The Lefts Runaround of 2A

Weatherman2020

Diamond Member
Mar 3, 2013
91,747
62,568
2,605
Right coast, classified
Destroy the lives of anyone who dares to defend themselves.
While Leftist racist felons get $1,000 bail for trying to murder their girlfriends.

Change my mind.

1638122444001.jpeg
1638122488743.jpeg
Shooting of Michael Brown - Wikipedia
 
It's starting to look like there really is something to that "better judged by 12 than carried by 6" thingy.
Yes, I think the OP's point is that the left is trying to make "judged by 12," so odious and deck-stacked, that the law-abiding will hide or submit to violence rather than defend themselves.

Which just shows the left's misunderstanding of human nature. No way was Kyle Rittenhouse thinking, 'I better not shoot this maniac that's trying to take my gun. I could get in trouble for that.'

Put a lefty in KR's position and they would do the same if they could figure out a trigger of the non-emotional type.
 
Destroy the lives of anyone who dares to defend themselves.
While Leftist racist felons get $1,000 bail for trying to murder their girlfriends.

Change my mind.

View attachment 569416View attachment 569417 Shooting of Michael Brown - Wikipedia

What the radical leftist nor neo-aristocratic mind will never comprehend is the fundamental human right to defend life and property of the everyday man, against the everyday criminal who for those political classes is a never-ending source of fortune and power. Our scumbag elected leaders need two things from the likes of us great unwashed middle-class masses: they need us to overlook crime or accept it as an eternal fact of life, and they need us to "take it" when criminals victimize us. In their eyes defending ourselves and families with a gun is far more barbaric than a criminal torturing us, killing us, stealing our property.
 
Destroy the lives of anyone who dares to defend themselves.
While Leftist racist felons get $1,000 bail for trying to murder their girlfriends.

Change my mind.

View attachment 569416View attachment 569417 Shooting of Michael Brown - Wikipedia
Ruin somebody's life? Isn't that guy or his wife talking about running for Congress or something. Bad example. He doesn't look like his life was destroyed, does it?
Lil Kyle will get over this bump, too. Betcha, he's seen his last nighttime riot on the streets. Looks like he found out, wanting to go to one of these events, is much more attractive than going. Good thing to know. If it were me and I was that age, I would disappear into the Army for a 4-year tour and let it blow over.
 
The guy in the top photo is running for Senator so it didn't seem to hurt him much.

Kyle is going to make some serious bank off of lawsuits so it didn't hurt him either.
This case did not need to become well known. It was pushed by Progs like others. As soon as the pushed begin in these thigs sides are formed. How smart he was going there can be debated. Defending himself seems to be a war the progs are pushing on Americans. That will not stop the murders in poorer areas. In fact it may mean the expansion of tribalism and areas protected by gangs.
 
Destroy the lives of anyone who dares to defend themselves.
While Leftist racist felons get $1,000 bail for trying to murder their girlfriends.

Change my mind.

View attachment 569416View attachment 569417 Shooting of Michael Brown - Wikipedia

At the moment the question is not the right to keep and bear arms. But how you use the arms.

What is really happening is that the get out of jail free phrase isn’t working in every instance. I was afeared for my life just ain’t cutting it anymore.

So what is driving this change? Mostly it is video. With Video being involved in most cases now, I was afeared for my life loses some of its power.

Take the case of Drejka in Florida. The State where Zimmerman was found not guilty. Ok. So we know self defense is a viable legal defense. So what was different? We didn’t have the words of the survivor as the only version. We had the dispassionate view of the camera.

Drejka was found guilty. The jury did not find his actions were “reasonable”.

Earlier this week, Florida, same state, found that a man was using Self Defense and found him Not Guilty on Murder and Attempted Murder.

It is what the Jury believes is Reasonable.

None of these cases are based upon your Second Amendment Rights. All of them are about how you employ that weapon. The picture in the OP is of the St. Louis couple. They broke the law by “Brandishing” their weapons. I’ve written how their actions were stupid Legally, Tactically, and Strategically. Enough so that you should have no problem finding those comments.

You are free to keep them. Free to bear them. But you can’t run around waving the bang sticks about. That is where you run into trouble.

Your second amendment rights are not under attack. Your lack of restraint in how you handle them is the issue. And it should be.
 
The guy in the top photo is running for Senator so it didn't seem to hurt him much.

Kyle is going to make some serious bank off of lawsuits so it didn't hurt him either.
I think the point of the OP is that the left is trying to ruin people's lives for invoking self-defense (when attacked by leftists), not that it will never backfire on them.

Look at all the lawsuits that were settled favorably for Sandman, the kid whose "life was ruined," by the media over wearing a MAGA hat in DC and being confronted by radical leftists. Sure, he came out of it smelling like a rose, but the left certainly tried to ruin his young life. Because they don't like the first amendment any more than they like the second.
 
At the moment the question is not the right to keep and bear arms. But how you use the arms.

What is really happening is that the get out of jail free phrase isn’t working in every instance. I was afeared for my life just ain’t cutting it anymore.

So what is driving this change? Mostly it is video. With Video being involved in most cases now, I was afeared for my life loses some of its power.

Take the case of Drejka in Florida. The State where Zimmerman was found not guilty. Ok. So we know self defense is a viable legal defense. So what was different? We didn’t have the words of the survivor as the only version. We had the dispassionate view of the camera.

