Kyle Rittenhouse - The Truth in 11 Minutes

#5,903
#5,903
luthervol said:
Why do you guys keep calling him a child and saying he was 17. If it's that significant, then maybe that's an indicator that he shouldn't legally be allowed to walk the streets openly carrying a gun.
What's that you guys say? You can't have your cake and eat it too.
Click to expand...

Those aren’t mutually exclusive. Yes, he’s not an adult. Yes, he should still be allowed to carry and defend himself.

And yes, it’s sick for you to prefer a 17 year old died rather than an adult who attacked the kid and who had a pretty sick criminal record. But in your mind the kid is evil because he had a gun, right?
 
#5,910
#5,910
southgatevol said:
Should have put MORE thought into his decision.
Click to expand...
lol..........no doubt. You can say that about all of the stupid people involved. More thought would have led to zero deaths.
Starting with the little 17 year old gun carrying kid. (I'll call him a kid since you guys seem to feel it's important).
 
#5,913
#5,913
Vol8188 said:
Those aren’t mutually exclusive. Yes, he’s not an adult. Yes, he should still be allowed to carry and defend himself.

And yes, it’s sick for you to prefer a 17 year old died rather than an adult who attacked the kid and who had a pretty sick criminal record. But in your mind the kid is evil because he had a gun, right?
Click to expand...
If he's not an adult, he had no business being there carrying a gun. Not a place for kids. That was stupid.
 
  • Like
Reactions: southgatevol
#5,914
#5,914
luthervol said:
lol..........no doubt. You can say that about all of the stupid people involved. More thought would have led to zero deaths.
Starting with the little 17 year old gun carrying kid. (I'll call him a kid since you guys seem to feel it's important).
Click to expand...
OR more appropriately starting with the stupid politicians allowing and refusing to stop the rioting.
 
#5,916
#5,916
luthervol said:
If he's not an adult, he had no business being there carrying a gun. Not a place for kids. That was stupid.
Click to expand...

Okay. So to clarify your reason for why you want him dead is because you don’t think he should’ve been at the car lot and because he had a gun?
 
#5,919
#5,919
luthervol said:
If he's not an adult, he had no business being there carrying a gun. Not a place for kids. That was stupid.
Click to expand...

I’m curious. Do you believe it was wrong and stupid of Ahmad Arbery to continually show up at a home under construction and run away when the neighbors tried speaking to him?

If so, are you also glad he’s dead?
 
#5,920
#5,920
luthervol said:
I just categorically disagree.
It is far to easy for guns to illegally find their way into the hands of criminals and would be criminals. There are rational and reasonable measures that could be taken that would reduce the number.
I'm not going to debate it. It's pointless and beyond frustrating.
Click to expand...
There’s nothing to debate. As it sits right now, gun control = population control.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SpaceCoastVol
#5,922
#5,922
hog88 said:
This I agree with you on. But it's immaterial to the fact it was perfectly legal for him to be there carrying a gun.
Click to expand...
I am not saying it wasn't legal.
It most certainly should have been illegal.
And it most certainly was stupid.
 
#5,923
#5,923
southgatevol said:
Reaching for someone's firearm or assaulting someone with a skateboard who is carrying a firearm appears to be more stupid.
Click to expand...
Trying to stop what you think to be an active shooter would be what some might call brave and admirable.
But stupid nonetheless.
 
#5,925
#5,925
luthervol said:
greed/selfishness
divisiveness
racism
sexism
homophobia
extreme nationalism
distrust/disdain for particular institutions
anti-intellectualism
Click to expand...

Ah! Thanks! And, correct me if I'm wrong, Rush Limbaugh and FOX News promulgate views on these items? No need to answer this unless I'm incorrect in this assumption. So let's take them one by one shall we? That way, we can keep the discussion on point.

divisiveness - First, this is way too much of a generalization and needs to be more clearly defined. Are you talking people who believe they should be able to own guns vs. those that believe no one should? If so, I agree with you, FOX and Limbaugh probably contributed to that kind of divisiveness in favor of the gun side. Could it be people who believe government should be limited in scope vs those who believe government should be more involved with our daily lives? Yep, FOX and Limbaugh I'd say are guilty of that as well for those of us who believe the government is too intrusive. Those who watch Monty Python vs those who don't? Alabama against Georgia?

How about some examples of the divisiveness to which you are referring?
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top