US Politics Thread

[super_city_si]

NRA rubbing its hands….

 

[Dax777]

Not sure id ignore someone with a rifle in the middle of the street. Admittedly, i wouldn’t attack him with a skateboard. But hard to ignore.

im not weighing in on the murder calls, thats kind of covered with t( stand your ground type laws, but i cant believe he gets away scott free from a situation he instigated and caused a death.

he turned up in the middle of a volatile situation holding a rifle.

He did not instigate any of the 3 incidences. And many people at the protest/riots came armed. As is the sensible thing to do.

Coming to a protest armed 'isnt' instigation. If it were then all his supposed victims will be equally guilty of the same. As they all at different times (on video) had weapons on them.

 

[bigquinn772]

I’m sure the families of the five boys raped and sodomized by Rosenbaum, feel justice was served today.

 

[bluethrunthru]

many people at the protest/riots came armed. As is the sensible thing to do.

Which illustrates why America is such a fucked up country - the UK has had demo's that turned into riots over the last 2 years all attended by stupid people who didn't have the reasonable forethought and preparation to bring a gun with them

 

[Dax777]

Which illustrates why America is such a fucked up country - the UK has had demo's that turned into riots over the last 2 years all attended by stupid people who didn't have the reasonable forethought and preparation to bring a gun with them

I'll agree they are different Countries.

 

[Dax777]

I’m sure the families of the five boys raped and sodomized by Rosenbaum, feel justice was served today.

Their prior history had little bearing on their actions that night. While all three that got shot had shady history, none of that was relevant.

They instigated the conditions that led to their demise. It is plain to see and that's why their shooter was found not guilty.

 

[BobKowalski]

Could have said the same of the 2 men he killed and the 3rd he maimed. They too could have stayed at home and none of this would have happened. Frankly, had the first guy stayed home, none of this would have happened.

You really should watch the hours of video of the event. The first guy was off his rocks ( and likely his meds). Clearly, from video evidence, he out for trouble. Kept yelling the 'N' word and getting in the faces of people with guns and daring them to shoot him. There is video of him turning over a mobile potty. Then turning over a flat bed and setting it on fire. Then yelling at someone who was puttng out a fire in a dumpster ( he may haves started that too).

Before unfortunately then jumping our from behind a box area to chase down his eventual killer who he lunged at before getting shot and killed. Perhaps Kyle shouldn't have been there ( Whatever that means.) Neither should this guy.


Nice theory, but anyone under those same circumstance, with that much video evidence available, everyone would have gotten off. If you wanted a perfect case of self defense. This was almost as close as you can get.

The problem often with a self defense claim in a murder trial is often the fact that there is often little evidence other than the claim of the person who killed someone. Here, we have independent evidence. Multiple! Including one of his assailants admitting it under oath.


Again, some capitol rioters are currently under prosecution and the Shaman was just sentenced to 4 years. And more will follow. So again your beliefs are not tracking the facts accurately.

Rittenhouse and his motivation in turning up armed at a protest with all its attendant tensions is a key factor in these murders. Take Rittenhouse out of the equation and there are no murders. The rules and the system permits these murders.

Protests are invariably about tension and confrontation. Allowing Rittenhouse into the protest is adding to that tension and confrontation. It is an aggressive act. It is a provocative act. Rittenhouse was the catalyst for murder. If I am seeking a fight I am not acting in self-defence, I am looking for violence and that is just a big a factor as the behaviour of others around me, others, who at that point, had not shot each other.

The self-defence argument is undermined by the intent and actions of Rittenhouse. Intent and actions which led to two deaths. A pasty white youth carrying a weapon into a protest over the shooting of a black man? It doesn’t get more aggressive or premeditated than that. Blind Pew could have spotted his intent and likely outcome.

You missed the point on the Capitol attack. Visit any far-right forum and you will see the entitled hypocrisy laid bare.

