Black Lives Matter thread

Originally posted by Old Man Whirly!
As a defendent in a criminal case, Rittenhouse is entitled to what his victims never had, a fair trial to test that. What he undoubtedly is, is an example of how words can create real word drama and tragedy. Whatever the outcome of the Rittenhouse case, prosecution—with all necessary safeguards for the civil liberties of the defendant—may well serve the useful purpose of deterring future Rittenhouses and other idiots discussed on this forum like Zimmerman, and McMichaels. Would-be vigilantes Larpers may think twice before taking actions that could kill others and subject themselves to extended investigation at best, and prison terms at worst.

Since Rittenhouse is being charged as an adult, he may spend the rest of his natural life in prison. This means that this 17-year-old virgin is going to prison without having been with a woman, and his first and only sexual experiences will be with men. Since black people are disproportionately policed, they are over-represented in prison. I wonder how all of the black men, who will make up the majority of his fellow inmates, will feel about him murdering people protesting a police officer murdering an unarmed black man in front of his three minor children while responding to a call that was not about him? Surely, they will see him as an upstanding citizen who was just defending himself like all of the gaslighting racists here believe. On second though, Rittenhouse did not really think this out. I hope his cherry ass enjoys prison!

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
Since Rittenhouse is being charged as an adult, he may spend the rest of his natural life in prison. This means that this 17-year-old virgin is going to prison without having been with a woman, and his first and only sexual experiences will be with men. Since black people are disproportionately policed, they are over-represented in prison. I wonder how all of the black men, who will make up the majority of his fellow inmates, will feel about him murdering people protesting a police officer murdering an unarmed black man in front of his three minor children while responding to a call that was not about him? Surely, they will see him as an upstanding citizen who was just defending himself like all of the gaslighting racists here believe. On second though, Rittenhouse did not really think this out. I hope his cherry ass enjoys prison!

So Adam is defending the rape of minors who were (as a matter of fact) trying to defend himself vs people trying to kill him.

I did speculate that this gay boy was a pedophile, thanks for confirming my suspicions.

Originally posted by JohnnyRotton
So Adam is defending the rape of minors who were (as a matter of fact) trying to defend himself vs people trying to kill him.

I did speculate that this gay boy was a pedophile, thanks for confirming my suspicions.

Who mentioned rape? It is very telling that is where your mind goes. I merely pointed out that the presumptively heterosexual Rittenhouse is likely going to spend the rest of his natural life in an all-male environment, which he should have considered before committing acts that would place him there.

Moreover, his offenses were against people protesting racism, and because of racism, he will likely spend the rest of his natural life in a majority black environment. Again, something he should have considered before committing the acts that would place him there.

But if racist gaslighters are correct, he does not have anything to worry about, because his actions were clearly not racist, and all of the inmates where he will likely spend the rest of his natural life will surely see it that way. So he will not have to worry about violence in prison, because he is an upstanding citizen exercising his freedumbs.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
...he [Kyle] does not have anything to worry about, because his actions were clearly not racist...

Correct.

And Kyle is extremely likely to get acquitted as the charges are bogus on purpose to quell the anger temporarily. Keeps Kyle tied up in court for months while the unrest dies down.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
Since Rittenhouse is being charged as an adult, he may spend the rest of his natural life in prison. This means that this 17-year-old virgin is going to prison without having been with a woman, and his first and only sexual experiences will be with men. Since black people are disproportionately policed, they are over-represented in prison. I wonder how all of the black men, who will make up the majority of his fellow inmates, will feel about him murdering people protesting a police officer murdering an unarmed black man in front of his three minor children while responding to a call that was not about him? Surely, they will see him as an upstanding citizen who was just defending himself like all of the gaslighting racists here believe. On second though, Rittenhouse did not really think this out. I hope his cherry ass enjoys prison!

Who mentioned rape? It is very telling that is where your mind goes

😕

Kyle will get misnomer charges at most.

The video evidence acquits him. So yah.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Correct.

And Kyle is extremely likely to get acquitted as the charges are bogus on purpose to quell the anger temporarily. Keeps Kyle tied up in court for months while the unrest dies down.

that's a class A misnomer in the state of Wisconsin. So he probably won't even get time and it won't count as a federal crime.

Originally posted by JohnnyRotton
that's a class A misnomer in the state of Wisconsin. So he probably won't even get time and it won't count as a federal crime.

Originally posted by JohnnyRotton
😕

What is there to be confused about? If you are going to spend the rest of your natural life in a sex-segregated environment, then your only options for sexual partners are going to be other members of the same-sex. If you are presumptively heterosexual, this should be disconcerting to you, as these are not members of the sex to which you are attracted. Something a 17-year-old with limited or no sexual experience should have thought about before doing something to end-up in prison. There is a distinct possibility that he will never have heterosexual sexual contact in his lifetime, which should be distressing to a presumptively heterosexual male, particularly one who is currently at his sexual peak. Not a lot of foresight here.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
What is there to be confused about? If you are going to spend the rest of your natural life in a sex-segregated environment, then your only options for sexual partners are going to be other members of the same-sex. If you are presumptively heterosexual, this should be disconcerting to you, as these are not members of the sex to which you are attracted. Something a 17-year-old with limited or no sexual experience should have thought about before doing something to end-up in prison. There is a distinct possibility that he will never have heterosexual sexual contact in his lifetime, which should be distressing to a presumptively heterosexual male, particularly one who is currently at his sexual peak. Not a lot of foresight here.

I imagine most heterosexual men don't want to receive anal, even if they don't have sex with women ever, making it rape. This is a fair presumption that describes most men.

Originally posted by Old Man Whirly!
well, he was illegally carrying a gun. So probably not.

That talking point has been discredited by his lawyer, already.

The police chief was wrong when he made his "open carry" statement about the laws about open carry and his age.

Originally posted by JohnnyRotton
I imagine most heterosexual men don't want to receive anal, even if they don't have sex with women ever, making it rape. This is a fair presumption that describes most men.

Originally posted by JohnnyRotton
that's a class A misnomer in the state of Wisconsin. So he probably won't even get time and it won't count as a federal crime.

I think your autocorrect is changing "misdemeanor" for "misnomer."

Originally posted by JohnnyRotton
I imagine most heterosexual men don't want to receive anal, even if they don't have sex with women ever, making it rape. This is a fair presumption that describes most men.

Who said anything about particular sex acts? Again, it is very telling that is where your mind goes.

However, sex is still a human need. And if he is desperate, he may elect to have sex with someone to whom he is not attracted to meet it. There is nothing non-consensual about it, regardless of which acts he elects to do or not do.

The point is that is a suboptimal circumstances that he put himself in by his own actions.

Originally posted by dadudemon
That talking point has been discredited by his lawyer, already.

The police chief was wrong when he made his "open carry" statement about the laws about open carry and his age.

Originally posted by dadudemon
I think your autocorrect is changing "misdemeanor" for "misnomer."

Originally posted by Old Man Whirly!
it really hasn't DDM. He was 17 with a loaded gun, in a state where you shouldn't be 17 with a loaded gun. It just needs a witness or piece of video to show he had the gun raised at some point prior to the shootings and his case of any kind of defence collapses.

The inadequate response of the local government is what precipitated these events. If anything, they do not want to be seen as not responding adequately to this, or they can expect more of the same. So they are more likely to swiftly convict him to distract from their own malfeasance. If people are talking about Rittenhouse, they are not talking about Sheskey. So if the people get their pound of flesh from the former, they will forget about the latter. That is what the prosecutors and the police are hoping for.