Drejka was found guilty. The jury did not find his actions were “reasonable”.

Earlier this week, Florida, same state, found that a man was using Self Defense and found him Not Guilty on Murder and Attempted Murder.

It is what the Jury believes is Reasonable.

None of these cases are based upon your Second Amendment Rights. All of them are about how you employ that weapon. The picture in the OP is of the St. Louis couple. They broke the law by “Brandishing” their weapons. I’ve written how their actions were stupid Legally, Tactically, and Strategically. Enough so that you should have no problem finding those comments.

You are free to keep them. Free to bear them. But you can’t run around waving the bang sticks about. That is where you run into trouble.

Your second amendment rights are not under attack. Your lack of restraint in how you handle them is the issue. And it should be.
Except in my 3 examples in the OP it was clear self defense. Yet Leftist prosecutors went after them to destroy their lives.
Yes, destroy. Ever seen a lawyer bill in that kind of case? DA uses taxpayer money.
 
Yes, I think the OP's point is that the left is trying to make "judged by 12," so odious and deck-stacked, that the law-abiding will hide or submit to violence rather than defend themselves.

Which just shows the left's misunderstanding of human nature. No way was Kyle Rittenhouse thinking, 'I better not shoot this maniac that's trying to take my gun. I could get in trouble for that.'

Put a lefty in KR's position and they would do the same if they could figure out a trigger of the non-emotional type.
Yep. Remember, 12 found OJ not guilty, and it works in reverse as well.
 
Except in my 3 examples in the OP it was clear self defense. Yet Leftist prosecutors went after them to destroy their lives.
Yes, destroy. Ever seen a lawyer bill in that kind of case? DA uses taxpayer money.

A clear case of self defense is the case of Magee I mentioned above. The Grand Jury declined to indict.

The St. Louis case was Brandishing. Not usually covered under Self Defense. And as memory serves they plead guilty in a plea bargain.


As a matter of fact and law. They admitted to committing crimes. Misdemeanors to be certain. But crimes.

Rittenhouse shot three people and fled the state. He was going to be tried. Any Prosecutor would have run him up before a Grand Jury.

Finally Michael Brown. Odd that you guys never admit what the investigation showed. Let’s link to it shall we?

105 pages.

What does it say? It says with examples that the police were racist, and violating the law, and violating the constitution.

Now imagine you have a pile of oily rags. It doesn’t take much of a spark to get the rags burning.

By the same token. The shooting of Michael Brown, chick does not belong on this list since the cop was never charged, was the imperfect spark that set a pile of rags alight.
 
Except in my 3 examples in the OP it was clear self defense. Yet Leftist prosecutors went after them to destroy their lives.
Yes, destroy. Ever seen a lawyer bill in that kind of case? DA uses taxpayer money.
I don't know if the media realizes how much they helped Rittenhouse by publicizing his case and attempting to make him the villain. By presenting their obviously false narrative of a white supremacist looking for black people to shoot and settling for shooting three white guys instead, they made him famous. Combined with the fact that anyone willing to use their own eyes can see it was self-defense, that allowed for a large legal fund to be raised for KR.

Without that, KR might have been stuck with a public defender, whose job performance is judged not on how many cases they win, but how many they settle.

We should also realize that the deck is just as stacked against any non-wealthy defendant.
 
Those snowflakes were not being attacked. People were walking down the street past their house on the way to the mayor's house.

They pled guilty and had to give up their guns. Because no menacing dipshits should ever be allowed to be armed.
Hilarious. ‘People’ were just walking down the street!
1638184271619.jpeg

Well then, home owners were just holding their guns on their own property!
 
Hilarious. ‘People’ were just walking down the street!
View attachment 569613
Well then, home owners were just holding their guns on their own property!
You own photo shows they are walking down the street, retard!

Holy shit!

As for the people with the guns pointing them at the people in the street, there's a legal term for that. It's called menacing, and it is a crime.

If you ever took a gun safety course, you would know that. If you have a concealed carry permit, and accidentally reveal your gun on your waist, you can be charged with menacing if a cop is in a bad mood. And that's without laying a hand on your gun.
 
You own photo shows they are walking down the street, retard!

Holy shit!

As for the people with the guns pointing them at the people in the street, there's a legal term for that. It's called menacing, and it is a crime.

If you ever took a gun safety course, you would know that. If you have a concealed carry permit, and accidentally reveal your gun on your waist, you can be charged with menacing if a cop is in a bad mood. And that's without laying a hand on your gun.
Yeah, a huge crowd just walking down a residential street!

The fact they were there as a lynch mob is irrelevant!

You validate the OP, you Leftards don’t want anyone defending themselves.
 
Yeah, a huge crowd just walking down a residential street!

The fact they were there as a lynch mob is irrelevant!

You validate the OP, you Leftards don’t want anyone defending themselves.

Find my posts. There are plenty. I said that the couple was stupid. They should have been inside. Why? Cover from any bullets from the crowd. Access to additional ammunition. Restricted access points. Oh and last but not least. Call the cops.

They ran outside and waved their guns around. Why? To scare the crowd. If the shooting had started perhaps a dozen in the crowd would have died. And the couple would have died. I doubt a dozen would have died. But I’ll pretend people who hold their firearms in such a way are just short of experts.
 

Forum List

Back
Top