Topic Actions

Topic Search

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests

Guns, Guns Guns

The Management is not responsible for the contents of this forum. Enter at your own risk.
Re: Guns, Guns Guns
Post by The E   » Tue Nov 23, 2021 5:09 am

The E
Admiral

Posts: 2624
Joined: Tue May 07, 2013 1:28 pm
Location: Bielefeld, Germany

Hah, this didn't even register the first time around, but in his Fox interview, Rittenhouse even said "imagine what could have happened if I were black".

Yeah, while I do think that he made a monumental error in judgment in going to Kenosha armed, this guy certainly seems to have a better idea of the real world than Imaginos does....
Top
Re: Guns, Guns Guns
Post by Joat42   » Tue Nov 23, 2021 9:19 am

Joat42
Vice Admiral

Posts: 1920
Joined: Tue Apr 16, 2013 7:01 am
Location: Sweden

Imaginos1892 wrote:
Joat42 wrote:No, I didn't mispresent one thing. If you wanted to justify why Rittenhouse was within his rights, you could just have said that Rittenhouse feared for his life when he was assaulted, instead you spend a lot of time on demonizing everyone.

Oh, but I did. Check the fourth section, and actually read the words in the post this time. Then read what I was responding to in that last section: cthia’s complaint about the judge calling them looters, arsonists and antefa terrorists — which they were — instead of ‘victims’, which they were NOT.

Isn't words nice, they actually mean something. If someone gets shot they are first and foremost a victim. That a judge allowed this means that he wasn't impartial, the trial was about Rittenhouse actions, what he knew and what transpired - not ANYTHING else.

You complain about prosecutorial misconduct but you don't bat an eye when the judge actually helps the defense. The judge also dropped the gun charge, which if left would have meant that Rittenhouse may have had to face the charge of "felony murder".

Aren't we all supposed to be treated equally under the law?

Imaginos1892 wrote:
Joat42 wrote:Do you actually believe all of them where violent felons. Have you actually verified this? I suggest you should do that because people can easily get the impression that you play fast and loose with the truth.

Well, you could try checking the facts instead of just nodding along with the left-wing media liars. Their criminal records are publicly available on official government web sites, and have been widely reported on some news outlets.

I've checked the facts but it's you that said that all three where violent felons which means you are free to cite the criminal records proving that they all actually where.

Imaginos1892 wrote:If you try to use violence and brutality to bring about social change, your cause will be taken over by violent brutes.

How do you think the USA came to be? One mans freedom fighter, another mans violent and brutal killer.

---
Jack of all trades and destructive tinkerer.


Anyone who have simple solutions for complex problems is a fool.
Top
Re: Guns, Guns Guns
Post by The E   » Tue Nov 23, 2021 11:00 am

The E
Admiral

Posts: 2624
Joined: Tue May 07, 2013 1:28 pm
Location: Bielefeld, Germany

Joat42 wrote:Isn't words nice, they actually mean something. If someone gets shot they are first and foremost a victim. That a judge allowed this means that he wasn't impartial, the trial was about Rittenhouse actions, what he knew and what transpired - not ANYTHING else.


The actual legal argument here is that "victim" creates an implicit image of Rittenhouse as a felon - that letting the prosecution call the people Rittenhouse shot victims might prejudice the jury (similarly, the judge ruled that calling the protesters "rioters, looters and arsonists" was something the defense could only do if they could prove that a given specific person was actually engaged in rioting, looting or arson).
It's a rule that makes some sense if you go at it from a "presumption of innocence" perspective - of course, it makes even more sense if you go at it from a "judicial bias" perspective, but .... I think that this is something murky and just leads to screaming and stupidity.

You complain about prosecutorial misconduct but you don't bat an eye when the judge actually helps the defense. The judge also dropped the gun charge, which if left would have meant that Rittenhouse may have had to face the charge of "felony murder".


The gun charge is also something that is somewhat murky. The specific law is (according to a federal prosecutor who posts on a different forum, so take with a grain of salt) somewhat badly worded, such that it's not clear whether or not it applies in this case. (IIRC, the spirit of the law was to prohibit ownership of, specifically, short-barrelled rifles - which Rittenhouse's AR wasn't)

Aren't we all supposed to be treated equally under the law?


Yes. And unless this verdict gets overturned, Rittenhouse was treated that way, but as he himself noted, if he had been black, that would not have been guaranteed.

Imaginos1892 wrote:If you try to use violence and brutality to bring about social change, your cause will be taken over by violent brutes.

How do you think the USA came to be? One mans freedom fighter, another mans violent and brutal killer.[/quote]

Yeah. At the end of the day, if tyranny comes to the US in open, it probably will happen because all those people with the guns want it to, not despite them.
Top
Re: Guns, Guns Guns
Post by Arol   » Wed Nov 24, 2021 9:29 am

Arol
Captain (Junior Grade)

Posts: 263
Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2014 12:55 pm
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark

The E wrote:...Yeah. At the end of the day, if tyranny comes to the US in open, it probably will happen because all those people with the guns want it to, not despite them.

