Jump to content

Several shot during 3rd night of Kenosha riots

clapclapclap

By clapclapclap
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, Doc Reeves said:


you can feel what ever you want.

Thank you for your permission.  I wasn't asking though.  You conveniently did not address the hypocrisy in North Loop's post.

 

Typical.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 5.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Poe It Up
Poe It Up

The “I used to vote Republican” line is the CR’s version of “I have a black friend.”   

hayden_horn
hayden_horn

so, yeah, this is the problem writ large. unarmed black dude, may be a threat, shot several times in the back. armed white dude, with an assault rifle present and visible, who just shot some people, w

CORN
CORN

Kenosha's very own Sweet Corn Fest, held every August Jerry Smith Produce and Pumpkin Farm (7150 18th St.), would like you to know that they are here to support you during this difficult time. Wh

Posted Images

Doc Reeves

Doc Reeves 6434

Posted
Posted
16 minutes ago, slorch said:

Thank you for your permission.  I wasn't asking though.  You conveniently did not address the hypocrisy in North Loop's post.

 

Typical.


I’m responding to your post. You asked if it was reasonable to feel angst against looters which it is. 
However, killing someone is not automatically considered ‘reasonable’ by the DA during unrest regardless of the circumstances.

those are simply facts I was presenting to answer your question. As for addressing hypocrisy, I couldn’t even begin to on this thread.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
52-80

52-80 19378

Posted
Posted
9 hours ago, Enchubben said:

Maybe I missed this in the videos or commentary, but has it been explained yet why the short guy was chasing the shooter yet? 

Someone pointed a gun at him.  It's not established who, or why.

 

In the aggro video he's shouting at a group of armed people "don't point that fucking shit at me".

One member of that group looks exactly like Ritter - slightly chubby, light green shirt, hat, slung long rifle (and dark backpack instead of red med kid). 

 

It's possible Rosenbaum later mistook Ritter for this guy.

 

 

From Ritter's point of view he was interviewed by McGinnis, then took off with another dude, and according to McGinnis police statement that's when they were accosted by Rosenbaum. 

 

McGinnis was coming up aggressively to them, that's why Ritter "juked" him, ran away, and all 3 (Ritter, Rosenbaum, McGinnis, the 'other dude') all ran towards that parking lot where the shooting occured.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
NorthLoop

NorthLoop 14420

Posted
Posted
6 hours ago, slorch said:

But we aren't allowed to feel the same way about looters and rioters?

I never said that. In fact, I think the protester in Austin who got killed because he inserted himself into that situation while armed with a rifle was also in the wrong. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
elguapo

elguapo 4620

Posted
Posted
12 hours ago, workswithseed said:

El Guapo said he apparently raise his gun Rosenbaum. I asked for evidence, but didn't get any. I'm just getting hearsay.

No I didn’t say that, I asked what the legal implications of pointing his gun at Rosenbaum before the chase would be because I was curious.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
elfenix

elfenix 34657

Posted
Posted



That's fair, and I'll own that I should have not even included the suppositions others posited which I disagreed with on the thread. I did put NOT on fire as an optional observation which was summarily ignored by you and others. I should have omitted it entirely and for that I was errant.
However, continued focus on that specific portion of what I just owned seems to be the primary focus for the entirety of the responses.
Will others admit and own that the specifics object is largely irrelevant to the overall analysis of the situation?
Will they take the time to actually try and determine what occured based on existing know evidence rather than continued efforts to describe a false narrative that fits their particular bias?
I've said repeatedly that I find multiple faults in all actors in this situation, and keep trying to get back to the actual occurrences and legality. Yet, rather than address those, a singular item has been the focus in all else I've submitted, which I just admitted I should have omitted entirely. 
Will others with an agenda and a narrative behave similarly? Or will that singular item continue to be the focus while ignoring all other evidence and testimony?
I think we all know that answer. This discussion is a echo chamber not unlike some other subs found on this webpage.
 


Including a debunked talking point as something that may still be on the table is classic misinformation technique. You're the fucking echo chamber.
  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
atomheartbevo

atomheartbevo 90542

Posted
Posted
12 hours ago, NorthLoop said:

I've already stated that I think this kid is gonna get off on all murder charges. I still think he's a murdering fuck. I also think that anyone who supports him is a bonafide piece of shit. Not legally of course - I'm not a legal judge and cannot legally decree someone a piece of shit. But feel free to get those panties wadded up tight. 

The first guy he killed, the killing shot appears to have been the one he fired through the guy's back.   That does not help his case at all.

The interviews he gave do him no favors - they established that he felt he needed a rifle and that he was going to be inserting himself into dangerous situations.   He was a teenager who knew full well he illegally carrying, knowingly out well past the local curfew, and he was from out-of-state, and he crossed state lines after the killings, when he should have turned himself into a police station (not cops in APCs intent on getting somewhere else).   

Those facts do him no good.  This was not an organic situation where he was defending the family store.  He drove across state lines, was deliberately violating multiple laws, both state and local laws.

I think he's going to be serving plenty of time.  Whether he beats the murder charges or not, at least his law enforcement career will never happen.

