Originally posted by cdtm
The fact they chased him is not speculation.Again, would you support a home owner chasing after the person who broke into their home as they were fleeing?
You said without a gun Rittenhouse would have been confronted and murdered. That's pure speculation on your part. 100% speculation. Keep trying though.
Originally posted by Old Man Whirly!
durmask
I'm sure Rob can offer a reason why this is different then.
They chased Kyle.
That's a fact, no one disputes this. The question is whether he acted in self defense.
Yet they still chased him..
All those Stand Your Ground cases where the home owner chases down a break and enter. In some cases shoots them in the back.
You were fine with those, right?
Originally posted by Robtard
You said without a gun Rittenhouse would have been confronted and murdered. That's pure speculation on your part. 100% speculation. Keep trying though.
Rob, if he was armed with a gun and they chased him down, you think it even matters?
Why would they hesitate if unarmed, when they chased an armed man?
They already proved they weren't deterred by a gun. So what prevents them from giving chase if he is unarmed?
Originally posted by cdtmCourse he wouldn't. Hell, even if the homeowner had shot him while was still in house Rob wouldn't be ok with that if the home invader was black and homeowner was white. Rob, like most leftists hates the fact we even have a 2nd amendment right to self-defense.
The fact they chased him is not speculation.Again, would you support a home owner chasing after the person who broke into their home as they were fleeing?
Originally posted by eThneoLgrRnae
Course he wouldn't. Hell, even if the homeowner had shot him while was still in house Rob wouldn't be ok with that if the home invader was black and homeowner was white. Rob, like most leftists hates the fact we even have a 2nd amendment right to self-defense.
I think you may be right.
Originally posted by Robtard
Yup
No.
Is Adam claiming a gun provokes a confrontation? Someone sees a gun, and immediately picks a fight.
That isn't how it works. If you see a gun, you run away. Only an idiot picks a fight with an armed person.
So which are they? Idiots who pick fights with a kid holding a rifle? Or could it be they didn't see the gun in the dark of night?
Originally posted by cdtm
Rob, if he was armed with a gun and they chased him down, you think it even matters?Why would they hesitate if unarmed, when they [b]chased an armed man
?They already proved they weren't deterred by a gun. So what prevents them from giving chase if he is unarmed? [/B]
Your angle is to push that walking around with (and pointing according to some testimony) assault rifle is not confrontational at all, especially in a heated environment. When it likely is.
Why you're doing your silly speculation that an unarmed Rittenhouse would have been murdered with a skateboard.
Originally posted by Robtard. I never argued that.
Your angle is to push that walking around with (and pointing according to some testimony) assault rifle is not confrontational at all, especially in a heated environment. When it is.
Why you're doing your silly speculation that an unarmed Rittenhouse would have been murdered with a skateboard.
So you believe Kyle's gun provoked the fight.
Ergo they saw the gun, and their first reaction was to chase after him.
If that's not it, please tell what you actually mean.
Originally posted by eThneoLgrRnae
lol@ rob thinking u can't kill or seriously injure someone with a skateboard.Also one of the thugs who were chasing him had a gun, ffs.
Strawman nonsense.
Yes, one of them did, multiple people can be in the wrong at one time. It's not this binary Rittenhouse = Good and his victims = Bad as your simple mind wants to push.