Domestic terrorist attack in Wisconsin

[RaoulDuke79]

On 8/26/2020 at 5:02 PM, Penfield45 said:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2020/08/26/jacob-blake-kenosha-police-protests/

 

This man drove over state borders, shot protesters to death, and got in his car in front of the police and drove back home. 

 

And yet there are braindead people who think nothing is wrong with this country and with the police force. 

 

 

Lol.....this aged well.

[Doc Brown]

7 hours ago, Beast said:

Sure, it’s possible. However the law is still the law and if one crosses the line they should be prosecuted.

 

Rittenhouse should not have been prosecuted. He was well within his rights.

 

To play devil’s advocate Doc, if Rittenhouse was wrongly convicted, would people have been afraid to rightly defend themselves?

Probably.  You've already seen that play out with police officers either resigning or retiring early across the country.  

[BillStime]

9 minutes ago, B-Man said:

 

In Billstime's tiny mind, and many others actually, everyone only thinks one way of the other.

 

They cannot comprehend when people think on their own instead of the liberal narrative's idea of what they should think.

 

 

Like when we point out a mistake by the Biden/Harris administration and his auto-response is to call us "Trump Cult"

 

He just can't make sense of a competing argument.

 

 

 

👆🤡

 

[unbillievable]

20 minutes ago, Doc Brown said:

Probably.  You've already seen that play out with police officers either resigning or retiring early across the country.  

 

The only thing you have to ask is...

 

IF someone were to start destroying your house (or your neighbors), and they didn't do anything else "threatening", are we supposed to just stand there and watch them do it?

 

Some people will say to just call the cops... but what if the cops said they weren't allowed to interfere?

 

Would you let everything you own get destroyed?

 

[Doc Brown]

1 minute ago, unbillievable said:

 

The only thing you have to ask is...

 

IF someone were to start destroying your house (or your neighbors), and they didn't do anything else "threatening", are we supposed to just stand there and watch them do it?

 

Some people will say to just call the cops... but what if the cops said they weren't allowed to interfere?

 

Would you let everything you own get destroyed?

 

No which is why America has soundly rejected the "defund the police" movement sweeping across this country at the ballot box.  I wouldn't be opposed to more money being directed towards the police for more officers and more training.  Whatever it takes to prevents some 17 year old kid from feeling the need to patrol the streets with an AR-15 during a protest/riot.

[Doc]

1 minute ago, Doc Brown said:

No which is why America has soundly rejected the "defund the police" movement sweeping across this country at the ballot box.  I wouldn't be opposed to more money being directed towards the police for more officers and more training.  Whatever it takes to prevents some 17 year old kid from feeling the need to patrol the streets with an AR-15 during a protest/riot.

 

Yeah, great, they rejected it after the damage has been done.  How are we getting those officers back or even recruiting new ones to replace them?  Why would anyone want that job is beyond me.

[Doc Brown]

1 minute ago, Doc said:

 

Yeah, great, they rejected it after the damage has been done.  How are we getting those officers back or even recruiting new ones to replace them?  Why would anyone want that job is beyond me.

High salary.  Decent pension.  At least in NYS.

[Doc]

Just now, Doc Brown said:

High salary.  Decent pension.  At least in NYS.

 

If you get killed because a lot of the people you're trying to protect want to kill you or fired because in doing so you get hung out to dry by the PD and local, state and fed pols, those far outweigh the monetary benefits.

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

1 hour ago, B-Man said:

 

In Billstime's tiny mind, and many others actually, everyone only thinks one way of the other.

 

They cannot comprehend when people think on their own instead of the liberal narrative's idea of what they should think.

 

 

Like when we point out a mistake by the Biden/Harris administration and his auto-response is to call us "Trump Cult"

 

He just can't make sense of a competing argument.

 

 

It’s NOT a cult, it’s a club!  

[B-Man]

1 hour ago, BillStime said:

 

 

Same thing over and over.  He has resorted to posting that meaningless picture 9 or 10 times now.

