• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Rittenhouse/Kenosha Shooting Split

Toni

Contributor
Joined
Aug 11, 2011
Messages
15,159
Location
NOT laying back and thinking of England
Basic Beliefs
Peace on Earth, goodwill towards all
Most 17 year olds hold many different abs perhaps conflicting career abs life aspirations. Rittenhouse’s is just ….very conveniently timed.
Why are you so interested in some 17 year old boy's abs? :)
Big old clumsy fingers, teeny tiny keyboard on phone.
 

Toni

Contributor
Joined
Aug 11, 2011
Messages
15,159
Location
NOT laying back and thinking of England
Basic Beliefs
Peace on Earth, goodwill towards all
If cops hadn’t shot up some unarmed guy whose small children were in the back of the car, there wouldn’t have been unrest in Kenosha.
Toni, give it a rest with your misinformation!
1. Jacob Blake was armed. He was holding a knife.
2. The vehicle was not his.
3. He did not have custody of the kids.
4. He had a felony sexual assault warrant.


And note that even if the shooting was not justified, rioting, looting and arson certainly is not.

If there were not dozens and dozens and dozens of other instances of cops shooting unarmed people, there would not be these demonstrations and protests that turn into riots with collateral damage, both property and human.
Most police shootings involve armed subjects. And often unarmed subjects can also be a threat justifying use of lethal force. If the police officer is too hesitant in shooting, un unarmed assailant can disarm that police officer and use his or her weapon against the cop. This has happened numerous times in the past.
Also, often armed perps also precipitate rioting. Jacob Blake was armed. Mario Woods was armed. Keith Smith was armed (it was not a book after all!)

It is hard to have peace without justice.
What justice? Jacob Blake - no matter how much Kamala Harris is proud of him - brought the shooting on himself.

He didn't have a knife in his hand. They found knife after they shot him.

It doesn't matter if it was his car or if he had custody of his kids. The police were not attempting to rescue his kids.

They shot him in front of his 3 young children, in a car. They could have very easily killed one or more of his children, rather than just traumatizing them.

I realize you are perfectly fine with police shooting as many black men as possible but a lot of people are tired of this shit and they are not all black people.
 

Loren Pechtel

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Sep 16, 2000
Messages
36,284
Location
Nevada
Gender
Yes
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
I would argue that a person too young to legally carry a semiautomatic weapon into a crowded demonstration DID put a lot of people in immediate danger. Anyone could have grabbed that weapon away from that kid and started shooting. I would argue that Rittenhouse DID indeed go to that demonstration intending to shoot ‘bad guys.’

I don't think the possibility of his gun being taken is relevant to the situation.

I would further argue that the men who pursued Rittenhouse were acting in the same good faith that supposedly Rittenhouse was acting under: they were chasing someone sought by police, who had just killed an unarmed man.

I don’t agree that the first shooting was justified. But if you think Rittenhouse was justified in the first instance, you certainly should understand the actions of the second and third man: they were trying to apprehend a under suspect—which, I believe, was Rittenhouse’s wet dream.

But this is--the legality of the second and third shootings comes down to the legality of the first--and I think he provoked that.
 

KeepTalking

Code Monkey
Joined
Jan 15, 2010
Messages
4,641
Location
St. Louis Metro East
Basic Beliefs
Atheist, Secular Humanist, Pastifarian, IPUnitard
It also does not include the right to be hunted down and killed
None of the shootees were "hunted down". JR chased KR and grabbed the barrel of his rifle. AH chased KR and hit him with a skateboard while also trying to grab his rifle. GG pointed his illegally carried handgun at KR.
It is a lie to suggest that KR "hunted down" anybody. If anything, he was the hunted.

Well, it's a good thing I did not say he did. I was very clearly responding to our resident Sage, who was advocating for exactly that.

by AR toting idiots who think they are fucking patriots, but are in reality fascists.
To the communist Antifas, everybody to the right of Leon Trotsky is considered a "fascist".
I am not a communist, nor am I an Antifa, therefor you can take it as granted that I do not find everyone to the right of Trotsky to be a fascist.
 

Elixir

Made in America
Joined
Sep 23, 2012
Messages
20,472
Location
Mountains
Basic Beliefs
English is complicated
He was holding a knife.
He didn't have a knife in his hand. They found knife after they shot him.
Close enough for a right wing racist to condone shooting him. And his kids too, if they don't like it.
Leave it to Derec to whine about "wrong thread" when people drag in things he likes to deny, but then go on about the knife Jacob Blake WASN’T holding, in a thread about the murderous little white fuck.
 
Last edited:

Toni

Contributor
Joined
Aug 11, 2011
Messages
15,159
Location
NOT laying back and thinking of England
Basic Beliefs
Peace on Earth, goodwill towards all
I would argue that a person too young to legally carry a semiautomatic weapon into a crowded demonstration DID put a lot of people in immediate danger. Anyone could have grabbed that weapon away from that kid and started shooting. I would argue that Rittenhouse DID indeed go to that demonstration intending to shoot ‘bad guys.’

I don't think the possibility of his gun being taken is relevant to the situation.

I would further argue that the men who pursued Rittenhouse were acting in the same good faith that supposedly Rittenhouse was acting under: they were chasing someone sought by police, who had just killed an unarmed man.

I don’t agree that the first shooting was justified. But if you think Rittenhouse was justified in the first instance, you certainly should understand the actions of the second and third man: they were trying to apprehend a under suspect—which, I believe, was Rittenhouse’s wet dream.