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
hayden_horn

hayden_horn 11401

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, BurntEyes said:

That's fair, and I'll own that I should have not even included the suppositions others posited which I disagreed with on the thread. I did put NOT on fire as an optional observation which was summarily ignored by you and others. I should have omitted it entirely and for that I was errant.

However, continued focus on that specific portion of what I just owned seems to be the primary focus for the entirety of the responses.

Will others admit and own that the specifics object is largely irrelevant to the overall analysis of the situation?

Will they take the time to actually try and determine what occured based on existing know evidence rather than continued efforts to describe a false narrative that fits their particular bias?

I've said repeatedly that I find multiple faults in all actors in this situation, and keep trying to get back to the actual occurrences and legality. Yet, rather than address those, a singular item has been the focus in all else I've submitted, which I just admitted I should have omitted entirely. 

Will others with an agenda and a narrative behave similarly? Or will that singular item continue to be the focus while ignoring all other evidence and testimony?

I think we all know that answer. This discussion is a echo chamber not unlike some other subs found on this webpage.

 

i was just pointing out that those that read the thread would already know that was debunked. fair play to you for the retraction. 

my response about this situation is above somewhere. i don't feel like finding it or retyping it, but i will sum it up: no winners here. rosenbaum was clearly agitated in some other videos preceding his death. he felt he had had a gun pointed at him, and was furious about it. i don't know why he chased down a guy carrying a gun. seems like a bad decision. what i do know is that if the kid stayed home, 2 people would not be dead and one would have full use of both arms. kid went looking for trouble, and it found him. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
immortal13

immortal13 4059

Posted
Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, hayden_horn said:

but you made it a point that it was an object that may have been on fire when that was completely debunked earlier in the thread. it was a fluttering plastic bag that was not a material threat and just muddies the water of the discussion. stop that. 

So it was an empty plastic bag?

Edited by immortal13
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dcar00

dcar00 14899

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, hayden_horn said:

i was just pointing out that those that read the thread would already know that was debunked. fair play to you for the retraction. 

my response about this situation is above somewhere. i don't feel like finding it or retyping it, but i will sum it up: no winners here. rosenbaum was clearly agitated in some other videos preceding his death. he felt he had had a gun pointed at him, and was furious about it. i don't know why he chased down a guy carrying a gun. seems like a bad decision. what i do know is that if the kid stayed home, 2 people would not be dead and one would have full use of both arms. kid went looking for trouble, and it found him. 

the kid and his parents are idiots and will get what is coming from the courts but you could say the same for rosenbaum.   stupid games stupid prizes

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dahobbs

Dahobbs 18181

Posted
Posted (edited)
20 minutes ago, BurntEyes said:

That's fair, I agree with your point on one bad choice but lean more toward if 3 people had just stayed home and not been dumb asses that went looking for trouble nobody would be dead or injured.

So, I think we're pretty close I just align more weight to all parties making bad choices and having at least some level of culpability. Particularly because from the evidence I've seen all of them were aggressors at various points.

The guy with the gun always has more responsibility. That is the role of the responsible gun owner, as the very presence of a gun increases tensions and the chances of something bad happening. 

Exercising a right confers a duty to use it wisely.

Edited by Dahobbs
  • Hook 'Em 5
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dcar00

dcar00 14899

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, BurntEyes said:

You know, one point that I believe we all agree on is the one regarding the kids parent. (From what I've gathered it's just him mom in the picture)

Setting aside the legal aspect, who in the fuck, why in the or what in the fuck is any parent thinking actually transporting their 17 y/o child to a area where there is a riot. Even without a gun, it's unfathomable to me. Even more so with a gun. 

This, among a series of a ton of stupid choices is among the top. 

Personally, I think chasing a person armed with a carbine while unarmed is close to equal on a stupidity scale, but the fact that he was only risking his own life pushes the mom dropping off her child over the top, imo.

hell I told my 2 kids(over 17 but home because covid) no going anywhere near downtown austin, until I clear it, when this started and the full on(austin style full on which is minor league compared to other places) rioting only lasted like 2 days.  

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dahobbs

Dahobbs 18181

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, dcar00 said:

hell I told my 2 kids(over 17 but home because covid) no going anywhere near downtown austin, until I clear it, when this started and the full on(austin style full on which is minor league compared to other places) rioting only lasted like 2 days.  

I think you'd be hard pressed to distinguish the Austin "riots" from a typical night on 6th Street.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
XYZ

XYZ 2154

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, BurntEyes said:

Setting aside the legal aspect, who in the fuck, why in the or what in the fuck is any parent thinking actually transporting their 17 y/o child to a area where there is a riot. Even without a gun, it's unfathomable to me. Even more so with a gun.

This. This is one of the more bizarre things I’ve heard of in a long time.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Homercles

Homercles 10206

Posted
Posted
18 minutes ago, Newdoc said:

Who on here is in charge of writing up the final “Surly Report” on solving the technicalities of this case? I’ll pick it up from Kinkos and mail it to the judge in Wisconsin if y’all chip in for stamps.

