you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 25 points 2 years ago (24 children)

Rittenhouse attacked 3 people, that's 3x the danger. But I guess I forgot to count up their net worths.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 24 child comments
  • [+] -15 points 2 years ago (23 children)

    Can we just not lie? Rittenhouse was attacked.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 23 child comments
  • [–] 15 points 2 years ago (10 children)

    Sure he was attacked in the same way you attack a burglar. He shouldve been hanged for waving that fucken rifle around outside of his hometown let alone in a different state. But such mistakes can always be corrected.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [+] -20 points 2 years ago (9 children)

    oh ffs. you are clearly unaware of how laws work in the particular states where this occurred, and are trying to staple vaguely European or Canadian laws on to the situation, mostly which are considered pretty fascist by those under them.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 2 years ago (8 children)

    I am simply stating that the locals of the town should've hanged him, this aint a legal argument on my part. I am but a simple Californian stating that I think Kyle Rittenhouse deserves death, my morality rarely aligns to law.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (7 children)

    So if you ain't no better than what you claim he is, why you mad, bro?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (6 children)

    For one I claimed no such thing, the locales shouldve linched him. Secondly I am better than him, mostly for the simple fact that I aint so stupid as to cross state borders and poke my nose into other folks business. And thirdly I aint such a weakling to need a gun to feel strong.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 2 years ago (4 children)

    No, dude. you aren't. You've already exposed yourself even if you didn't realize it then and want to backtrack now. Just another jerk off whose idea of right and wrong is which team.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (3 children)

    No this was an argument about legality and morality. Also he is a fucken fascist of course I want to bash his brains in, he doesnt classify as a human in my books at least as far as respect and rights are concerned.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (2 children)

    well you've certainly refuted my theory

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    It isnt about refuting your theory, because all you are trying to do is both sides. I consider you just barely above a fascist, roughly in the area of Mormons or Seventh day Adventists, which is to say if I ever took action and you got in the way I will treat you as a fascist. Mind you so long as you mind your own business I wont and will continue to not give a damn.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago (9 children)

    There is no Self Defense when you seek conflict.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 2 years ago (8 children)

    Court entirely disagreed with your scenario, even the survivor admitted he was attacking.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (7 children)

    The court was wrong. Anyone not blinded by ideology can see Rittenhouse crossed state lines to go cause trouble with a gun. His fig leaf of a cover blew apart and conservatives pretended it still applied.

    Furthermore despite conservative judges protecting attackers this must be a tenet of self defense, otherwise there is no longer any way to convict someone of murder, except the arbitrary denial of self defense as an argument to defendants.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 2 years ago (6 children)

    Was the survivor also lying, you propaganda pushing piece of shit?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (5 children)

    Nothing that happened after he grabbed a gun and went to the protest matters. If he hadn't gone there with the intent of using his gun none of this would have happened. He is the instigating force and cannot claim self defense.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 2 years ago* (4 children)

    And yet, look what happened in court, because he actually did nothing of the sort. Do you not understand anything about how the laws work or what happened there? (Don't answer, that was rhetorical. "Rhetorical" means a question for conversational effect, not an actual request for an answer. The previous sentence contains condescension, and I'm just going to assume you need an definition for that also, as you seem to have no idea of what goes on at all.)

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (3 children)

    They literally got caught lying in court. They were there to protect a store, no they were there to render aid, no they were there to counter protest, no they were there to protect the cops.

    He got the same jury nullification as other white men killing black men get.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments