Domestic terrorist attack in Wisconsin

[Buffarukus]

13 minutes ago, daz28 said:

In the world we live in seeing a guy who just shot someone running is about as big of a direct threat as you'll ever encounter.  It would be VERY reasonable to assume he's a shooter. Your whole "street justice" narrative in unfounded.  Now you want to blame them for "poor decisions", while Kyle gets none.  "Take cover and call the cops" is not the mantra of the "good guy with a gun" crowd.  Their mantra is take him out without prejudice as quickly as possible to mitigate a the further threat.  See how quickly your idea of a "hero" changes based on how you view them, and the situation.  

 

it may be my fault as i have a bad habit of reading my post and adding context in a edit 

[daz28]

6 minutes ago, Buffarukus said:

 

no your completely overlooking my direct threat and running TOWARDS THE POLICE. if you think you should chase down a gunman knowing nothing about the situation whatever the intentions while hes not pointing a weopon at you or acting hostile in any form while trying to run away from you towards the cops then you will not be in this world long my friend. 

 

your discounting a ton of important details to slide in your perspective as if this was some active shooter posing threats to everyone around with no options

No matter what direction you ran in you were "running towards police".  It's funny you're acting like being stupid is hazardous to everyone's health, but Kyles.  No one dies that day if he wasn't the genius medic with a gun.

[Buffarukus]

51 minutes ago, daz28 said:

In your instance, the janitor would have laid his weapon down after he mistakenly shot someone.  Totally different.  People here are acting like all the people he shot were just an angry mob looking to hurt someone.  If that's true, then why pick on the guy with a gun??  It makes ZERO sense, and isn't a reasonable argument. 

 

he would have laid his weopon down because he wasnt surrounded by threats. people were shooting all around before and after he shot rosenbaum.

 

make it personal. your sister is in a dark parking lot and a group that are committing crimes at the store she is ar. she says please stop doing that in which one of them says shutup ill kill you. he then directs attention directly towards her and chases her. do you hope she has a gun? at what point should she use it? if she uses it at a appropriate time should she now drop it? is she a active shooter and should be chased by the mob that was with the person she shot. they are threatening her as she flees towards police, punching her in the head, trying to stomp her and swinging weopons at her. now what should she do? shes not wearing a uniform and hopefully has not taken your advice to drop her weopon or been determined to be a threat to be terminated by any with their own firearms as being your definition of active direct threat.

 

im 100% sure you would hope she did everything kyle did to save her life. you just wont say it because the outcome of a 17 year old you dont know doesnt effect you like it would a family member. 

Edited November 19, 2021 by Buffarukus

[daz28]

3 minutes ago, Buffarukus said:

 

he would have laid his weopon down because he wasnt surrounded by threats. people were shooting all around before and after he shot rosenbaum.

 

make it personal. your sister is in a dark parking lot and a group that are committing crimes at the store she is ar. she says please stop doing that in which one of them says shutup ill kill you. he then directs attention directly towards her and chases her. do you hope she has a gun? at what point should she use it? if she uses it at a appropriate time should she now drop it? is she a active shooter and should be chased by the mob that was with the person she shot. they are threatening her as she flees towards police, punching her in the head, trying to stomp her and swinging weopons at her. now what should she do? shes not wearing a uniform and hopefully has not taken your advice to drop her weopon or been determined to be a threat to be terminated by any with their own firearms as being your definition of active direct threat.

 

im 100% sure you would hope she did everything kyle did to save her life. you just wont say it.

Just a horrible analogy.  First off my sister's not a dumb kid;  Kyle is.  My sister wouldn't lie under oath after saying she had someone else buy her a gun, then claim she didn't know it was illegal to have it;  DUH!!!!  My sister is smart enough to realize if she provokes angry people, whether committing criminal acts or not, it might not end up well for her.  Maybe, just maybe if the cops, medic, and firefighters are staying clear, my sister would be smart enough to stay away, too.  How come the "common sense" and "play stupid games win stupid prizes" people aren't applying that here, where it CLEARLY fits?  Cuz hypocrites, that's why.  All of HIS actions, including going there with a gun he knew he shouldn't have precipitated this.  It's pretty obvious that SOMETHING he did provoked something.  Even if that something was being in a place he had a "right" to be in, doesn't mean he should be there.  If you're a member of the Outlaws, you don't go in a Hell's Angels bar, and expect a good result even if while running away you yell, "friendly!". 

