Ferguson, MO

[tinselwolverine]

Wait, so it is not acceptable to consider the histories of the individuals who were killed? Their history explains how and why they attended the riot in the first place. They obviously suffered from mental conditions that inhibited their ability to accurately assess proper action. If they were not mentally unstable, they would not have been persuaded to go to Kenosha in the first place. At that point, the fire does not get started. But let us go another step further, let us go with the idea that they were mentally sound. When seeing the kid trying to put out the fire, does a mentally sound person see that and go after the kid to stop putting out the fire? Does he get assistance from someone who has a gun to chase the kid and threaten him, especially when the kid has a clearly visible AR???

Snopes is dead wrong with their statement that a review of the history of the deceased has no relevance. It is that history that explains why they were there, started the fire, and chased the kid. Without their mental dysfunction, there is a very good chance that they have the mental capacity to disperse when the police gave the order, but even if not, no sane person would chase after someone for trying to put out a fire...especially when that person is carrying an assault rifle!

Furthermore, businesses ask people to defend their properties all the time, often with weapons as necessary. If a Security Officer, or even a Bouncer, is working and they see someone attempting to commit arson at a nearby business, they have the right to attempt to put out that fire. If the arsonist threatens them and they run away from the arsonist, but the arsonist chases after them with another individual who has a gun, corners them, threatens them, does that Security Officer or Bouncer not have the right to defend themselves by discharging their own weapon? Then, upon attempting to administer first aid to the person they shot, more people begin to chase them, and as they are running away one of the chasers catches up to them and assaults them, does that person not have the right to once again use their firearm to protect themselves?

I get this Prosecutor is in a tough spot as not getting a conviction will likely lead to more riots, but this should never have gone to trial. Not that any of the video evidence matters to the Liberal mobs. They will undoubtedly return to Kenosha to finish what they started if the kid is not convicted. Maybe Champ will even join them this time.

Wait, what?

When considering whether self-defense is a justifiable legal defense for using deadly force?

You are seriously asking that?

The simple easy and obvious answer is no.

It doesn?t matter if the decedent is the Philistine Goliath.

It doesn?t matter if the decedent is Sir Galahad.

It is zero consequence when weighing the legal justification for using deadly force.

 

[tinselwolverine]

Damn, I remember 20 years, Watching former President Bill Clinton singing along to that Lee Greenwood song ?God bless the USA? at some kind of 911 Memorial.

I had no idea at the time that it was code for white supremacy.

Do I feel dumb, or what?

 

[Michchamp]

Wait, so it is not acceptable to consider the histories of the individuals who were killed? ....

no. only in a certain limited sense... such as to judge whether Rittenhouse rightfully feared for his life and therefore was justified using deadly force to defend himself.

but in this case that's immaterial... Rittenhouse didn't know any of his shooting victims from Adam.

It's obviously just a PR campaign to try to mislead the "undecideds" who aren't wholly endorsing his actions here, even if they feel the shootings were justified.

Damn, I remember 20 years, Watching former President Bill Clinton singing along to that Lee Greenwood song ?God bless the USA? at some kind of 911 Memorial.

I had no idea at the time that it was code for white supremacy.

Do I feel dumb, or what?

I think some of us might need some context to this...

I know who Bill Clinton is, and I know the Lee Greenwood song, which is objectively terrible, and would be, even if he wrote it about a good country (like Italy) instead of a bad one like ours.

 

[tinselwolverine]

no. only in a certain limited sense... such as to judge whether Rittenhouse rightfully feared for his life and therefore was justified using deadly force to defend himself.

but in this case that's immaterial... Rittenhouse didn't know any of his shooting victims from Adam.

It's obviously just a PR campaign to try to mislead the "undecideds" who aren't wholly endorsing his actions here, even if they feel the shootings were justified.



I think some of us might need some context to this...

I know who Bill Clinton is, and I know the Lee Greenwood song, which is objectively terrible, and would be, even if he wrote it about a good country (like Italy) instead of a bad one like ours.

You do know the song is literally Nessun Dorma translated to English except he changes Se?or Benedict Italia to God bless the USA, don?t you?

 

[Spartanmack]

Wait, what?

When considering whether self-defense is a justifiable legal defense for using deadly force?

You are seriously asking that?

The simple easy and obvious answer is no.

It doesn?t matter if the decedent is the Philistine Goliath.

It doesn?t matter if the decedent is Sir Galahad.

It is zero consequence when weighing the legal justification for using deadly force.

in a court of law sure, but when assessing which person's death would do America the biggest favor like our friend did, shouldn't their backgrounds as well as the specifics of the circumstances come in to play?

 

[Spartanmack]

no. only in a certain limited sense... such as to judge whether Rittenhouse rightfully feared for his life and therefore was justified using deadly force to defend himself.

but in this case that's immaterial... Rittenhouse didn't know any of his shooting victims from Adam.

It's obviously just a PR campaign to try to mislead the "undecideds" who aren't wholly endorsing his actions here, even if they feel the shootings were justified.

How are factual statements like that misleading? And how is that "PR campaign" any different from calling Rittenhouse a 'Nazi' or a 'Hitler Youth' - apart from those slurs actually being totally misleading vs the facts pointed out about the character of his victims?

 

[tinselwolverine]

in a court of law sure, but when assessing which person's death would do America the biggest favor like our friend did, shouldn't their backgrounds as well as the specifics of the circumstances come in to play?

That?s funny.

You GOT to know by now that I?m pretty much about nothin? if not the bottom line.

So I haven?t assessed much else.