If/when such an event would occur; gaining power through the barrel of a gun, those now I power would start; like in almost all revolutions, to eat their “children”.
Case in point: Afghanistan!
If there is a people more gun-happy and gun-toting then Americans it’s the Afghans!
So what’s one of the first things that the Taliban started when they won? They started to confiscate the firearms that were in private hands! After all now that they were in power, there was no reason for private citizens to have possession of firearms. :roll:
After all they (the Taliban) would now keep them safe!!!! :lol:
Top
Re: Guns, Guns Guns
Post by Imaginos1892   » Wed Nov 24, 2021 2:39 pm

Imaginos1892
Rear Admiral

Posts: 1330
Joined: Sat Mar 24, 2012 3:24 pm
Location: San Diego, California, USA

Joat42 wrote:If someone gets shot they are first and foremost a victim.

So, if the police shoot a terrorist to protect a dozen hostages, the terrorist is a 'victim'? If somebody had shot that shithead on Sunday while he was maliciously running over 60 people in a Christmas parade in Waukesha, the shithead would have been a 'victim'? Aaaah…no. That's just stupid.

Joat42 wrote:You complain about prosecutorial misconduct but you don't bat an eye when the judge actually helps the defense.

The judge smacked down the prosecutors for misconduct. That's his JOB. If the defense had behaved half as egregiously as the prosecutors did, he would have smacked them down too. Fortunately, the defense lawyers weren't a bunch of ass-clowns.

Joat42 wrote:The judge also dropped the gun charge, which if left would have meant that Rittenhouse may have had to face the charge of "felony murder".

The judge dismissed the gun charge because it did not apply. That law prohibits certain 'short barreled rifles and shotguns' in specific terms. Kyle Rittenhouse's AR-15 was not a 'short barreled rifle' according to that law. The prosecutors were idiots to have filed that charge in the first place.

Also, the gun charge had nothing to do with whether or not K.R. was acting in justifiable self-defense when he shot three of the violent mob members that were trying to kill him.

I've read some additional analysis of the events shown in those videos. The triggering incident appears to have been when K.R. extinguished a dumpster fire while the rioters were pushing the burning dumpster towards a gas station. Then they tried to kill him for interrupting their 'fun'.

What would have happened if the rioters had succeeded in setting that gas station on fire? How much gasoline, and gasoline vapor, was in the station's storage tanks that night? How much more of Kenosha would have been burned to the ground? How many innocent people would have been killed?

Joat42 wrote:I've checked the facts but it's you that said that all three where violent felons which means you are free to cite the criminal records proving that they all actually where.

Did you expect other kids to do your homework for you in school, too? That would explain a lot. Like the illiterate way you keep using 'where' when the correct word is 'were'.

I’ll even show you how to get started. Go online, search for ‘Joseph Rosenbaum pederast’ and tell us how many hits you get. Then search for criminal records on the other two, and the one that kicked Kyle in the head but wasn't shot because he ran away.
———————————
The Democrats trust violent criminals and terrorists with guns more than they trust you.
Top
Re: Guns, Guns Guns
Post by The E   » Thu Nov 25, 2021 8:44 am

The E
Admiral

Posts: 2624
Joined: Tue May 07, 2013 1:28 pm
Location: Bielefeld, Germany

Imaginos1892 wrote:I've read some additional analysis of the events shown in those videos. The triggering incident appears to have been when K.R. extinguished a dumpster fire while the rioters were pushing the burning dumpster towards a gas station. Then they tried to kill him for interrupting their 'fun'.


Hey, Imaginos, hate to interrupt your ranting there, but if you're so adamant that presumption of innocence must be maintained and all, maaayyybeee you shouldn't scream stuff like "they tried to kill him!!!" unless that's actually been proven?

Like, you can't prove that any of that was their actual intent.

What would have happened if the rioters had succeeded in setting that gas station on fire? How much gasoline, and gasoline vapor, was in the station's storage tanks that night? How much more of Kenosha would have been burned to the ground? How many innocent people would have been killed?


What would have happened if the moon had turned into cheese?

You're piling on hypotheticals to make your arguments (and Rittenhouse's actions) look better, but none of those things actually happened or can be absolutely proven to be things that would have happened unless Rittenhouse intervened.

In other words, Imaginos: Your side "won" this round, why are you still so angry about it?

Also, while I have your attention: You claimed earlier that the people Rittenhouse shot were hailed as "heroes" by "the Left".
Now, I'm curious: Have you compared the the amount of hero worship those guys got with the amount of similar hero worship that Rittenhouse has gotten and is getting right now?
At the end of the day, the dude made a stupid choice, killed 2 guys and wounded another in apparent self-defense, and now he's getting TV interviews on the biggest show on Fox, PR appointments with Trump, offers of internships with several congresspeople, and is currently starting a legal battle to get the money raised for his defense free from the grifters that took it. Is that equivalent to what happened to the people he shot?

