Jump to content

Harrison Bergeron

Full Members
  • Posts

    1640
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Harrison Bergeron

  1. 43 minutes ago, Johnny Sack said:

    That's what they are really mad about.  A white guy defending himself against lawless thugs on their team.

    As someone else noted, it is funny glancing through the old Garrett Foster thread (Austin guy carrying a long gun that got shot after he brandished it), and the many of the same guys ripping Rittenhouse oddly have sympathy for Foster and do not seem concerned with his carrying or his insane social media posts. To be fair, there are a couple of reasonably consistent posters.

    • Hook 'Em 4
    • Haha 1
  2. 55 minutes ago, immortal13 said:

    He is still regarded as a legal expert. Is that all you've got? And I have refuted your only argument as to why Rittenhouse should be convicted of murder, and that is that his "intent" was to go to Kenosha with his AR15 and shoot protesters. The problem with your theory is that not only can it not be proven, it is contradicted by KR's actions. Keep fucking that chicken until it's dead, though 

    Expert means "agree with me" ... 

  3. 5 minutes ago, JimmyJames said:

    The right wing hate machine made it political. I guess in response to initial media reports. Hell they posted his 2 million dollar bail and are funding his defense. If you can’t see that I can’t help you. 

    Okay. That's actually funnier than anything on the Lulz board. I actually would love to read your Form 500 details.

  4. 1 hour ago, washparkhorn said:

    So again, the crux of the case is whether loses his right to claim self-defense because he intended to provoke an attack against himself by unlawfully carrying the weapon with the intent of then using that attack as an excuse to use deadly force against his attackers.

    Based on the facts I have seen, that's a stretch for any jury given the kid looks and acts like an incel, has a shitty parent/s, and has loser dead-end friends. He doesn't appear bright, he presents as lost, and his friends look like an anchor.

    Frankly this looks like LARPing or Cosplay gone amuck. 

    You just described every member of antifa.

    • Hook 'Em 1
    • Like 1
  5. 30 minutes ago, sheeeit said:

    Just my opinion but I do not think KR went to the riots with the intent on shooting anyone.  He is a kid.  Him popping off on the video is pretty typical macho talk- heck people in the CR threaten to kill someone or wish death on someone daily.  

    I certainly agree that him actually going to the riots with a gun was a stupid thing to do and certainly makes his comments look worse in hindsight.  He should not be heralded for his actions.  I hope his case is an example for those like him of what not to do.  There were many ways he could have helped that didn't require him bringing an AR.  I genuinely think he went there to help and was certainly a bit naive as to what might happen but nothing presented as evidence makes him look like some sociopath on a hunt to kill people.   As mentioned, there is not a single bit of evidence shown in the trial that he was being confrontational or acting crazed in any way.  

    As to washpark's comments above, It seems people continue to gloss over pretty important aspects of the law here.  The self defense statutes have been posted a few times.  Even in a best case scenario for the prosecution that somehow KR gave up his defense of self defense by the simple fact of showing up with an AR, the next part of the statute says (paraphrasing) the self defense protection is immediately reinstated if the person attempts to remove themselves from the situation.  It is on video and acknowledged by one of the detectives that when Rosenbaum hid and then confronted KR that KR ran away while loudly proclaiming "friendly, friendly".  He absolutely tried to remove himself from the situation.  So his self defense claims were absolutely valid legally.

    The disturbing thing to me is that the prosecution obviously knew before the trial as did the judge and the defense attorneys.  The case should never have been brought.  I hope this does not give rise to more KR types that put themselves in bad situations.  

    I will also add that there is a LOT of criticism of those that are acting like KR is to be commended.  Yet, especially in the CR, no one has any criticism whatsoever for all of the national pundits (including actual members of congress on up to POTUS) that mischaracterized the case from the beginning.  It is hard for folks not to push back.

    This is a great summary post.

    I will reiterate that I am sick and tired of a segment of the twattering class picking on minors and made exponentially worse by at best pushing misinformation and at worst intentionally lying about said minors. The ideological media should be embarrassed and ashamed.

    If one has to pick on children to make stupid political or cultural points, one should re-examine their lives. Made worse still by the fact that these same groups regularly defend actual criminal conduct if the perp is wearing the right jersey and demand that no prior information be considered when evaluating a particular incident.

    This obviously was purely a political prosecution (against a minor). It was refreshing to see an old school judge basically give the double bird to the twatters and hypocrites.

