Murderer's Mother Receives Standing Ovation from GOP

[Loren Pechtel]

"Huge shoutout sent from all of us in WI to warrior @LLinWood. I was able to talk to Kyle by phone & THANK HIM for his courage! #fightback."

Now cold blooded murderers are the heroes of the "Party" (Junta) of the President, the Senate. the DOJ and coming soon, the SCOTUS.
Sickening.

He isn't a cold blooded murderer. Indeed, he isn't a murderer at all. The videos are there for all to see, and we've been over this, the kid only shot in self-defense.

The important video doesn't exist--what started the incident.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Yes, we've been over this. If you are interested, a new video has recently been released that purports to show that
1) Rittenhouse was running to put out a fire.
2) Rosenbaum was starting fires.
3) Rosenbaum was acting aggressively to another person, who was wearing similar clothes to Rittenhouse, so it may have been a case of mistaken identity.

Got a link?

 

[J842P]

Yes, we've been over this. If you are interested, a new video has recently been released that purports to show that
1) Rittenhouse was running to put out a fire.
2) Rosenbaum was starting fires.
3) Rosenbaum was acting aggressively to another person, who was wearing similar clothes to Rittenhouse, so it may have been a case of mistaken identity.

Got a link?

Here you go:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AbIQGLyz_O8&t=240s&has_verified=1&bpctr=1601255076

Obviously, this is created by someone who supports Rittenhouse. But all these clips are floating around twitter and facebook, and were essentially what I personally saw unfold almost live that night.

 

[Shadowy Man]

“Only a good guy with a gun can stop a bad guy with a gun.”

Bad guy shoots good guy and claims self defense.

 

[J842P]

More like stupid, naive young guy shoots two bad guys and one guy who maybe just made stupid decision.

 

[Arctish]

More like stupid, naive young guy shoots two bad guys and one guy who maybe just made stupid decision.

More like naive young guy shoots one angry guy and two heroic guys who tried to stop him from shooting more people.

 

[Worldtraveller]

And once again, ya'll are letting the trumpsuckers derail the thread.

The main point here, is that even if (and I think the little fucker outright murdered people, regardless of the jacking off in this and other threads) it was defensible in any way, the GOP fucking applauded this killing.

If that doesn't put a rest to the idiotic 'both sides'-ism that keeps popping up from various trolls, then nothing will (and I'm willing to make that bet....). Seriously, the Dem party would, at the very least, have the decency to pretend that they are appalled and don't condone the violence. The GOP ratfuckers don't even pretend anymore.

 

[Arctish]

Interesting article from Slate on that very thing:

“Own the Libs” Is Gradually Morphing Into “Kill the Libs”

And far from just a GOP slogan, it’s becoming actual policy.

If Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis gets his way, people who merely attend a protest that results in property damage will be prosecuted for felonies. Yelling at someone in a restaurant as part of such a protest will be a criminal offense. And a driver who kills demonstrators with his car will not be liable for their deaths, as long as he is “fleeing for safety from a mob.”

These are just a few of the policies proposed by DeSantis in a package meant to chill dissent and punish those in the streets demanding an end to racist police violence. Republican leaders in the Florida Legislature have promised to file the bill in 2021. By introducing it now, DeSantis clearly hopes to rile up Trump’s base in Florida, one of the most crucial swing states, with fears of black-clad cabals rampaging through their gated communities. But the specifics of the proposal are worth close consideration, because it represents a rising consensus among conservative leaders under Donald Trump: A governing ethos that once boiled down to “troll the libs” is steadily escalating toward “kill the libs.”

 

[J842P]

And once again, ya'll are letting the trumpsuckers derail the thread.

The main point here, is that even if (and I think the little fucker outright murdered people, regardless of the jacking off in this and other threads) it was defensible in any way, the GOP fucking applauded this killing.

If that doesn't put a rest to the idiotic 'both sides'-ism that keeps popping up from various trolls, then nothing will (and I'm willing to make that bet....). Seriously, the Dem party would, at the very least, have the decency to pretend that they are appalled and don't condone the violence. The GOP ratfuckers don't even pretend anymore.

You can fuck off with that "Trumpsucker" nonsense. I didn't vote for Trump, and I bet before Trump you were happily voting for every right-wing neo-con and neoliberal with a folksy accent. Just because I'm not entirely ideologically captured, and can use my eyes doesn't mean I'm a "Trump Sucker".

And yes, what do you expect? The Republican party has always hailed firearms as a means of self-defense. Why wouldn't they celebrate it? Of course, I'll note, in this very thread you have someone characterizing the another guy with a gun as "heroic". But of course, you don't give a shit about consistency, reason, or truth. Just your partisan masturbatory reveling.

 

[J842P]

Interesting article from Slate on that very thing:

“Own the Libs” Is Gradually Morphing Into “Kill the Libs”

And far from just a GOP slogan, it’s becoming actual policy.

If Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis gets his way, people who merely attend a protest that results in property damage will be prosecuted for felonies. Yelling at someone in a restaurant as part of such a protest will be a criminal offense. And a driver who kills demonstrators with his car will not be liable for their deaths, as long as he is “fleeing for safety from a mob.”

These are just a few of the policies proposed by DeSantis in a package meant to chill dissent and punish those in the streets demanding an end to racist police violence. Republican leaders in the Florida Legislature have promised to file the bill in 2021. By introducing it now, DeSantis clearly hopes to rile up Trump’s base in Florida, one of the most crucial swing states, with fears of black-clad cabals rampaging through their gated communities. But the specifics of the proposal are worth close consideration, because it represents a rising consensus among conservative leaders under Donald Trump: A governing ethos that once boiled down to “troll the libs” is steadily escalating toward “kill the libs.”

The criminalization of merely attending a protest that results in property damage, or even death, is a serious attack on civil liberties.

The criminalization of mobbing people in restaurants is not. That is assault. And it is reprehensible behavior.

The car thing I'd have to see the specifics.

 

[Arctish]

Of course, I'll note, in this very thread you have someone characterizing the another guy with a gun as "heroic". But of course, you don't give a shit about consistency, reason, or truth. Just your partisan masturbatory reveling.

I you mean me, I didn't call him heroic because he had a gun. I called him heroic because he risked his life attempting to stop/subdue/disarm a shooter who had just killed someone.

 

[J842P]

Of course, I'll note, in this very thread you have someone characterizing the another guy with a gun as "heroic". But of course, you don't give a shit about consistency, reason, or truth. Just your partisan masturbatory reveling.

I you mean me, I didn't call him heroic because he had a gun. I called him heroic because he risked his life attempting to stop/subdue/disarm a shooter who had just killed someone.

So I guess you feel the same way about Rittenhouse, then?

And I don't think him having a gun is the point. But it that fact only seems to bother you when it is about Rittenhouse.

 

[Elixir]

The criminalization of merely attending a protest that results in property damage, or even death, is a serious attack on civil liberties.

True. Especially while it's not even illegal to systematically and violently destroy hundreds of millions of dollars worth of federal property in order to handicap the operation of and/or destroy public faith in a taxpayer-funded national public service (USPS).

 

[J842P]

The criminalization of merely attending a protest that results in property damage, or even death, is a serious attack on civil liberties.

True. Especially while it's not even illegal to systematically and violently destroy hundreds of millions of dollars worth of federal property in order to handicap the operation of and/or destroy public faith in a taxpayer-funded national public service (USPS).

I know what you are getting at, but it's not the same, and trying to equivocate is pathetically partisan.

Also, I'm going to go out on a limb and say you didn't give a shit about the USPS for all the decades the Democratic party has been systemically dismantling publicly funded national services, including the USPS. I apologize if I am wrong.

 

[ZiprHead]

Also, I'm going to go out on a limb and say you didn't give a shit about the USPS for all the decades the Democratic party has been systemically dismantling publicly funded national services, including the USPS. I apologize if I am wrong.

When was this???

 

[Arctish]

Of course, I'll note, in this very thread you have someone characterizing the another guy with a gun as "heroic". But of course, you don't give a shit about consistency, reason, or truth. Just your partisan masturbatory reveling.

I you mean me, I didn't call him heroic because he had a gun. I called him heroic because he risked his life attempting to stop/subdue/disarm a shooter who had just killed someone.

So I guess you feel the same way about Rittenhouse, then?

And I don't think him having a gun is the point. But it that fact only seems to bother you when it is about Rittenhouse.

There are a couple of things that bother me about Rittenhouse. The type of weapon he was carrying, the fact he was not of legal age to be carrying it, my suspicion he had no training in it's use, and the fact he deliberately went to Kenosha so he could patrol the streets openly carrying it with the militia guys. He put himself into that situation. I don't expect maturity from a teenager which is why I said earlier I really wanted to talk to his parents. But I do expect a person carrying a firearm to behave responsibly.

Add to that my disapproval of the cops giving him and the militia guys a big thumbs up, then driving past him after he killed people because they don't see a white guy carrying an AR-15 as a problem even when they are responding to a "shots fired" call. And then add the reprehensible denigration of people who tried to stop an active shooter on top of that, and the whole thing bothers me.

FYI, I own guns and sometimes carry one. I do not threaten people with it. I do not point it at others. I have absolutely no intention of ever shooting another human being. And I can't imagine going to a potential riot with one so I could openly display it because that's inflammatory and foolish. IMO it's the kind of thing a naive teenager would do, and I am long past the age where I can claim youth as an excuse for poor judgement.

I am a firm believer in firearms safety training. I think it should be mandatory for people who want to own and use them. And I think they should have to demonstrate competency and meet the age limit before they are permitted to be out in public while armed.

I think an untrained teenager armed with an AR-15 at a potential riot should make everyone nervous. .

