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

Mrs Whiggins

Mrs Whiggins 13049

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

On the plus side, plenty of other people who were convicted on charges under a statute that is unconstitutionally vague are going to get their convictions overturned, right?

Battered woman's defense combined with stand your ground self defense should work for all female demographics in domestic violence cases but I'm not holding my breath.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
wildcat09

wildcat09 29187

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

I may have missed it in this shit show of a thread, but why did the judge drop the gun charge?  Wasn't that basically already established?  Wouldn't that have been the easiest charge to get a guilty verdict on?

The statute is horribly worded and lends itself to an interpretation that it actually allows minors to carry guns except for a few very limited scenarios. It's kind of an absurd interpretation if you bother to consider any context at all, but it's not an insane reading of the text. 

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

Guest Lobo

Posted
Posted (edited)

I haven't followed the trial as closely as most of you.  But I did get an "A" in CrimPro in law school (my only "A", I don't read so good).  But I think the kid should skate on this.

But I am genuinely curious about what this does as precedent for people who wanna show up to an event armed to the teeth.  Person A shows up in cosplay gear, points at Person B who seems to be up to general mischief but not actively beating/stabbing other people.  Person B is threatened, tries to grab at Person A's weapon, so Person A kills Person B and gets away with as self-defense, 'Person B was gonna grab my gun and shoot me so I had to do it.'  This just seems like a brave new world with all the changes in protesting and carry laws across myriad states.  I mean, I'm a peaceful person, I never carry in public. 

If I'm a political rally and I'm shouting insults at you, and you point your rifle or handgun at me up close, I'm gonna try and get the fuck outta there.  If I can't, I'm gonna try and get your weapon away from you.  Now suddenly I'm the aggressor who needs to be shot to preserve your safety?  What recourse do I have as the one with the bullet in me at this point?  If you point a gun at me first, and I am unarmed and unable to escape the immediate area...and I charge at you to try to beat the life out of you or grab your weapon or at least take the bullet so others can escape...how does Person A get persuaded to not show up and do that in the first place?  

Any asshole with a rifle can easily show up to a rally and wait for somebody to get close to them, threaten to shoot them, and provoke that person to make a move on their gun/their body.  Where does this go from here?

Edited by Lobo
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chad Fuck

Chad Fuck 17503

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, Lobo said:

I haven't followed the trial as closely as most of you.  But I did get an "A" in CrimPro in law school (my only "A", I don't read so good).  But I think the kid should skate on this.

But I am genuinely curious about what this does as precedent for people who wanna show up to an event armed to the teeth.  Person A shows up in cosplay gear, points at Person B who seems to be up to general mischief but not actively beating/stabbing other people.  Person B is threatened, tries to grab at Person A's weapon, so Person B kills them and gets away with as self-defense, 'Person B was gonna grab my gun and shoot me so I had to do it.'  This just seems like a brave new world with all the changes in protesting and carry laws across myriad states.  I mean, I'm a peaceful person, I never carry in public. 

If I'm a political rally and I'm shouting insults at you, and you point your rifle or handgun at me up close, I'm gonna try and get the fuck outta there.  If I can't, I'm gonna try and get your weapon away from you.  Now suddenly I'm the aggressor who needs to be shot to preserve your safety?  What recourse do I have as the one with the bullet in me at this point?  If you point a gun at me first, and I am unarmed and unable to escape the immediate area...and I charge at you to try to beat the life out of you or grab your weapon or at least take the bullet so others can escape...how does Person A get persuaded to not show up and do that in the first place?  

Any asshole with a rifle can easily show up to a rally and wait for somebody to get close to them, threaten to shoot them, and provoke that person to make a move on their gun/their body.  Where does this go from here?

"Civil war."  - Brisket, '21. 

  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mrs Whiggins

Mrs Whiggins 13049

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Lobo said:

Any asshole with a rifle can easily show up to a rally and wait for somebody to get close to them, threaten to shoot them, and provoke that person to make a move on their gun/their body.  Where does this go from here?

GOP uses a strategy of plausible deniability so polling sites in certain areas with militias providing 'security' (voter fraud protection) are likely another scenario. One incident and self preservation mode gets turned on and people won't show up to vote.

  • Rage+1 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
wildcat09

wildcat09 29187

Posted
Posted
14 minutes ago, Lobo said:

Any asshole with a rifle can easily show up to a rally and wait for somebody to get close to them, threaten to shoot them, and provoke that person to make a move on their gun/their body.  Where does this go from here?

That's exactly what they want. 

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

Chuckie Finster 22583

Posted
Posted
45 minutes ago, Lobo said:

I haven't followed the trial as closely as most of you.  But I did get an "A" in CrimPro in law school (my only "A", I don't read so good).  But I think the kid should skate on this.

