Black Lives Matter thread

Started by Old Man Whirly!159 pages

Originally posted by Surtur
It's okay to shoot someone trying to do you harm.
we'll see, some people are going to be so triggered if he goes down.

Originally posted by Old Man Whirly!
we'll see, some people are going to be so triggered if he goes down.

I mean, are you disputing that people went after him before he fired on anyone?

Originally posted by Surtur
I mean, are you disputing that people went after him before he fired on anyone?
he'll have his time in court, which is more than his victims will.

Originally posted by Old Man Whirly!
he'll have his time in court, which is more than his victims will.

I'm asking what you personally believe. There is video out there, etc.

Even the NYT admits he didn't fire the first shot while also pointing out none who were killed did, but you gotta admit it would put someone on alert, and then being attacked?

I'm just curious what you dispute. Do you disagree they went after him first?

Originally posted by Surtur
I'm asking what you personally believe. There is video out there, etc.

Even the NYT admits he didn't fire the first shot while also pointing out none who were killed did, but you gotta admit it would put someone on alert, and then being attacked?

I'm just curious what you dispute. Do you disagree they went after him first?

ive seen the videos, read witness testimony, know no one at the parking lot asked anyone to "protect". Seen pictures of him in his Police Uniform, his crocs, combat gear and proudly with his gun. Heard conflicting things prior to the video we have seen, know other footage exists allegedly. We'll see, he'll have his day in court. 🙂

Footage shows them going after him. So I'm confused.

Originally posted by Surtur
I'm asking what you personally believe. There is video out there, etc.

Even the NYT admits he didn't fire the first shot while also pointing out none who were killed did, but you gotta admit it would put someone on alert, and then being attacked?

I'm just curious what you dispute. Do you disagree they went after him first?

I think what he did was self defense, that said I'm not a big fan of open carry. Although I do like conceal and carry. Also the ppl in the evening weren't peacful protesters, they were there to cause a riot and destroy things, the 3 ppl in question also didn't live in the town they went to destroy.

Originally posted by Surtur
Footage shows them going after him. So I'm confused.
He was getting about before hand according to some medics behaving strangely, some say pointing his gun about, we'll see.

But the video evidence doesn't show that and Whirly you can agree video would trump statements right?

So it sounds like he is gonna be acquitted of the most serious charges.

If he is, on a scale of 1 to 10 what do you feel the chances are animals will riot?

One thing I wonder about is...

According to requirements listed on the Chicago government’s website, a person must be at least 18 to get even the most basic EMT license. In addition, the Antioch Fire Department told ABC Chicago that while Rittenhouse was a fire cadet and a member of the Grayslake and Lindenhurst Law Enforcement Explorer Program, he had been with the explorer program less than a year.

Originally posted by Old Man Whirly!
One thing I wonder about is...

According to requirements listed on the Chicago government’s website, a person must be at least 18 to get even the most basic EMT license. In addition, the Antioch Fire Department told ABC Chicago that while Rittenhouse was a fire cadet and a member of the Grayslake and Lindenhurst Law Enforcement Explorer Program, he had been with the explorer program less than a year.

I am unsure how this negates claims of self defense.

One thing I wonder about is...

According to requirements listed on the Chicago government’s website, a person must be at least 18 to get even the most basic EMT license. In addition, the Antioch Fire Department told ABC Chicago that while Rittenhouse was a fire cadet and a member of the Grayslake and Lindenhurst Law Enforcement Explorer Program, he had been with the explorer program less than a year.

He wasn't an EMT, he probably had taken first aid under red cross.

Did he claim to be one? He was a lifeguard so I'm sure he was familiar with some medical basics.

Originally posted by Surtur
I am unsure how this negates claims of self defense.

Also WI has a castle doctrine which means you can protect YOUR property not other peoples.

He shot someone in the head. He was fleeing the scene after he murdered someone. It was only then that he was attacked by the crowd as he tried to run. Then he shot 2 more people. The DA has a strong case that this guy came from out of state fully armed to instigate violence. His social media backs up this fact, witnesses will back up this fact, hence why they charged him 1st degree.

He murdered two people then fled the state... Arrested as a fugitive and awaiting extradition back to WI.

So Surt, if you and DDM dress up in your KKK costumes and strap semi-auto's across your shoulder and march into a social justice demonstration, you have the right to shoot anyone who acts aggressively towards you?

And, anyway, Self defense or not the Larper was underage, carrying a gun, he shot and killed two people at a BLM protest. He should've been at home, not breaking a curfew and carrying a gun at a protest.

Lol wait, you are claiming the first person he shot was not going after him?

Should those whose lives got snuffed out have been at home too or no?

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
I did not state that Kyle had a "sweet ass." Once again, that is you telling on yourself. "Sweet" is your descriptor, and one you came up with

Oh I'm sorry I didn't make the irrelevant distinction between "Sweet ass" and "Cherry ass".

because you were thinking about it.

Nope. I wasn't the one mentioning Kyle's "cherry ass" after detailing a fantasy about which he gets put in prison for life and is raped.

I also never mentioned rape.

You didn't have to explicitly mention it, but it is what you meant.

No one was thinking about what was going to happen to a minor's ass in jail until you mentioned it. We can just put 2 and 2 together. The fact that you feel more sympathy for the person who attacked Kyle (a convicted pedo rapist) then the 17 year old defending himself is telling on yourself. Not to mention the empirical data showing that gay men, such as yourself, are much more likely to be pedos.

Plenty of ostensively straight men have gay sex in prison.

plenty of ostensively straight men get raped in prison yeah, much higher that rates at which heterosexual men have consensual intimacy according to the stats.

But you would be the expert on desperate and sexless young men, so I will defer to your lived experience.

I love how this is the go to any time a failing argument is proposed. Robtard said the same thing a year ago and the forum and it what decided to prove myself wrong I had to post a picture with my GF and Laptop with the KMC page still in the photo, still with the same girl.

But regardless, anytime I've ever faced a dry spell, I never thought about having sex with a gay boy. The vast majority of hetrosexual men don't want to either in a drought. Not that it matters to you considering little boys are you're preference, quite clearly.

It t slander if it is not true. [/B]

correct.

Originally posted by Surtur
Lol wait, you are claiming the first person he shot was not going after him?

Should those whose lives got snuffed out have been at home too or no?

Like I say, opinions differ, we will see in court

I notice you don't challenge most of what I wrote.

Originally posted by JohnnyRotton
Oh I'm sorry I didn't make the irrelevant distinction between "Sweet ass" and "Cherry ass".

Nope. I wasn't the one mentioning Kyle's "cherry ass" after detailing a fantasy about which he gets put in prison for life and is raped.

You didn't have to explicitly mention it, but it is what you meant.

No one was thinking about what was going to happen to a minor's ass in jail until you mentioned it. We can just put 2 and 2 together. The fact that you feel more sympathy for the person who attacked Kyle (a convicted pedo rapist) then the 17 year old defending himself is telling on yourself. Not to mention the empirical data showing that gay men, such as yourself, are much more likely to be pedos.

plenty of ostensively straight men get raped in prison yeah, much higher that rates at which heterosexual men have consensual intimacy according to the stats.

I love how this is the go to any time a failing argument is proposed. Robtard said the same thing a year ago and the forum and it what decided to prove myself wrong I had to post a picture with my GF and Laptop with the KMC page still in the photo, still with the same girl.

But regardless, anytime I've ever faced a dry spell, I never thought about having sex with a gay boy. The vast majority of hetrosexual men don't want to either in a drought. Not that it matters to you considering little boys are you're preference, quite clearly.

correct.

Wow, calm down mate... Wow!

Originally posted by Old Man Whirly!
Like I say, opinions differ, we will see in court

I notice you don't challenge most of what I wrote.

Most of your shit was nonsense I was doing you a kindness trust me.

Originally posted by Surtur
Most of your shit was nonsense I was doing you a kindness trust me.
😉 Sure Jan!