BULLDOG
Diamond Member
- Jun 3, 2014
- 100,948
- 36,123
- 2,250
Wrong.
There are no white supremacy signs.'
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Wrong.
There are no white supremacy signs.'
You don't like that self defense is legal?I don’t hate the kid. I don’t like it that what he did was legal and cool with you fools
no proof needed. just accusations huh!!!!Copy and paste BS. You really are an idiot.
Democrats don't need to prove anything.
Rittenhouse is a murderer. And the jury let him walk.
We don't think he's a WS.
It’s why police officer Rusten Sheskey was not charged with a crime for shooting Jacob Blake seven times in the back and the side. Blake’s pocketknife made Sheskey fear for his life, but Rittenhouse was allowed to waltz past officersfrom the same police department carrying a killing machine during chaotic protests. They did not see the gun-toting teenager as a threat. He is not Black. He was not scary.
![]()
Kyle Rittenhouse wasn’t convicted because, in America, white reasoning rules | Michael Harriot
When white people find Black protesters scary, and white vigilantes heroic, where does that leave the legal concept of ‘reasonable belief’?www.theguardian.com
It is reasonable to assume that police fear for their lives when they detain Black suspects. It is reasonable for conservatives to assume that Black voters will upset the political equilibrium if they are not systemically suppressed. And yes, it was reasonable to believe that Kyle Rittenhouse’s white jurors would grant him the privilege of self-defense.
The Rittenhouse verdict is proof that it is reasonable to believe that the fear of Black people can absolve a white person of any crime.
Downright retarded that anyone would be against being able to defend their life against criminals because of who they support politically.The divide in this country is not racial. It is political. Right vs left.
DAMN those white supremacists! DAMN THEM ALL!!!!!
Self-defense is always cool. You've been lied to and told it was murder.I don’t hate the kid. I don’t like it that what he did was legal and cool with you fools
If you're serious, good on you. The truth was available since long before the trial started.I change my mind after reading this
Rosenbaum lunged at Rittenhouse and grabbed his gun. Rittenhouse said he shot Rosenbaum to stop him.
Video evidence also showed that Rittenhouse shot Huber only after Huber started hitting him in the head — and tried to take his gun.
Grosskreutz, who was armed, also put his hand on Rittenhouse’s gun before he was shot.
They don't have a lot of functioning discernment when it comes to leftist lies. Are those blinders implanted surgically at birth, I wonder?Self-defense is always cool. You've been lied to and told it was murder.
I don't like that it's legal for a person to take his gun to a protest or riot. What was he thinking? Even a lot of you cons said he made poor decisions that night.You don't like that self defense is legal?
Making a poor decision doesn't mean you forfeit your right to life and the right to defend yourself.I don't like that it's legal for a person to take his gun to a protest or riot. What was he thinking? Even a lot of you cons said he made poor decisions that night.
Beats me.I don't like that it's legal for a person to take his gun to a protest or riot. What was he thinking? Even a lot of you cons said he made poor decisions that night.
Well, I don't know any non-black people who would say "I don't know no DNA, DNA just means OJ gots blood". That's a direct quote from an OJ juror after the trial by the way.Nothing to do with race? If they were white would black people have defended them? So race did have something to do with it.
How many blacks were on the OJ trial?
So race did have something to do with it. I'm sure 12 white jurors would have seen it differently.
Oh, and the racial makeup of the OJ criminal jury was nine blacks, one Latino and two whites.Nothing to do with race? If they were white would black people have defended them? So race did have something to do with it.
How many blacks were on the OJ trial?
So race did have something to do with it. I'm sure 12 white jurors would have seen it differently.
That's your usual bullshit. A woman who kills her husband while he is in the act of attacking her will walk, she will even be given the benefits of any doubts because of the difference in physical capabilities. Now the ones who kill their husbands in their sleep ARE rightfully, called inmates. That is murder. An abused spouse ALWAYS has the ability to simply walk away from the abuser. Most won't, they just make excuses for their abusers until it gets them killed.You’re screaming thread title is total bullshit. You’re outraged that the media can’t prove this thug is a white supremacist. But you’re completely OK with the legal murder of two unarmed citizens.
The United States of America has now completely legalize the murder of people who threaten white men in any way. Armed or unarmed, if you frighten the white guy with a gun, you can get shot and nothing bad will happen to him.
This courtesy does not extend white women since women who murder their husbands and claim self-defence because of abuse are now called “prison inmates”. But a guy like George Zimmerman can stalk a kid, against police instructions, frighten him and then murder him when the child tries to defend himself against the stalker, and claim self defense.
Kyle Rittenhouse can point his gun at protesters and frighten them and when they try to take his gun away from him, he can murder them and get away with it because they frightened him.
The only outrage that you have is over name-calling?
Your priorities are completely fucked.
You mean him defending his sister from a bully? Good luck making that look bad.Let him sue. His racist statements in the CV Pharmacy won’t be excluded from that trial. Nor will his beating of the teenage girl. These are both consistent with white supremacist behaviour.
That photo gives me great pleasure.
I just came upon a really graphic photo of that animal's ruined arm, but I can't post it here. Too graphic.That photo gives me great pleasure.
That's been debunked for years. However, people who believe guns are magic talismans that make people obey you by waving them around DO get disarmed. DON'T pull a pistol unless you intend to kill someone with it, and then fire as soon as you pull it. DON'T say stop, or anything else, just shoot and keep shooting until your assailant goes down.Yes, I've had numerous gun nuts here telling me how I would have been much "safer" I'd be if I had a gun. Since none of the bad things they say I need a gun for have happened to me in over 70 years, I seriously doubt they're about to start. I don't think anyone at the local church supper is going to snap and open fire, but you really never know.
There was a woman who's husband had attacked and threatened her, and she had called the police. They took a while getting there, and she said she wished she had a gun that day, in case he came back. He didn't and she was OK, but she wished she'd had a gun so would have been "safe". The thought of him taking her gun and using it against her never occurred to her. Stats show that members of gun owning households are more likely to be injured by that gun, than they are to use it for self defence.