not been there they wouldn't have been shot.

It was not his responsibility to go there to provide justice.

That doesnt make it wrong or even a crime.

Vigilantism usually is a crime though. He and others went there to provide justice and protection without legal authorization and ultimately killed people by putting himself in a position where violence between him and others were inevitable.

Wrong.......he went there to stand guard over a business....and to render first aid. They attacked him...what about that isn't sinking in?

They chased him down, in all 3 shootings....what part of that is still not getting into your brain?

Stand guard over a business that wasn't his. Why that business? Render first aid? Why carry a rifle and not a medical kit? Was he there to fight or to render aid?

The owner of the business asked him to go and look after it. He did have a first aid kit. That's why he was wearing gloves.

A business owner can't effectively deputize a minor to defend his property with lethal force, plus the business owner (Car Source) has already said that they did not hire security. He simply just joined up with a militia group to take it upon themselves to defend businesses, vigilantism.

No one was deputized. There was no militia group. Have you ever been in a riot?

No-one was hired either. I have not been in a riot, I don't plan on going to find one so that I can participate in the violence either.

they dont need to be hired in a free country,, in fact they dont need the owners permission to defend his business if its getting destroyed,,

I'm just telling you what he claimed. He claimed he was hired as security which is why he said he was there except the business owner already said that he wasn't hired to be security or asked to help. So he lied. He traveled with a gun that he shouldn't have had to a state he doesnt live in to do a job that he wasn't hired to do and ended up being in the middle of chaos and killed two people.

so,, I wouldnt waste time worrying about it cause its a nothing burger either way,,

I'm not invested in this crime/incident either, but I just think it's worth knowing real truths about what happened and not just the emotional and political divide around it. I feel bad for him since he probably has ruined his life over this.

then why are you talking about non issues pertaining to the shootings???

whether he was asked or not is irrelevant,,

In a court room his credibility could be called into question and a good lawyer will now try and show that he was there to commit violence.

are you his lawyer???

Ugh, no, but you are defending him based on emotion. I'm just pointing out the problems he is going to have.

funny thing to focus on when its pretty clear he was defending himself and not the attacker,,,

Clear as mud

to you,, maybe you should pull your head out of the mud and see the world as it spins around you,,,

Courtrooms are muddy. You want to assume everyday in that courtroom sees it as you do then that's fine, but it doesn't take much effort to take one lie from this kid and turn it into a totally different case.

youre the one assuming not me,, I'm talking about the provable facts relevant to the case like any smart lawyer would do,,,

 

[progressive hunter]

THe ow

He should have stayed home.

So should the antifa/blm joe biden voters who were burning, looting, beating and attacking people.........had they not been there they wouldn't have been shot.

It was not his responsibility to go there to provide justice.

That doesnt make it wrong or even a crime.

Vigilantism usually is a crime though. He and others went there to provide justice and protection without legal authorization and ultimately killed people by putting himself in a position where violence between him and others were inevitable.

Wrong.......he went there to stand guard over a business....and to render first aid. They attacked him...what about that isn't sinking in?

They chased him down, in all 3 shootings....what part of that is still not getting into your brain?

Stand guard over a business that wasn't his. Why that business? Render first aid? Why carry a rifle and not a medical kit? Was he there to fight or to render aid?

The owner of the business asked him to go and look after it. He did have a first aid kit. That's why he was wearing gloves.

A business owner can't effectively deputize a minor to defend his property with lethal force, plus the business owner (Car Source) has already said that they did not hire security. He simply just joined up with a militia group to take it upon themselves to defend businesses, vigilantism.

No one was deputized. There was no militia group. Have you ever been in a riot?

No-one was hired either. I have not been in a riot, I don't plan on going to find one so that I can participate in the violence either.

No one has to be hired. Just asked. I've been in several riots. There are not well organized.

He wasn't asked by the business owner either.

I dont think that matters.

It does matter since that's what he told police and that was his reason for supposedly traveling there.

What does that have to do with him shooting those people? Assuming youre right about him saying that, what difference does it make? All that matters is whats on the video.

Because you could now make the argument that his intent was not benevolent. If he lied about his reason for being there then what was the reason? A good lawyer can turn that lie into something pretty nefarious.

His intent is irrelevant. You clearly see him running away until the guy catches up to him and leaves him with no choice but to defend himself.

The argument could be made that the people attacking him were doing it out of self defense since he was the one with the gun.

He ran away from them............so it wasn't self defense since he was retreating from them and they pursued him.

or according to the lawyers of the victims maybe he ran away from the victims just enough to have enough room to have a better aim to shoot them?

to bad theres video to show how stupid that is,,,

 

[JordannaNY]

THe ow

He should have stayed home.

So should the antifa/blm joe biden voters who were burning, looting, beating and attacking people.........had they not been there they wouldn't have been shot.

It was not his responsibility to go there to provide justice.

That doesnt make it wrong or even a crime.

Vigilantism usually is a crime though. He and others went there to provide justice and protection without legal authorization and ultimately killed people by putting himself in a position where violence between him and others were inevitable.

Wrong.......he went there to stand guard over a business....and to render first aid. They attacked him...what about that isn't sinking in?

They chased him down, in all 3 shootings....what part of that is still not getting into your brain?

Stand guard over a business that wasn't his. Why that business? Render first aid? Why carry a rifle and not a medical kit? Was he there to fight or to render aid?

The owner of the business asked him to go and look after it. He did have a first aid kit. That's why he was wearing gloves.

