Rittenhouse trial

Rittenhouse is an idiot. Going into that situation with an assault rifle is asking for trouble. He may not be legally culpable but he bears moral culpability. He did nothing but inflame an already bad situation.

But everyone out there rioting bears moral culpability too. If you tear down the rule of law you create a situation where things get out of hand. You don't get a Rittenhouse without things descending to near state of nature.

If these people had respected the rule of law then Rittenhouse doesn't shoot anyone and if he does then he has no cover.
 
sturg33 said:
What isn't white supremacy?

[TW]1461781712275443721[/TW]
Click to expand...

Sue him too, Kyle.

Where's the white supremacy come from?

ETA... CK is such a weird individual. He was raised by an affluent white couple, but now seems to hate white people
 
Last edited:
Definitely white supremacy for his white parents to adopt him and raise him like their own.

Ungrateful ****. Its all poison intended to destroy America.

We are awake to it now. We want the fight and we will win.
 
This is the mentality. Pronouns are important on the left, pay attention to the one she uses.

[tw]1461767944124387337[/tw]
 
Huber's (one of the rioters killed) girlfriend just said at a BLM protest that if the two deceased rioters' lives didn't matter, then no one's lives matter, and we need to get to a place where all lives matter.
 
thethe said:
There is just so much momentum right now to take back the country.

Have to move forward with suing FB/MSM and even Biden for defamation.

Never take the foot off the pedal.

We are winning and taking the country back.
Click to expand...

And then this....
 
sturg33 said:
What isn't white supremacy?

[TW]1461781712275443721[/TW]
Click to expand...

See, this is the problem with the left. They just can't compartmentalize things away from their emotions.

This article slamming the decision is a perfect example. https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/opin...m-that-ideal/ar-AAQUPUy?ocid=hponeservicefeed

It basically has 3 premises:

1. "You cannot claim self-defense against a danger that you create." This is the exact same type of victim blaming we are trying to move past in things like rape and other crimes. No, it is not a woman's fault for being raped because she dressed provocatively and was out at 3 am. It is an extremely stupid thing to do, but she is not at fault. So no, it is not this kid's fault that he was attacked while doing something stupid, and legal. Being stupid doesn't justify being attacked, so this double standard folks only apply when convenient to their point of view is illogical.

2. "He was, in fact, the only person that night who killed anyone." Another pointless "point'. He was probably also the only one who had someone try to wrestle a firearm from their grasp after being told bythat person he was going to kill him if found alone. Being the N = 1 person does not prove anything other than only 1 person encountered a scenario.

3. "Rittenhouse's ability, as a white man, to walk the streets armed with military-style weapons and live to see trial is exactly the racial injustice that people were protesting that fateful night in Kenosha." Now this is true, and a black man would almost certainly be dead right now had he done the same thing, but completely off topic from the point of the trial. This kid should not have been found guilty to prove some point about racial inequality. The fix is to stop killing minorities, not to make an example out of a stupid white kid.
 
thethe said:
Maybe that ****ing loser Lebron James will comment on Rittenhouse breaking down crying.

Big changes are going to happen in this country.

We have all the momentum.
Click to expand...

Love this bizarro universe where this basement bound loser can attempt to call Lebron James a loser.
 
NoelCaslerComedy
@caslernoel
·
4h
Somebody just got himself a new intern.

Be careful Matt, kid’s got a temper.
 
Enscheff said:
See, this is the problem with the left. They just can't compartmentalize things away from their emotions.

This article slamming the decision is a perfect example. https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/opin...m-that-ideal/ar-AAQUPUy?ocid=hponeservicefeed

It basically has 3 premises:

1. "You cannot claim self-defense against a danger that you create." This is the exact same type of victim blaming we are trying to move past in things like rape and other crimes. No, it is not a woman's fault for being raped because she dressed provocatively and was out at 3 am. It is an extremely stupid thing to do, but she is not at fault. So no, it is not this kid's fault that he was attacked while doing something stupid, and legal. Being stupid doesn't justify being attacked, so this double standard folks only apply when convenient to their point of view is illogical.

2. "He was, in fact, the only person that night who killed anyone." Another pointless "point'. He was probably also the only one who had someone try to wrestle a firearm from their grasp after being told bythat person he was going to kill him if found alone. Being the N = 1 person does not prove anything other than only 1 person encountered a scenario.

3. "Rittenhouse's ability, as a white man, to walk the streets armed with military-style weapons and live to see trial is exactly the racial injustice that people were protesting that fateful night in Kenosha." Now this is true, and a black man would almost certainly be dead right now had he done the same thing, but completely off topic from the point of the trial. This kid should not have been found guilty to prove some point about racial inequality. The fix is to stop killing minorities, not to make an example out of a stupid white kid.
Click to expand...

You're making sense. Well reasoned opinions are far to rare these days.
 
you lost me at " the left"

if nothing else has not hit home the past 50-90 years it is that " the left" is not a monolith but a pretentious slogan of someone trying to act erudite


Let everyone k now when " the left" has red hats and banners
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top