Did the kid have reason to believe that deadly force or force that might cause severe bodily harm was the only way to protect himself from probable death or severe bodily harm?

Probably.

That said, as far as assessment, I?m wondering about this kids father. I really haven?t had time to even look up what his relationship with the guy who sired him is.

I do know that if when I was 17 if my father got wind of my intention to do what the Rittenhouse was going to do, he would have gotten my uncle and the two of them would have locked me up in the basement, like Clinton Eastwood did with the little mong kid in that movie Gran Torino.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=y-TS_85-Kwo

 

[Michchamp]

That?s funny.

You GOT to know by now that I?m pretty much about nothin? if not the bottom line.

So I haven?t assessed much else.

Did the kid have reason to believe that deadly force or force that might cause severe bodily harm was the only way to protect himself from probable death or severe bodily harm?

Probably.

That said, as far as assessment, I?m wondering about this kids father. I really haven?t had time to even look up what his relationship with the guy who sired him is.

I do know that if when I was 17 if my father got wind of my intention to do what the Rittenhouse was going to do, he would have gotten my uncle and the two of them would have locked me up in the basement, like Clinton Eastwood did with the little mong kid in that movie Gran Torino.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=y-TS_85-Kwo

but if Rittenhouse's dad did that, he wouldn't have been there to stop that dumpster from burning. and then gotten to shoot three people, killing two.

all that trash would have been burned.

 

[Spartanmack]

but if Rittenhouse's dad did that, he wouldn't have been there to stop that dumpster from burning. and then gotten to shoot three people, killing two.

all that trash would have been burned.

If Rosenbaum wasn't there to commit arson and wreak havoc rioting over a nonexistent problem, he wouldn't have started the dumpster fire or died trying to kill the armed kid for putting out the dumpster fire he started.

 

[tinselwolverine]

If Rosenbaum wasn't there to commit arson and wreak havoc rioting over a nonexistent problem, he wouldn't have started the dumpster fire or died trying to kill the armed kid for putting out the dumpster fire he started.

Yep.

It would have been better for all of them if they had all just stayed home.

 

[byco42]

So it appears that CBNC broadcast the prosecution's closing argument, but not the defense's. If accurate, that's expected, but disappointing.

I guess the upside is that no-one watches CNBC.

 

[Michchamp]

So it appears that CBNC broadcast the prosecution's closing argument, but not the defense's. If accurate, that's expected, but disappointing.

I guess the upside is that no-one watches CNBC.

it appears? did they give a reason why?

there's a lot wrong with the way this case has gone. the authorities seem to actually be encouraging elements of a circus, and the judge himself is angling for his own Fox News show.

 

[byco42]

it appears? did they give a reason why?

Apparently CNBC and CNN switched to Biden signing the infrastructure bill into law.

there's a lot wrong with the way this case has gone. the authorities seem to actually be encouraging elements of a circus, and the judge himself is angling for his own Fox News show.

I wonder why these proceedings are even televised. Seems to me that they shouldn't be.

 

[Michchamp]

Apparently CNBC and CNN switched to Biden signing the infrastructure bill into law.



I wonder why these proceedings are even televised. Seems to me that they shouldn't be.

One more ominous thing I've noticed in some of these highly politicized cases is the lack of concern for the appearance of impropriety. By most accounts I've read, outside attorneys expect a full acquittal here. And the Judge probably knows this... so why play his Trump ringtone in court, ask for a salute of veterans in the courtroom, when Rittenhouse's next witness just so happens to be a veteran, and let Rittenhouse select the jury by lottery (usually done by the court clerk to AVOID bias in favor of one party)?

It used to be that judges actually cared enough to keep up the fiction that they were impartial... not here though, or in the Donzinger case in NY, or in the Stratfor hack prosecution.

Justice in America is NOT blind, and we don't care anymore who knows or still believes it is.

 

[byco42]

Maybe the law is a ass, after all.

 

[Spartanmack]

So it appears that CBNC broadcast the prosecution's closing argument, but not the defense's. If accurate, that's expected, but disappointing.

I guess the upside is that no-one watches CNBC.

Was is CNBC or MSNBC? I quit watching CNBC several years ago but criminal trials seem more like MSNBC material than business channel material...

 

[Spartanmack]

One more ominous thing I've noticed in some of these highly politicized cases is the lack of concern for the appearance of impropriety. By most accounts I've read, outside attorneys expect a full acquittal here. And the Judge probably knows this... so why play his Trump ringtone in court, ask for a salute of veterans in the courtroom, when Rittenhouse's next witness just so happens to be a veteran, and let Rittenhouse select the jury by lottery (usually done by the court clerk to AVOID bias in favor of one party)?

It used to be that judges actually cared enough to keep up the fiction that they were impartial... not here though, or in the Donzinger case in NY, or in the Stratfor hack prosecution.

Justice in America is NOT blind, and we don't care anymore who knows or still believes it is.

the Trump ringtone - classic. I guess Bob will have to throw that one in the trash along with the teekee torches he lamented buying just before the Charlotsville incidents.

By the way Donzinger should go to prison for life.

 

[Spartanmack]

If this wasn't so sad, it would be funny.

This line from the opening paragraph is says it all:

We have now reached a point where Democrats are calling for black workers to receive time off work because of the verdict in a case where white people were killed by a white person.

 

[byco42]

Was is CNBC or MSNBC? I quit watching CNBC several years ago but criminal trials seem more like MSNBC material than business channel material...

Don't even care

 

[tinselwolverine]

Not guilty