It won’t get there in time to make a shit if you use USPS stamps, maybe consider FedEx

Link to comment
Share on other sites
VABuckeye

VABuckeye 2481

Posted
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, BurntEyes said:

Could you provide any details that support a shot in the back on the initial encounter? I haven't seen such, but to be clear don't claim it's not true.

Beyond illegal carrying of a rifle underage and violation of curfew, what other local and state laws did he break? Again, just looking for clarification.

I think there is interpretation available on what the interview shows. I don't disagree with yours.

Pretty sure the initial person shot was a head shot.  The guy that asked him to shoot him.  The video showed them wrapping his head.

Edited by VABuckeye
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dcar00

dcar00 14899

Posted
Posted
13 minutes ago, VABuckeye said:

Pretty sure the initial person shot was a head shot.  The guy that asked him to shoot him.  The video showed them wrapping his head.

I don't think we've established the guy rosen rosen was saying shoot me to was rambo boy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Judge Roybeanbag

Judge Roybeanbag 11856

Posted
Posted
19 minutes ago, VABuckeye said:

Pretty sure the initial person shot was a head shot.  The guy that asked him to shoot him.  The video showed them wrapping his head.

The police report posted a page or so ago said the head wound was a graze.  He was also shot in the hand, the groin/pelvic region and the back, which hit the liver.  The pelvic and back shots are what killed him.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
VABuckeye

VABuckeye 2481

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Judge Roybeanbag said:

The police report posted a page or so ago said the head wound was a graze.  He was also shot in the hand, the groin/pelvic region and the back, which hit the liver.  The pelvic and back shots are what killed him.  

Thank you.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 31983

Posted
Posted
15 minutes ago, South Austin said:

Not being a racist or white supremist doesn't mean he's not a piece of shit who was looking for violence. 

Meh.  I have the distinct impression that this kid was immature and naive rather than malicious.  He seemed to have been consumed by some kind of hero/martyr/glory fantasies.

 

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
South Austin

South Austin 53151

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, TwiceHorn said:

Meh.  I have the distinct impression that this kid was immature and naive rather than malicious.  He seemed to have been consumed by some kind of hero/martyr/glory fantasies.

Even if there was truly no bad intent, when you take a gun to another city in another state to get involved in a volatile situation with which you have no personal connection or reason to defend life or property, you're looking for violence.

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Stros121

Stros121 3

Posted
Posted
12 minutes ago, South Austin said:

Fair, but the dead and shot didn't bring firearms.  Meaningful distinction in my opinion.

The man who was shot in the bicep was seen pointing a gun at 17 yo before he was shot and after he was shot. He was a convicted felon carrying a firearm.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
3adays

3adays 454

Posted
Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, South Austin said:

Even if there was truly no bad intent, when you take a gun to another city in another state to get involved in a volatile situation with which you have no personal connection or reason to defend life or property, you're looking for violence.

I agree the kid was an idiot and found the trouble he was looking for. But why do people keep making a big deal about him driving to another state? It’s like he drove from Round Rock to Buda. 

Edited by 3adays
  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dcar00

dcar00 14899

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, South Austin said:

Even if there was truly no bad intent, when you take a gun to another city in another state to get involved in a volatile situation with which you have no personal connection or reason to defend life or property, you're looking for violence.

thats why I blame the parent(s).  the kid wanted to play cop.  the parent is supposed to say you are not fucking playing cop at a riot with a gun.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Stros121

Stros121 3

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, 3adays said:

I agree the kid was an idiot and found the trouble he was looking for. But why do people keep making a big deal about him driving to another state? It’s like he drove from Round Rock to Buda. 

I heard it was 15 miles from his house across the state line. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Popular Post
South Austin

South Austin 53151

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted
3 minutes ago, 3adays said:

But why do people keep making a big deal about him driving to another state?

We're not going to Moscow. It's Czechoslovakia. It's like we're going into Wisconsin.

Well, I got the shit kicked out of me in Wisconsin once. Forget it.

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 2
  • Haha 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites
achooloco

achooloco 1086

Posted
Posted (edited)
On 8/28/2020 at 7:48 PM, atomheartbevo said:

I haven't seen it verified, but one one of the news sites had him living alone with his mom, in a small apartment.   They also claimed she drove him to Wisconsin to drop him off to meet up with somebody (maybe the person he called on the phone).   If the dad was not present, there could be some unresolved daddy issues, and that's why she was enthusiastic about his police junior academy stuff, Back the Blue (she's a nurse), and why she bought him the rifle (and his other firearms, unless those were borrowed).  And if she drove him to Wisconsin, she knew he had the rifle and was taking it across the state lines.

I have not seen any photos of him with his father, just with his mom.

 I don't know how much I trust any of that though, although his classmates saying he would be the school shooter is pretty telling, but if she did buy him the rifle, drove him to Wisconsin, etc., she's pretty fucked as well.

Edit: don’t  mean AHB obviously 

Fuck them Both. Enjoy prison you two assholes. Or the needle. I’m not picky 

Edited by achooloco
Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...