Jump to content

Kyle Rittenhouse

tx 3 putt

By tx 3 putt
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 2.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Satoshi
Satoshi

Horrible situation that night. He will be acquitted. The dumbest guy in all this was the one who brought a skateboard to a gun fight. The definition of FAFO

Satoshi
Satoshi

Shots had already been fired at the point of the skateboard guy getting involved. So yeah it reached the level of gun fight at the point he got involved. Not sure what you don’t understand about that.

Brian Fantana
Brian Fantana

I just want to add that I'm not here to pillory Kyle Rittenhouse. He is a fucking child. A child. I had an extensive conversation about this with a good friend of mine who is a juvenile defender by pr

Posted Images

immortal13

immortal13 4059

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Hank Kingsley said:
  • After one user on Patriots.win wrote, “Antifags and BLMKKK gotta be shitting. We have permission to defend ourselves now,” [sic] another responded, “We don’t need fucking permission and never did. But now, it’s a legal precedent.”
  •  
  • One boogalooer on Twitter wrote: “WE CAN PROTECT OUR COMMUNITIES NOW REFERENCING RITTENHOUSE V. Wisconsin.”
  •  
  • On Telegram, QAnon John wrote, “This case is a MAJOR turning point in the quest for JUSTICE in our country. Especially in terms of the 2nd Amendment, and self-defense cases moving forward…The precedent set in this trial will be one that is revisited, and referenced for the unseeable future.”
  •  
  • Also on Telegram, Aaron Chapman, the leader of the neo-Nazi group the Occidental Templars, praised the verdict as giving “good Americans legal precedent and license to kill violent commies without worrying about doing life in prison if we defend ourselves in a riot. This will also show militia types that they don’t have to avoid the riots to protect themselves legally.”
  •  
  • One user in the Proud Boys public chatroom on Telegram shared an image of the snake from the Gadsden flag biting the fist from the antifa logo with the caption “YOU WERE WARNED.” Beneath it, the user wrote, “#Kyle #FAFO” (“FAFO” stands for “Fuck around and find out.”)

How do you "erupt in cheers" online? Lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand

Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand 13586

Posted
Posted
31 minutes ago, ChickenSandwich said:

That is certainly the message the radical left is putting out on the propaganda rags. Some red meat for the mob. 

You're not answering the question.  When you leave a void where an answer should be and force people to guess what they should do in life and death situations in Gun Freedom Land, that's just as much on you as it is on what you characterize the "radical left".

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
immortal13

immortal13 4059

Posted
Posted
Just now, Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand said:

You're not answering the question.  When you leave a void where an answer should be and force people to guess what they should do in life and death situations in Gun Freedom Land, that's just as much on you as it is on what you characterize the "radical left".

 

If you don't have enough sense not to chase after someone with an AR15 then well.....Darwin and all that

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Beantown Express 2.0

Beantown Express 2.0 6559

Posted
Posted

So I have a question for the actual lawyers on this site.  Let's say in the future a African American man goes to a predominantly white neighborhood and is armed to the teeth with a few rifles and guns.  Someone in the neighborhood comes out and says "what are you doing here".  Does the man with the guns have the right to start shooting people and then claiming it was self defense because he had fear for his life?  You can reverse this same scenario to a white man going into a African American neighborhood fully armed and doing the same thing.  Is this technically legal now and your lawyer would cite precedent in the Rittenhouse case?  I don't need to here that the white guy can do it but the black guy can't as I already know there is racial bias in this country.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
DDD Dad

DDD Dad 14346

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Beantown Express 2.0 said:

So I have a question for the actual lawyers on this site.  Let's say in the future a African American man goes to a predominantly white neighborhood and is armed to the teeth with a few rifles and guns.  Someone in the neighborhood comes out and says "what are you doing here".  Does the man with the guns have the right to start shooting people and then claiming it was self defense because he had fear for his life?  You can reverse this same scenario to a white man going into a African American neighborhood fully armed and doing the same thing.  Is this technically legal now and your lawyer would cite precedent in the Rittenhouse case?  I don't need to here that the white guy can do it but the black guy can't as I already know there is racial bias in this country.  

I presume it will all depend on whether the gun-toting individual could present evidence that the person in the neighborhood's actions caused him to have a reasonable fear for his personal life/safety sufficient to force the prosecutor to have to disprove self-defense.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
lilMAC25

lilMAC25 3801

Posted
Posted (edited)
5 minutes ago, Beantown Express 2.0 said:

So I have a question for the actual lawyers on this site.  Let's say in the future a African American man goes to a predominantly white neighborhood and is armed to the teeth with a few rifles and guns.  Someone in the neighborhood comes out and says "what are you doing here".  Does the man with the guns have the right to start shooting people and then claiming it was self defense because he had fear for his life?  You can reverse this same scenario to a white man going into a African American neighborhood fully armed and doing the same thing.  Is this technically legal now and your lawyer would cite precedent in the Rittenhouse case?  I don't need to here that the white guy can do it but the black guy can't as I already know there is racial bias in this country.  

