If you are talking about Rosenbaum, then yes. He was a dumb motherfucker who was the one seeking trouble throughout that night.
Ritt was armed, yes, but he wasn't waving his gun around. Nor is there any evidence he was "severely disturbed". Again, all this fits your boy Rosenbaum the Pedo. He had just been released from a mental institution, and could not stay with his fiancée Kariann Swart because he had beaten her up before. So he was a mentally disturbed, violent person.
What is your opinion of all the heavily armed #BLM/Antifa types who were common during 2020? In few cities, e.g. Atlanta, Seattle and Minneapolis, they took over and held territory with armed force. In Atlanta, one of them murdered an 8 year old girl. But no, a 17 year old who was attacked by a deranged felon and defended himself is the real problem here. While the actions of the rioters in Kenosha and elsewhere are just "peaceful protesting".
#BLM held territory with armed force in Minneapolis? Are you refering to the riot? If so, that seems an intellectually dishonest characterization.
It doesn't even reach the level of false equivalence. That usually involves two situations that have differing significance, outcome, or magnitude being falsely portrayed as similar to one another.It's called a false equivalence, which your kind <Removed by Moderator> are quite fond of. There's nothing threatening about clothing. There is something threatening about carrying an assault rifle. There, just destroyed your false equivalence with 2 seconds of basic critical thought <Removed by Moderator>.You're quite literally excusing the assault of a minor on the grounds that the minor brought it on himself by having shown poor judgement. Your logic is the same logic used to excuse assaults of women on the grounds that the woman brought it on themselves by having shown poor judgement.That is pathetic! Are you for real? The parallel fails on several fronts. Most importantly, the issue of the third party HARMING the first party. Your ridiculous rape comment would be the exact opposite of that. A woman third party that is standing somewhere is generally not going to be considered a threat to someone's life. Where as a person who fits the profile of many many mass shooters open carrying a rifle can reasonably be considered threatening.If she hadn't been wearing such a short skirt she wouldn't have gotten herself raped?
That's not what happened here though. Nobody insinuated anyone here is OK with sexual assault of minors. One member insinuated another member was okay with a non-sexual assault of a minor. The sexual assault was in a hypothetical example for the sake of argument. The implication of the argument wasn't "You'd be okay with the sexual example too."; it was "You know how you wouldn't be okay with the sexual example? Well, you ought to think about the non-sexual case the same way.".
Your post is equating physically attacking an openly armed third person with finding the person alarming. Your statement is ridiculous.
No, it didn't. It indicated that Rittenhouse was accosted because he was open carrying a rifle which caused alarm, which is a perfectly normal reaction to seeing a person open carrying a rifle among a crowd, seeing the difference between a good guy with a gun and bad guy with a gun is pretty much too late.
If the idiot wouldn't have gone there in the first place none of this happens. Also he had no reason to go and had no right to own a firearm. "Waving around a gun" and brandishing is the same thing.If you are talking about Rosenbaum, then yes. He was a dumb motherfucker who was the one seeking trouble throughout that night.
It went south for him when he attacked somebody armed. Fuck around, find out, as they say.
Ritt was armed, yes, but he wasn't waving his gun around. Nor is there any evidence he was "severely disturbed". Again, all this fits your boy Rosenbaum the Pedo. He had just been released from a mental institution, and could not stay with his fiancée Kariann Swart because he had beaten her up before. So he was a mentally disturbed, violent person.
And in fact, had Rosenbaum not attacked Ritt, none of this would have happened.
What is your opinion of all the heavily armed #BLM/Antifa types who were common during 2020? In few cities, e.g. Atlanta, Seattle and Minneapolis, they took over and held territory with armed force. In Atlanta, one of them murdered an 8 year old girl. But no, a 17 year old who was attacked by a deranged felon and defended himself is the real problem here. While the actions of the rioters in Kenosha and elsewhere are just "peaceful protesting".
B-b-but that would leave the intellectual cripple without their crutch.
Sadly, I've lost my tolerance for egregious whataboutisms and getting sucked into bad faith arguments with people whose only intention is to waste the time of the person arguing in good faith. It saves so much aggravation.
I'm sure it seems unquestionably threatening to you... but for many americans who grew up around hunters and farmers it's not threatening in and of itself.
Therefore, any of the rioters who were armed deserved to be killed? Or is it only the people opposed to the rioters who are looking for trouble to such an extent that they no longer have a right to defend themselves?
Nuh-uh, you're the dummy! Pthbthbthbthb!!!!!
Nah. It was an observation of the logic of your argument. The actual logical framing of your position is the same - it's blaming the victim for having caused their own victimization, and opining that if they just hadn't done something, they wouldn't have gotten themselves hurt.
Jimmy, the form of your argument is identical to victim blaming someone who was raped.
If Rosenbaum wouldn't have gone there in the first place, none of this happens. Rosenbaum had no reason to go, and had no right to chase, corner, and attack someone.
Nobody said that. Not a one. You're making things up in your head and then assigning those fictions to others.