 

[Dax777]

Rittenhouse and his motivation in turning up armed at a protest with all its attendant tensions is a key factor in these murders. Take Rittenhouse out of the equation and there are no murders. The rules and the system permits these murders.

No it's not. Because lots of people were armed. Frankly, if you are not armed you probably shouldn't be there. And they are NOT murders. Again, murder had legal elements. Killings? Yes. Murders? No.

Protests are invariably about tension and confrontation. Allowing Rittenhouse into the protest is adding to that tension and confrontation.

And I suppose allowing Rosenbaum, Huber and Greutkruz into the protest doesn't? Again, the reason why this line of thinking doesn't work is self evident... It applies also to the 2 who got killed and the one who got his bicep shot.

It is an aggressive act. It is a provocative act. Rittenhouse was the catalyst for murder. If I am seeking a fight I am not acting in self-defence,

This is true. However, if the person you sort a fight against shoots you, he'd have a self defense claim.. Rosenbaum came to the riots looking to destroy stuff and pick a fight. There is video evidence of him doing both before he later got shot. Unfortunately, he got killed because of it. He was the provocateur and the evidence on that is full proof.

I am looking for violence and that is just a big a factor as the behaviour of others around me, others, who at that point, had not shot each other.

Again, if you attack someone who has a gun, you really have no one but yourself to blame if you get shot. All 3 assailant attacked someone with a gun and got shot for it. On them.

The self-defence argument is undermined by the intent and actions of Rittenhouse. Intent and actions which led to two deaths. A pasty white youth carrying a weapon into a protest over the shooting of a black man? It doesn’t get more aggressive or premeditated than that. Blind Pew could have spotted his intent and likely outcome.

His intent documented by video evidence includes, walking away from a guy who accosts him, providing medical to someone in need, responding with Friendly when crossing a barricade, and then running away from his assailants. And only shooting them when he was cornered or attacked

For the record all of the actors here were white, so the race of the defendant is irrelevant. Lucky for him. Seeing as there was a black assailant who dropped kicked his head when he was on the ground. He fired at that guy but missed.

His reaction when the guy started walking away, is even more telling of what his intent was. He didn't shoot him. Only focused on imminent threats.

You missed the point on the Capitol attack. Visit any far-right forum and you will see the entitled hypocrisy laid bare.

Whatever the far right talkverse is saying isn't that important. That the rioters are being prosecuted is the Key.

And as far as entitlement goes, mobs threatening violence if the defendant was acquitted, another Video taping the jurors with intent to dox them. Not to mention, an MSNBC operative tailing the juror bus to find out where they were staying, all smacks of a greater sense of entitlement than anything some Proudboys might be saying on Facebook.

This case is just not the hill to die on.

 

[BobKowalski]

No it's not. Because lots of people were armed. Frankly, if you are not armed you probably shouldn't be there. And they are NOT murders. Again, murder had legal elements. Killings? Yes. Murders? No.

And I suppose allowing Rosenbaum, Huber and Greutkruz into the protest doesn't? Again, the reason why this line of thinking doesn't work is self evident... It applies also to the 2 who got killed and the one who got his bicep shot.

This is true. However, if the person you sort a fight against shoots you, he'd have a self defense claim.. Rosenbaum came to the riots looking to destroy stuff and pick a fight. There is video evidence of him doing both before he later got shot. Unfortunately, he got killed because of it. He was the provocateur and the evidence on that is full proof.

Again, if you attack someone who has a gun, you really have no one but yourself to blame if you get shot. All 3 assailant attacked someone with a gun and got shot for it. On them.



His intent documented by video evidence includes, walking away from a guy who accosts him, providing medical to someone in need, responding with Friendly when crossing a barricade, and then running away from his assailants. And only shooting them when he was cornered or attacked

For the record all of the actors here were white, so the race of the defendant is irrelevant. Lucky for him. Seeing as there was a black assailant who dropped kicked his head when he was on the ground. He fired at that guy but missed.

