Adam Toledo video released

[Loren Pechtel]

Did you see the video? That's pretty clear-cut case of self-defense.
An angry Rosenbaum (after having a nigga moment) chased Rittenhouse and threw an object at him.
Huber hit him with a skateboard while he was on the ground.
Grosskreutz advanced at him with his own gun drawn.

Again, watch the video and tell me why you think this was not self defense. These adult men, two of them with felony records, were chasing and attacking a child.

The issue isn't the video, it's what the video doesn't show.

If the video is the whole story then it's justified. Many of us, however, think something happened off screen to provoke the situation. If he has unclean hands the self defense claim goes away.

 

[Derec]

The issue isn't the video, it's what the video doesn't show.

If the video is the whole story then it's justified. Many of us, however, think something happened off screen to provoke the situation. If he has unclean hands the self defense claim goes away.

What do you think happened off-screen? And what evidence is there of it?

This smacks of a political prosecution to me.

 

[Derec]

BUT, I thought that deaths resulting from a felony are Murder. If Rittenhouse was already committing a felony, the killings become Murders, right? Even if they were justifiable self-defense. Rittenhouse is charged with "Minor in possession of firearm," but that's just a misdemeanor.

That answers your question right there.

I've no doubt Rittenhouse is a racist asshole, but is he guilty of Murder?

Why do you think he is a "racist asshole"? He went there to protect businesses from left-wing looters, rioters and arsonists, many of whom have been white. They were rioting over a shooting that was later shown to be justified. The people he shot were all fellow Krauts, so where do you possibly see racism?

Anyway, parsing all these killings one-by-one is rather beside the point. The whole gun-crazed race-hating country is dysfunctional; the stories that make the news are just the iceberg's tip.

If you want to accuse somebody of murder, then parsing what happened during the killings is right on point. Your opinions about the "whole gun-crazed race-hating country" are beside the point.

 

[untermensche]

He went there to protect businesses from left-wing looters, rioters and arsonists, many of whom have been white.

Yes he put property over human life and justice.

He had no business there.

All that could happen was something bad.

As did.

 

[Derec]

Yes he put property over human life and justice.

He did neither. "Justice" is not something that can be obtained through mob violence. Whatever these rioters were doing, it was not in service of justice. And in any case, the shooting was deemed justified anyway.
And he only shot at people after he was attacked by three Antifa thugs, two of whom had felony records.

He had no business there.

True. It was foolish of him to go there, especially armed. But there have been many armed people at these protests on both sides. Black extremists (New Black Panthers and the like) marching in uniforms and rifles was a common sight throughout 2020. A group of them occupied a city block in SW Atlanta and killed an 8 year old girl.
During the Kenosha riots that night, Rittenhouse was not the first to fire his gun. That was an Antifa named Joshua Ziminski.

All that could happen was something bad.
As did.

Rittenhouse acted foolishly (he could have easily been the one killed by the Antifa thugs), but he is a teenager after all, and I think he did it for the right reasons. Note that he was also seen during the day cleaning up the damage #BLM/Antifa did the night before.

 

[untermensche]

He did neither. "Justice" is not something that can be obtained through mob violence.

And ignorant untrained punks are nothing but an accident waiting to happen.

And if legitimate protest is not legitimate because a tiny few act badly then there is no hope for social justice from violent oppressive masters.

Whatever these rioters were doing, it was not in service of justice.

What percentage of the crowd was a rioter?

Right wing agitators cause a lot of the damage.

They were protesting against social injustice. Not rioting.

That stupid kid had no business anywhere near there.

An accident waiting to happen.

 

[Derec]

And ignorant untrained punks are nothing but an accident waiting to happen.

Applies to the armed occupation of University and Pryor in Atlanta as well, where an 8 year old girl was murdered. And yet you choose to only focus on Rittenhouse even though he, based on evidence we have, acted in self-defense.

And if legitimate protest is not legitimate because a tiny few act badly then there is no hope for social justice from violent oppressive masters.

In Kenosha there was widespread looting, rioting and arson. It was not "a tiny few bad apples".
Also, the Kenosha shooting was justified.

What percentage of the crowd was a rioter?

Don't know the percentage. Enough to cause a lot of damage.

Right wing agitators cause a lot of the damage.

Do you have any evidence there was any damage done by any "right wing agitators" in Kenosha?

They were protesting against social injustice. Not rioting.

