Kansas Crimson

I'm flattered to know so many were eagerly awaiting my replies.

Another really good one:

Your stupidity is impressive

I just wrote something respectful pertaining to Lobster but decided not to share it because frankly it shouldn't be important to me and I am convinced no one else would care about what I wrote.
Only thing I will say is it would be nice if he didn't pass off other's exact thoughts and words as his own. Basically plagiarism. Like he did last night at 11:33pm.

i spoke with a lawyer friend of mine who is familiar with Wisconsin state laws about guns/etc....basically he said self defense is not something you can claim while committing a crime. Being in the process of committing a crime nullifies any self defense argument. Defending a business is legal, but you have to be an owner/operational manager, not a kid from 20min away who has no association with the business.

I'm confident before 10 days ago, not a single person reading this knew who Kyle Rittenhouse and Jacob Blake were/are. 10 days later, these two people have literally millions of people either defending them and singing their praises or attacking them and expressing how horrible of people they are.
Both of these people have had extremely life altering things happen to them. You know what - BOTH ultimately chose what happened to them. My fear is that others are going to follow suit. Meaning they will either disobey the police to the extreme so that they feel they are making a difference and will become know to the world or they will take "vigilantism" to the point where they will take other's lives in the process so that they will feel important and become known to the world.
To me, that equates to a lose/lose situation.

ousdahl wrote: ↑Sun Aug 30, 2020 2:50 pm I think it’s time to really flesh out the substance of the 2nd amendment - which is to say, make sure any action taken with respect to 2A is focused on being necessary to the security of a free state.

And if we have these vigilante militias, ok fine, but regulate the shit out of them, just like the amendment says.

I've said it in other threads, but I would support, among other measures, a liability insurance requirement for buying/owning firearms.

Yeah, I think that’s a great idea.

Just like cars, which have inherent risks. If we can require them for cars, we can require them for guns. Point to the “well-regulated” part of 2A if there are questions of constitutionality.

And, insurance would presumably be offered by the private market, rather than make it more gummint bureaucracy to fuss about.

I still wonder how much trouble it would create though. Would the 2A crowd buy into it? How would it be received if and when otherwise lawful gun owners get busted for uninsured arms?

https://www.oregonlive.com/crime/2020/0 ... otest.html

Real winner here.

On July 5 at one of the demonstrations, Reinoehl was cited at 2:10 a.m. in the 700 block of Southwest Main Street on allegations of possessing a loaded gun in a public place, resisting arrest and interfering with police

He was given a date to appear in court later that month, but the allegations were dropped on July 30 with a “no complaint,” according to court records. The documents don’t indicate why prosecutors decided not to pursue the accusations. Reinoehl spent no time behind bars.

Imma go out on a limb and guess this guy isn’t black...

ousdahl wrote: ↑Mon Aug 31, 2020 10:24 am Yeah, I think that’s a great idea.

Just like cars, which have inherent risks. If we can require them for cars, we can require them for guns. Point to the “well-regulated” part of 2A if there are questions of constitutionality.

And, insurance would presumably be offered by the private market, rather than make it more gummint bureaucracy to fuss about.

I still wonder how much trouble it would create though. Would the 2A crowd buy into it? How would it be received if and when otherwise lawful gun owners get busted for uninsured arms?

This is a big selling feature to me. I like the ability of the insurance industry to assess risk. Hopefully the result would be that it becomes harder for the riskiest people to have the riskiest armories.

IllinoisJayhawk wrote: ↑Mon Aug 31, 2020 7:48 am i spoke with a lawyer friend of mine who is familiar with Wisconsin state laws about guns/etc....basically he said self defense is not something you can claim while committing a crime. Being in the process of committing a crime nullifies any self defense argument. Defending a business is legal, but you have to be an owner/operational manager, not a kid from 20min away who has no association with the business.

You can certainly claim self defense if someone is trying to cause bodily harm to you on private property. He was friend of the business, and there's nothing in the law that says you cannot do that. Hell, even the Koreans were doing this during the 1992 riots.

Lobster, do you have any opinion regarding the fact he was out past curfew? Or unlawfully possessing the gun? Or made comments that seemed like he was looking for trouble?

And a self-defense claim hinges on the threat of imminent bodily harm or death, and requires a reasonable reaction of force — do you think a plastic bag thrown in his direction satisfies the threat of imminent harm? Do you think firing an assault rifle is a reasonable force to counter the bag?