 

Sad.

 

 

 

 

This is the type of propaganda that the left should be sued for.

 

 

[Backintheday544]

1 hour ago, BillStime said:

 

👆🤡

 

This is why you’ll never see a defamation lawsuit from the family about being associated with white nationalism. Discovery would be a hay day.

 

Remember the first defense to defamation is that what was said is true.

[daz28]

6 hours ago, Westside said:

Uhhh….Yeah, asking if self defense would encourage vigilantism is a round about way of saying that. 
Vigilantism and self defense are two totally different things. If anyone would use this as an excuse to become a hero should be punished to the full extent of the law.

 

Myself personally would be more worried about rioters burning down cities and assaulting people than any vigilante, since no one has been arrested for those crimes. Seems that kind of violence is acceptable to the radical left.

They are not clearly 2 totally different things.  I brought up the Bernhard Goetz trial, and if you're not familiar, I suggest you look into it.  He was acquitted even though one of the men he shot was cowering in fear when he was shot, which is as clear cut of an example of not being self-defense that it's laughable.

 

The second statement is PATENTLY false.  Many, many arrests were made.  This is from Fox news, which is why I was surpirised you never saw it:  Federal prosecutors have announced the arrests of more than six dozen people on charges ranging from murder to arson to looting in connection with rioting that grew out of protests over the death of George Floyd in the past five weeks.

 

The cities did do a horrible job, but so did you.  Your statement was both a bold and bald faced lie.  

1 hour ago, Doc Brown said:

No which is why America has soundly rejected the "defund the police" movement sweeping across this country at the ballot box.  I wouldn't be opposed to more money being directed towards the police for more officers and more training.  Whatever it takes to prevents some 17 year old kid from feeling the need to patrol the streets with an AR-15 during a protest/riot.

The judges incompetence has left citizens believing that it is indeed legal to carry at age 17.  A fact which could have very easily been discovered had he not been incompetent.  

6 minutes ago, Backintheday544 said:

This is why you’ll never see a defamation lawsuit from the family about being associated with white nationalism. Discovery would be a hay day.

 

Remember the first defense to defamation is that what was said is true.

People get very confused as to what defamation is.  

9 minutes ago, B-Man said:

 

Same thing over and over.  He has resorted to posting that meaningless picture 9 or 10 times now.

 

Sad.

 

 

 

 

This is the type of propaganda that the left should be sued for.

 

 

Both sides should be held accountable for propoganda.  Fox has openly argued that people shouldn't believe them.

[Backintheday544]

5 minutes ago, daz28 said:

They are not clearly 2 totally different things.  I brought up the Bernhard Goetz trial, and if you're not familiar, I suggest you look into it.  He was acquitted even though one of the men he shot was cowering in fear when he was shot, which is as clear cut of an example of not being self-defense that it's laughable.

 

The second statement is PATENTLY false.  Many, many arrests were made.  This is from Fox news, which is why I was surpirised you never saw it:  Federal prosecutors have announced the arrests of more than six dozen people on charges ranging from murder to arson to looting in connection with rioting that grew out of protests over the death of George Floyd in the past five weeks.

 

The cities did do a horrible job, but so did you.  Your statement was both a bold and bald faced lie.  

The judges incompetence has left citizens believing that it is indeed legal to carry at age 17.  A fact which could have very easily been discovered had he not been incompetent.  

People get very confused as to what defamation is.  

Both sides should be held accountable for propoganda.  Fox has openly argued that people shouldn't believe them.

Per news stories Kyles mom thinks Biden defamed her son.

[B-Man]

 

ROGER SIMON: 

 

Normally, the case wouldn’t have been tried at all. It was obvious self-defense. We do, last I heard, have the right of self-defense and the right to bear arms, though much of the craziness around this trial seems aimed at taking those rights away.

 

But the biggest lie of all was and is about race. Rittenhouse has been called a “white supremacist” more times than Joe Biden has said “C’mon, man.” This even though all combatants in the trial incident were white. As clearly shown on videotape, a young white man was defending himself against extremely violent white attackers.

 

Yet it’s become another version of the old story—who are you going to believe, me or your lying eyes? Or, more ominously and, alas, more accurately, as Joseph Goebbels once put it, “A lie told once is just a lie, but a lie told a thousand times becomes the truth.”

 

Unfortunately, we are well past a thousand when it comes to false accusations of racism in our country, maybe closer to a million.

 

If racism were a God, the Democrats would pray to it and the media would write its Bible.

 

 

 

https://www.theepochtimes.com/rittenhouse-free-but-where-can-the-white-supremacist-go-in-race-obsessed-america_4114714.html

 

 

[daz28]

1 hour ago, Doc Brown said:

No which is why America has soundly rejected the "defund the police" movement sweeping across this country at the ballot box.  I wouldn't be opposed to more money being directed towards the police for more officers and more training.  Whatever it takes to prevents some 17 year old kid from feeling the need to patrol the streets with an AR-15 during a protest/riot.

Politicians are responsible for all of this, and in many more ways than we can even begin to think of.  

1 minute ago, Backintheday544 said:

Per news stories Kyles mom thinks Biden defamed her son.

Can she prove he's not a white supremecist?  That's like trying to prove you don't like the smell of farts.  

[Backintheday544]

1 minute ago, B-Man said:

 

ROGER SIMON: 

 

Normally, the case wouldn’t have been tried at all. It was obvious self-defense. We do, last I heard, have the right of self-defense and the right to bear arms, though much of the craziness around this trial seems aimed at taking those rights away.

 

But the biggest lie of all was and is about race. Rittenhouse has been called a “white supremacist” more times than Joe Biden has said “C’mon, man.” This even though all combatants in the trial incident were white. As clearly shown on videotape, a young white man was defending himself against extremely violent white attackers.

 

Yet it’s become another version of the old story—who are you going to believe, me or your lying eyes? Or, more ominously and, alas, more accurately, as Joseph Goebbels once put it, “A lie told once is just a lie, but a lie told a thousand times becomes the truth.”

 

Unfortunately, we are well past a thousand when it comes to false accusations of racism in our country, maybe closer to a million.

 

If racism were a God, the Democrats would pray to it and the media would write its Bible.

 

 

 

https://www.theepochtimes.com/rittenhouse-free-but-where-can-the-white-supremacist-go-in-race-obsessed-america_4114714.html

 

 

I mean yea if you ignore things like him flashing white power signs in a bar.

3 minutes ago, daz28 said:

Politicians are responsible for all of this, and in many more ways than we can even begin to think of.  

Can she prove he's not a white supremecist?  That's like trying to prove you don't like the smell of farts.  

She can’t… Andy point was she wouldn’t bring the case because the defense would be discovery of things like his internet posts, pics of hun hanging at bars where he flashes white supremacy signs and all that.

 

It would be interest to see her try tho.

[daz28]

3 minutes ago, B-Man said:

 

ROGER SIMON: 

 

Normally, the case wouldn’t have been tried at all. It was obvious self-defense. We do, last I heard, have the right of self-defense and the right to bear arms, though much of the craziness around this trial seems aimed at taking those rights away.

 

But the biggest lie of all was and is about race. Rittenhouse has been called a “white supremacist” more times than Joe Biden has said “C’mon, man.” This even though all combatants in the trial incident were white. As clearly shown on videotape, a young white man was defending himself against extremely violent white attackers.

 

Yet it’s become another version of the old story—who are you going to believe, me or your lying eyes? Or, more ominously and, alas, more accurately, as Joseph Goebbels once put it, “A lie told once is just a lie, but a lie told a thousand times becomes the truth.”

 

Unfortunately, we are well past a thousand when it comes to false accusations of racism in our country, maybe closer to a million.

 

If racism were a God, the Democrats would pray to it and the media would write its Bible.