But this is--the legality of the second and third shootings comes down to the legality of the first--and I think he provoked that.
There are claims that Rosenbaum grabbed at his weapon. So, that is an issue. The other two men were pursuing someone who had just shot an unarmed man and was actively being sought by the police. Whether or not the shooting of Rosenbaum can be considered self defense, there is no way that the those pursuing Rittenhouse could know if it was justified or not. They just new an armed active shooter was sought by the police abs was running through a crowd. It seems as though it was logical to attempt to prevent Rittenhouse’s escape—frankly quite brave. Maybe not wise, even if two men were not shot by Rittenhouse while pursuing him.
 

Metaphor

Sjajna Zvijezda
Joined
Apr 1, 2007
Messages
10,932
Location
Slouching towards Bethlehem
So what? Predacious little fuckers
"Predacious little fucker" describes Joseph Rosenbaum much better actually.
Wrong thread.
How was KR's mother an "accessory"? Please be specific.
Arming, then Transporting a kid across State lines for the purpose of shooting protesters...
Can nothing stop you repeating this falsehood?

just a "normal" thing for you right wing extremists, so no surprise you see nothing wrong with it.
 

laughing dog

Contributor
Joined
Dec 29, 2004
Messages
21,153
Location
Minnesota
Gender
IT
Basic Beliefs
Dogs rule
So what? Predacious little fuckers
"Predacious little fucker" describes Joseph Rosenbaum much better actually.
Wrong thread.
How was KR's mother an "accessory"? Please be specific.
Arming, then Transporting a kid across State lines for the purpose of shooting protesters...
Can nothing stop you repeating this falsehood?

just a "normal" thing for you right wing extremists, so no surprise you see nothing wrong with it.
The irony of that standard is overwhelming.
 
Joined
Sep 27, 2015
Messages
226
Location
On the outside, trickling down on the Insiders
Basic Beliefs
logic, experience, independence
It is assholes like Rittenhouse — or the adults who filled him with hatred and gave him access to a gun — who have helped turn the U.S.A. into a shit-hole country.

No, it is assholes like Rosenberg, Huber and Grosskreutz, as well as elsewhere assholes like Colinford Mattis and Urooj Rahman that are threatening to turn this country into a shithole country with their regular violent rioting whenever they feel upset about something.

If there weren't violent unrests in Kenosha over several days, Rittenhouse would have just chilled and we all would not know his name
Thughuggers Commit Capital Treason

A riot is a state of war. Every citizen has an obligation to use his gun to kill the rioters. They are the enemy; merely arresting them would just encourage more riots. Also, during wartime regulations about illegal possession of weapons are waived.
Where do I find this in the law?
One Riot, One Ranger

It's the natural law, which had protected civilization for millennia until the thughuggers took over. Your "rule of law" is the law of your rulers. Patriots must take the law back into our own hands.
 
Joined
Sep 27, 2015
Messages
226
Location
On the outside, trickling down on the Insiders
Basic Beliefs
logic, experience, independence
Rittenhouse isn't the problem. Or should I say he isn't the main problem.

How many cunts who should never be near a loaded gun are going to see the OAN/Newsmax translation of this case, become inspired and go out to emulate Rittenhouse? Except because they are cunts, they are going to do it juuussst a little "better"?

I was thinking along similar lines. If Rittenhouse is not held accountable in some way, I think we are going to see a number of these yahoos wading into protests with their strap on AR 15s so they can hunt "antifas". Given that it appears to me that the judge is acting as a part of the defense team, I see very little chance of Rittenhouse being held accountable.
We Don't Need More Prisons; We Need More Morgues

That's exactly what patriots should do to our anti-American enemies. That would send the only effective message to the ruling class that empowered these ferals and feralphiles.
Patriots? Ha! You make me laugh. When right-wing assholes refuse to get a little shot and wear a simple mask to help country they are far from patriotic.
Sons of Liberty

The nightmare race traitors won't woke from: a whole generation of Rittenhouses
 

ZiprHead

Loony Running The Asylum
Staff member
Joined
Oct 23, 2002
Messages
30,559
Location
Frozen in Michigan
Gender
Old Fart
Basic Beliefs
Democratic Socialist Atheist
It is assholes like Rittenhouse — or the adults who filled him with hatred and gave him access to a gun — who have helped turn the U.S.A. into a shit-hole country.

No, it is assholes like Rosenberg, Huber and Grosskreutz, as well as elsewhere assholes like Colinford Mattis and Urooj Rahman that are threatening to turn this country into a shithole country with their regular violent rioting whenever they feel upset about something.

If there weren't violent unrests in Kenosha over several days, Rittenhouse would have just chilled and we all would not know his name
Thughuggers Commit Capital Treason

A riot is a state of war. Every citizen has an obligation to use his gun to kill the rioters. They are the enemy; merely arresting them would just encourage more riots. Also, during wartime regulations about illegal possession of weapons are waived.
Where do I find this in the law?
One Riot, One Ranger

It's the natural law, which had protected civilization for millennia until the thughuggers took over. Your "rule of law" is the law of your rulers. Patriots must take the law back into our own hands.
How do we know YOU are a patriot? You sound like a fascist.
 