Lolno.

 

 

if the people tried to attack him? Yes

Edited by lilMAC25
  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
DDD Dad

DDD Dad 14346

Posted
Posted
Just now, Sawbonz said:

If either of them aimed a gun at someone in a threatening manner and that person shot them, I would vote to acquit were I on their jury

They certainly appeared to be waving them in the direction of the protesters, from the photos I saw.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand

Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand 13586

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, Sawbonz said:

If either of them aimed a gun at someone in a threatening manner and that person shot them, I would vote to acquit were I on their jury

Aimed more towards immortal- response appreciated, but "threatening manner" pretty much goes hand-in-hand with "aimed a gun". 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DDD Dad

DDD Dad 14346

Posted
Posted (edited)
3 minutes ago, Bravo said:

Guess the jurors didn't see that. BTW it is apparent you didn't watch the trial because the prosecution had no real evidence of this. It's why the provocation claim didn't stick. 

They pleaded guilty to misdemeanor assault.  I know it's earlier out there in Hawaii so maybe go easy on the Mai Tais.

Edited by DDD Dad
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sawbonz

Sawbonz 27580

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, DDD Dad said:

They certainly appeared to be waving them in the direction of the protesters, from the photos I saw.

I didn’t see anything except them posing with their guns for the tv cameras but if they were doing that and got shot for it I would see it as self defense 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sawbonz

Sawbonz 27580

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand said:

Aimed more towards immortal- response appreciated, but "threatening manner" pretty much goes hand-in-hand with "aimed a gun". 

Ha ha yeah as soon as I hit submit I was thinking Colonel Jessup. But to me, nothing better demonstrates a reasonable fear of harm worthy of self-defense with deadly force other than someone physically assaulting you 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DDD Dad

DDD Dad 14346

Posted
Posted
Just now, Bravo said:

I'll be honest. I have a good buzz. You can't drink all day if you don't start early. Am I insane or was Rittenhouse just found not guilty on all charges and plead guilty to nothing? 

Try and keep up.  McCloskeys, St. Louis, guilty plea, subsequent pardon by Missouri governor.  

Shit, she's pointing at someone in this photo.  He's checking her aim.

merlin_192572682_03c32cc0-f490-480d-9443

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sawbonz

Sawbonz 27580

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Bravo said:

I'll be honest. I have a good buzz. You can't drink all day if you don't start early. Am I insane or was Rittenhouse just found not guilty on all charges and plead guilty to nothing? 

Ddd is talking about the dip shit in his fat ass wife who were standing outside their house with guns in Kansas or somewhere like that while protesters were marching by

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sawbonz

Sawbonz 27580

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand said:

And really, that's a question for anyone celebrating today's verdict since the rest of are simply left to deduce what to do in potential life and death situations, being this is where you typically clam up. 

 

Do you really expect any aspect of your life or any of your decisions to change based on this verdict?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Goofyboy

Goofyboy 3293

Posted
Posted
Do you really expect any aspect of your life or any of your decisions to change based on this verdict?

Yes. I expect to see more death and more fighting and division in this country. This has emboldened more white supremacists to be more dangerous with even less fear of being persecuted.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
washparkhorn

washparkhorn 9939

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, Sawbonz said:

Do you really expect any aspect of your life or any of your decisions to change based on this verdict?

As a city dweller with 17 year old sons, I will again caution them to stay away from Protests and Counter-Protests near Civic Center Park in Denver.

How about you?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
goatsaag

goatsaag 279

Posted
Posted
24 minutes ago, Beantown Express 2.0 said:

So I have a question for the actual lawyers on this site.  Let's say in the future a African American man goes to a predominantly white neighborhood and is armed to the teeth with a few rifles and guns.  Someone in the neighborhood comes out and says "what are you doing here".  Does the man with the guns have the right to start shooting people and then claiming it was self defense because he had fear for his life?  You can reverse this same scenario to a white man going into a African American neighborhood fully armed and doing the same thing.  Is this technically legal now and your lawyer would cite precedent in the Rittenhouse case?  I don't need to here that the white guy can do it but the black guy can't as I already know there is racial bias in this country.  

I've seen similar things to this several times now where people are worried that there is now a precedent that a person can just show up wherever they want with a gun and then start indiscriminately shooting whoever they want based on "I was afraid for my life".

I don't understand how this case would do anything of the sort. It wasn't some South Park "It's coming right for us!" situation. Everything was on video and we all got to see what happened. No matter what you think about Rittenhouse (he's an idiot who basically has zero chance now at becoming a reasonable human being), whether he should have been there (obviously not), or open carry laws (completely fucking stupid and should be done away with), he didn't just show up and start shooting whoever he felt like shooting.

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

RomaVicta 29949

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Bravo said:

Soviet Russia wasn't very keen on gun ownership. Your views on this more align with Soviet Russia. BTW the kid was stupid going down there but doesn't mean he gives up his right to self defense. Being stupid isn't a crime otherwise CR wouldn't exist 

GUN OWNERSHIP!! SELF DEFENSE!!! YOU'RE A RED!! MANLY MANFULNESS MELTING ALL YOU LIB SNOWFLAKES!!!!!!!!!!

Does seeing my avatar in particular evoke that spew or is it generally triggered by any nearby sonic disturbance?

My point wasn't about gun ownership in the Soviet Union. It was about belonging to the party in the Soviet Union. You and many others spout the dogma you're fed about the evil media, libs, BLM, antifa, and the big lie about the election like the solid party members you are. 

You're double plus good party members. Big brother smiles upon you!

You either don't get it or won't get it. The results are the same. The idiots aren't much better than the knowingly malign.

Congrats on having your hero the fire-puttin'-out medical-aid-offerer acquitted. Everything is going well in our fair country.

spacer.png

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Harrison Bergeron

Harrison Bergeron 1798

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, goatsaag said:

I've seen similar things to this several times now where people are worried that there is now a precedent that a person can just show up wherever they want with a gun and then start indiscriminately shooting whoever they want based on "I was afraid for my life".

I don't understand how this case would do anything of the sort. It wasn't some South Park "It's coming right for us!" situation. Everything was on video and we all got to see what happened. No matter what you think about Rittenhouse (he's an idiot who basically has zero chance now at becoming a reasonable human being), whether he should have been there (obviously not), or open carry laws (completely fucking stupid and should be done away with), he didn't just show up and start shooting whoever he felt like shooting.

Exactly. I swear I wonder sometimes how 95% of the country manages to shit on a toilet and wipe their ass and wash their hands. No wonder the Chinese will own us - we are a collection of absolute fucking morons. The worse part is we let these people vote.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sawbonz

Sawbonz 27580

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, Goofyboy said:


Yes. I expect to see more death and more fighting and division in this country. This has emboldened more white supremacists to be more dangerous with even less fear of being persecuted.

What decisions will you personally make in your behavior going forward based on this verdict? And also, why do you think only white supremacists would be emboldened to pick up arms going forward? I would expect protesters on the left to be better armed going forward. If extremists on both sides (yes I said both sides) want to shoot it out in the streets, it may as well happen now as later. I really don’t think that’s what’s going to happen, but if you do, I guess we will see.

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

Sawbonz 27580

Posted
Posted
11 minutes ago, washparkhorn said:

As a city dweller with 17 year old sons, I will again caution them to stay away from Protests and Counter-Protests near Civic Center Park in Denver.

How about you?

As a city dweller with four teenagers, I told them that shit before any of this happened, and I would continue to tell them that. People in general are dumb, and crowds/mobs are downright moronic. Nothing good ever comes in that situation. 

  • Hook 'Em 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand

Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand 13586

Posted
Posted
30 minutes ago, Sawbonz said:

Do you really expect any aspect of your life or any of your decisions to change based on this verdict?

2.75328 percent chance, tho what my solitary odds are in a country of 350 million people isn't really the most relevant question. Weird that you asked that today though. Peeps cray. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
52-80

52-80 19205

Posted
Posted
41 minutes ago, Goofyboy said:


Yes. I expect to see more death and more fighting and division in this country. This has emboldened more white supremacists to be more dangerous with even less fear of being persecuted.

If it scared skateboarder anarchists to have more fear of attacking people, thats a fine outcome also

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

jimmyjazz 46001

Posted
Posted
25 minutes ago, Sawbonz said:

Care to explain that?

Sure.  Every proposed policy change since trickle-down has been a "ermahgad it's a slippery slope" freakout on the part of the right.  Economics, guns, abortion, whatever.  It's constant hysteria.

And now you have the temerity to question why people might be concerned that this ruling will embolden the 2A Warriorz to come shoot up every gathering?  Really?  I mean, you are quite literally one of the smartest people on this board.  Come the fuck on.

You even acknowledged it:  "If extremists on both sides (yes I said both sides) want to shoot it out in the streets, it may as well happen now as later."  

You see it coming, and you aren't concerned?

  • Like 1
  • Rage+1 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 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...