Kenosha

[Deleted User 89]

the shit show from all sides in this was to be expected. after all, wisconsin is the home of Making a Murderer

the legal/justice/law enforcement system up there is fucked. must be all the cheese

[ousdahl]

Remember that time in Wisconsin when a little Asian kid was stumbling down the street naked and bleeding from his ass, and two black women reported it to the cops, and the cop response was to threaten arresting the black women just cuz, because they instead took some random white guy’s word for it when he drunkenly explained the naked bleeding Asian kid was just a dinner guest?

That guy’s name was Jeffrey Dahmer.

after police let him take the struggling kid into his custody, he took him back to his apartment and injected his brain with an ultimately fatal cocktail of chemicals.

But go ahead and arrest the black chicks about it!

[JKLivin]

Remember that time in Wisconsin when a little Asian kid was stumbling down the street naked and bleeding from his ass, and two black women reported it to the cops, and the cop response was to threaten arresting the black women just cuz, because they instead took some random white guy’s word for it when he drunkenly explained the naked bleeding Asian kid was just a dinner guest?

That guy’s name was Jeffrey Dahmer.

after police let him take the struggling kid into his custody, he took him back to his apartment and injected his brain with an ultimately fatal cocktail of chemicals.

But go ahead and arrest the black chicks about it!

You betcha. Never mind that race has nothing to do with the Rittenhouse case or that the Dahmer case happened 30 years ago. oUTrAgE!

[ousdahl]

Saying race had nothing to do with the Rittenhouse case seems a whitewash, no pun intended.

[Deleted User 89]

psych is literally the only one outraged in this discussion

hilarious

[JKLivin]

Saying race had nothing to do with the Rittenhouse case seems a whitewash, no pun intended.

I'm sorry, what race were the three people he shot?

[ousdahl]

I’m sorry, why were so many upset protestors out late in the streets to begin with?

[JKLivin]

psych is literally the only one outraged in this discussion

hilarious

To the contrary, I seem to be the only one who is NOT getting outraged, judging by the name-calling and harsh language, neither of which are coming from me.

[JKLivin]

I’m sorry, why were so many upset protestors out late in the streets to begin with?

oUTrAgE!

[Deleted User 89]

psych is literally the only one outraged in this discussion

hilarious

To the contrary, I seem to be the only one who is NOT getting outraged, judging by the name-calling and harsh language, neither of which are coming from me.

you think that equates to outrage?

i’d normally say you must be new hear, but since we know that’s not the case, i’ll just chalk it up to you making up more falsities to fit your narrative

[JKLivin]

psych is literally the only one outraged in this discussion

hilarious

To the contrary, I seem to be the only one who is NOT getting outraged, judging by the name-calling and harsh language, neither of which are coming from me.

you think that equates to outrage?

i’d normally say you must be new hear, but since we know that’s not the case, i’ll just chalk it up to you making up more falsities to fit your narrative

It definitely equates to incivility, which is usually motivated by intense negative emotions. It’s not hard to do the math.

[jfish26]

Remember that time in Wisconsin when a little Asian kid was stumbling down the street naked and bleeding from his ass, and two black women reported it to the cops, and the cop response was to threaten arresting the black women just cuz, because they instead took some random white guy’s word for it when he drunkenly explained the naked bleeding Asian kid was just a dinner guest?

That guy’s name was Jeffrey Dahmer.

after police let him take the struggling kid into his custody, he took him back to his apartment and injected his brain with an ultimately fatal cocktail of chemicals.

But go ahead and arrest the black chicks about it!

You betcha. Never mind that race has nothing to do with the Rittenhouse case or that the Dahmer case happened 30 years ago. oUTrAgE!

This is among the sillier things that's been said here. And I don't say that lightly.

The iceberg really didn't have much to do with the perished Titanic passengers; they died of asphyxiation, cardiac arrest and/or hypothermia, not iceberg trauma.

[ousdahl]

Yea.

And according to the police report, George Floyd simply experienced a medical emergency.

Could happen to any of us!

[twocoach]

Joseph Rosenbaum verbally threatened and threw toiletry items at Rittenhouse before grabbing at the barrel of his rifle.

And before that, Kyle’s rifle was already raised toward Rosenbaum.

Does that make any difference to you?

Cuz that’s the difference the jury is deciding.

That seems to be the major discrepancy between the two accounts. Not sure it makes a difference to me either way.

I would consider a gun raised and pointing towards me as more of a threat than having toiletry items thrown at me but maybe that's just me...

[twocoach]

soo that WI weapons statute, about underage and whatnot

I see these headlines like “gun charge dropped as result of poorly worded law”

It apparently covers everything from guns to tasers to nunchucks to throwing stars to brass knuckles….but not, you know, assault rifles, assuming the barrel is of a certain length.

Exceptions include target practice under adult supervision, members of armed forces or national guard, or for deer hunting.

And while it’s not necessarily inappropriate for the court to interpret it on some technical level to not apply to Kyle, could they have interpreted it to apply just the same?

Could a judge say, I think the whole point of this law was to account for essentially these sorts of situations, and don’t think it intends to excuse an assault rifle at a riot. And let appellate courts decide that precedent?

Could a halfway competent prosecutor grill Kyle about the exact terms of the law - eg whether he brought it for deer hunting? And whether he considered brass knuckles instead?

