Dems want Laws changed after Rittenhouse shootings. Are vigilantes the answer? (Poll)

[Resnic]

well no one was a vigilante the night of Rosenbaum's attack on a kid helping the city. Maybe Rosenbaum was the vigilante since he was starting fires and causing chaos. But, the folks that were called in for security were called in for security much like a bank has security. Are banks now vigilantes?

And none of that had anything to do with the point I made or what I was saying at all.

 

[Flash]

Democrats on the Sunday morning shows, as well as many others want laws changed so that law abiding citizens can't defend themselves from criminals.
In SF gangs of looters emptied Louis Vitton and other high-end stores. What if Louis hired a few armed vigilantes?
In Philadelphia, a mom and baby were killed coming home from a baby shower,
WHERE IS THE DEMOCRAT'S OUTRAGE???????????????.

Pregnant Woman Shot, Killed Returning Home From Her Baby Shower, Philadelphia Police Say

A pregnant woman is dead after a shooting in the Crescentville section of Philadelphia.

philadelphia.cbslocal.com

NYC Mayor DeBlasio said the Rittenhouse verdict "sends a horrible message"...
De Blasio joins NY’s left in raging over Kyle Rittenhouse — as NYPD on alert for potential unrest
“This verdict is disgusting and it sends a horrible message to this country. Where is the justice in this,” de Blasio tweeted after the 18-year-old defendant was cleared of all charges in the deaths of two men and the wounding of a third during racially charged violence in Kenosha, Wisconsin, in 2020."

Biden, Adams, Sharpton and others weigh in on Rittenhouse verdict

The acquittal of Kyle Rittenhouse in a Kenosha, Wis., courtroom sparked plenty of opinions on Friday — divided in the same way the country is. The baby-faced gunman, who killed two men and wounded a third at a Black Lives Matter protest last year, was hailed as a hero in right-wing circles...

news.yahoo.com

"Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) tweeted, “It’s time to dismantle systemic racism & fundamentally transform our broken justice system.”

California Gov. Gavin Newsom worried about the precedent set by the Rittenhouse case.
“America today: you can break the law, carry around weapons built for a military, shoot and kill people, and get away with it,” the Democrat tweeted. “That’s the message we’ve just sent to armed vigilantes across the nation.”


What if neighborhoods organized vigilantes to shoot criminals in their neighborhoods, today's version of a "well regulated militia"? Would urban gang shootings stop?

Lets take a poll on what should happen when pols and DAs stop police from arresting and prosecuting violent criminals.

Should vigilantes fill the gap and protect neighborhoods from criminals?

[The OP and thread title are now better aligned, sorry for the closure of the first thread discussion]

The irony is that the real vigilantes in Kenosha were the BLM/Commie mob that tried to run down Kyle and kill him because he didn't go along with their agenda of destruction.

 

[Mac-7]

Most of those burned out businesses in Kenosha were mom and pop businesses.

Leftists wont say so but they hate mom and pop even more than the big corporations

Corporations can be browbeaten by the left

They are the useful idiots in our society

See Chic-Fil-Lay

But small business tends to vote republican and thats a capital crime in lib la la land

 

[jc456]

And none of that had anything to do with the point I made or what I was saying at all.

sure it was. people like you throwing words out and not expecting to get challenged on it. Who were the vigilantes you are referring to?

 

[jc456]

Leftists wont say so but they hate mom and pop even more than the big corporations

Corporations can be browbeaten by the left

They are the useful idiots in our society

See Chic-Fil-Lay

But small business tends to vote republican and thats a capital crime in lib la la land

that is the crime. voting for a different methodology from them. again, they don't want that to exist. It's why they can't have the Rittenhouse verdict.

 

[Care4all]

Regardless of any new law good American men and women will defend themselves, their loved ones and their property, whatever it takes. Yes. Every neighborhood should raise and maintain an armed watch.

With 17 year olds and long arms?

 

[Care4all]

It is elementary, this notion of defense of life and property. America and every other empire down through history pays or paid armed men to defend lives and property, both domestically and on other shores. The right of the average citizen to defend life and property is equally valid. The answer is also quite elementary: do not go out and burn, pillage and loot. Refrain from any of those three actions and armed private citizens will not shoot at you. R-E-S-P-E-C-T.

But the gas station owner, did not hire them??

 

[jc456]

With 17 year olds and long arms?

why not?

 

[jc456]

But the gas station owner, did not hire them??

hahahahahahahahahahahaha. maybe rosenbaum shouldn't have attacked rittenhouse. still waiting on why that happened? Tell us?

 

[struth]

With 17 year olds and long arms?

why not? if they want to volunteer. Frankly, i wouldn’t use them if I had enough older volunteers

to be honest i was likely better when a rifle at. 17 then i am now. I had far more time to hunt back then and did it regularly. I haven’t used a gun in years now

 

[Godboy]

This is not the wild west. Civil and criminal liability is a thing now.

It IS the wild west in left wing cities, only its WAY more dangerous now than it was in the olden days.. Have you been living under a rock?

 

[Care4all]

why not?

The law right now in Wisconsin, doesn't allow those under 18 to run around town, with a gun. Why would they want them to be permitted to run around town brandishing a long arm?

 

[Godboy]

The law right now in Wisconsin, doesn't allow those under 18 to run around town, with a gun. Why would they want them to be permitted to run around brandishing a long arm?

Youre an idiot. He wasnt breaking any law. His gun wasnt a "short barrel rifle" and therefore perfectly legal. Didnt you follow this case?

 

[kyzr]

You're an idiot of you actually believe that.
I suppose it's possible you do.

Another empty post from Crep.
Re-read post #12 and see if you can backup your statements/comments.
Probably not. You're just a garden variety whiner.

 

[Care4all]

why not? if they want to volunteer. Frankly, i wouldn’t use them if I had enough older volunteers

to be honest i was likely better when a rifle at. 17 then i am now. I had far more time to hunt back then and did it regularly. I haven’t used a gun in years now

If I were the business owner, I wouldn't hire a 17 year old as part if my armed militia....or any unprofessional security force....for fear of lawsuits, if something went South (wrong).

 

[Care4all]

Youre an idiot. He wasnt breaking any law. His gun wasnt a "short barrel rifle" and therefore perfectly legal. Didnt you follow this case?

Yes, I do know that....about long arms.

I am not questioning that....

What I am asking and questioning, is the intent of the law that makes it illegal for those under 18 to own or carry guns, while allowing those under 18 to legally carry a long arm, and its purpose? Why not okay for handguns, while ok for long arms?

I presumed their lawmakers don't make long arms illegal for 16 and 17 year olds in the State, because long arms are used for hunting??

Am I correct? Or wrong?

 

[badger2]

No. Drones are the answer. Because no American could or would follow a loot-and-burn baboon in 2020, a Citizen’s Archive of the future will develop to begin eliminating perpetrated, opportunist violence, violence that Rittenhouse was addressing. Roof drones are fast and can be activated day or night in seconds.

Citizen’s Archive, 2022-2050

 

[Godboy]

Yes, I do know that....about long arms.

I am not questioning that....

What I am asking and questioning, is the intent of the law that makes it illegal for those under 18 to own or carry guns, while allowing those under 18 to legally carry a long arm, and its purpose? Why not okay for handguns, while ok for long arms?

I presumed their lawmakers don't make long arms illegal for 16 and 17 year olds in the State, because long arms are used for hunting??

Am I correct? Or wrong?

I dont presume to know why they made their laws, all i know is it wasnt illegal.

 

[kyzr]

Yes, I do know that....about long arms.
I am not questioning that....
What I am asking and questioning, is the intent of the law that makes it illegal for those under 18 to own or carry guns, while allowing those under 18 to legally carry a long arm, and its purpose? Why not okay for handguns, while ok for long arms?
I presumed their lawmakers don't make long arms illegal for 16 and 17 year olds in the State, because long arms are used for hunting??
Am I correct? Or wrong?

Correct. Long guns are typically used for hunting, while short guns and pistols are meant to be concealed.
You okay with Kyle defending himself from the child rapist, wife beater, and armed attacker?
I'm still waiting for ANY "news" outlet to put up the story about that pregnant mom in Philadelphia getting shot in the head twice coming home from her baby shower. That doesn't fit their Leftist "narrative".

 

[Care4all]

I dont presume to know why they made their laws, all i know is it wasnt illegal.

I agree. It wasn't illegal for him to carry a long arm, it was only illegal for him to carry a hand gun.