Rhea

Cyborg with a Tiara
Staff member
Joined
Feb 1, 2001
Messages
13,234
Location
Recluse
Basic Beliefs
Humanist
.
We Don't Need More Prisons; We Need More Morgues

That's exactly what patriots should do to our anti-American enemies. That would send the only effective message to the ruling class that empowered these ferals and feralphiles.
Patriots? Ha! You make me laugh. When right-wing assholes refuse to get a little shot and wear a simple mask to help country they are far from patriotic.
Sons of Liberty

The nightmare race traitors won't woke from: a whole generation of Rittenhouses


These people think it is “patriotic” to kill people without due process?
For what country?
 

ZiprHead

Loony Running The Asylum
Staff member
Joined
Oct 23, 2002
Messages
30,559
Location
Frozen in Michigan
Gender
Old Fart
Basic Beliefs
Democratic Socialist Atheist
.
We Don't Need More Prisons; We Need More Morgues

That's exactly what patriots should do to our anti-American enemies. That would send the only effective message to the ruling class that empowered these ferals and feralphiles.
Patriots? Ha! You make me laugh. When right-wing assholes refuse to get a little shot and wear a simple mask to help country they are far from patriotic.
Sons of Liberty

The nightmare race traitors won't woke from: a whole generation of Rittenhouses


These people think it is “patriotic” to kill people without due process?
For what country?
The Sage of Main Street sounds more like the looney on the soap box.
 

Arctish

Centimillionaire
Joined
Jul 30, 2003
Messages
6,199
Location
Alaska
Basic Beliefs
Agnostic Humanist
.
We Don't Need More Prisons; We Need More Morgues

That's exactly what patriots should do to our anti-American enemies. That would send the only effective message to the ruling class that empowered these ferals and feralphiles.
Patriots? Ha! You make me laugh. When right-wing assholes refuse to get a little shot and wear a simple mask to help country they are far from patriotic.
Sons of Liberty

The nightmare race traitors won't woke from: a whole generation of Rittenhouses


These people think it is “patriotic” to kill people without due process?
For what country?
Killing Americans for Mother Russia.

This is the infiltration unit at work. The paratroopers will arrive after the Wolverines have been subverted.
 

Derec

Contributor
Joined
Aug 19, 2002
Messages
21,862
Location
Atlanta, GA
Basic Beliefs
atheist
Wrong thread.
As usual, you are completely wrong. Rosenbaum is one of the Antifa thugs whom Rittenhouse shot in self defense, so this is the right thread to talk about that predacious little fucker.

How was KR's mother an "accessory"? Please be specific.
Arming, then Transporting a kid across State lines for the purpose of shooting protesters...
Wrong on all counts. KR's mother did not procure KR's weapon for him. She did not drive him "across state lines" - he was already in Kenosha. And there was no purpose to shoot any protesters. Swing and a miss. Three strikes and you're out.

just a "normal" thing for you right wing extremists, so no surprise you see nothing wrong with it.
Willfully misrepresenting the situation and libeling a mother is just a "normal" thing for you left wing extremists ...
 

Don2 (Don1 Revised)

Contributor
Joined
Apr 1, 2004
Messages
11,641
Location
USA
Basic Beliefs
Nonpracticing agnostic
I haven't been following this that much. My little knowledge of Rosenbaum was that he was a mentally ill person who got out of the hospital, had nowhere to go, and joined the chaos without a defining ideology. Further, he felt agitated by the paramilitary types and so kept taunting them, even using racial slurs, which some of the supremacists probably hated, but that a BLMer wouldn't be doing. He also allegedly dared them to shoot him. His fiance denied him a place to stay in her hotel room due to domestic violence I think and he seems more of an incidental participant in chaos than an ideologue. However, I am open to hearing relevant information. Does anyone have info on his political organization membership?
 

Derec

Contributor
Joined
Aug 19, 2002
Messages
21,862
Location
Atlanta, GA
Basic Beliefs
atheist
Wrong thread again, Derec. Focus, dude - you can DO IT!

Your mindless condescension is not fooling anyone. You were the one who got the wrong thread - I was merely replying to you.

This thread is about your boy Kyle and the people he murdered
Kyle is not "ma boy" and he did not "murder" your boys Joseph "kid fucker" Rosenbaum and Anthony "gonna gut my brother like a pig" Huber.

You used to insist that YOU were a "liberal", Derec. What happened?
Nothing. I am still liberal. Right to self defense is not in conflict with liberal values.

You sure went full trumpsucker in a big way.
I never even voted for the guy. If he runs in 2024 I will not vote for him. Do you ever get sick of always being this wrong?

Is it your shared love of prostitutes?
There should be something like Godwin's Law (Courtesan's Law?). Whenever you and your ilk know they have lost, you are sure to bring up sex workers apropos of nothing. It is getting tiresome.

That's cool... you, Trump and Jesus.... peas in a pod.
I guess Jesus was also a friend of sex workers and sinners. ;)
 

Derec

Contributor
Joined
Aug 19, 2002
Messages
21,862
Location
Atlanta, GA
Basic Beliefs
atheist
I haven't been following this that much. My little knowledge of Rosenbaum was that he was a mentally ill person who got out of the hospital, had nowhere to go, and joined the chaos without a defining ideology.

You are probably right. While we do not know what was in his mind when he joined the Kenosha rioting, he does not seem to have been part of any #BLM or Antifa group. All three of these people were very different. Huber and his girlfriend were lefties, but he also had personal connection in that he knew Jacob Blake. Grosskreutz is most ideological of the bunch - he is part of an outfit called "People's Revolution Milwaukee".
 