 

 

[Buffarukus]

1 hour ago, daz28 said:

No matter what direction you ran in you were "running towards police".  It's funny you're acting like being stupid is hazardous to everyone's health, but Kyles.  No one dies that day if he wasn't the genius medic with a gun.

 

i kind of figured it get to the chicken egg portion. no one dies that day if people in the town werent destroying it as well. unfortunatly for your narrative plenty of people died well before a 17 year old doing somthing stupid that day showing pretty clear evidence that rioting is pretty deadly on its own merits. i can guarentee every one of the murder victims or there families that were with them wishes they were as stupid as this kid so they at least had a chance to defend themselves over the coarse of the year leading up to kinosha and beyond.

Edited November 19, 2021 by Buffarukus

[Buffarukus]

20 minutes ago, daz28 said:

Just a horrible analogy.  First off my sister's not a dumb kid;  Kyle is.  My sister wouldn't lie under oath after saying she had someone else buy her a gun, then claim she didn't know it was illegal to have it;  DUH!!!!  My sister is smart enough to realize if she provokes angry people, whether committing criminal acts or not, it might not end up well for her.  Maybe, just maybe if the cops, medic, and firefighters are staying clear, my sister would be smart enough to stay away, too.  How come the "common sense" and "play stupid games win stupid prizes" people aren't applying that here, where it CLEARLY fits?  Cuz hypocrites, that's why.  All of HIS actions, including going there with a gun he knew he shouldn't have precipitated this.  It's pretty obvious that SOMETHING he did provoked something.  Even if that something was being in a place he had a "right" to be in, doesn't mean he should be there.  If you're a member of the Outlaws, you don't go in a Hell's Angels bar, and expect a good result even if while running away you yell, "friendly!". 

 

 

 

so instead of putting yourself in the position to answer the questions directly you decide to change everything so you dont have to. 

 

lets start with provokes. your disapointing me. you HAVE watched the videos to know what he did to provoke..right? he put out a burning dumpster that was being pushed towards a gas station. if that gas station exploded and hurt or killed..oh well stupid games right. aka who cares.

 

second stay away. i mean dont do anything when your town is in flames. i mean its not like your father lives there. regardless its well known he was there to help.. THE PROTESTERS as well. he was trying to mitigate destruction and offered med support to ANYONE who needed it. its good for you that you would elect to be safe and cozy as everything you care for where you live is destroyed. thats a very good option. its a shame our gov leaders felt the same to the point where citizens had to be the ones to try and stop it. it was a dumb decision, i agree but more because kyle failed to realize that he, not the rioters, would be considered the enemy of the state and ALOT people that simply refuse to distinguish the difference between peaceful unrest and violent criminals..hypocracy as you put it.

 

 

Edited November 19, 2021 by Buffarukus

[daz28]

19 minutes ago, Buffarukus said:

 

so instead of putting yourself in the position to answer the questions directly you decide to change everything so you dont have to. 

 

lets start with provokes. your disapointing me. you HAVE watched the videos to know what he did to provoke..right? he put out a burning dumpster that was being pushed towards a gas station. if that gas station exploded and hurt or killed..oh well stupid games right. aka who cares.

 

second stay away. i mean dont do anything when your town is in flames. i mean its not like your father lives there. regardless its well known he was there to help.. THE PROTESTERS as well. he was trying to mitigate destruction and offered med support to ANYONE who needed it. its good for you that you would elect to be safe and cozy as everything you care for where you live is destroyed. thats a very good option. its a shame our gov leaders felt the same to the point where citizens had to be the ones to try and stop it. it was a dumb decision, i agree but more because kyle failed to realize that he, not the rioters, would be considered the enemy of the state and ALOT people that simply refuse to distinguish the difference between peaceful unrest and violent criminals..hypocracy as you put it.

 

 

I work, and pay taxes so that trained police can do their job.  Somehow their failure leads to my being a bad citizen in your view.  

 

Would it be reasonable to assume that trying to undo what agrravated protesters were doing would, I don't know, maybe "PROVOKE" them?? When the guy said, "if I see you again alone, I'm going to kill you" maybe make you think staying in your group, or better yet getting the heck out of there might be a good idea?  