Couldn’t some sane person have said, why could he be busted for fucking nunchucks but not a goddamn assault rifle?

Again, assuming any semblance of sanity in Merica, but could we see legislatures address this in a way to prevent similar future incidents? Maybe even go so far as to say something like, bringing an assault rifle to a riot is provoking enough in itself, so at the very least don’t expect self-defense claims to be available if you shoot the place up.

That’s prob way too much for Merica tho. We’ll prob see codified legislation to instead protect active shooter rights at riots going forward

It's worded so that you can't arrest a kid for going deer hunting with a hunting rifle. A fortunate loophole for any kids who want to walk around with AR15's.

[twocoach]

That seems to be the major discrepancy between the two accounts. Not sure it makes a difference to me either way.

So it makes no difference to you if randos on the street are pointing guns in people’s faces?

Or is it that it makes no difference to you because in this case you’re less interested in legal accountability and more interested in political ownage?

Cuz I mean randos pointing guns on the street is like so totally NOT the future libs want. So if you are willing to do with that, you shure is owning them on that one!

If, heaven forbid, someone points a gun in your face too, just remember to not get caught up in some adrenaline rush fight or flight reaction like, throw your groceries at them.

A gun in your face is nbd as long as you comply!

Of course it does. You're mischaracterizing Rittenhouse's actions to fit your preferred narrative. Guns weren't pointed until threats were made. I don't believe Rittenhouse had any intention of using the gun until he felt that his life was in danger, which is the whole point of carrying a firearm in the first place.

I'd prefer that no one was walking around with an AR-15 in everyday life. It's overkill and invites problems like the one in Kenosha. I'd also prefer that people didn't feel the need to throw temper tantrums by burning, rioting, and looting the private property of people who had nothing to do with hurting them when court rulings don't go their way. Both actions are wrong and are against the law.

Where I have a problem is that libs tend to get all bent out of shape when the former happens, but excuse and even applaud when the latter happens - to the point where police no longer feel confident enough to step up and handle the problem, leaving private citizens to protect their own property, or in Rittenhouse's case, solicit others to protect it for them.

I'm not interested in "owning" anybody. I'm interested in the legal definition of murder staying where it is rather than being expanded to include people who exercise their Second Amendment rights to bear arms and protect themselves. That's a slippery slope to totalitarianism.

Didn't drone footage from that night show Rittenhouse repeatedly point his weapon at demostrators prior to the initial shooting?

[ousdahl]

Don’t keep bringing up Rittenhouse’s actions just cuz it fits yer preferred narrative!

And deer hunters, come on, it’s not like Kyle was threatening folks with nunchucks bro

[JKLivin]

So it makes no difference to you if randos on the street are pointing guns in people’s faces?

Or is it that it makes no difference to you because in this case you’re less interested in legal accountability and more interested in political ownage?

Cuz I mean randos pointing guns on the street is like so totally NOT the future libs want. So if you are willing to do with that, you shure is owning them on that one!

If, heaven forbid, someone points a gun in your face too, just remember to not get caught up in some adrenaline rush fight or flight reaction like, throw your groceries at them.

A gun in your face is nbd as long as you comply!

Of course it does. You're mischaracterizing Rittenhouse's actions to fit your preferred narrative. Guns weren't pointed until threats were made. I don't believe Rittenhouse had any intention of using the gun until he felt that his life was in danger, which is the whole point of carrying a firearm in the first place.

I'd prefer that no one was walking around with an AR-15 in everyday life. It's overkill and invites problems like the one in Kenosha. I'd also prefer that people didn't feel the need to throw temper tantrums by burning, rioting, and looting the private property of people who had nothing to do with hurting them when court rulings don't go their way. Both actions are wrong and are against the law.

Where I have a problem is that libs tend to get all bent out of shape when the former happens, but excuse and even applaud when the latter happens - to the point where police no longer feel confident enough to step up and handle the problem, leaving private citizens to protect their own property, or in Rittenhouse's case, solicit others to protect it for them.

I'm not interested in "owning" anybody. I'm interested in the legal definition of murder staying where it is rather than being expanded to include people who exercise their Second Amendment rights to bear arms and protect themselves. That's a slippery slope to totalitarianism.

Didn't drone footage from that night show Rittenhouse repeatedly point his weapon at demostrators prior to the initial shooting?

After being threatened, chased, and pelted with various sundries? Yes.

As the judge explained and the prosecution tried to obscure, provocation is nullified when an individual attempts to retreat, which is what Rittenhouse did prior to shooting anybody. Once you start pursuing, the provocation defense is nullified.

[JKLivin]

And before that, Kyle’s rifle was already raised toward Rosenbaum.

Does that make any difference to you?

Cuz that’s the difference the jury is deciding.

That seems to be the major discrepancy between the two accounts. Not sure it makes a difference to me either way.

I would consider a gun raised and pointing towards me as more of a threat than having toiletry items thrown at me but maybe that's just me...

Except that, in the moment, you have no idea what is being thrown at you. We also don't know what the words that accompanied the items were. Context matters.

[JKLivin]

Yea.

And according to the police report, George Floyd simply experienced a medical emergency.

Could happen to any of us!

So, illegal acts are permissible so long as they are motivated by oUTrAgE?!? By your logic, then, the protesters and rioters in DC on January 6th were justified in their actions and should not be held accountable nor do they deserve negative repercussions. See how slippery that slope gets?