His reaction when the guy started walking away, is even more telling of what his intent was. He didn't shoot him. Only focused on imminent threats.


Whatever the far right talkverse is saying isn't that important. That the rioters are being prosecuted is the Key.

And as far as entitlement goes, mobs threatening violence if the defendant was acquitted, another Video taping the jurors with intent to dox them. Not to mention, an MSNBC operative tailing the juror bus to find out where they were staying, all smacks of a greater sense of entitlement than anything some Proudboys might be saying on Facebook.

This case is just not the hill to die on.

Except the only murders were at the hands of Rittenhouse. The status of the other participants (armed/not armed) are irrelevant as they did not shoot and kill anyone. Rittenhouse did.

Adding Rittenhouse to a combustible mix proved deadly. Absenting Rittenhouse would have meant no deaths. You might as well argue that a woman being assaulted and raped is as much as fault as the rapist because she too was there. Proximity alone is not the issue. Proximity and outcome is the issue.

The absurdity of American gun laws, it’s fetishisation of gun culture, narcissism of the individual ‘defending his rights‘, and inability to accept its racial history, propels an inadequate individual in to a situation with deadly results and this is then compounded by lack of consequences so that the cycle can continue.

This is not my case, hell, it’s not even my country. We’ve got our own morons to worry about. Thankfully, ours are not armed.

 

[SWP's back]

Anyone who watched the trial could see this from a mile away. The most one sided trial I've ever seen.

Frankly, if it wasn't for politics, I doubt they'd have brought a case.

There was just too much video evidence.

Most people know I rarely agree with you but from the trial and the actual law, rather than the media leading up to it, it was a slam dunk acquittal.

 

[SWP's back]

1) Bullshit!
2) Everything related to guns and murder is politics.
3) Font forget this was a protest in response to another black man being shot! The PRESIDENT said bad things about the cops (Idiotic!) and people took to the streets, where a white man shot other unarmed who’re men, and now walks free!!!

There is a certain irony to it all, but let’s watch and see what happens from here. I doubt we have seen the tip of this iceberg yet, because it’s still forming!!

Not all the men Rittenhouse shot were unarmed.

 

[SWP's back]

shoots 3 people who were unarmed and it’s OK to do so?

Another that certainly didn’t watch any of the trial.

 

[SWP's back]

He went to a different STATE.

The shooting took place 25 minutes by car from where he lived. The shooting took place in the city where he works and following his shift at work.

It’s a different State for sure but that doesn’t quite tell the whole story. You know I’m anything but I rabid pro-gun right winger, but I’ve been watching and reading this trial every day (I’m 13 hours ahead of NY so have the US evening news on in the background whilst I’m working in a morning).

There was virtually no chance he was going to be found guilty of the charges they put to the jury.

Har they gone for lesser charges, then I’m sure it would have been a different outcome.

 

[SWP's back]

One of them was armed. One of them hit him in the head with a skateboard. The other tried to grab his gun. I'm not surprised he was found not guilty.

Well said and it pleasing to see you’re also able to set aside your personal feelings and give an accurate description of what happened.

 

[SWP's back]

Except the only murders were at the hands of Rittenhouse. The status of the other participants (armed/not armed) are irrelevant as they did not shoot and kill anyone. Rittenhouse did.

1) legally not murders, officially.
2) one did fire a shot
3) another admitted on the stand that “Rittenhouse did not shoot me until I pointed my gun at him”

 

[FogBlueInSanFran]

Well said and it pleasing to see you’re also able to set aside your personal feelings and give an accurate description of what happened.

Oh I haven’t set aside any personal feelings. I wrote exactly what I think about this insecure nerd child and the stupidity of those who decided to challenge him (and his gun).

 

[ChicagoBlue]

What part? It was a decidedly one sided trial. The evidence favored the defense and the Prosecutors we're very poor. Are least 1 was. The other was ok.