But I am genuinely curious about what this does as precedent for people who wanna show up to an event armed to the teeth.  Person A shows up in cosplay gear, points at Person B who seems to be up to general mischief but not actively beating/stabbing other people.  Person B is threatened, tries to grab at Person A's weapon, so Person A kills Person B and gets away with as self-defense, 'Person B was gonna grab my gun and shoot me so I had to do it.'  This just seems like a brave new world with all the changes in protesting and carry laws across myriad states.  I mean, I'm a peaceful person, I never carry in public. 

If I'm a political rally and I'm shouting insults at you, and you point your rifle or handgun at me up close, I'm gonna try and get the fuck outta there.  If I can't, I'm gonna try and get your weapon away from you.  Now suddenly I'm the aggressor who needs to be shot to preserve your safety?  What recourse do I have as the one with the bullet in me at this point?  If you point a gun at me first, and I am unarmed and unable to escape the immediate area...and I charge at you to try to beat the life out of you or grab your weapon or at least take the bullet so others can escape...how does Person A get persuaded to not show up and do that in the first place?  

Any asshole with a rifle can easily show up to a rally and wait for somebody to get close to them, threaten to shoot them, and provoke that person to make a move on their gun/their body.  Where does this go from here?

This is our concern, dude.

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

hayden_horn 11360

Posted
Posted
48 minutes ago, Lobo said:

I haven't followed the trial as closely as most of you.  But I did get an "A" in CrimPro in law school (my only "A", I don't read so good).  But I think the kid should skate on this.

But I am genuinely curious about what this does as precedent for people who wanna show up to an event armed to the teeth.  Person A shows up in cosplay gear, points at Person B who seems to be up to general mischief but not actively beating/stabbing other people.  Person B is threatened, tries to grab at Person A's weapon, so Person A kills Person B and gets away with as self-defense, 'Person B was gonna grab my gun and shoot me so I had to do it.'  This just seems like a brave new world with all the changes in protesting and carry laws across myriad states.  I mean, I'm a peaceful person, I never carry in public. 

If I'm a political rally and I'm shouting insults at you, and you point your rifle or handgun at me up close, I'm gonna try and get the fuck outta there.  If I can't, I'm gonna try and get your weapon away from you.  Now suddenly I'm the aggressor who needs to be shot to preserve your safety?  What recourse do I have as the one with the bullet in me at this point?  If you point a gun at me first, and I am unarmed and unable to escape the immediate area...and I charge at you to try to beat the life out of you or grab your weapon or at least take the bullet so others can escape...how does Person A get persuaded to not show up and do that in the first place?  

Any asshole with a rifle can easily show up to a rally and wait for somebody to get close to them, threaten to shoot them, and provoke that person to make a move on their gun/their body.  Where does this go from here?

pretty much the precedent being set here.

and it gets johnny sack off. 

until the tables are turned. i really don't understand why people on the right are celebrating this kid's irresponsible decision making.

oh wait. maybe i do.

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

Mdhorn 5908

Posted
Posted (edited)
45 minutes ago, Mrs Whiggins said:

GOP uses a strategy of plausible deniability so polling sites in certain areas with militias providing 'security' (voter fraud protection) are likely another scenario. One incident and self preservation mode gets turned on and people won't show up to vote.

This is another prong for what precedence this is establishing.  Voter intimidation being a big one.  This isn't a both sides or anything other than their own armed militants unless both sides get to openly carry at polling stations or elsewhere. But we all know how they felt about the Black Panthers--they wet their pants.  It's just a matter of time till there's bloodshed at the polls.  Those against gun control always use a slippery slope rationale, logic they conveniently suspend for everything else.      

Edited by Mdhorn
  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
wildcat09

wildcat09 29187

Posted
Posted
11 minutes ago, hayden_horn said:

pretty much the precedent being set here.

and it gets johnny sack off. 

until the tables are turned. i really don't understand why people on the right are celebrating this kid's irresponsible decision making.

oh wait. maybe i do.

Because they’re confident that the tables will never be turned, legally speaking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sawbonz

Sawbonz 27375

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Chad Fuck said:

"Civil war."  - Brisket, '21. 

Didn’t this already happen in Austin? Some dude with a long gun confronted a driver who tried to drive through protesters and the driver blasted him? Not sure what the status of it is, but it seems like whoever shoots first may be within their rights in that situation. What a world

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hmbre97

Hmbre97 6297

Posted
Posted (edited)

qth7sSG.gif

giphy.gif

 

Ned and Jimbo were just trying to keep those active rioters deer and bears away from places trees to destroy. 

My god, just think what would happen if we didn't have those brave vigila..... err, people around to keep the local KFC from getting the windows busted out! I know that was my priority when I was a high school junior. I couldn't get to my rifle fast enough if I feared a local burger king might get looted. Won't someone think of those poor mega corporations and franchisees with insurance to cover such losses. Not on my watch!

Edited by Hmbre97
  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
JimmyJames

JimmyJames 12271

Posted
Posted
26 minutes ago, Johnny Sack said:

Not really worried.  I am not going to unjustifiably attack someone who is carrying a rifle.