EDIT:

Okay, I know that Marjorie Taylor-Greene is about as insane as it gets when it comes to GOP congresspeople, but:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics ... story.html

(TL;DR: Taylor-Greene has introduced a bill to award Rittenhouse the Congressional Gold Medal for "protecting the ccommunity of Kenosha")

Now, this is pretty unlikely to succeed given the current makeup of the US Congress, but I would really like to ask you, Imaginos, where the equivalent bills are for the people Rittenhouse shot.
Top
Re: Guns, Guns Guns
Post by Imaginos1892   » Thu Nov 25, 2021 1:49 pm

Imaginos1892
Rear Admiral

Posts: 1330
Joined: Sat Mar 24, 2012 3:24 pm
Location: San Diego, California, USA

The E wrote:Hey, Imaginos, hate to interrupt your ranting there, but if you're so adamant that presumption of innocence must be maintained and all, maaayyybeee you shouldn't scream stuff like "they tried to kill him!!!" unless that's actually been proven?

Like, you can't prove that any of that was their actual intent.

The fact that they tried to kill him has been proven in court. Have you not been paying attention? Or did you just not understand?

The E wrote:What would have happened if the moon had turned into cheese?

You're piling on hypotheticals to make your arguments (and Rittenhouse's actions) look better, but none of those things actually happened or can be absolutely proven to be things that would have happened unless Rittenhouse intervened.

What gives you such faith that a rioting mob pushing a flaming dumpster towards a gas station DIDN'T intend to set it on fire? Especially after they had already set so many other buildings on fire. Do you believe that putting out the dumpster fire was an unreasonable action? Do you believe that chasing down and attacking K.R. with murderous intent was a reasonable action?

The E wrote:In other words, Imaginos: Your side "won" this round, why are you still so angry about it?

Why do you believe I am angry? For me, correcting stupid shit on the internet does not involve anger. Annoyance, at most.

The E wrote:Also, while…

(A bunch of inane blather omitted)

Well, you can't put all that shit back in the bull.

The E wrote:Now, this is pretty unlikely to succeed given the current makeup of the US Congress, but I would really like to ask you, Imaginos, where the equivalent bills are for the people Rittenhouse shot.

We don't typically hand out awards to murderous criminals for rioting, looting, vandalism and arson. I don't think an Act of Congress to give Rittenhouse an award is appropriate, either. He didn't do anything that extraordinary. The fact that he's garnered worldwide attention for helping the people threatened by a rioting mob is a sad commentary on all the people that didn't. If he hadn't been alone, he probably wouldn't have had to shoot three violent criminals in self-defense.

An apology from Biden for falsely calling him a 'white supremacist' would be in order, though.
———————————
Not everybody should go to college. Some folks, you send 'em to college and you just wind up with an educated idiot.
Top
Re: Guns, Guns Guns
Post by The E   » Thu Nov 25, 2021 4:14 pm

The E
Admiral

Posts: 2624
Joined: Tue May 07, 2013 1:28 pm
Location: Bielefeld, Germany

Imaginos1892 wrote:The fact that they tried to kill him has been proven in court. Have you not been paying attention? Or did you just not understand?


Oh, I have been paying attention. What was proven in court was that Rittenhouse's belief that he was under attack was genuine and that he was thus acting legitimately in self-defense.

But, and this is important, this does not prove that any of his assailants were acting with intent to kill, or that any of the other things you implied were about to happen were actually going to happen. Details, Imaginos. They're important.

What gives you such faith that a rioting mob pushing a flaming dumpster towards a gas station DIDN'T intend to set it on fire? Especially after they had already set so many other buildings on fire. Do you believe that putting out the dumpster fire was an unreasonable action? Do you believe that chasing down and attacking K.R. with murderous intent was a reasonable action?


No, personally I believe that engaging someone who is visibly armed and visibly not calm in an aggressive manner is a stupid thing to do.

Why do you believe I am angry? For me, correcting stupid shit on the internet does not involve anger. Annoyance, at most.


Yes, I would imagine it would be quite annoying to be living in a world that isn't conforming to your preconceptions.

Well, you can't put all that shit back in the bull.


Which part of that was bullshit, you think? The attention right-wing figures are slathering on Rittenhouse? The many ways in which especially far-right figures were praising Rittenhouse as a brave man finally doing what they've all been daydreaming about?
Or the really funny bit, where there's now a fight over the money that was donated to pay for his bail? (No, really)

We don't typically hand out awards to murderous criminals for rioting, looting, vandalism and arson. I don't think an Act of Congress to give Rittenhouse an award is appropriate, either. He didn't do anything that extraordinary.


And yet...
Top

Return to Politics