The Rittenhouse Verdict

[Vrenn]

In the scanario you present - the one where you're going to murder people for carrying a gun - there's no need to conceal your gun.
So, good luck with that LadySmith.

It's only murder when it happens to your bunch. But to all other groups, it's justifiable homicide.

 

[Vrenn]

So, you're going to open carry, so you can shoot someone else for openly carrying.

You seem to leave out that to open carry, the weapon is in a holster of some kind or in a sling in a non aggressive way. Look for a change the next time you send you children with a weapon in the ready position.

 

[M14 Shooter]

It's only murder when it happens to your bunch. But to all other groups, it's justifiable homicide.

I hope you enjoy your time in prison.

 

[M14 Shooter]

You seem to leave out that to open carry, the weapon is in a holster of some kind or in a sling in a non aggressive way.

Yes. Like low carry or patrol carry.
You know - the way Rittenhouse carried his rifle.
Why do you continue to lie about how Rittenhouse carried his rifle?

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Property can be replaced. Lives can't be.

You know... Human life... that's what happens when a person is done being a fetus.

Actaully [sic] there was no evidence Huber or Grosskuertz had damaged any property... and Rosenbaum just set a dumpster on fire because he wasn't right in the head.

You consistently err in denying the humanity of the very most defenseless and innocent of all human beings; while demanding that violent, destructive subhuman criminal filth should be considered human and treated as such. You call for the cold-blooded murder of the former, while demanding that actual human beings suffer the violent and destructive behavior of the latter with no recourse or defense.

It's true of the left wrong in general, but much more true of you, that where a conflict exists between good and evil, you are always found solidly on the side of evil. Always. And where reason conflicts with madness, you are similarly always found solidly on the side of madness. You're like Isaiah 5:20 on steroids.

 

[AZrailwhale]

Okay then, why didn’t he go to the homeless camp?

It doesn’t matter that he was homeless, he still had the choice not to start a confrontation with Rittenhouse.



You apparently think it’s okay to attack someone for putting out a fire. So?

It’s not acceptable, but thanks to the very liberal ACLU, society can’t confine them against their will, so it’s reality.

 

[AZrailwhale]

You seem to leave out that to open carry, the weapon is in a holster of some kind or in a sling in a non aggressive way. Look for a change the next time you send you children with a weapon in the ready position.

Rittenhouse’s rifle was attached to a patrol sling. There are plenty of videos of him not touching the rifle and it staying in place.

 

[AZrailwhale]

You seem to leave out that to open carry, the weapon is in a holster of some kind or in a sling in a non aggressive way. Look for a change the next time you send you children with a weapon in the ready position.

Rittenhouse’s rifle was attached to a patrol sling. There are plenty of videos of him not touching the rifle and it staying in place. This is a double post, so I’ll just add that you lack the common sense god gave a goat.

 

[Vrenn]

I hope you enjoy your time in prison.

If prison time means I stopped an active shooter then so be it.

 

[Vrenn]

Yes. Like low carry or patrol carry.
You know - the way Rittenhouse carried his rifle.
Why do you continue to lie about how Rittenhouse carried his rifle?

I carried a M-16 the same way. You want to play war, fine. But look for the other side to retaliate. When you shoot at someone and they shoot back, yelling "Hey, that's not fair" is just bitching.

 

[Vrenn]

Rittenhouse’s rifle was attached to a patrol sling. There are plenty of videos of him not touching the rifle and it staying in place.

The non intimidation carrying is actually swing to the back. When we weren't trying to intimidate, that's the way we held our M-16, Now you are saying he was on "Patrol". Think about it.

 

[Dr Grump]

Okay then, why didn’t he go to the homeless camp?

er, because he was mentally ill. You are following the thread, right?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Property can be replaced. Lives can't be.

You know... Human life... that's what happens when a person is done being a fetus.

Actaully there was no evidence Huber or Grosskuertz had damaged any property... and Rosenbaum just set a dumpster on fire because he wasn't right in the head.

Property can be replaced.

You have the right to defend your property.

 

[JoeB131]

So “Get him and kill him” is not an escalation or possibly a hint that his life was in danger?

Only people who died that night were killed by Shooty McFlopsweat, so, um, no... his life wasn't in danger.

 

[JoeB131]

You consistently err in denying the humanity of the very most defenseless and innocent of all human beings; while demanding that violent, destructive subhuman criminal filth should be considered human and treated as such. You call for the cold-blooded murder of the former, while demanding that actual human beings suffer the violent and destructive behavior of the latter with no recourse or defense.

You see, Bob, because I am not a member of a sociopathic cult, I don't reduce people to the worst thing they did in their lives. Lots of kids I grew up with - white working class kids - did all sorts of stupid petty property crime. Almost all of them grew up to be solid citizens.

I don't call for anyone to get an abortion, I just don't believe I can stop them, either. If a woman doesn't want to be pregnant, she'll find a way to not be pregnant.

Don't support an inhuman society and then be surprised when people aren't all that keen into bringing more humans into it.

It's true of the left wrong in general, but much more true of you, that where a conflict exists between good and evil, you are always found solidly on the side of evil. Always. And where reason conflicts with madness, you are similarly always found solidly on the side of madness. You're like Isaiah 5:20 on steroids.

Hey, Bob, maybe you should try out Psalm 137:9.... it puts a whole new perspective.

9 Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones.

Wait, this is the book that you are holding up as a source of morality...

No, I just have different definitions of evil than you do.
People who damage property out of frustration with fascist police departments aren't any more evil than people who storm the Capitol because they didn't get the election result they wanted. They are just people who showed poor judgement.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

You see, Bob, because I am not a member of a sociopathic cult, I don't reduce people to the worst thing they did in their lives. Lots of kids I grew up with - white working class kids - did all sorts of stupid petty property crime.

I think we've established that before, that from a young age, you associated with a much lower class of nominal humans than most people did.

All my life, I've never associated with criminals.

And I think the difference between us, that this has made, shows very vividly.

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

er, because he was mentally ill. You are following the thread, right?

Are you following the thread? You’ve already been given ample evidence that Rittenhouse acted in self defense yet you insist on pushing the post hoc fallacy.

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

Only people who died that night were killed by Shooty McFlopsweat, so, um, no... his life wasn't in danger.

His success at neutralizing his attackers does not mean he was never in danger you idiot.

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

If prison time means I stopped an active shooter then so be it.

The shooter has to be actively shooting to be considered an active shooter. But what you’re saying amounts to murdering someone for not carrying their weapon correctly.

 

[beagle9]

Why do you keep lying about how Rittemhouse carried his rifle?

And you will go to jail for murder.

Yep... He undoubtedly don't know the difference between an act of self defense, and him being the aggressor in the situation if it were him. He is undoubtedly attempting to fill the shoe's of Rosen-bum instead of the shoe's of Kyle within his little scenario. Let him try his bull crap on a plain clothes cop that's maybe assigned to a protest, and let's see how that goes for him. I don't think he'll be snatching another gun from somebody he doesn't know.