And what’s your take on the fact he shot the guy in the back as he ran away?

Good questions ousdhal! I would also be interested to know how Lobster determined that "Kyle" was on private property. He may have initially been on private property but when he started firing his gun at people it seems he was on public property.
Also, I'm curious to know how/why/what "Kyle's" connection was to the particular property people are claiming he was protecting.

2 shootings. 2 interesting responses.

This country is in trouble, headed in a bad direction at the moment.

Vega said the private property element was prob not relevant. In the vids it looks like the first shooting is on the car lot, but I’m not sure.

All I know is if I was the lot owner, I would be coming out condemning this kid, saying he was trespassing on my lot, not invited, don’t know him, I didn’t want anything to do with him or other vigilantes.....orrrr I would double down, say he was protecting my property for me, and that he has every right to defend himself against the big bad boogeymen #maga

One minor correction the story. The first gun shot was from Antifa, but now the video confirms it was from someone in the crowd who was aiming it up and away from Kyle. However, the guy who confronted Kyle was trying to physically take away his rifle. You can act in self defense if someone is trying to take your weapon. I would have done the same thing Kyle did.

Walrus wrote: ↑Mon Aug 31, 2020 11:04 am

IllinoisJayhawk wrote: ↑Mon Aug 31, 2020 7:48 am i spoke with a lawyer friend of mine who is familiar with Wisconsin state laws about guns/etc....basically he said self defense is not something you can claim while committing a crime. Being in the process of committing a crime nullifies any self defense argument. Defending a business is legal, but you have to be an owner/operational manager, not a kid from 20min away who has no association with the business.

You can certainly claim self defense if someone is trying to cause bodily harm to you on private property. He was friend of the business, and there's nothing in the law that says you cannot do that. Hell, even the Koreans were doing this during the 1992 riots.

You can, but apparently not if you are breaking the law yourself while on that private property...or at least that is how it has been explained to me.

And tbh, i dont think either shooting actually occured on the private property he claims to he defending, it was near it, but not on it from what i can see in videos.

Walrus wrote: ↑Mon Aug 31, 2020 11:57 am One minor correction the story. The first gun shot was from Antifa, but now the video confirms it was from someone in the crowd who was aiming it up and away from Kyle. However, the guy who confronted Kyle was trying to physically take away his rifle. You can act in self defense if someone is trying to take your weapon. I would have done the same thing Kyle did.

And you base "The first gun shot was from Antifa" on what specifically?

twocoach wrote: ↑Mon Aug 31, 2020 12:12 pm

Walrus wrote: ↑Mon Aug 31, 2020 11:57 am One minor correction the story. The first gun shot was from Antifa, but now the video confirms it was from someone in the crowd who was aiming it up and away from Kyle. However, the guy who confronted Kyle was trying to physically take away his rifle. You can act in self defense if someone is trying to take your weapon. I would have done the same thing Kyle did.

And you base "The first gun shot was from Antifa" on what specifically?

A YouTube video

IllinoisJayhawk wrote: ↑Mon Aug 31, 2020 12:03 pm

Walrus wrote: ↑Mon Aug 31, 2020 11:04 am

IllinoisJayhawk wrote: ↑Mon Aug 31, 2020 7:48 am i spoke with a lawyer friend of mine who is familiar with Wisconsin state laws about guns/etc....basically he said self defense is not something you can claim while committing a crime. Being in the process of committing a crime nullifies any self defense argument. Defending a business is legal, but you have to be an owner/operational manager, not a kid from 20min away who has no association with the business.

You can certainly claim self defense if someone is trying to cause bodily harm to you on private property. He was friend of the business, and there's nothing in the law that says you cannot do that. Hell, even the Koreans were doing this during the 1992 riots.

You can, but apparently not if you are breaking the law yourself while on that private property...or at least that is how it has been explained to me.

And tbh, i dont think either shooting actually occured on the private property he claims to he defending, it was near it, but not on it from what i can see in videos.

I think the bigger issue here is, we have people who think they are entitled to violence based on a political reasons (the definition of terrorism). Why are people not talking about this? Simply because they are company men on the left and support these rioters. Very disturbing that people promote burning cars and murder because it's on "their side". This is why I'm not on either side -- I can see the unbiased truth for what it is.

There was a Trump supporter who was shot for no reason in Portland over the weekend. He was wearing the "wrong" hat. Almost no media coverage and no one cares because he wasn't black and because he was on the wrong side. This is disgusting.