Burning down buildings is not legitimate protesting. Looting is not legitimate protesting. Rioting is not legitimate protesting.
And even legitimate protesters did not have a point. They were not protesting against any "social injustice" because at the time of the riots, there was precious little information available. Turns out the perp, Jacob Blake, was armed and the shooting was justified.

That stupid kid had no business anywhere near there.

Then Rosenbaum, Huber and Grosskreutz had no business being there either. And they certainly had no business attacking a kid.
Note that even before he assaulted a child, Rosenbaum tried to blow up a gas station by rolling a dumpster on fire toward it. Somebody putting that fire out really set him off and that's probably why he attacked Rittenhouse in the first place.

Note that unlike RH&G , Rittenhouse did also some good helping out to clean up the damage done by #BLM and Antifas the night before.

 

[untermensche]

Applies to the armed occupation of University and Pryor in Atlanta as well, where an 8 year old girl was murdered. And yet you choose to only focus on Rittenhouse even though he, based on evidence we have, acted in self-defense.

He had no business there and he killed people. Damn right I focus on the moron.

Talking about other bad behavior to try to excuse the ignorant dangerous behavior of this punk is called deflection.

It is an irrational form of defense.

Do you have any evidence there was any damage done by any "right wing agitators" in Kenosha?

We see right wing agitators at all these protests.

They are not good people.

They are trying to discredit legitimate protest.

Burning down buildings is not legitimate protesting.

It all depends on the level of injustice.

A criminal justice system that looks a lot like slavery might very well cause a lot of social unrest.

If the masters can oppress without any consequences they will continue to oppress. Human nature.

 

[TV and credit cards]

We have .8 seconds from the frame with the gun to the frame with the shot.

Not all .8 seconds are available for the decision, though. The officer must decide and then pull the trigger--something that will take a good portion of those .8 seconds.

And by the time the firearm is pointed in your direction it's too late, you gave them the first shot. If they're any good, the first couple of shots.

It’s like the development of a Trent Tucker Rule for cops.

 

[DBT]

Running around the streets shooting guns isn't a good idea, a level of utter stupidity that makes it highly likely that a tragedy will happen. So why does it happen so frequently in the US? The availability of guns is certainly a factor, but that alone does not explain the culture, mindset and state of US society.

 

[laughing dog]

Your reality check is not reality. If it were, you'd acknowledge
a) there is more than a fraction of a second,
b) it takes a firearm pointed in one's direction to make one a target, and
c) targets are not always hit (or people killed when shot).



Your responses are inane enough without the babble.

We have .8 seconds from the frame with the gun to the frame with the shot.

Not all .8 seconds are available for the decision, though. The officer must decide and then pull the trigger--something that will take a good portion of those .8 seconds.

And by the time the firearm is pointed in your direction it's too late, you gave them the first shot. If they're any good, the first couple of shots.

I know you truly believe the tripe you post, but no one else had to. If soldiers on patrol in a war zone could hold their fire until they were fired upon (as my son in Afghanistan did) snd survive, police officers can wait until someone is pointing at them.

The 0.8 seconds is not the result of natural law but the officer’s choice.

 

[Swammerdami]

He went there to protect businesses from left-wing looters, rioters and arsonists, many of whom have been white.

"Left-wing looters"? So Derec, when right-wing looters want to join in looting the spoils do they check the protestors' political agenda?

"Hey, Jimmy Bob. There's given away free scotch whiskey downtown. Bring yer own weapons."
"Nah, Billie Joe. Them's a BLM riot; we's waitin fer a good ol' Proud Boys riot afore we go fetch our'n free whiskey."

Yes he put property over human life and justice.

He had no business there.

All that could happen was something bad.

As did.

Yes. Reminds me of the asshole Zimmerman, but at least that asshole was an adult.

I still think there should be some felony offense for the brandishing of (or threatening with) an assault rifle by an under-age youth. In that case the killings become murders whether in self-defense or not.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

The issue isn't the video, it's what the video doesn't show.

If the video is the whole story then it's justified. Many of us, however, think something happened off screen to provoke the situation. If he has unclean hands the self defense claim goes away.

What do you think happened off-screen? And what evidence is there of it?

This smacks of a political prosecution to me.

Multiple protesters are going after him. They aren't going after anyone else. That makes me strongly suspect there was some off-screen incident to trigger that. The question comes down to what that incident was--did he step over the line?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Your reality check is not reality. If it were, you'd acknowledge
a) there is more than a fraction of a second,
b) it takes a firearm pointed in one's direction to make one a target, and
c) targets are not always hit (or people killed when shot).



Your responses are inane enough without the babble.

