Kid gets body slammed by congressional candidate

[Nosmo King]

Stupid kid tries to steal shit, stupid kid gets caught, stupid kid gets body slammed.

The operative word is "kid".

We can accurately describe someone aged 14 years as a kid. How would you accurately describe an adult who body slams a kid? The term "Trumpian" might suffice.

A lack of maturity applies to both.

I happen to think that the candidate was wrong to do what he did there, however, do you condone those little punks doing what they were doing?

Of course not. There is no equivocation between them however.

One was a kid taking a yard sign, the other an alleged adult running for public office.

 

[White 6]

The kids were idiots, but he was a grown man running for office. Serious lack of judgement and self control there. If he was a 6'2" 250lb. employee seen on video body slamming a 14 year old kid, he would probably be job hunting if he were salary.

Funny, I never saw this comment from you about all the Democrat macho men who intimidated kids for wearing MAGA hats. Sandmann, the guy who dumped the soda on the kid, the old man who just went to the local store. These and many more have been threads on this site, I would remember a leftist like you speaking up against it. Didn't happen.

Suddenly, a standard emerges for you. A standard that will fade away when we flip parties

Were they candidates for office flinging dumb ass kids like a rag doll? I do not think so. You are confusing the issue. Not whether the kids were right. They were not. Not whether other kids whipping their ass, for the offenses would have illicit-ed the same comments from me. They wouldn't. I would probably laughed thinking it funny. It sucks to be a grown up sometimes and having to act responsibly in the face of adversity, but it does not change the fact that we have a different standard for adult, especially adults aspiring to a leadership position. You know. I know it.

Fuck those little turds, and their parents who forgot to flush.

They're old enough to know some things are dangerous, like sticking a fork in an electrical outlet, so I don't give a damn if they got body slammed, kicked, or pushed into the street...... shit, I'd be okay with dragging them behind a truck for awhile.

Kids are stupid, always have been. I have read it is the lack of experience and hormone changes that they do not get settled until early to mid twenties, especially boys. Though they way they are raised has a heck of a lot to do with it too. I grew up in the 60s/70s with the Vietnam war and civil rights movement (from a distance). Remember when they moved the drinking age down to 18, under the theory old enough to fight old enough to drink. Didn't turn out too well for kids and others on the highways. Now the age is basically back up everywhere and you cannot even legally buy a pack of smokes until 21. Little girls are getting knocked up at younger ages and have heard some high schools even have day care to help the kids raising their kids. Yep, kids are dumber than dirt and to young and juiced with hormones to know it.

 

[j-mac]

Stupid kid tries to steal shit, stupid kid gets caught, stupid kid gets body slammed.

The operative word is "kid".

We can accurately describe someone aged 14 years as a kid. How would you accurately describe an adult who body slams a kid? The term "Trumpian" might suffice.

A lack of maturity applies to both.

I happen to think that the candidate was wrong to do what he did there, however, do you condone those little punks doing what they were doing?

Of course not. There is no equivocation between them however.

One was a kid taking a yard sign, the other an alleged adult running for public office.

The reason I asked is that these kids are about to be of voting age, by the next election. Where are they getting the idea that physical destruction of opposing views in the form of property is ok? And or, physical assault of someone trying to protect that property?

Is that what we should accept?

 

[j-mac]

The kids were idiots, but he was a grown man running for office. Serious lack of judgement and self control there. If he was a 6'2" 250lb. employee seen on video body slamming a 14 year old kid, he would probably be job hunting if he were salary.

Funny, I never saw this comment from you about all the Democrat macho men who intimidated kids for wearing MAGA hats. Sandmann, the guy who dumped the soda on the kid, the old man who just went to the local store. These and many more have been threads on this site, I would remember a leftist like you speaking up against it. Didn't happen.