Derec

Contributor
Joined
Aug 19, 2002
Messages
21,862
Location
Atlanta, GA
Basic Beliefs
atheist
Big old clumsy fingers, teeny tiny keyboard on phone.
:)

He didn't have a knife in his hand.
He most definitely did. Did you even watch that video?

And Blake himself admits to it.
Jacob Blake said:
I realized I had dropped my knife, had a little pocket knife. So I picked it up after I got off of him because they tased me and I fell on top of him.
I shouldn’t have picked it up, only considering what was going on. At that time, I wasn’t thinking clearly.
From:
Jacob Blake admits in interview to having a knife in his possession on day of police shooting
They found knife after they shot him.
They found the knife on the floorboard because dropped it after he was shot. Duh!
1ablake.png


It doesn't matter if it was his car or if he had custody of his kids. The police were not attempting to rescue his kids.
They were trying to arrest him. But it does matter that Blake did not have custody and was trying to leave with them. That's kidnapping, and in a stolen car to boot.

They shot him in front of his 3 young children, in a car.
You keep harping on the "3 young children" to make him seem more sympathetic, but then declare children irrelevant when they do not bolster your false narrative of Jacob the victim.

They could have very easily killed one or more of his children, rather than just traumatizing them.
No, the children were in the opposite direction to the direction of the shooting. We went through all this in the main thread, including the fact that Blake was armed. Why do you keep ignoring the facts?

I realize you are perfectly fine with police shooting as many black men as possible
Bullshit! Just because Blake is black does not automatically make a shooting unjustified. Neither does his race mean we should pretend he was unarmed when he clearly was armed.

but a lot of people are tired of this shit and they are not all black people.
"A lot of people" can be wrong and frequently are. The Ferguson riots were built on lies. So were the Kenosha riots. You are trying to downplay the insanity of the Kenosha riots by pretending they had a noble cause. And for that you need to pretend that Blake was an innocent, unarmed victim of police.
 

Toni

Contributor
Joined
Aug 11, 2011
Messages
15,159
Location
NOT laying back and thinking of England
Basic Beliefs
Peace on Earth, goodwill towards all
It also does not include the right to be hunted down and killed
None of the shootees were "hunted down". JR chased KR and grabbed the barrel of his rifle. AH chased KR and hit him with a skateboard while also trying to grab his rifle. GG pointed his illegally carried handgun at KR.
It is a lie to suggest that KR "hunted down" anybody. If anything, he was the hunted.

by AR toting idiots who think they are fucking patriots, but are in reality fascists.
To the communist Antifas, everybody to the right of Leon Trotsky is considered a "fascist".
Yes, Rittenhouse was hunted and chased after he killed an unarmed man and was being sought by the police as an active shooter. Frankly the other two men were acting the way Rittenhouse wanted to act: they were trying to stop a bad guy. Whether or not Rittenhouse's shooting of the first guy was justified, certainly that is a matter of law and the other two were merely seeking to apprehend someone who had shot and killed a man. They had no way of knowing if a court would find Rittenhouse guilty or innocent or even if he would face charges.

I would like to think that this would put a damper on vigilantism but I doubt it will.
Big old clumsy fingers, teeny tiny keyboard on phone.
:)

He didn't have a knife in his hand.
He most definitely did. Did you even watch that video?

And Blake himself admits to it.
Jacob Blake said:
I realized I had dropped my knife, had a little pocket knife. So I picked it up after I got off of him because they tased me and I fell on top of him.
I shouldn’t have picked it up, only considering what was going on. At that time, I wasn’t thinking clearly.
From:
Jacob Blake admits in interview to having a knife in his possession on day of police shooting
They found knife after they shot him.
They found the knife on the floorboard because dropped it after he was shot. Duh!
1ablake.png


It doesn't matter if it was his car or if he had custody of his kids. The police were not attempting to rescue his kids.
They were trying to arrest him. But it does matter that Blake did not have custody and was trying to leave with them. That's kidnapping, and in a stolen car to boot.

They shot him in front of his 3 young children, in a car.
You keep harping on the "3 young children" to make him seem more sympathetic, but then declare children irrelevant when they do not bolster your false narrative of Jacob the victim.

They could have very easily killed one or more of his children, rather than just traumatizing them.
No, the children were in the opposite direction to the direction of the shooting. We went through all this in the main thread, including the fact that Blake was armed. Why do you keep ignoring the facts?

I realize you are perfectly fine with police shooting as many black men as possible
Bullshit! Just because Blake is black does not automatically make a shooting unjustified. Neither does his race mean we should pretend he was unarmed when he clearly was armed.

but a lot of people are tired of this shit and they are not all black people.
"A lot of people" can be wrong and frequently are. The Ferguson riots were built on lies. So were the Kenosha riots. You are trying to downplay the insanity of the Kenosha riots by pretending they had a noble cause. And for that you need to pretend that Blake was an innocent, unarmed victim of police.
Blake had a knife. In his hand when they shot him? As far as I know, that’s not what he admitted to. For the purposes of the police, the knife being in the car counts as ‘in his possession’

Please spare me the care the police took not to murder his children and to mere traumatize them.
 

Derec

Contributor
Joined
Aug 19, 2002
Messages
21,862
Location
Atlanta, GA
Basic Beliefs
atheist
Close enough for a right wing racist to condone shooting him.
Pointing out the truth is neither "right wing" nor "racist".