 

As for your virtue signalling, being a stupid kid doesn't make him a bigger hero than me.  He's extremely lucky to even be alive.  This coming from you, who earlier reminded me that the people trying to stop him were dumb, and that's why they're dead.  You've admitted Kyle is dumb, and that's where I'm at, too.  

 

For the record, I'm not pro-riot, but he went to one willingly, knew threats to himself were present and current, and yet he still put himself in a position for a bad outcome.  Now people are dead.  The riot was going to happen with or without him, so that point is moot(your chicken or egg argument).  I think the funniest thing is even after this debacle, you're still claiming that less people would have been hurt if more people present had guns.  Oy vey!

 

You tried, but I still feel that he put himself in a bad and dangerous spot, which he was not qualified to handle.  That situation was a certainty.  His attendance didn't need to be.  Was he a vigilante? In my opinion, no.  Did he put himself in a situation where it was likely he would end up one?  Yes.  Was he aware of that possibility?  After receiving a death threat, most certainly.  What did he choose to do after knowing this?  He stayed.  I feel after all this, and the way he knowingly skirted the means to obtain the gun, he is culpable of some negligence.   I still have some questions about why Rosenbaum was shot 4 times, including 1 in the back.  The skateboard kid also seemed to be trying to get away when shot.  At the end of the day you'll have your opinion, I'll have mine.  I'd say there's a very good chance you get your outcome, and he's aquitted.  I'd like to see him get a couple years.  It's really a shame that all of this is going on no matter what 'side' anyone is taking.  I don't think there's many of the people you call hypocrites, though.  Most people do distinguish violence from peace.  Rioting bad, insurrection bad, social injustice bad.  It's really not that difficult.  

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

8 hours ago, daz28 said:

Lot's of people are victim shaming, and taking the position you are that they targeted him.  I'm arguing that it's more likely people targeting a known shooter aren't just looking to get a few licks in on an easy target(one armed and known to use the weapon???), but rather trying to stop him evading or causing further harm. 

 

If you're correct about him needing reassurance, why didn't he contact police shortly after, or turn himself in sooner?  He will say he was scared, but if I just get done protecting myself from people attacking me, I don't go into hiding.  

 

My personal opinion is he is negligent, because he was a child with a weapon who shouldn't have had the weapon.  He was NOT hunting, and that's what the rifle exception is for.  If he stayed at the car lot, likely no one is harmed.  Other people's actions led to their own harm(we will not know their true intentions), but none of them happen if he is following the law in the first place.  The kicker of this whole thing is that the guy who bought him the gun is going to be in prison for many years, but all the negligence after that is somehow washed down the drain.  

I’m not victim shaming, and I’m not on the jury having considered all the facts down to the excruciating detail.  I am considering what I know about the case based on news accounts, some video footage, some witness testimony and a clear understanding that Kenosha was being sacked and pillaged that night.  
 

You asked what was “most reasonable” so I answered. I could be wrong, you could be right and Rittenhouse was an active shooter looking to victimize anyone and everyone possible that night, and found three.  It just doesn’t seem reasonable. 
 

I answered the question about why he may not have  turned himself in earlier, but following your logic that he shot innocent people, why did he turn himself in at all?  
 

 

[billsfan1959]

6 hours ago, daz28 said:

In the world we live in seeing a guy who just shot someone running is about as big of a direct threat as you'll ever encounter.

 

Except they didn't see him shoot anyone when they started chasing him. At that moment, however stupid his his prior choices may have been, he is running away and posing no threat to the group chasing him. Whatever their "assumptions" may be are irrelevant - it is about his state of mind when he fired his weapon. The moment they chose to chase him, their actions were not reactive - but proactive. He is running away. They chose to chase him, attacked him as he was running, and attacked him as he fell to the ground. IMO, his actions from the moment they began chasing him can only be interpreted as reactive. The evidence is what it is. 

 

[All_Pro_Bills]

1 hour ago, billsfan1959 said:

 

Except they didn't see him shoot anyone when they started chasing him. At that moment, however stupid his his prior choices may have been, he is running away and posing no threat to the group chasing him. Whatever their "assumptions" may be are irrelevant - it is about his state of mind when he fired his weapon. The moment they chose to chase him, their actions were not reactive - but proactive. He is running away. They chose to chase him, attacked him as he was running, and attacked him as he fell to the ground. IMO, his actions from the moment they began chasing him can only be interpreted as reactive. The evidence is what it is. 