Suddenly, a standard emerges for you. A standard that will fade away when we flip parties

Were they candidates for office flinging dumb ass kids like a rag doll? I do not think so. You are confusing the issue. Not whether the kids were right. They were not. Not whether other kids whipping their ass, for the offenses would have illicit-ed the same comments from me. They wouldn't. I would probably laughed thinking it funny. It sucks to be a grown up sometimes and having to act responsibly in the face of adversity, but it does not change the fact that we have a different standard for adult, especially adults aspiring to a leadership position. You know. I know it.

Fuck those little turds, and their parents who forgot to flush.

They're old enough to know some things are dangerous, like sticking a fork in an electrical outlet, so I don't give a damn if they got body slammed, kicked, or pushed into the street...... shit, I'd be okay with dragging them behind a truck for awhile.

Kids are stupid, always have been. I have read it is the lack of experience and hormone changes that they do not get settled until early to mid twenties, especially boys. Though they way they are raised has a heck of a lot to do with it too. I grew up in the 60s/70s with the Vietnam war and civil rights movement (from a distance). Remember when they moved the drinking age down to 18, under the theory old enough to fight old enough to drink. Didn't turn out too well for kids and others on the highways. Now the age is basically back up everywhere and you cannot even legally buy a pack of smokes until 21. Little girls are getting knocked up at younger ages and have heard some high schools even have day care to help the kids raising their kids. Yep, kids are dumber than dirt and to young and juiced with hormones to know it.

Should there be some kind of law enforcement toward the youths in this incident?

 

[EvilCat Breath]

The kid should have been gutted.

 

[White 6]

The kids were idiots, but he was a grown man running for office. Serious lack of judgement and self control there. If he was a 6'2" 250lb. employee seen on video body slamming a 14 year old kid, he would probably be job hunting if he were salary.

Funny, I never saw this comment from you about all the Democrat macho men who intimidated kids for wearing MAGA hats. Sandmann, the guy who dumped the soda on the kid, the old man who just went to the local store. These and many more have been threads on this site, I would remember a leftist like you speaking up against it. Didn't happen.

Suddenly, a standard emerges for you. A standard that will fade away when we flip parties

Were they candidates for office flinging dumb ass kids like a rag doll? I do not think so. You are confusing the issue. Not whether the kids were right. They were not. Not whether other kids whipping their ass, for the offenses would have illicit-ed the same comments from me. They wouldn't. I would probably laughed thinking it funny. It sucks to be a grown up sometimes and having to act responsibly in the face of adversity, but it does not change the fact that we have a different standard for adult, especially adults aspiring to a leadership position. You know. I know it.

Fuck those little turds, and their parents who forgot to flush.

They're old enough to know some things are dangerous, like sticking a fork in an electrical outlet, so I don't give a damn if they got body slammed, kicked, or pushed into the street...... shit, I'd be okay with dragging them behind a truck for awhile.

Kids are stupid, always have been. I have read it is the lack of experience and hormone changes that they do not get settled until early to mid twenties, especially boys. Though they way they are raised has a heck of a lot to do with it too. I grew up in the 60s/70s with the Vietnam war and civil rights movement (from a distance). Remember when they moved the drinking age down to 18, under the theory old enough to fight old enough to drink. Didn't turn out too well for kids and others on the highways. Now the age is basically back up everywhere and you cannot even legally buy a pack of smokes until 21. Little girls are getting knocked up at younger ages and have heard some high schools even have day care to help the kids raising their kids. Yep, kids are dumber than dirt and to young and juiced with hormones to know it.

Should there be some kind of law enforcement toward the youths in this incident?

Should have been booked for something, both should. I suspect when the cops showed up, everybody was wanting to avoid legal entanglements. Probably the only wise move made on both sides.

 

[White 6]

The kid should have been gutted.

Would you give up your freedom and lifestyle for that? Not a good trade off, just to satisfy an emotional reaction.

 

[freyasman]

The kids were idiots, but he was a grown man running for office. Serious lack of judgement and self control there. If he was a 6'2" 250lb. employee seen on video body slamming a 14 year old kid, he would probably be job hunting if he were salary.