Leave it to Derec to whine about "wrong thread" when people drag in things he likes to deny,
I did not drag anything in. Toni was the one who brought up Jacob Blake and promulgated falsehoods by calling him "unarmed".

but then go on about the knife Jacob Blake WASN’T holding,
Oh, Jacob Blake most definitely WAS holding the knife. He even admitted to it. But then again, you lefties love your alternative facts, don't you? It's like Trump is your brother from another mother ...
in a thread about the murderous little white fuck.
Rosenbaum was a little (5'3") white fuck, but he luckily did not murder anybody because his would be victim defended himself.
 
Last edited:

Derec

Contributor
Joined
Aug 19, 2002
Messages
21,862
Location
Atlanta, GA
Basic Beliefs
atheist
Yes, Rittenhouse was hunted and chased after he killed an unarmed man and was being sought by the police as an active shooter.
He was also hunted down by Rosenbaum.
This drone video shows it pretty clearly.


Frankly the other two men were acting the way Rittenhouse wanted to act: they were trying to stop a bad guy. Whether or not Rittenhouse's shooting of the first guy was justified, certainly that is a matter of law and the other two were merely seeking to apprehend someone who had shot and killed a man.
But they had no authority to apprehend anybody. Huber and Grosskreutz wanted to be heroes.

They had no way of knowing if a court would find Rittenhouse guilty or innocent or even if he would face charges.
So they wanted to dispense "revolutionary justice" right then and there?
This is how the Antifa mob dealt with a civilian who did not have a weapon to defend himself.
'Broke his jaw:' Man in his 70s attacked while trying to protect burning Kenosha mattress store

I would like to think that this would put a damper on vigilantism but I doubt it will.
Had police been authorized to go harder on the rioters, there would have been no need for armed civilians to protect the businesses.
RIoters, looters and arsonists need to be arrested and then prosecuted to the full extent of the law. Especially that last part has been solely lacking in most jurisdictions. Even when arrested, most rioters got away with it because sympathetic "progressive" DAs simply dropped the charges.

Blake had a knife. In his hand when they shot him?
Yes. In his hand.

As far as I know, that’s not what he admitted to. For the purposes of the police, the knife being in the car counts as ‘in his possession’

Oh, for fuck's sake Toni! You are sounding like a YEC right now. This is what Jacob Blake said.
Jacob Blake said:
I realized I had dropped my knife, had a little pocket knife. So I picked it up after I got off of him because they tased me and I fell on top of him.
I shouldn’t have picked it up, only considering what was going on. At that time, I wasn’t thinking clearly.
So he had a knife which he dropped when he was tased. He then picked it up. He is on the passenger side of the car. He then walks around the car (that's where the video still that shows him with a knife in his hand was taken) and the knife is on the floorboard of the car. How is that possible if he was not holding the knife?

Please spare me the care the police took not to murder his children and to mere traumatize them.
You mean the children Blake was about to kidnap when he was stealing his baby mama's car?
 

Don2 (Don1 Revised)

Contributor
Joined
Apr 1, 2004
Messages
11,641
Location
USA
Basic Beliefs
Nonpracticing agnostic
1ablake.png

In the first photo, the knife is ON TOP of his hand. Can you explain exactly what kind of video "enhancement" was used to do that? Also, do you have an original?
 
Last edited:

Toni

Contributor
Joined
Aug 11, 2011
Messages
15,159
Location
NOT laying back and thinking of England
Basic Beliefs
Peace on Earth, goodwill towards all
On an adjacent topic; I love how most of the people who are against open borders are willing to give this kid a pass for breaking the law whilst crossing state lines.
He did not break the law while crossing state lines.
I suppose that hinges on whether or not you believe that his 'friend' was holding the gun (which Rittenhouse was unable to legally possess) in Wisconsin until Rittenhouse turned 18. This is what his attorney Lin Wood claims but Lin Wood should have been disbarred already for the false and dangerous claims and narratives he promoted about the 2020 election. Here's some info about Wood. Skip to the part about 2020 elections, in the interest of brevity: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L._Lin_Wood#cite_note-72

I don't know who is paying Wood but my guess would be the NRA. With what is another matter. They're broke.
 

Don2 (Don1 Revised)

Contributor
Joined
Apr 1, 2004
Messages
11,641
Location
USA
Basic Beliefs
Nonpracticing agnostic
On an adjacent topic; I love how most of the people who are against open borders are willing to give this kid a pass for breaking the law whilst crossing state lines.
He did not break the law while crossing state lines.
I suppose that hinges on whether or not you believe that his 'friend' was holding the gun (which Rittenhouse was unable to legally possess) in Wisconsin until Rittenhouse turned 18. This is what his attorney Lin Wood claims but Lin Wood should have been disbarred already for the false and dangerous claims and narratives he promoted about the 2020 election. Here's some info about Wood. Skip to the part about 2020 elections, in the interest of brevity: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L._Lin_Wood#cite_note-72

I don't know who is paying Wood but my guess would be the NRA. With what is another matter. They're broke.

There were some College Republicans in Wisconsin who raised something like $14,000 for Rittenhouse's legal defense, but then being Republicans they went and used some of the money for themselves. So, what's that, like $7000 toward the legal fund left. But money isn't everything. Maybe the rest of the payment to Lin Wood is in a promised political position, bitcoin, auction rights to the killer's AR-15 and body armor, and free Russian hookers.
 