Well, I suppose that's why a case was brought. Coz the facts didn't support bringing one.

Yes. Kyle's shooting had little to so with the protest though. I don't know why you are pointing out Rittenhouse race. You do know he shot 3 white men right?

I know there is an attempt to racialize this event. But the facts are not cooperating. Nor were those men unarmed. One had a pistol. The other had a skateboard that he used (twice) on the defendant.

Hopefully nothing would happen. But I must say for someone who waxes lyrical often about how Trump and his minions are trying to undermine America.

I am shocked you've said very little of about the attempts to intimidate the jury. By video taping them and some MSNBC activist tailing their bus.

Thw attempts to influence the jury through mob like intimidation should be the biggest story of this trial. Not the outcome.

There was nothing surprising about the acquital.

I numbered them to help you. Clearly, it didn’t!

Sadly, I have neither the time, nor inclination, to answer the numerous issues with what you said…but you got done takers.

Well done.

 

[SWP's back]

Back to all parties being the same:

 

[ChicagoBlue]

Not all the men Rittenhouse shot were unarmed.

Indeed, only two of them were…in the manner in which we discuss police shootings.

Not for nothing, anyone with any sense should know the phrase “Run, Hide, Fight.”

I’m not sure if “vigilante vs potential superhero” is a comic book, but it certainly sounds like it in the cold, harsh, post shooting daylight.

If someone has a gun, given the chance you run away. If that isn’t an option, you hide and even barricade yourself in if you have the ability. Lastly, with no ability to run or hide, you fight, knowing that death may be imminent and unavoidable if you do not, you “fight until the lights go out!”

All three men shot had the ability to run and/or hide, but chose to fight. Personally, I think that was because THEY thought he was young and beatable. Sadly, they didn’t realize he had the great equalizer and knew how to use it. A deadly miscalculation.

Personally, as I believe I stated here, I didn’t think he was ever going to be done for First Degree, but I did think Reckless Endangerment had a chance.

When the Judge dismissed the weapons charge due to a “confusing” statute, then gave the Jury Instructions he did, I believe a significantly larger number than previous knew there was little chance of a conviction.

I live just down the road from Kenosha, and even closer to where this (now) man lives. I can tell you that you don’t need to get too far outside the leafy green burbs to the north and northwest of Chicago to be in semi-rural and rural towns. In these towns, it is some kind of hunting season almost year round, boat licenses and bait are available at most convenience stores, and trucks quickly begin to outnumber cars.

It is unsurprising that Rittenhouse is a bit of a gun nut, and I suspect he has been using once since childhood. While it may be difficult for many to understand on here, because their experience of America may be touristy and urban, guns are literally everywhere. You might not always see them, but people are walking around with them, they’re in almost every rural home, and often in vehicles…hidden or otherwise!

I don’t think that culture is going to change and, sadly, I think it only leads to more tears of the bereaved.

I, myself, have succumbed (mainly because of firearms training and practice) and have been seduced by the notion of not being at the mercy of others who may be armed. However, I can tell you that unless I was virtually 100% certain of neutralizing a deadly threat within about 3 seconds, I would be running, hiding, and only coming out to fight if absolutely necessary!

America is many things to many people, and many of both are great, but not all. Guns and idiots are in plentiful supply. Too plentiful for my liking.

This is not the first public shooting that has divided opinions, and it won’t be the last, but my fear is that the next time there is a “protest” like Kenosha, it will not be peaceful marching in the streets or even fires and looting, but a pitched, urban warfare, gun battle, more akin to Kabul than Kenosha.

 

[SWP's back]

Indeed, only two of them were…in the manner in which we discuss police shootings.

Again, not correct.

By the laws of the State, he acted in self defence and that’s why he was acquitted.

Now whether those laws are correct is another matter. They’re in place. They’re also part of the reason I’d never want to live there.