A business owner can't effectively deputize a minor to defend his property with lethal force, plus the business owner (Car Source) has already said that they did not hire security. He simply just joined up with a militia group to take it upon themselves to defend businesses, vigilantism.

No one was deputized. There was no militia group. Have you ever been in a riot?

No-one was hired either. I have not been in a riot, I don't plan on going to find one so that I can participate in the violence either.

No one has to be hired. Just asked. I've been in several riots. There are not well organized.

He wasn't asked by the business owner either.

I dont think that matters.

It does matter since that's what he told police and that was his reason for supposedly traveling there.

thats not the reason why he traveled there,,,

he worked there and was there helping clean up the mess left by the rioters,,,

He didn't work there. He claimed he was hired to be security which the owner has denied. He doesnt even live in that state.

he worked in the town,,, and was there all day cleaning up,,

And he brought a rifle with him and used it

to defend himself against violent attackers,,,

That he went looking for since he wasn't really there at a business owners request. Lawyers will play these games.

let them,,, the facts about the attack are he was attacked and defended himself,,

if he didnt have the gun he would be dead or severely beaten,,

He probably wouldn't have even been there without the gun.

I wouldnt recommend being there without a gun.

Which is why he wouldn't have been there without it.

 

[progressive hunter]

THe ow

He should have stayed home.

So should the antifa/blm joe biden voters who were burning, looting, beating and attacking people.........had they not been there they wouldn't have been shot.

It was not his responsibility to go there to provide justice.

That doesnt make it wrong or even a crime.

Vigilantism usually is a crime though. He and others went there to provide justice and protection without legal authorization and ultimately killed people by putting himself in a position where violence between him and others were inevitable.

Wrong.......he went there to stand guard over a business....and to render first aid. They attacked him...what about that isn't sinking in?

They chased him down, in all 3 shootings....what part of that is still not getting into your brain?

Stand guard over a business that wasn't his. Why that business? Render first aid? Why carry a rifle and not a medical kit? Was he there to fight or to render aid?

The owner of the business asked him to go and look after it. He did have a first aid kit. That's why he was wearing gloves.

A business owner can't effectively deputize a minor to defend his property with lethal force, plus the business owner (Car Source) has already said that they did not hire security. He simply just joined up with a militia group to take it upon themselves to defend businesses, vigilantism.

No one was deputized. There was no militia group. Have you ever been in a riot?

No-one was hired either. I have not been in a riot, I don't plan on going to find one so that I can participate in the violence either.

No one has to be hired. Just asked. I've been in several riots. There are not well organized.

He wasn't asked by the business owner either.

I dont think that matters.

It does matter since that's what he told police and that was his reason for supposedly traveling there.

thats not the reason why he traveled there,,,

he worked there and was there helping clean up the mess left by the rioters,,,

He didn't work there. He claimed he was hired to be security which the owner has denied. He doesnt even live in that state.

he worked in the town,,, and was there all day cleaning up,,

And he brought a rifle with him and used it

to defend himself against violent attackers,,,

That he went looking for since he wasn't really there at a business owners request. Lawyers will play these games.

let them,,, the facts about the attack are he was attacked and defended himself,,

if he didnt have the gun he would be dead or severely beaten,,

He probably wouldn't have even been there without the gun.

so now youre a mind reader,,,

he was there all day without a gun,,,

Not a mind reader, just realistic.

thats not realistic cause the facts of that day prove it wrong,,,

he was there all day without a gun cleaning,,,

 

[JordannaNY]

THe ow

He should have stayed home.

So should the antifa/blm joe biden voters who were burning, looting, beating and attacking people.........had they not been there they wouldn't have been shot.

It was not his responsibility to go there to provide justice.

That doesnt make it wrong or even a crime.

Vigilantism usually is a crime though. He and others went there to provide justice and protection without legal authorization and ultimately killed people by putting himself in a position where violence between him and others were inevitable.

Wrong.......he went there to stand guard over a business....and to render first aid. They attacked him...what about that isn't sinking in?

They chased him down, in all 3 shootings....what part of that is still not getting into your brain?

Stand guard over a business that wasn't his. Why that business? Render first aid? Why carry a rifle and not a medical kit? Was he there to fight or to render aid?

The owner of the business asked him to go and look after it. He did have a first aid kit. That's why he was wearing gloves.

A business owner can't effectively deputize a minor to defend his property with lethal force, plus the business owner (Car Source) has already said that they did not hire security. He simply just joined up with a militia group to take it upon themselves to defend businesses, vigilantism.

No one was deputized. There was no militia group. Have you ever been in a riot?

No-one was hired either. I have not been in a riot, I don't plan on going to find one so that I can participate in the violence either.

No one has to be hired. Just asked. I've been in several riots. There are not well organized.

He wasn't asked by the business owner either.

I dont think that matters.

It does matter since that's what he told police and that was his reason for supposedly traveling there.

thats not the reason why he traveled there,,,

he worked there and was there helping clean up the mess left by the rioters,,,

He didn't work there. He claimed he was hired to be security which the owner has denied. He doesnt even live in that state.

he worked in the town,,, and was there all day cleaning up,,

And he brought a rifle with him and used it

to defend himself against violent attackers,,,

That he went looking for since he wasn't really there at a business owners request. Lawyers will play these games.

let them,,, the facts about the attack are he was attacked and defended himself,,

if he didnt have the gun he would be dead or severely beaten,,

He probably wouldn't have even been there without the gun.

so now youre a mind reader,,,

he was there all day without a gun,,,

And made sure to arm up when he went to defend the business he wasn't asked to defend? So he clearly didn't stumble his way innocently into the violence. He was ready for it. He went looking for it?