SigmatheZeta

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2021
Messages
599
Gender
she/her
Basic Beliefs
Generally, I am rooted in both ancient Epicurean and ancient Pyrrhonist sentiments, although I am somewhat sympathetic toward the intentions behind ancient Cynicism.
My opinion on guns varies based on the person that I am talking to.

If you are some obsessed lunatic that wants to try to bully me into buying a gun based on some cooked statistics and is callously cruel toward anybody that does not think in the same way that you do, then I think that guns ought to be banned outright. All of them. Back off my beliefs and choices, motherfucker, or I will destroy your shit so fast that you won't even know what hit you.

On the other hand, if you just choose to own a firearm because that particular choice is what makes you feel the most comfortable, then to be perfectly honest, I have almost no opinions at all on gun regulation. I see it as irrelevant to my quality of life. I am mildly sympathetic with the point-of-view that my neighbor should be able to choose to own one if they can be assed to go through basic background checks, but I do not really consider it to be a major issue on my political radar. If your candidate supports unrelated things that I actually care about, then I'll vote for them.

However, the NRA doesn't really care about people's "Second Amendment rights." The NRA cares about arming racist hate groups to make it easier for them to engage in violent pogroms, so fuck them. Until they get firmly on the side of fighting back against institutionalized racism, then I am not a fan.
 

laughing dog

Contributor
Joined
Dec 29, 2004
Messages
21,153
Location
Minnesota
Gender
IT
Basic Beliefs
Dogs rule
Yes, Ritte

Please spare me the care the police took not to murder his children and to mere traumatize them.
You mean the children Blake was about to kidnap when he was stealing his baby mama's car?
Yes, those children. The ones who might have been hit by police bullets. Or are you under the impression that shooting innocent children is ok as long as they are black?
 

Loren Pechtel

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Sep 16, 2000
Messages
36,284
Location
Nevada
Gender
Yes
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
Blake had a knife. In his hand when they shot him? As far as I know, that’s not what he admitted to. For the purposes of the police, the knife being in the car counts as ‘in his possession’

Please spare me the care the police took not to murder his children and to mere traumatize them.

There was no question he had a knife. It just doesn't fit your impression of him as an innocent.

He was engaged in a non-custodial abduction when he was shot.
 

Jason Harvestdancer

Contributor
Joined
Oct 24, 2005
Messages
7,274
Location
Lots of planets have a North
Basic Beliefs
Wiccan
The Young Jerks, I mean The Young Turks, have walked back their prior position on KR now that they've seen what came out during the trial. They are no longer convinced of his guilt and think it might be possible that maybe he acted in self defense.
 

Toni

Contributor
Joined
Aug 11, 2011
Messages
15,159
Location
NOT laying back and thinking of England
Basic Beliefs
Peace on Earth, goodwill towards all
Yes, Rittenhouse was hunted and chased after he killed an unarmed man and was being sought by the police as an active shooter.
He was also hunted down by Rosenbaum.
This drone video shows it pretty clearly.


Frankly the other two men were acting the way Rittenhouse wanted to act: they were trying to stop a bad guy. Whether or not Rittenhouse's shooting of the first guy was justified, certainly that is a matter of law and the other two were merely seeking to apprehend someone who had shot and killed a man.
But they had no authority to apprehend anybody. Huber and Grosskreutz wanted to be heroes.

They had no way of knowing if a court would find Rittenhouse guilty or innocent or even if he would face charges.
So they wanted to dispense "revolutionary justice" right then and there?
This is how the Antifa mob dealt with a civilian who did not have a weapon to defend himself.
'Broke his jaw:' Man in his 70s attacked while trying to protect burning Kenosha mattress store

I would like to think that this would put a damper on vigilantism but I doubt it will.
Had police been authorized to go harder on the rioters, there would have been no need for armed civilians to protect the businesses.
RIoters, looters and arsonists need to be arrested and then prosecuted to the full extent of the law. Especially that last part has been solely lacking in most jurisdictions. Even when arrested, most rioters got away with it because sympathetic "progressive" DAs simply dropped the charges.

Blake had a knife. In his hand when they shot him?
Yes. In his hand.

As far as I know, that’s not what he admitted to. For the purposes of the police, the knife being in the car counts as ‘in his possession’

Oh, for fuck's sake Toni! You are sounding like a YEC right now. This is what Jacob Blake said.
Jacob Blake said:
I realized I had dropped my knife, had a little pocket knife. So I picked it up after I got off of him because they tased me and I fell on top of him.
I shouldn’t have picked it up, only considering what was going on. At that time, I wasn’t thinking clearly.
So he had a knife which he dropped when he was tased. He then picked it up. He is on the passenger side of the car. He then walks around the car (that's where the video still that shows him with a knife in his hand was taken) and the knife is on the floorboard of the car. How is that possible if he was not holding the knife?

Please spare me the care the police took not to murder his children and to mere traumatize them.
You mean the children Blake was about to kidnap when he was stealing his baby mama's car?

Who said he was stealing a car? Who said he was kidnapping.....his own children?

I realize that one of the officers is now
Blake had a knife. In his hand when they shot him? As far as I know, that’s not what he admitted to. For the purposes of the police, the knife being in the car counts as ‘in his possession’

Please spare me the care the police took not to murder his children and to mere traumatize them.

There was no question he had a knife. It just doesn't fit your impression of him as an innocent.

He was engaged in a non-custodial abduction when he was shot.
I’ve never claimed that Blake us a good guy. As far as ‘non-custodial ‘abduction’ of his children, that is not something I’ve heard before.