 

Strip away all the political and social commentary and this is perhaps the key insight.  Chasing somebody is an act of aggression.  Its a signal you want to engage in a confrontation.  If not you don't chase them, period.  You can't argue that somebody who initiates a confrontation is the victim.  They are not.  They are the assailant, they are the instigator.  The other individual, armed or not has a right to self-defense regardless of the argument made by the prosecutor.  Combine this with the knowledge the city government will not allow the police to act or intervene in the riot and you're already aware that you're on your own.  So self-defense is the only option as police response is off the table in this situation.  Also, the citizens arrest argument is off the table when testimony revealed one of the rioters threatened that he was going to kill Rittenhouse.  That's not an arrest scenario, that's an execution.  Ironically, something the protesters/rioters were there to protest and riot about regarding a police shooting.  

Now we can argue the "just shoot him in the leg" position on the use of deadly force but a very good assumption is that if nobody chased the kid down and attacked him from behind he'd have run down the street without any such incident taking place. 

 

 

[Doc]

7 hours ago, daz28 said:

No matter what direction you ran in you were "running towards police".  It's funny you're acting like being stupid is hazardous to everyone's health, but Kyles.  No one dies that day if he wasn't the genius medic with a gun.

 

No one dies that day if Rosenbaum doesn't act like an idiot.  Many times.

[All_Pro_Bills]

8 minutes ago, Doc said:

 

No one dies that day if Rosenbaum doesn't act like an idiot.  Many times.

If I could run the 100 meters three seconds faster I'd be the Olympic champion in the event.  And we can engage in hypothetical's by eliminating or changing one thing or another that occurred that night but that doesn't absolve anyone from their actions.  Why not go back further? 

 

Maybe if the event was a peaceful protest rather than a riot it would have turned out different? 

Maybe if the mayor let the police do their jobs it would have been different? 

Maybe if Blake cooperated with police when they attempted to arrest him on a felony warrant rather than engage in a confrontation it wouldn't have resulted in a shooting?  

 

And none of this would be happening.. 

[BillStime]

17 minutes ago, Doc said:

 

No one dies that day if Rosenbaum doesn't act like an idiot.  Many times.

Or Kyle stayed home and played w his barbies w his Mom.

[Buffarukus]

9 hours ago, daz28 said:

I work, and pay taxes so that trained police can do their job.  Somehow their failure leads to my being a bad citizen in your view.  

 

i never called you a bad citizen. i said staying safe is a good option. there were many others out that day that had weopons trying to do what kyle intended. did they protect anyones life or property? not making headline news as they did not run into a rosenbaum who chased them down. i guess the question is where did kyle get isolated? that was the biggest determining factor in the situation as they must have seen him as weak.

 

9 hours ago, daz28 said:

 

Would it be reasonable to assume that trying to undo what agrravated protesters were doing would, I don't know, maybe "PROVOKE" them?? When the guy said, "if I see you again alone, I'm going to kill you" maybe make you think staying in your group, or better yet getting the heck out of there might be a good idea?  

 

you can use better judgment looking at the exact situation in reverse and you would actually be advocating for peace and non violence. if a guy with a gun is stopping you from destroying things and committing violent acts should you threaten them? continue to destroy? chase them and try and take the weopon? should ROSENBAUM have left? crazy how all the duty to retreat was on the person who was NOT committing criminal acts.

 

 

9 hours ago, daz28 said:

 

As for your virtue signalling, being a stupid kid doesn't make him a bigger hero than me.  He's extremely lucky to even be alive.  This coming from you, who earlier reminded me that the people trying to stop him were dumb, and that's why they're dead.  You've admitted Kyle is dumb, and that's where I'm at, too.  

 

again never said he was a "bigger hero then you" simply someone who did something other then shelter in place and hope the destruction did not effect his community or family. he was stupid and so were the rioters. i think there is equal blame and it all falls on elected officials for creating a situation in which that happened. but lets not act that sheltering in place and (not provoking) would save you from the exact same scrutiny and jail time that kyle is facing and demonized for. not ironic the states key witness was a felon carring a firearm with a pending dui charge and not being prosecuted for the same dumb decision, into the same situation you are stating.

 

here is one of many stories from the summer. a man committed suicide after defending his life and buisness! this after pleading and firing a warning shot as the attack was happening. rioter still tryed choking him out. given the exact same treatment kyle got in the media until the venom and despair of possible longterm jailtime became to much.