No but when you see a black dude coming near you with a rifle you’re gonna shoot him and then claim self defense and later do the Kavanaugh blubber on the stand.

  • Fuck You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
LW Goatman

LW Goatman 1117

Posted
Posted

Criminal trials...people who don't know shit about criminal law make up their minds, watch the trial, then bitch if things don't go their way. 

The system is setup to be in favor of the defendant, their freedom is in the balance.

I didn't watch any part of this trial but it looks like the prosecution had a hard time. That can be because of incompetence and that can also be a result of there was no factual basis to prove the case. Based on the small amount I've read here, seems like a good combination of both, but your evidence sucks when you have nothing to present. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Johnny Sack

Johnny Sack 8397

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, JimmyJames said:

No but when you see a black dude coming near you with a rifle you’re gonna shoot him and then claim self defense and later do the Kavanaugh blubber on the stand.

You dream up a lot of weird shit.  I was sitting next to a black guy with an AR most of last weekend.  It never occurred to me to shoot him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gidnik

Gidnik 3250

Posted
Posted (edited)
38 minutes ago, LW Goatman said:

 

The system is setup to be in favor of the defendant, their freedom is in the balance.

 

I forget who said it one of the founding fathers stated it was better that 500 guilty men went free than one innocent man imprisoned 

 

e: Ben Franklin. And it was 100. 

Edited by Gidnik
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest Lobo

Guest Lobo

Posted
Posted
39 minutes ago, Johnny Sack said:

You dream up a lot of weird shit.  I was sitting next to a black guy with an AR most of last weekend.  It never occurred to me to shoot him.

Although it seems completely implausible given my background and current station in life, many of my best friends are assault rifle-wielding African Americans whom take a seat next to me.  According the most bizarre non sequitir I’ve ever read.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JimmyJames

JimmyJames 12271

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, Lobo said:

Although it seems completely implausible given my background and current station in life, many of my best friends are assault rifle-wielding African Americans whom take a seat next to me.  According the most bizarre non sequitir I’ve ever read.  

What a coincidence! Im sitting right next to an AR wielding black guy too! We’re just chilling. Small world.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
burntorangebongos

burntorangebongos 10681

Posted
Posted

Animated GIF

The old white man judge kept ruling in the young white man's favor cuz he can picture himself in him and is biased as fuck. When it comes to justice, the white man gets the benefit of the doubt and the thumb on the scale weighted in his favor. Example number 100,500,344.  

Also, the prosecutor has a douchebag hairstyle.  I'm sure that is part of the judge's ire and I'm with him on that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Anastasis

Anastasis 23375

Posted
Posted
Just now, burntorangebongos said:

The old white man judge kept ruling in the young white man's favor cuz he can picture himself in him and is biased as fuck. When it comes to justice, the white man gets the benefit of the doubt and the thumb on the scale weighted in his favor. Example number 100,500,344.  

There is none greater leeway give universally than bouncing boobs. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JimmyJames

JimmyJames 12271

Posted
Posted
10 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

No.  Be honest.  You are going nowhere near the former, but feel pretty comfortable with the latter. 

Ok. You got me. I don’t go fishing with guys who carry AR on the fishing trip, whether white or black. Actually I don’t hang out with anyone carrying AR. But since you’re a “libertarian” I bet you do. Amright?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Anastasis

Anastasis 23375

Posted
Posted
Just now, JimmyJames said:

Ok. You got me. I don’t go fishing with guys who carry AR on the fishing trip, whether white or black. Actually I don’t hang out with anyone carrying AR. But since you’re a “libertarian” I bet you do. Amright?

Huh. Doesn't go anywhere where a certain inanimate object may be present. But happy to go fishing with racists.  You do you Jimmy. 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JimmyJames

JimmyJames 12271

Posted
Posted (edited)
8 minutes ago, burntorangebongos said:

He lives in Texas and hangs out with white people so how is he gonna avoid the racists, huh?   GIF by Redneck Island

It really shouldn’t have to be said but I guess it does.

What can I do? I’m a middle age white guy in Texas who has a professional job. Many similar guys I meet and don’t know me simply assume it’s ok to say somewhat racist shit in my presence. If only they knew me like Annie does from this board I guess since here I’m supposedly “a lib.”

Edited by JimmyJames
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Anastasis

Anastasis 23375

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, JimmyJames said:

If only they knew me like Annie does from this board I guess since here I’m supposedly “a lib.”

I don't know what you are.  But I have never knowingly gone fishing with racists, and then excused it with "What you gonna do, I am a white man in Texas." But again, you do you buddy. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JimmyJames

JimmyJames 12271

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

I don't know what you are.  But I have never knowingly gone fishing with racists, and then excused it with "What you gonna do, I am a white man in Texas." But again, you do you buddy. 

LOL. Everyone I hang with isn’t racist! Or if they are I don’t know it! 

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...