  6. 14 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

    Don't ask me if he wanted to shoot people.  Ask Kyle:

    Again, that doesn't change whether or not the actual shootings in the moment were acts of self-defense.  But it's pretty clear he didn't just want to engage in the "apply bandages and tourniquets" part of the medic fantasy....the "carry an AR and shoot people" was an openly stated part of that fantasy.  That's not good.

    To be frank, given the shoddy nature of journalism in general and particular in this case, I would not believe anything around intent unless it was a primary source. Even that newspaper acknowledges "a voice that sounds like Rittenhouse." By today's journalism standards, that could mean it sounded male. Again, I am not assigning a motive either, but I do not think we have any evidence his intent was to shoot or to confront.

  7. 29 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

    Ledge.  It's ledge talk.

    And there are actually a good number of folks on this thread who I think are in the neighborhood of the right take.  The conclusion of that is 1) Kyle ain't no hero, and shouldn't have been down there, and 2) once he was there, three dumbasses acted in utterly dumbtastic ways that gave him a solid defense of self-defense.

    Kyle went down there because he had delusions of glory, being a warrior hero, etc.  He openly talked about wanting to shoot people.  He was a kid, and shouldn't have been there.  And the local cops shouldn't have encouraged him to put himself in that role.  That was not good.

    The guys he shot were shitheels engaged in shitheelery.  And they attacked a guy carrying an AR (which is perhaps the dumbest part of their symphony of dumbassery)....who then shot his attackers, giving him a pretty damned good defense.

    In another thread, I used the example of a gangbanger who had a rival come at him, and he shot him in self-defense.  Gangbanger may be an utter POS, or may have been HOPING for his rival to come at him so he'd get a chance to take him out, none of which is good.  But he still has a good defense of self-defense.

    KR is not a hero.  He should not be turned into one.  We should not have people -- of ANY political lean or persuasion -- heading down to protests or riots (or protests, hoping that it turns into a riot so you get a chance to shoot some people you don't like) to act as vigilante/self-deputized cops.  I've said it before -- when you show up with a visible gun, then you just turned every possible confrontation into a gun fight.  That's usually a bad outcome.  We'd have all been better off if KR stayed home, the dumbasses did the same and/or if they were going to be out there, protest peacefully and non-violently, and if the cops did the job of dealing with dumbasses committing acts of arson and destruction of property.  That's the optimum path.  Things that go wildly outside that path shouldn't be lauded or held up as positive examples.

    TLDR; I don't much like any of the characters involved in this shitty drama.  I have the most sympathy for KR because he is the youngest one, and allowed himself to be seduced into a course of action he thought was heroic.  But my sympathy doesn't go very far, even for him.

    I agree with 90% of your post and appreciate the levity. It is rare these days, especially for high volume CRers.

    I am not sure I agree with your assign motive. Admittedly, I am not a scholar of this situation, but I am not familiar with clear evidence that his motive was anything other than to help people and to protect businesses. If he stated otherwise, I'll gladly stand corrected.

    I agree with you that he is not a hero, but I think it is a little Motte & Bailey to act like there is this great attempt to elevate him as such. If anything, this is an example of the frequently repeated (to cite another source) "Republicans Pounce" lines. What is meant by that is the Left will do something stupid, the Right reacts, and the story becomes "Republicans Pounce." In this affair, this case for no justifiable reason other than division was elevated to a national story, and the ideological media (once again) completely misconstrued a situation involving a minor to fan the flames of division and feed read meat to its ideologue audiences. So right are wrong, it is not unexpected that some would react to that slander and libel and exaggerate the "goodness" of his actions.

    I have said previously that I generally oppose the nationalization of these local crime cases. Our ideological media spends too much time trying to fan outrage and division by nationalizing local stories at the expense of good and comprehensive national and international journalism.

    • Hook 'Em 1
    • Like 1
  8. 11 minutes ago, OneOfTheOutOfFocusGuys said:

    the best evidence for this is that people i don't like disagree with it.  very familiar theme coming from a particular group.

    It seems really weird that this elicits they typical tribal histrionic reaction. I have no idea if it will succeed or not, but there is a lot of information content in the cartoonish responses. U.S. higher education has some significant problems, and I welcome anyone attempting an innovative model. I also like the idea that it wants to return to the academy to its traditional values of liberalism and freedom. Time will tell if the market wants it.

    • Hook 'Em 1
  9. 2 minutes ago, Cheeseweasel said:

    I used to make a decent annual donation to the ACLU before they stopped being for Civil Liberties.. I will honestly consider the innocence project as a replacement. 

    It does great work ... although I wish it would avoid the high profile, money raising cases of people so obviously guilty.