Nonetheless, the police grossly and needlessly endangered 3 young children.
 

SigmatheZeta

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2021
Messages
599
Gender
she/her
Basic Beliefs
Generally, I am rooted in both ancient Epicurean and ancient Pyrrhonist sentiments, although I am somewhat sympathetic toward the intentions behind ancient Cynicism.
If you can believe it, this is really the first conversation, regarding the Kenosha shooting, in which I have had anything to say at all, but now that I am here, this will be my primary contribution to the discussion.

The problem is not the fact that this guy committed a serious act of homicide. Those happen every single day, and to tell you the truth, I am usually at least slightly sympathetic toward people that have made those kinds of mistakes. I believe very firmly in restorative justice, and I think that our current judicial system's method of handling all crimes is deeply counter-productive. I agree with the Norwegian model for prison reform and feel very strongly that this young man could be turned to a better path if we adhered to such a model for reform. Regardless, the fact that he does not acknowledge the true depth of his error makes me highly inclined to mock him, not for committing the crime but for his failure to take adequate responsibility.

However, the police officers that were at the scene should not be allowed to continue working in their occupations. I do not really mean to say this in a vindictive tone, but their conduct demonstrates that, while they might deserve opportunities to pursue more appropriate careers, law-enforcement is not really an appropriate occupation for them. Their failure has become an iconic piece of evidence that we need comprehensive, even revolutionary reform in how we approach public safety. Everything needs to change, and the old way of thinking needs to be overturned. If they did not want such comprehensive reform, then they should have responded differently.

I have had a long time to think about this, and my position on the topic is non-negotiable.
 

Arctish

Centimillionaire
Joined
Jul 30, 2003
Messages
6,199
Location
Alaska
Basic Beliefs
Agnostic Humanist
The Young Jerks, I mean The Young Turks, have walked back their prior position on KR now that they've seen what came out during the trial. They are no longer convinced of his guilt and think it might be possible that maybe he acted in self defense.
So they incorporated new information into their thinking and have come to a more complete understanding of the situation?

Good for them.

That's how it's supposed to work.
 

Don2 (Don1 Revised)

Contributor
Joined
Apr 1, 2004
Messages
11,641
Location
USA
Basic Beliefs
Nonpracticing agnostic
The Young Jerks, I mean The Young Turks, have walked back their prior position on KR now that they've seen what came out during the trial. They are no longer convinced of his guilt and think it might be possible that maybe he acted in self defense.
Were they discussing their thoughts on his guilt or their thoughts on the _result_ of the trial?

Here's a recent video:


Is this the video you are discussing?
 

thebeave

Veteran Member
Joined
Dec 22, 2001
Messages
3,435
Location
Silicon Valley, CA
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
The Young Jerks, I mean The Young Turks, have walked back their prior position on KR now that they've seen what came out during the trial. They are no longer convinced of his guilt and think it might be possible that maybe he acted in self defense.
Were they discussing their thoughts on his guilt or their thoughts on the _result_ of the trial?

Here's a recent video:


Is this the video you are discussing?

I believe this is video that Jason Harvestdancer is referring to. Not sure if TYT has changed their minds or just Ana Kasparian. It does make you wonder what sources she was initially getting her info from on this case, so as to be so backwards on her original opinion.

 
Last edited:

Rhea

Cyborg with a Tiara
Staff member
Joined
Feb 1, 2001
Messages
13,234
Location
Recluse
Basic Beliefs
Humanist
Toni said:
Frankly the other two men were acting the way Rittenhouse wanted to act: they were trying to stop a bad guy.
But they had no authority to apprehend anybody. Huber and Grosskreutz wanted to be heroes.

They had no way of knowing if a court would find Rittenhouse guilty or innocent or even if he would face charges.
So they wanted to dispense "revolutionary justice" right then and there?


Rittenhouse “had no authority” to be there, to have a gun or to dispense medical care. He “wanted to be a hero.”
Rittenhouse wanted to “ dispense ‘revolutionary justice’ right then and there.”
 

Trausti

Deleted
Joined
Jul 30, 2005
Messages
9,784
Seen on Twitter: when Kyle "cried" on the stand, those eyes were drier than Ben Shapiro's wife.

:hysterical:
I posted a couple of Twitter memes in this thread to expose how depraved, childish, and nasty the progressive left was on this issue. I see you are more than happy to do the exposing work for me.
The joke doesn't even work: Shapiro has three children.
 

Trausti

Deleted
Joined
Jul 30, 2005
Messages
9,784
Toni said:
Frankly the other two men were acting the way Rittenhouse wanted to act: they were trying to stop a bad guy.
But they had no authority to apprehend anybody. Huber and Grosskreutz wanted to be heroes.

They had no way of knowing if a court would find Rittenhouse guilty or innocent or even if he would face charges.
So they wanted to dispense "revolutionary justice" right then and there?


Rittenhouse “had no authority” to be there, to have a gun or to dispense medical care. He “wanted to be a hero.”
Rittenhouse wanted to “ dispense ‘revolutionary justice’ right then and there.”
The "authorities" had abandoned the citizens and were content with letting the city burn. When you promote chaos, don't complain about the consequences.
 

thebeave

Veteran Member
Joined
Dec 22, 2001
Messages
3,435
Location
Silicon Valley, CA
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
Seen on Twitter: when Kyle "cried" on the stand, those eyes were drier than Ben Shapiro's wife.