We have .8 seconds from the frame with the gun to the frame with the shot.

Not all .8 seconds are available for the decision, though. The officer must decide and then pull the trigger--something that will take a good portion of those .8 seconds.

And by the time the firearm is pointed in your direction it's too late, you gave them the first shot. If they're any good, the first couple of shots.

I know you truly believe the tripe you post, but no one else had to. If soldiers on patrol in a war zone could hold their fire until they were fired upon (as my son in Afghanistan did) snd survive, police officers can wait until someone is pointing at them.

The 0.8 seconds is not the result of natural law but the officer’s choice.

Your son was dealing with people who were probably innocent.

We know this kid was guilty of acts that are probably felonies. It's a very different situation.

 

[TomC]

The issue isn't the video, it's what the video doesn't show.

If the video is the whole story then it's justified. Many of us, however, think something happened off screen to provoke the situation. If he has unclean hands the self defense claim goes away.

What do you think happened off-screen? And what evidence is there of it?

This smacks of a political prosecution to me.

Multiple protesters are going after him. They aren't going after anyone else. That makes me strongly suspect there was some off-screen incident to trigger that. The question comes down to what that incident was--did he step over the line?

Multiple people went after Nicholas Sandmann. The internet is full of stupid uninformed people jockeying to be the most extreme.
Tom

 

[laughing dog]

I know you truly believe the tripe you post, but no one else had to. If soldiers on patrol in a war zone could hold their fire until they were fired upon (as my son in Afghanistan did) snd survive, police officers can wait until someone is pointing at them.

The 0.8 seconds is not the result of natural law but the officer’s choice.

Your son was dealing with people who were probably innocent.

Reading is fundamental to basic reasoning in internet discussions. That means he and his comrades were not permitted to fire at anyone even when they had guns pointed at them unless they were fired upon. At some point, you should realize that not responding is more convincing than offering up these stupid excuses of yours.

We know this kid was guilty of acts that are probably felonies. It's a very different situation.

No acts of violence against persons, so once again, your response is just another example of a vapid or stupid excuse.

 

[Derec]

"Left-wing looters"? So Derec, when right-wing looters want to join in looting the spoils do they check the protestors' political agenda?

Obviously, all looting is to be condemned, but it is the Left that supports looting as a "legitimate" form of political "activism".

Chicago #BLM leader calls looting a form of reparations.
Speaker At Black Lives Matter Rally Defends Looting: "This Is Reparations... Businesses Have Insurance"

Fauxgressive Congressman and private second class Jamaal Bowman and his squad leader Sgt. Sandy attacked Joe Biden for condemning rioting and looting over St. Daunte, the "Prince of Brooklyn Park".
Jamaal Bowman, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Slam Biden Over Daunte Wright Response

"There's no justification for killing someone over expired plates. There's no justification to mention damage to property before the damage police killings inflict on Black America," Bowman tweeted Monday.

He is a bold-faced liar too. St. Daunte wasn't killed over "expired plates" but because he had a warrant for an illegal gun (he was barred from possessing a firearm because he was on conditional release for armed robbery) and was resisting arrest. And even that was an accident in the end.
But no matter the

Yes. Reminds me of the asshole Zimmerman, but at least that asshole was an adult.

Being an asshole does not mean your right to self-defense is revoked. St. Trayvon was an asshole too, and he assaulted Z.

I still think there should be some felony offense for the brandishing of (or threatening with) an assault rifle by an under-age youth. In that case the killings become murders whether in self-defense or not.

Just because you want this kid to be locked up for defending himself from some violent felons does not mean that that would be justice.

 

[none]

Obviously, all looting is to be condemned, but it is the Left that supports looting as a "legitimate" form of political "activism".

unless you are a colonist.

 

[Toni]

Reading is fundamental to basic reasoning in internet discussions. That means he and his comrades were not permitted to fire at anyone even when they had guns pointed at them unless they were fired upon. At some point, you should realize that not responding is more convincing than offering up these stupid excuses of yours.

We know this kid was guilty of acts that are probably felonies. It's a very different situation.

No acts of violence against persons, so once again, your response is just another example of a vapid or stupid excuse.

Zimmerman was/is a violent racist who stalked Trayvon Martin while armed and ultimately murdered him for daring to fight back.

 

[Elixir]

Obviously, all looting is to be condemned, but it is the Left that supports looting as a "legitimate" form of political "activism".

Ah, that mythical "left".
Care to name any names? Or would that highlight your dishonest and intentional misrepresentation of their views.