  10. 33 minutes ago, Captainant said:

    ftfy.

    Rittenhouse CHOSE TO BE THERE. He's in an interview mere minutes before he was attacked saying with a big smile and rifle in hand that he's there to run towards danger.

    He should not have been there. He should not have been encouraged by the police to be there. He gets to live with blood on his hands because of everyone's bad decisions that day.

    I was wrong with respect to his self defense claim, by the letter of the law he was justified in defending himself. The prosecution should not have proceeded to trial with this case if they hadn't even interviewed their own witnesses prior to the trial. It was a huge waste of taxpayer money and it's clear that the prosecution team didn't know their ass from their elbow. They didn't even bother to bring evidence to support some of their charges lol.

    He chose to be there. His presence did not violate any laws. He did not choose to be attacked. I have not seen any evidence that points to his provoking attack.

    If that is going to be your standard, fair. Now apply it equally not only to this case but to all cases as well as other issues where people put themselves in bad situations. I would be willing to bet you would not apply this standard across the board, i.e. if someone puts themself in a bad situation "they get what they deserve."

    • Hook 'Em 1
  11. I get the sense that Rittenhouse is a naive, well intentioned kid ... kid being the operative word. I agree with the above that he wants to speak for himself and set the record straight. Too bad he is not old enough to realize that is not really possible in our system. The CNN headline will be: "White Supremacist who Stormed the Capitol Tells Jury He Wanted to Fight for Trump When He Killed Three Peaceful Protesters Who were Standing Up for Racial Equality."

  12. 1 hour ago, Carl Spackler said:

    1.  You are right.  I didn't read your prior post very well.  I should have pointed out that the two possibilities you mention aren't the entire gamut of potential outcomes in that situation.  Another potential outcome is that you rebuff the stranger's efforts to take the firearm and you maintain control of it.  The two possibilities you mentioned are the potential outcomes (in general) IF and only if the stranger succeeds in taking the firearm.  Like you, I wouldn't want to relinquish my weapon and risk finding out that the stranger isn't favorably inclined toward me.  So I'm doing everything I can to maintain control of the firearm.  If it gets to the point where I have a reasonable belief that he intends to do me harm and my efforts to disengage are being thwarted -- then I think I've got a good basis to use deadly force to protect myself.  

    2.  The "extra complexities" and "specific nuances" could be the difference between a viable self-defense claim and a failed one.  The particular facts and circumstances matter.  Rittenhouse shoots an unarmed Rosenbaum simply because Rosenbaum tries to grab his weapon (no threat, no chase, no cornering, etc.)?  Almost certainly not self defense.  Rittenhouse shoots Rosenbaum after the latter threatened his life, chased him, threw objects at him, cornered him, and then tried to grab Rittenhouse's weapon?  Very good chance it's self-defense.  

    I certainly understand where you're coming from.

    You're basically trying to paint a hypothetical where a guy comes into a store, puts a weapon in the clerk's face and demands all the money from the til. You're asking the clerk to ponder whether his intent is the do a quick count to make sure the cash matches the receipts before returning all the money and wishing you a good day.

    • Hook 'Em 2
  13. 6 minutes ago, Johnny Sack said:

    They did the same bullshit with Michael Brown and with Trayvon Martin (using a picture of him when he was 12). Deliberately evil shit they do.

    And virtually every one of these cases that rise to some sort of "national dialogue." It is deliberately evil because it is divisive and creates a ignorant public. As you noted previously, there is a reason why those that identify themselves as "very liberal" or "liberal" believe there are thousands of unarmed black men killed by police every year. Even "very conservative" people reported they think there are hundreds.

    The CR crazies are telling: they had so much emotional hysterics invested in this case driven by deliberate misinformation they cannot process the actual trial testimony, which is why they've devolved into the usual bogey men and histrionics.

    • Hook 'Em 2
  14. 51 minutes ago, Johnny Sack said:

    Yeah.  If I am carrying a holstered pistol.  And someone I don't know tries to snatch it from me, I think I don't have to sit there and let them and hope they don't shoot me with it.

    That seems like a textbook threat that would warrant a self-defense response. If person A is not pointing the gun at person B and person B attempts to take the weapon from person A, seems like the only reasonable inference person A could make is that person B is attempting to do person A harm with said weapon.

    The media coverage of this trial may be the only thing slightly more fascinating than the actual performance in the courtroom. Feels like its entered "mostly peaceful protests" realm.

    • Hook 'Em 1
×
×
  • Create New...