 

 

 

https://www.theepochtimes.com/rittenhouse-free-but-where-can-the-white-supremacist-go-in-race-obsessed-america_4114714.html

 

 

I don't know that it's "obvious self-defense" when one of the people was shot in the back.  That alone raises questions, and letting a jury decide it probably wasn't a bad idea

4 minutes ago, Backintheday544 said:

I mean yea if you ignore things like him flashing white power signs in a bar.

She can’t… Andy point was she wouldn’t bring the case because the defense would be discovery of things like his internet posts, pics of hun hanging at bars where he flashes white supremacy signs and all that.

 

It would be interest to see her try tho.

What's funny is most of the people saying that this case shouldn't have even made it to court are the same ones saying that he should sue Biden, when there's pretty clearly no defamtion case.  #hypocritenation

[Backintheday544]

3 minutes ago, daz28 said:

I don't know that it's "obvious self-defense" when one of the people was shot in the back.  That alone raises questions, and letting a jury decide it probably wasn't a bad idea

What's funny is most of the people saying that this case shouldn't have even made it to court are the same ones saying that he should sue Biden, when there's pretty clearly no defamtion case.  #hypocritenation

The one line of questioning from the prosecution really stuck with me.

 

Basically, you came with a medical pack to help people. You shot a person, all threats were gone and another person was over the person you shot yelling for a medic to help save a life…. What did you do? And Kyle said he ran away.

[B-Man]

6 minutes ago, daz28 said:

 

I don't know that it's "obvious self-defense" when one of the people was shot in the back.  That alone raises questions

 

 

 

The jury listened to the expert testimony Daz.

 

It WAS self-defense.

 

Rosenbaum and Rittenhouse moved across the parking lot and appeared to be close to each other when loud bangs were suddenly heard and Rosenbaum fell to the ground, the complaint said. Dr. Douglas Kelley with the Milwaukee County Medical Examiner's Office testified Rittenhouse shot Rosenbaum four times -- twice in the front, once in the back and once along the side of his head, and determined the fatal shot to his back came as his body leaned forward.

 

https://www.cnn.com/2021/11/01/us/kyle-rittenhouse-shooting-victims-trial/index.html

 

 

Perhaps you were thinking of the original shooting, where Jacob Blake was shot in the back.

 

 

 

[daz28]

10 minutes ago, B-Man said:

 

The jury listened to the expert testimony Daz.

 

It WAS self-defense.

 

Rosenbaum and Rittenhouse moved across the parking lot and appeared to be close to each other when loud bangs were suddenly heard and Rosenbaum fell to the ground, the complaint said. Dr. Douglas Kelley with the Milwaukee County Medical Examiner's Office testified Rittenhouse shot Rosenbaum four times -- twice in the front, once in the back and once along the side of his head, and determined the fatal shot to his back came as his body leaned forward.

 

https://www.cnn.com/2021/11/01/us/kyle-rittenhouse-shooting-victims-trial/index.html

 

 

Perhaps you were thinking of the original shooting, where Jacob Blake was shot in the back.

 

 

 

I'm saying that becasue there was a shot to the back, that could be a reason to want to have a jury trial.  I'm not arguing it wasn't self-defense.  All along I've said I felt he may have been somewhat negligent.  The jury did not know many of the facts in determining that:  1) if he said in that recording that he wished he had his AR to shoot shoplifters; 2) Was it legal for him to be carrying the weapon; 3) Did the video show him pointing a weapon at people before the shootings

13 minutes ago, Backintheday544 said:

The one line of questioning from the prosecution really stuck with me.

 

Basically, you came with a medical pack to help people. You shot a person, all threats were gone and another person was over the person you shot yelling for a medic to help save a life…. What did you do? And Kyle said he ran away.

It's almost like he knew that if he used the weapon he brought to protect himself, it could put him in a very precarious situation right after.  I'm sure he just ran, because he was scared, but that seems to be what precipitated the actions of people afterwards.  I'm not going to blame Kyle for that.  That falls squarely on the shoulders of the city, which couldn't police itself. 

Edited November 20, 2021 by daz28