 

[laughing dog]

Of course, I'll note, in this very thread you have someone characterizing the another guy with a gun as "heroic". But of course, you don't give a shit about consistency, reason, or truth. Just your partisan masturbatory reveling.

I you mean me, I didn't call him heroic because he had a gun. I called him heroic because he risked his life attempting to stop/subdue/disarm a shooter who had just killed someone.

So I guess you feel the same way about Rittenhouse, then?

And I don't think him having a gun is the point. But it that fact only seems to bother you when it is about Rittenhouse.

Rittenhouse travelled to another city in another state with a firearm to attend a protest/riot. That should bother any sane person.

Just like it should bother any sane person that a mother would drive her teenager to a protest/riot, let alone when he is carrying a firearm. Instead, we have the GOP applauding her.

 

[Elixir]

The criminalization of merely attending a protest that results in property damage, or even death, is a serious attack on civil liberties.

True. Especially while it's not even illegal to systematically and violently destroy hundreds of millions of dollars worth of federal property in order to handicap the operation of and/or destroy public faith in a taxpayer-funded national public service (USPS).

I know what you are getting at, but it's not the same, and trying to equivocate is pathetically partisan.

Also, I'm going to go out on a limb and say you didn't give a shit about the USPS for all the decades the Democratic party has been systemically dismantling publicly funded national services, including the USPS. I apologize if I am wrong.

You're wrong, but no need to apologize. It was a partisan snark.
FWIW, I became rather upset with USPS several years ago. We are a county seat, and there used to be a sorting operation in this small town (county pop ~15,000). It was a very good service; in-state mail would get there next day, first class mail to virtually anywhere in the contiguous States took 2-3 days. They took out the sorting machines and cut the workforce several years ago (before Trump) and since then it takes six days for a letter to travel across the street. It goes from here to the State Capitol where there's a sorting center, then comes back to town (... for some reason I have a hard time believing that it's cheaper to transport it 400 miles than 4 blocks) and at least that to anywhere else. It's certainly not "better". But it did not reek of malicious intent when they shut down our sorting center.

FWIW, the destruction of sorting machined in recent weeks and months has been wanton and deliberately irreversible. The "parts" excuse is bogus. So while I ask for no apology, I make no apology for the political snark. I pay taxes (more than Trump) and have actually created jobs - not just hired some illegals, either. That USPS bullshit is an inexcusable waste of MY money and everyone else's. If we can afford hundreds of millions to pay for Trump to undermine our electoral process, we can afford a few million in property damages to support the vast majority of demonstrators' 1st amendment rights.
DeJoy and Trump both belong in prison along with the toady Barr. </$0.02>

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

It doesn't make him a murderer. It's encouragement for him to go out and make himself a murderer.

Taking a gun to a riot sounds like premeditation to me.

Yea, I agree with this. He was looking for trouble. I'm pro gun rights (but follow the law and common gun safety). I have a conceal carry permit. But everyone who's interested in protection and gun rights know that a person who carries in plain sight is an idiot and probably looking for trouble. We mock people like him.

I think he had no fucking clue what he was getting himself into. The parent is supposed to be a parent in that situation and metaphorically slap some sense into him.

 

[Derec]

Interesting article from Slate on that very thing:

Ugh, Slate!

If Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis gets his way, people who merely attend a protest that results in property damage will be prosecuted for felonies.

That is overly broad. However, ...

Yelling at someone in a restaurant as part of such a protest will be a criminal offense.

What's wrong with that? It's disturbing the peace at the very least, and could be seen as verbal assault as well.
Going into restaurants (or libraries, etc.) and yelling at people is not legitimate protest. And in the case of #BLM nutjobs it's also racial intimidation as they are targeting white restaurant patrons.

And a driver who kills demonstrators with his car will not be liable for their deaths, as long as he is “fleeing for safety from a mob.”

This is kind of like stand your ground, as there are certainly legitimate stand your ground cases, but the law can also be misused. What is clear is that if "protesters" attack a car just for being on the road, the driver should not be faulted for trying to drive away.
And there should be no "protesters" on the interstate highways to begin with.

By the way, #BLMers also sometimes drive into protesters.
Woman Charged With Attempted Murder After Driving Into Pro-Trump Protesters
Unless the protesters put her in danger, she should be convicted. Of course, in fauxgressive California she may get off.

These are just a few of the policies proposed by DeSantis in a package meant to chill dissent and punish those in the streets demanding an end to racist police violence.

Just because the author agrees with the "protesters" does not mean these "protesters" should be able to do whatever they want. Attacking cars or yelling at restaurant patrons is not legitimate protest.

A governing ethos that once boiled down to “troll the libs” is steadily escalating toward “kill the libs.”

Nobody is "killing the libs" by for example prosecuting obnoxious idiots yelling at people in restaurants. Not to mention that these radicals are anything but liberal.


This is NOT ok!