Gurn Posted November 7, 2021 Share Posted November 7, 2021 2 minutes ago, MaxVerstappen33 said: This didn't happen in Canada. The gun charges and misdemeanors in the state. Link please Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaxVerstappen33 Posted November 7, 2021 Author Share Posted November 7, 2021 1 hour ago, JM_ said: this is it. If he goes there armed and to cause trouble, lies about his abilities to others there to get into a fight, then he's being the aggressor. Self defence goes by bye bye. Oops I lied my way into danger isn't a legit defence. The reasonablness and proportioned response questions are strictly about the moment he decided to shoot. People that are of age , who have totally legal guns don't have better cases for self defense just for those reasons. Not at all. It's about the moment. If someone is on their property with a legal gun and of age , they can't just blow someone away unless their life was threatened in the moment Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JM_ Posted November 7, 2021 Share Posted November 7, 2021 3 minutes ago, MaxVerstappen33 said: The reasonablness and proportioned response questions are strictly about the moment he decided to shoot. People that are of age , who have totally legal guns don't have better cases for self defense just for those reasons. Not at all. It's about the moment. If someone is on their property with a legal gun and of age , they can't just blow someone away unless their life was threatened in the moment This comes down to if the jury thinks he created the dangerous moment. Thats what this is going to hang on, whether or not he's responsible for being in that moment and being aggressive. If you create your own problem by being aggressive, you can't claim self defence. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kragar Posted November 7, 2021 Share Posted November 7, 2021 17 hours ago, drummer4now said: Well one could argue both groups are at fault carrying guns.. But he is far from a domestic terrorist More like a vigilante. I think manslaughter is the best outcome for this case. Parents speaking up about their child's curriculum are considered domestic terrorists, and people burning government buildings are mostly peaceful protesters. One of the things more messed up than the political polarization here is the deliberate twisting of language. He should get nailed on the weapons charges. Manslaughter might be a stretch, but ya never know if the trial plays out the whole way. Interesting point made later by @JM_ about the Rittenhouse's parents' responsibilities here. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted November 7, 2021 Share Posted November 7, 2021 20 minutes ago, MaxVerstappen33 said: You are aware that the 2 people shot literally tried to fight the gun out of the guys hand ? The shooter was not legally required to give his gun to whoever was trying to steal it just because he shouldn't have been there The punk murderer crossed state lines to confront protesters he didn’t politically align with. He was armed and started a fight so he could shoot people and then claim it was self defence. This is a federal case now, and the little murdering weasel coward (his actions were incredibly cowardly) will serve a very long sentence, or have his neck stretched. just imagine allowing people to carry guns and go to places where they plan on antagonizing others so they can then shoot them, and then claim it was self defence. Only a complete fool would encourage this behaviour. 2 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canorth Posted November 7, 2021 Share Posted November 7, 2021 36 minutes ago, Alflives said: The punk murderer crossed state lines to confront protesters he didn’t politically align with. He was armed and started a fight so he could shoot people and then claim it was self defence. This is a federal case now, and the little murdering weasel coward (his actions were incredibly cowardly) will serve a very long sentence, or have his neck stretched. just imagine allowing people to carry guns and go to places where they plan on antagonizing others so they can then shoot them, and then claim it was self defence. Only a complete fool would encourage this behaviour. Quoted for truth. Thank you!!! I Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JM_ Posted November 7, 2021 Share Posted November 7, 2021 2 hours ago, Alflives said: The punk murderer crossed state lines to confront protesters he didn’t politically align with. He was armed and started a fight so he could shoot people and then claim it was self defence. This is a federal case now, and the little murdering weasel coward (his actions were incredibly cowardly) will serve a very long sentence, or have his neck stretched. just imagine allowing people to carry guns and go to places where they plan on antagonizing others so they can then shoot them, and then claim it was self defence. Only a complete fool would encourage this behaviour. the whole self defence thing might be more believable if he didn't shoot three people, one of them being unarmed. I suspect if he does get convicted it will be for killing the unarmed man, and not the other two. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ilunga Posted November 7, 2021 Share Posted November 7, 2021 2 hours ago, Kragar said: Parents speaking up about their child's curriculum are considered domestic terrorists, and people burning government buildings are mostly peaceful protesters. One of the things more messed up than the political polarization here is the deliberate twisting of language. He should get nailed on the weapons charges. Manslaughter might be a stretch, but ya never know if the trial plays out the whole way. Interesting point made later by @JM_ about the Rittenhouse's parents' responsibilities here. Listen mate I know we disagree on something's but how do you really feel about living in a society where the citizens of your society can wander legally round the streets armed with guns,threaten other citizens and kill other citizens ? While we have our problems here in Aus, coming from a reasonably sane society this strikes me as insanity. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kragar Posted November 7, 2021 Share Posted November 7, 2021 33 minutes ago, Ilunga said: Listen mate I know we disagree on something's but how do you really feel about living in a society where the citizens of your society can wander legally round the streets armed with guns,threaten other citizens and kill other citizens ? While we have our problems here in Aus, coming from a reasonably sane society this strikes me as insanity. I understand and agree with the right to bear arms here. Doesn't mean there isn't room to improve on that right, but most of the "common sense" suggestions that get floated are pretty pointless, or outright illegal. Some are even racist, given how the term is applied to other concepts. FYI, in case you were moving in that direction, I will not continue a 2nd Amendment discussion on here, except perhaps via DM. Been done to death - no pun intended - and it's not worth the headache. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kragar Posted November 7, 2021 Share Posted November 7, 2021 51 minutes ago, Ilunga said: Listen mate I know we disagree on something's but how do you really feel about living in a society where the citizens of your society can wander legally round the streets armed with guns,threaten other citizens and kill other citizens ? While we have our problems here in Aus, coming from a reasonably sane society this strikes me as insanity. BTW, I understand your perspective. When I lived in Canada, I felt similarly abt the gun situation in the US. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bishopshodan Posted November 8, 2021 Share Posted November 8, 2021 (edited) 4 hours ago, Kragar said: He should get nailed on the weapons charges. Manslaughter might be a stretch, but ya never know if the trial plays out the whole way. What do YOU think? Do you think he should get manslaughter? For killing the plastic bag thrower? Edited November 8, 2021 by bishopshodan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUPERTKBD Posted November 8, 2021 Share Posted November 8, 2021 Just my opinion and I'm aware that it has no bearing on US law, but as far as I'm concerned, if you show up armed with a lethal weapon at any event that isn't part of a military operation, the "self-defense" claim should be out the window.... 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kragar Posted November 8, 2021 Share Posted November 8, 2021 34 minutes ago, bishopshodan said: What do YOU think? Do you think he should get manslaughter? For killing the plastic bag thrower? Was the bag on fire when it was thrown at him? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted November 8, 2021 Share Posted November 8, 2021 1 minute ago, Kragar said: Was the bag on fire when it was thrown at him? None of that matters. What in the heck was this guy doing there in the first place? Clearly he went there to antagonize, start fights, and then shoot people while claiming self defence. Even in the craziest loonie parts of the US this mentality will not fly. Yes, in the loonie toon US people can carry, and even concealed. But in no State can one person be the aggressor, start conflict, and then shoot the other persons. That’s not self defence. That’s premeditated murder. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bishopshodan Posted November 8, 2021 Share Posted November 8, 2021 1 minute ago, Kragar said: Was the bag on fire when it was thrown at him? I dont know. If you're asking me that you haven't seen any of my posts in this thread. I pointed out in this thread that it seems that in the case they are referring to it as a plastic bag. No mention of fire or any type of molotov that the OP posts as an accurate account of the event. So since this killing is the one that started it all, killing an unarmed man...that is why I asked you if you think he should get a manslaughter charge? he did kill this man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kragar Posted November 8, 2021 Share Posted November 8, 2021 26 minutes ago, bishopshodan said: I dont know. If you're asking me that you haven't seen any of my posts in this thread. I pointed out in this thread that it seems that in the case they are referring to it as a plastic bag. No mention of fire or any type of molotov that the OP posts as an accurate account of the event. So since this killing is the one that started it all, killing an unarmed man...that is why I asked you if you think he should get a manslaughter charge? he did kill this man. I've seen the picture of the bag sitting there that you posted, and the picture from what I can see doesn't count for much one way or the other. I haven't read half the posts in the thread, and am not about to. Rosenberg (IIRC is the one who threw it) has already been shown to have issued death threats to Rittenhouse. Personally, if I saw a guy with a gun, I wouldn't be making any threats at him, so Rosenberg was an absolute dumbass, and one who was there looking for trouble. He found it. The thrown bag, or whatever it is, especially if it was on fire, can be seen as an aggressive, threatening action. Coupled with the earlier death threats, that could give Rittenhouse enough of an excuse. I'm no lawyer, and I'm choosing to not watch the rest of the videos, cuz honestly I don't much care. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JM_ Posted November 8, 2021 Share Posted November 8, 2021 1 hour ago, bishopshodan said: What do YOU think? Do you think he should get manslaughter? For killing the plastic bag thrower? its no coincidence that the kids supporters are trying to create a dangerous narrative for the first killing, which was off camera and involving an unarmed man. Its kind of laughable that its a plastic bag, if that holds as a life threatening device we're all doomed. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bishopshodan Posted November 8, 2021 Share Posted November 8, 2021 Just now, Kragar said: I've seen the picture of the bag sitting there that you posted, and the picture from what I can see doesn't count for much one way or the other. I haven't read half the posts in the thread, and am not about to. Rosenberg (IIRC is the one who threw it) has already been shown to have issued death threats to Rittenhouse. Personally, if I saw a guy with a gun, I wouldn't be making any threats at him, so Rosenberg was an absolute dumbass, and one who was there looking for trouble. He found it. The thrown bag, or whatever it is, especially if it was on fire, can be seen as an aggressive, threatening action. Coupled with the earlier death threats, that could give Rittenhouse enough of an excuse. I'm no lawyer, and I'm choosing to not watch the rest of the videos, cuz honestly I don't much care. So, no to a manslaughter charge on his first killing? You see it as self defense? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kragar Posted November 8, 2021 Share Posted November 8, 2021 37 minutes ago, Alflives said: None of that matters. What in the heck was this guy doing there in the first place? Clearly he went there to antagonize, start fights, and then shoot people while claiming self defence. Even in the craziest loonie parts of the US this mentality will not fly. Yes, in the loonie toon US people can carry, and even concealed. But in no State can one person be the aggressor, start conflict, and then shoot the other persons. That’s not self defence. That’s premeditated murder. It absolutely matters. If he did not initiate the violence, then that goes a long way to his defense. Just the fact that he was there with a gun does not mean he is clearly guilty of anything except the weapons charges. There were other idiots there with guns. Are you giving them passes, just because they were protesting? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JM_ Posted November 8, 2021 Share Posted November 8, 2021 2 minutes ago, Kragar said: Rosenberg (IIRC is the one who threw it) has already been shown to have issued death threats to Rittenhouse. . is that a fact, or some kind of twitter speculation? that would be one hell of a coincidence for these two to run into each other that night. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts