Kyle Rittenhouse - The Truth in 11 Minutes

#4,354
#4,354
The crux of the case hinged on whether Kyle was legally applying self defense against Rosenbaum. Once that was established the rest os moot. As the prosecutor was so keen to point out, ignorance of the law is not an excuse. Once it is determined KR acted in self defense, everyone else that "heroically" attempted to stop him fell into the ignorance category. Civil suits against KR won't succeed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NurseGoodVol and 0nelilreb
#4,355
#4,355
W.TN.Orange Blood said:
Cuomo has a discussion with Ritt's lawyer ..... it's the 2nd tweet below the first.

Click to expand...


Imagine your actual stance being that it should illegal to defend yourself from someone who everyone agrees intends to “beat” you. That’s Cuomo’s real stance if. If you’re on the right, you just have to lay down and take it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tntar heel, NurseGoodVol, txbo and 3 others
#4,358
#4,358
Weezer said:
Apparently he needed the gun to protect himself since he was indeed attacked. That makes him prepared, not stupid. Stupid, or more likely suicidal, is attacking someone with a gun and trying to harm them. You ever heard the phrase, "Don't start nothing there won't be nothing"? Had KR not been attacked, none of this would have happened. It's very simple logic, luther. The left wants to blame the guy with the gun because he had a gun when the real blame lies with the first guy that initiated the attack on KR. That guy started the domino effect that caused this particular mess.
Click to expand...
 
  • Like
Reactions: CagleMtnVol and McDad
#4,360
#4,360
Vol8188 said:
Imagine your actual stance being that it should illegal to defend yourself from someone who everyone agrees intends to “beat” you. That’s Cuomo’s real stance if. If you’re on the right, you just have to lay down and take it.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Lefty’s love to Monday morning QB and argue that a more rational decision should have been made in a split second when someone feels their life is in danger. Which is extremely ironic given that lefty’s can’t seem to think rationally during any part of their day, on any subject, or in any situation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: W.TN.Orange Blood
#4,364
#4,364
VOLS INC. said:
Exactly. Lefty’s love to Monday morning QB and argue that a more rational decision should have been made in a split second when someone feels their life is in danger. Which is extremely ironic given that lefty’s can’t seem to think rationally during any part of their day, on any subject, or in any situation.
Click to expand...

Yeah. Cuomo’s real argument is “I doubt he’d actually beat you to death” and he’s upset that the law allows Rittenhouse to not take that risk and find out
 
  • Like
Reactions: VOLS INC.
#4,368
#4,368
luthervol said:
There is plenty of stupidity to go around. That's why the story was of no interest to me. It was just stupid on stupid.
The drunk red neck country hick who attacks the hoodie wearing gun carrying idiot at the monster truck rally is an idiot.
They are both idiots, but the law will find one guilty.
I don't mind saying one broke no law but was incredibly stupid.
Click to expand...
Except we know BLM rioters have a history of assault, rioting, looting and other crimes. You are simply making up some fake “monster truck rally” white boogeymen you satisfy your biases
 
#4,371
#4,371
My hot take on the angry reaction to the the trial: Those fighting back hardest believe the topic of the violent protests was so important that any violence/destruction associated with it is to be tolerated, minimized and is even justified for some. KR was a small challenge to the legitimacy of the violence and thus cannot be tolerated. People taking a stand against the violence are portrayed as taking a hard stand against the protest topic and are thus sworn enemies of the "cause". They have no rights and the crusaders for the cause have all rights.

Or they're just nut jobs
 
  • Like
Reactions: MG1968, UT_Dutchman, tntar heel and 6 others
#4,372
#4,372
Rickyvol77 said:
Except we know BLM rioters have a history of assault, rioting, looting and other crimes. You are simply making up some fake “monster truck rally” white boogeymen you satisfy your biases
Click to expand...
Rioters by definition have that history.
BLM protestors do not have that history, and that accounts for 99%.
 
#4,373
#4,373
volinbham said:
My hot take on the angry reaction to the the trial: Those fighting back hardest believe the topic of the violent protests was so important that any violence/destruction associated with it is to be tolerated, minimized and is even justified for some. KR was a small challenge to the legitimacy of the violence and thus cannot be tolerated. People taking a stand against the violence are portrayed as taking a hard stand against the protest topic and are thus sworn enemies of the "cause". They have no rights and the crusaders for the cause have all rights.

Or they're just nut jobs
Click to expand...


Nobody defends the riots. That's just a false claim. Rioters should he prosecuted and held responsible for their own actions, just as anyone else should.

Those championing Rittenhouse are too short sighted to see what his kind of action can lead to in other scenarios that might have you not so happy about.
 
#4,374
#4,374
volinbham said:
My hot take on the angry reaction to the the trial: Those fighting back hardest believe the topic of the violent protests was so important that any violence/destruction associated with it is to be tolerated, minimized and is even justified for some. KR was a small challenge to the legitimacy of the violence and thus cannot be tolerated. People taking a stand against the violence are portrayed as taking a hard stand against the protest topic and are thus sworn enemies of the "cause". They have no rights and the crusaders for the cause have all rights.

Or they're just nut jobs
Click to expand...

Considering what their so called “cause” was for this particular crime spree, it is definitely option # 2.
 
#4,375
#4,375
luthervol said:
Rioters by definition have that history.
BLM protestors do not have that history, and that accounts for 99%.
Click to expand...

So a minority of instances of BLM protestors getting violent is no indication that they have a history of violence but a single picture of KR with no other indications is enough to brand him a White Supremacist.

That seems fair.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 0nelilreb, Boca Vol, MemphisVol77 and 3 others
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top