 

 

https://www.courthousenews.com/family-of-omaha-bar-owner-charged-in-protesters-death-claim-he-was-denied-due-process/

 

i can pull many more sad stories and many more videos of citizens who were mercilessly attacked or killed with no way to defend themselves. DO NOT PROTECT YOURSELF BECOME A VICTIM OR YOU WILL BE PROSECUTED.

 

 

9 hours ago, daz28 said:

 

For the record, I'm not pro-riot, but he went to one willingly, knew threats to himself were present and current, and yet he still put himself in a position for a bad outcome.  Now people are dead.  The riot was going to happen with or without him, so that point is moot(your chicken or egg argument).  I think the funniest thing is even after this debacle, you're still claiming that less people would have been hurt if more people present had guns.  Oy vey!

i hit on these points above. 

9 hours ago, daz28 said:

 

You tried, but I still feel that he put himself in a bad and dangerous spot, which he was not qualified to handle.  That situation was a certainty.  His attendance didn't need to be.  Was he a vigilante? In my opinion, no.  Did he put himself in a situation where it was likely he would end up one?  Yes.  Was he aware of that possibility?  After receiving a death threat, most certainly.  What did he choose to do after knowing this?  He stayed.  I feel after all this, and the way he knowingly skirted the means to obtain the gun, he is culpable of some negligence.   I still have some questions about why Rosenbaum was shot 4 times, including 1 in the back.  The skateboard kid also seemed to be trying to get away when shot.  At the end of the day you'll have your opinion, I'll have mine.  I'd say there's a very good chance you get your outcome, and he's aquitted.  I'd like to see him get a couple years.  It's really a shame that all of this is going on no matter what 'side' anyone is taking.  I don't think there's many of the people you call hypocrites, though.  Most people do distinguish violence from peace.  Rioting bad, insurrection bad, social injustice bad.  It's really not that difficult.  

 

i agree with this, reasonable questions. i am glad you are against the violence. there are more hypocrites then you realize, even if we don't fall in that category. i think people that are against violence need to stop being partisan and uniformly state as such. they are advocating for it again if the trial goes a certain direction which will only lead to more situations like this we can disagree on. maybe we come together to unifyingly denounce any violence. which ever side reacts to the verdict. only by being as loud as the extremist and demand it stop before it starts we can stop the chicken before any eggs are hatched. 😏

Edited November 19, 2021 by Buffarukus

[SoCal Deek]

This is just like the debate that rages about a random play in the FIRST quarter of a close Bills loss. You physically attack a guy who’s carrying a completely visible rifle in the midst of a riot…there’s a darn good chance you’re gonna get shot! How is this complicated?

[Doc]

2 hours ago, All_Pro_Bills said:

If I could run the 100 meters three seconds faster I'd be the Olympic champion in the event.  And we can engage in hypothetical's by eliminating or changing one thing or another that occurred that night but that doesn't absolve anyone from their actions.  Why not go back further? 

 

Maybe if the event was a peaceful protest rather than a riot it would have turned out different? 

Maybe if the mayor let the police do their jobs it would have been different? 

Maybe if Blake cooperated with police when they attempted to arrest him on a felony warrant rather than engage in a confrontation it wouldn't have resulted in a shooting?  

 

And none of this would be happening.. 

2 hours ago, BillStime said:

Or Kyle stayed home and played w his barbies w his Mom.

 

Read the above.

[Albwan]

1 hour ago, SoCal Deek said:

This is just like the debate that rages about a random play in the FIRST quarter of a close Bills loss. You physically attack a guy who’s carrying a completely visible rifle in the midst of a riot…there’s a darn good chance you’re gonna get shot! How is this complicated?

When its raysis but not really.

[Chef Jim]

2 hours ago, SoCal Deek said:

This is just like the debate that rages about a random play in the FIRST quarter of a close Bills loss. You physically attack a guy who’s carrying a completely visible rifle in the midst of a riot…there’s a darn good chance you’re gonna get shot! How is this complicated?

 

You bring a loaded weapon and carry it around in the midst of a riot don't come crying self defense to me when you get attacked.  

 

 

[BillStime]

 

[Brandon]

Verdict is in: Not Guilty on all counts. 

I've been reading along but have refrained from commenting.  I think the jury absolutely reached the correct verdict.