He doesn't know the age of those kids. They were the ones who were violent... a man can protect himself and his property. When does the violence from the left end, when we stand up for ourselves.

Pushing a young teen girl off the curb out into street traffic and body slamming a little kid are a little beyond the pale. The dumb ass kids rattled the adults into a really messy incident. Betcha he doesn't get elected.

Grown adults who were raised with manners, decorum, and respect for others are caught off-guard by the complete lack of that in many youngsters today; they are more akin to wild dogs, than decent young people.
That is a difficult adjustment for people who are actually civilized to make, especially in the moment. If you have never seen a rabid dog, you might mistake it for Fluffy until it's too late, and you've already been bitten.

And this is where it has led us... in American streets across the nation...

Good move on his part. He kept his cool and only made twitter instead of an arraignment.

Shouldn't you be more concerned about the fact that a large group of people thought it was okay to harass, taunt and menace an armed man who was walking away?
Does their willingness to engage in behavior that would get them shot down in the streets if the man actually was what they were accusing him of being, not concern you?

Because that sort of toxic behavior, and sense of entitlement to abuse others, coupled with an irrational belief in no consequences, seems like a recipe for a lot of blood getting spilled, to me.

It doesn't seem too bright, but you never know how many people are armed, concealed at these street demonstrations. I personally am not an open carry guy. Those people are trying to make a point or make an impression. Nobody needs to see my hardware until I need it. The lone open carry guy is always a target.

I have no doubt he'd take some return fire, but so what? He'd still be able to do a lot of damage first, so the only reason anyone would taunt or harass someone like that, is if they didn't really believe he would shoot them...... and if they don't believe that, then why are they calling him names and trying to provoke him?





I'll tell you why......
Because they're a bunch of dangerously stupid jackasses, who are going to be a problem for all of us sooner or later, or because they are provocateurs deliberately trying to cause an incident they can use as propaganda to incite even more violence by their sympathizers and against their opposition..... their opposition btw, being those people who don't harass, taunt, or menace other people, and who don't try to start shit. And that is even more dangerous than just the stupidity option.

Probably not. If moving to assault, with intent, an assault weapon is a good choice, but like I said, it is too visible. It's movement is to obvious and he, by himself is automatically "the" target. He could take shots at people in the semi dark and most like not ever see the concealed carry guy that would have him as a single target until it was too late as raising and aiming the assault style takes gross body movements and the weapon sticks out and it did not look like he was wearing a flack jacket, where some of the crowd obviously were. It is just the wrong choice for the task and is most likely what brought attention to him in the first place. He made the right choice, moved out smartly, but with showing alarm, but steady movement out of the situation. People who flaunt their rifles are often untrained cowboys, counting on the shock effect of seeing their armament and probably end up like Kyle, arrested or dead. Just saying, it is like anything else, choose the right tool for the right job.

Again, I think you're too focused on him, the guy we're all pretty sure isn't going to attack anyone, instead of paying attention to the crowd which is where the actual violence is going to start.

The guy vastly outnumbered and visibly armed is always the one to focus on and watch. He is the one that was in the wrong place at the wrong time, but made the right moves to keep the peace, and protect his own life and the lives of other. Can't say that much for the forethought of the long gun, but he kept his shit together. My kind of guy. Wouldn't mind him on my flank in a pinch. And, that is how I measure men with weapons, always have.

I focus on potential threats; that guy wasn't one.

That crowd was clearly full of trouble though....... guess where I'm going to keep my attention at?

 

[freyasman]

The kids were idiots, but he was a grown man running for office. Serious lack of judgement and self control there. If he was a 6'2" 250lb. employee seen on video body slamming a 14 year old kid, he would probably be job hunting if he were salary.

He doesn't know the age of those kids. They were the ones who were violent... a man can protect himself and his property. When does the violence from the left end, when we stand up for ourselves.

