You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
George Floyd murder / Derek Chauvin guilty of murder
- Thread starter Ric
- Start date
I do also wonder how much the NRA contributed to the defence costs
Just watched the end of "Dopesick" and it just amplifies how far from "justice" you can get with a hefty wallet behind
Not true is it -that wasn’t what happened.Shocking verdict for rittenhouse case , he did trumps bidding , striding around with his automatic gun extremely provocately (sp) and was clearly looking for a fight , we all know if he was black and shot three white men in that manner he would be in prison for life or executed , it fucking stinks
If he was black shooting white men he would be guilty
DrBlueBob
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 3 Jul 2008
- Messages
- 6,536
- Team supported
- Need you ask?
He could still be given a jail term term of up to 30 years after being convicted felon in possession of a firearm. Sentencing in January.
Your knowledge of the case is what stinks.Shocking verdict for rittenhouse case , he did trumps bidding , striding around with his automatic gun extremely provocately (sp) and was clearly looking for a fight , we all know if he was black and shot three white men in that manner he would be in prison for life or executed , it fucking stinks
kaz7
Well-Known Member
I followed it when i first saw the video on cnn when it happened but thanksYour knowledge of the case is what stinks.
Well then you should know American citizens have a constitutional right to bear arms and a constitutional right to self defence. The law also grants the right to use lethal force if other options of escaping an attack aren’t there. The first attacker lunged at the defendant from short distance and the next attackers were armed themselves, one pointing a gun at the defendant, when he was on the ground after being chased by 3 of them in a car park.I followed it when i first saw the video on cnn when it happened but thanks
There is nothing “shocking” about the verdict, it was actually pretty straight forward and no surprise not a single member of the jury disagreed with the decision.
kaz7
Well-Known Member
He should never have been there, it was provocative , a white kid with a gun like that patrolling not in his district during a blm protest , trump congratulated him on his aquital, he went because trump put out a racist dog whistle , what could go wrongWell then you should know American citizens have a constitutional right to bear arms and a constitutional right to self defence. The law also grants the right to use lethal force if other options of escaping an attack aren’t there. The first attacker lunged at the defendant from short distance and the next attackers were armed themselves, one pointing a gun at the defendant, when he was on the ground after being chased by 3 of them in a car park.
There is nothing “shocking” about the verdict, it was actually pretty straight forward and no surprise not a single member of the jury disagreed with the decision.
With all due respect, what has any of that got to do with the verdict of the trial?He should never have been there, it was provocative , a white kid with a gun like that patrolling not in his district during a blm protest , trump congratulated him on his aquital, he went because trump put out a racist dog whistle , what could go wrong
Your problem is you’re looking at it through a lens of political bias. The only thing that matters here is what is his constitutional right and what the law says. In the eyes of both he did nothing wrong.
Trevor Morley's Tache
Well-Known Member
The fact he did what he did with ZERO punishment is essentially a green light for anyone who has similar ideas for turning up at a protest with an assault rifle to 'help out'.With all due respect, what has any of that got to do with the verdict of the trial?
Your problem is you’re looking at it through a lens of political bias. The only thing that matters here is what is his constitutional right and what the law says. In the eyes of both he did nothing wrong.
The authorities should have at least considered that the lesser firearms offences he was initially charged with should have been upheld to act as a deterrent and to prevent further tragedies such as this.