:hysterical:
I posted a couple of Twitter memes in this thread to expose how depraved, childish, and nasty the progressive left was on this issue. I see you are more than happy to do the exposing work for me.
The joke doesn't even work: Shapiro has three children.
I guess I'm a little bit out of the loop these days wrt slang. What exactly does it even mean that Ben's wife is "dry"? She's in menopause?
 

Metaphor

Sjajna Zvijezda
Joined
Apr 1, 2007
Messages
10,932
Location
Slouching towards Bethlehem
Seen on Twitter: when Kyle "cried" on the stand, those eyes were drier than Ben Shapiro's wife.

:hysterical:
I posted a couple of Twitter memes in this thread to expose how depraved, childish, and nasty the progressive left was on this issue. I see you are more than happy to do the exposing work for me.
The joke doesn't even work: Shapiro has three children.
I guess I'm a little bit out of the loop these days wrt slang. What exactly does it even mean that Ben's wife is "dry"? She's in menopause?
I assumed it meant her vagina is dry, because Ben Shapiro does not sexually excite her.

Of course, that would be an unkind thing to say, and we know the left is always kind.
 

Trausti

Deleted
Joined
Jul 30, 2005
Messages
9,784
Seen on Twitter: when Kyle "cried" on the stand, those eyes were drier than Ben Shapiro's wife.

:hysterical:
I posted a couple of Twitter memes in this thread to expose how depraved, childish, and nasty the progressive left was on this issue. I see you are more than happy to do the exposing work for me.
The joke doesn't even work: Shapiro has three children.
I guess I'm a little bit out of the loop these days wrt slang. What exactly does it even mean that Ben's wife is "dry"? She's in menopause?
Dude, no way calling yourself "thebeave" you'd miss a vag joke.
 

JohnG

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 12, 2007
Messages
503
Location
Western Canada
Basic Beliefs
Non- theist
Toni said:
Frankly the other two men were acting the way Rittenhouse wanted to act: they were trying to stop a bad guy.
But they had no authority to apprehend anybody. Huber and Grosskreutz wanted to be heroes.

They had no way of knowing if a court would find Rittenhouse guilty or innocent or even if he would face charges.
So they wanted to dispense "revolutionary justice" right then and there?


Rittenhouse “had no authority” to be there, to have a gun or to dispense medical care. He “wanted to be a hero.”
Rittenhouse wanted to “ dispense ‘revolutionary justice’ right then and there.”
Yes. Nothing good was going to happen with this kid running around the streets with a weapon. The US is so bizarre.
 

Trausti

Deleted
Joined
Jul 30, 2005
Messages
9,784
Toni said:
Frankly the other two men were acting the way Rittenhouse wanted to act: they were trying to stop a bad guy.
But they had no authority to apprehend anybody. Huber and Grosskreutz wanted to be heroes.

They had no way of knowing if a court would find Rittenhouse guilty or innocent or even if he would face charges.
So they wanted to dispense "revolutionary justice" right then and there?


Rittenhouse “had no authority” to be there, to have a gun or to dispense medical care. He “wanted to be a hero.”
Rittenhouse wanted to “ dispense ‘revolutionary justice’ right then and there.”
Yes. Nothing good was going to happen with this kid running around the streets with a weapon. The US is so bizarre.
Rittenhouse is what happens when you say that rioting and property destruction are peaceful protests. He's the personification of "defund the police."
 

Patooka

Veteran Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2004
Messages
4,753
Location
Sydney
Basic Beliefs
aaa
Seen on Twitter: when Kyle "cried" on the stand, those eyes were drier than Ben Shapiro's wife.

:hysterical:
I posted a couple of Twitter memes in this thread to expose how depraved, childish, and nasty the progressive left was on this issue. I see you are more than happy to do the exposing work for me.
The joke doesn't even work: Shapiro has three children.
There is a very clear, obvious and believable scenario that can explain that discrepancy. I honestly thought you were smarter than that.
 

Swammerdami

Squadron Leader
Staff member
Joined
Dec 16, 2017
Messages
2,668
Location
Land of Smiles
Basic Beliefs
pseudo-deism
What a stupid prosecution this turned into. (I don't mean the prosecutors were necessarily stupid. The whole system has failed.) The Zimmerman wannabe figures to walk scot-free, just like Zimmerman did.

Even the misdemeanor possession charge is in doubt. Supposedly, because Rittenhouse was 17 (not 16) AND the weapon was long-barrelled, the relevant statute doesn't apply to him.
Fox News said:
Criminal laws are supposed to be interpreted narrowly. It is called the "rule of lenity" and has been around in the English system for centuries. For example, in 1547, the court was faced with a law making it a felony to steal "Horses, Geldings or Mares." Given the use of plural nouns, the court ruled that it did not apply to stealing just one horse.
 

marc

Veteran Member
Joined
Mar 27, 2008
Messages
1,842
Location
always on the move
Basic Beliefs
Atheist, skeptic, nerd
I guess I'm a little bit out of the loop these days wrt slang. What exactly does it even mean that Ben's wife is "dry"? She's in menopause?
I assumed it meant her vagina is dry, because Ben Shapiro does not sexually excite her.

Of course, that would be an unkind thing to say, and we know the left is always kind.
It is a reference to Shapiro going on a tear badmouthing the Cardi B song WAP (Wet Ass P****y). One statement he posted on twitter was that his wife said that is a sign of an infection. Which led people to believe he has never gotten his wife wet.
 
Top Bottom