Stealing a sign is violent??

Snatch and grab robbery, yes.

"Robbery??" What are you, fucked in the head?

​

Robbery—Definition.​

​

A person commits robbery when he or she unlawfully takes personal property from the person of another or in his or her presence against his or her will by the use or threatened use of immediate force, violence, or fear of injury to that person or his or her property or the person or property of anyone. Such force or fear must be used to obtain or retain possession of the property, or to prevent or overcome resistance to the taking; in either of which cases the degree of force is immaterial. Such taking constitutes robbery whenever it appears that, although the taking was fully completed without the knowledge of the person from whom taken, such knowledge was prevented by the use of force or fear.[/url]​

​

So who did those kids threaten with force or fear of injury?​

You can't read?

 

[freyasman]

Stupid kid tries to steal shit, stupid kid gets caught, stupid kid gets body slammed.

The operative word is "kid".

We can accurately describe someone aged 14 years as a kid. How would you accurately describe an adult who body slams a kid? The term "Trumpian" might suffice.

A lack of maturity applies to both.

The "kids" involved were fourteen and fifteen according to the reporter, Kyle Rittenhouse is sixteen, I don't see you calling him a "kid" and making excuses for his behavior.

One took a yard sign, the other murdered two people.

Do you want to draw some equivalents?

No he didn't.

 

[DukeU]

but it does not change the fact that we have a different standard for adult, especially adults aspiring to a leadership position. You know. I know it.

Different standards that do not include ignoring or bowing to criminal behavior.

 

[White 6]

The kids were idiots, but he was a grown man running for office. Serious lack of judgement and self control there. If he was a 6'2" 250lb. employee seen on video body slamming a 14 year old kid, he would probably be job hunting if he were salary.

He doesn't know the age of those kids. They were the ones who were violent... a man can protect himself and his property. When does the violence from the left end, when we stand up for ourselves.

Pushing a young teen girl off the curb out into street traffic and body slamming a little kid are a little beyond the pale. The dumb ass kids rattled the adults into a really messy incident. Betcha he doesn't get elected.

Grown adults who were raised with manners, decorum, and respect for others are caught off-guard by the complete lack of that in many youngsters today; they are more akin to wild dogs, than decent young people.
That is a difficult adjustment for people who are actually civilized to make, especially in the moment. If you have never seen a rabid dog, you might mistake it for Fluffy until it's too late, and you've already been bitten.

And this is where it has led us... in American streets across the nation...

Good move on his part. He kept his cool and only made twitter instead of an arraignment.

Shouldn't you be more concerned about the fact that a large group of people thought it was okay to harass, taunt and menace an armed man who was walking away?
Does their willingness to engage in behavior that would get them shot down in the streets if the man actually was what they were accusing him of being, not concern you?

Because that sort of toxic behavior, and sense of entitlement to abuse others, coupled with an irrational belief in no consequences, seems like a recipe for a lot of blood getting spilled, to me.

It doesn't seem too bright, but you never know how many people are armed, concealed at these street demonstrations. I personally am not an open carry guy. Those people are trying to make a point or make an impression. Nobody needs to see my hardware until I need it. The lone open carry guy is always a target.

I have no doubt he'd take some return fire, but so what? He'd still be able to do a lot of damage first, so the only reason anyone would taunt or harass someone like that, is if they didn't really believe he would shoot them...... and if they don't believe that, then why are they calling him names and trying to provoke him?





I'll tell you why......
Because they're a bunch of dangerously stupid jackasses, who are going to be a problem for all of us sooner or later, or because they are provocateurs deliberately trying to cause an incident they can use as propaganda to incite even more violence by their sympathizers and against their opposition..... their opposition btw, being those people who don't harass, taunt, or menace other people, and who don't try to start shit. And that is even more dangerous than just the stupidity option.

Probably not. If moving to assault, with intent, an assault weapon is a good choice, but like I said, it is too visible. It's movement is to obvious and he, by himself is automatically "the" target. He could take shots at people in the semi dark and most like not ever see the concealed carry guy that would have him as a single target until it was too late as raising and aiming the assault style takes gross body movements and the weapon sticks out and it did not look like he was wearing a flack jacket, where some of the crowd obviously were. It is just the wrong choice for the task and is most likely what brought attention to him in the first place. He made the right choice, moved out smartly, but with showing alarm, but steady movement out of the situation. People who flaunt their rifles are often untrained cowboys, counting on the shock effect of seeing their armament and probably end up like Kyle, arrested or dead. Just saying, it is like anything else, choose the right tool for the right job.

Again, I think you're too focused on him, the guy we're all pretty sure isn't going to attack anyone, instead of paying attention to the crowd which is where the actual violence is going to start.

The guy vastly outnumbered and visibly armed is always the one to focus on and watch. He is the one that was in the wrong place at the wrong time, but made the right moves to keep the peace, and protect his own life and the lives of other. Can't say that much for the forethought of the long gun, but he kept his shit together. My kind of guy. Wouldn't mind him on my flank in a pinch. And, that is how I measure men with weapons, always have.

I focus on potential threats; that guy wasn't one.

That crowd was clearly full of trouble though....... guess where I'm going to keep my attention at?

You at least think and consider. Where was your threat potential? I'll go back and have a look.

 

[Faun]

The kids were idiots, but he was a grown man running for office. Serious lack of judgement and self control there. If he was a 6'2" 250lb. employee seen on video body slamming a 14 year old kid, he would probably be job hunting if he were salary.

He doesn't know the age of those kids. They were the ones who were violent... a man can protect himself and his property. When does the violence from the left end, when we stand up for ourselves.

Stealing a sign is violent??

Snatch and grab robbery, yes.

"Robbery??" What are you, fucked in the head?

​

Robbery—Definition.​

​

A person commits robbery when he or she unlawfully takes personal property from the person of another or in his or her presence against his or her will by the use or threatened use of immediate force, violence, or fear of injury to that person or his or her property or the person or property of anyone. Such force or fear must be used to obtain or retain possession of the property, or to prevent or overcome resistance to the taking; in either of which cases the degree of force is immaterial. Such taking constitutes robbery whenever it appears that, although the taking was fully completed without the knowledge of the person from whom taken, such knowledge was prevented by the use of force or fear.[/url]​

​

So who did those kids threaten with force or fear of injury?​

You can't read?

Sure I can. Apparently, you can't answer...

So who did those kids threaten with force or fear of injury?

 

[Faun]

The kids were idiots, but he was a grown man running for office. Serious lack of judgement and self control there. If he was a 6'2" 250lb. employee seen on video body slamming a 14 year old kid, he would probably be job hunting if he were salary.

Actions have consequences, it's obvious these kids weren't taught that. Well they got a lesson, didn't they, and they deserved it.

.

You think the guy who could face criminal charges learned his lesson about drawing a firearm when it's not warranted?

Oh I don't know about that. It looked like a cigarette lighter to me. Then again it could have been a water pistol. Prove that it was a gun, dumbass.

"It looked like a cigarette lighter to me."

 

[danielpalos]

...we should be grateful the kid was not seriously hurt.

 

[Nosmo King]

Stupid kid tries to steal shit, stupid kid gets caught, stupid kid gets body slammed.

The operative word is "kid".

We can accurately describe someone aged 14 years as a kid. How would you accurately describe an adult who body slams a kid? The term "Trumpian" might suffice.

A lack of maturity applies to both.

I happen to think that the candidate was wrong to do what he did there, however, do you condone those little punks doing what they were doing?

Of course not. There is no equivocation between them however.

One was a kid taking a yard sign, the other an alleged adult running for public office.

The reason I asked is that these kids are about to be of voting age, by the next election. Where are they getting the idea that physical destruction of opposing views in the form of property is ok? And or, physical assault of someone trying to protect that property?

Is that what we should accept?

Ask Trump to have them stand back and stand by. Because there are very fine people on both sides.

 

[Nosmo King]

Stupid kid tries to steal shit, stupid kid gets caught, stupid kid gets body slammed.

The operative word is "kid".

We can accurately describe someone aged 14 years as a kid. How would you accurately describe an adult who body slams a kid? The term "Trumpian" might suffice.

A lack of maturity applies to both.

The "kids" involved were fourteen and fifteen according to the reporter, Kyle Rittenhouse is sixteen, I don't see you calling him a "kid" and making excuses for his behavior.

One took a yard sign, the other murdered two people.

Do you want to draw some equivalents?

No he didn't.

No who didn't? Are there two dead people BY HIS HAND in Kenosha or not?

 

[freyasman]

The kids were idiots, but he was a grown man running for office. Serious lack of judgement and self control there. If he was a 6'2" 250lb. employee seen on video body slamming a 14 year old kid, he would probably be job hunting if he were salary.

He doesn't know the age of those kids. They were the ones who were violent... a man can protect himself and his property. When does the violence from the left end, when we stand up for ourselves.

Stealing a sign is violent??

Snatch and grab robbery, yes.

"Robbery??" What are you, fucked in the head?

​

Robbery—Definition.​

​

A person commits robbery when he or she unlawfully takes personal property from the person of another or in his or her presence against his or her will by the use or threatened use of immediate force, violence, or fear of injury to that person or his or her property or the person or property of anyone. Such force or fear must be used to obtain or retain possession of the property, or to prevent or overcome resistance to the taking; in either of which cases the degree of force is immaterial. Such taking constitutes robbery whenever it appears that, although the taking was fully completed without the knowledge of the person from whom taken, such knowledge was prevented by the use of force or fear.[/url]​

​

So who did those kids threaten with force or fear of injury?​

You can't read?

Sure I can. Apparently, you can't answer...

So who did those kids threaten with force or fear of injury?

Watch the video.
Are you saying they weren't trying to rip it out of the owner's hands?


Look, we don't have to go back and forth, we all know you're full of shit and if it was reversed you'd want the kids to get the death penalty. You're not fooling anyone.

 

[freyasman]

Stupid kid tries to steal shit, stupid kid gets caught, stupid kid gets body slammed.

The operative word is "kid".

We can accurately describe someone aged 14 years as a kid. How would you accurately describe an adult who body slams a kid? The term "Trumpian" might suffice.

A lack of maturity applies to both.

The "kids" involved were fourteen and fifteen according to the reporter, Kyle Rittenhouse is sixteen, I don't see you calling him a "kid" and making excuses for his behavior.

One took a yard sign, the other murdered two people.

Do you want to draw some equivalents?

No he didn't.

No who didn't? Are there two dead people BY HIS HAND in Kenosha or not?

So?
I don't even know for sure how many people I've killed but I've never murdered anyone.

 

[j-mac]

Stupid kid tries to steal shit, stupid kid gets caught, stupid kid gets body slammed.

The operative word is "kid".

We can accurately describe someone aged 14 years as a kid. How would you accurately describe an adult who body slams a kid? The term "Trumpian" might suffice.

A lack of maturity applies to both.

I happen to think that the candidate was wrong to do what he did there, however, do you condone those little punks doing what they were doing?

Of course not. There is no equivocation between them however.

One was a kid taking a yard sign, the other an alleged adult running for public office.

The reason I asked is that these kids are about to be of voting age, by the next election. Where are they getting the idea that physical destruction of opposing views in the form of property is ok? And or, physical assault of someone trying to protect that property?

Is that what we should accept?

Ask Trump to have them stand back and stand by. Because there are very fine people on both sides.

Cute that you would use two lies to try and make your point..So, I'll just conclude that you are in favor of punks attacking your political opponents, and thus, just as bad as they are.