Rittenhouse situation

stocker08

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 2, 2009
Messages
26,377
Reaction score
7,456
Points
113
Serious question--Did the mob attack any other people in this fashion, or just Kyle?

Exactly. Why was this the singular incident? Since he had left the lot he claimed he was there to "protect"....it would seem he was trying to throw around authority in the streets. Authority that he didn't have. People don't have to comply with a kid because he has a gun. But wannabee police man was clearly ready to start shooting.
 

kg21

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 25, 2021
Messages
1,856
Reaction score
773
Points
113
The facts are this.....Rittenhouse wasn't asked to defend anything or patrol a lot. He LEFT the lot to go elsewhere. And he was trying to play fake police. Everyone that he was following or trying to command was in danger due to this kid running around with an AR. They have every right to defend themselves as well. But Rittenhouse was the one with a gun. Not Rosenbaum.

Just like when Trump lost the election.....you are going to be a sad dotard when Rittenhouse is correctly sentenced. You'll claim victim even though you've been proven terribly wrong. Then you'll go back to your unemployed existence of shitposting and defending white supremacists because they are like you.

Added easily one of the saddest posters to ever grace GH.
Rosenbaum must have been asked to show up, get in peoples faces and set the garbage on fire and then chase a kid he thought was going to be easy prey. Remember, Rosenbaum was the victim here.

You have to be a bit.

I"ve got the playbook down here. Rosenbaum was just a peaceful protestor.

Oh, and dummy, one more time. There were firearms everywhere. Literally everywhere.

Who asked Rosenbaum to do what he was doing? Any ideas? Rittenhouse wasn't asked to show up according to you. So who asked Rosenbaum to show up and start lighting fires. Oh, wait, we don't care.
 
Last edited:

kg21

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 25, 2021
Messages
1,856
Reaction score
773
Points
113
Exactly. Why was this the singular incident? Since he had left the lot he claimed he was there to "protect"....it would seem he was trying to throw around authority in the streets. Authority that he didn't have. People don't have to comply with a kid because he has a gun. But wannabee police man was clearly ready to start shooting.
It was a singular incident because that pedophile, Rosenbaum, made it a singular incident. DUH
 







Section2

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
50,166
Reaction score
4,308
Points
113
I don't feel bad for Rosenberg (or whatever his name is) or the other guys who got shot either. Sounds like they were shitheads. But that doesn't mean that Rittenhouse should be let off with a slap on the wrist. Going to that situation with a loaded AR and no authority whatsoever put everyone in danger. Seems like he was trying to play police and people took exception to it. Rittenhouse had an itchy trigger finger and was quick to shoot.

Tough break for him if his intentions were good. But it sure seems like he wanted to play cowboy and ended up making a big mistake. That shouldn't get rewarded.



The people chasing him were doing so because he was walking around with an AR and shot someone to death. What world do you live in?



Nobody else was shot and killed. Only Rittenhouse shot and killed people. Over four days of rioting/protesting. I don't need to connect the dots for you. Rittenhouse was roaming the street putting everyone in danger because he was woefully un-prepared. I get that he is a MAGA, Proud Boy.....so you need to step up the defense here.....but fault isn't a one way street. He was wandering around playing police, panicked and shot people.

One way ticket to jail. And a good lesson for other vigilantes. YOU ARE NOT THE POLICE. YOU DON'T HAVE AUTHORITY.
But he wasn’t quick to shoot. He shot when he was attacked. It’s clear self defense. I don’t care if he gets charged with a weapons violation.

playing cowboy isn’t illegal. That no one else was shot and killed isn’t proof that he didn’t act in self defense no matter how many times you say it. One guy chased him and attacked him and KR shot that guy. That now gives license for others to chase and attack him? Aren’t they then acting as police? Why do they get authority? There was no police presence. Burning and looting was happening without any resistance. Someone either had to step up and fill that void or let it burn. The rioters don’t want a police force, this is what you get.

This has nothing to do with MAGA or proud boys. This is basic fundamental rights. If we give rioters special privileges and take away protections for lawful defense, shut it down.
 



kg21

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 25, 2021
Messages
1,856
Reaction score
773
Points
113
So, an untrained kid with a rifle was a destabilizing thing? Who'd have thought.
No, a 33 year old lighting shit on fire was the destabilizing thing. All while running around yelling Nig--a and then chasing a kid he wanted to punch.
 

Section2

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
50,166
Reaction score
4,308
Points
113
So, an untrained kid with a rifle was a destabilizing thing? Who'd have thought.
The destabilizing thing was the riots, burning and looting. So sorry a 17 year old broke up the party.
 





Section2

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
50,166
Reaction score
4,308
Points
113
Exactly. Why was this the singular incident? Since he had left the lot he claimed he was there to "protect"....it would seem he was trying to throw around authority in the streets. Authority that he didn't have. People don't have to comply with a kid because he has a gun. But wannabee police man was clearly ready to start shooting.
Where is your evidence for any of this narrative?
 

Section2

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
50,166
Reaction score
4,308
Points
113
He actually didn't. He made it worse.
He made it worse for the rioters. They could have either: not rioted, not burned, not chased, not attacked, and none of this would have happened. They were the initiating force and they got what they deserved.
 

saintpaulguy

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 21, 2009
Messages
10,251
Reaction score
4,820
Points
113
He made it worse for the rioters. They could have either: not rioted, not burned, not chased, not attacked, and none of this would have happened. They were the initiating force and they got what they deserved.
As far as I can tell, his presence did nothing positive, and he's lucky to be alive.
 




howeda7

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
58,200
Reaction score
13,875
Points
113
Looked pretty damn well trained to me! Totally in control and only fired when he had to, and only fired at actual threats. Why do you have such a hard on for this kid?
When you put it like that he sounds like a Patriot and Hero. I bet 17 year old 2 would have grabbed the gun and headed for Wisconsin too...
 

Section2

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
50,166
Reaction score
4,308
Points
113
As far as I can tell, his presence did nothing positive, and he's lucky to be alive.
I think we agree that a 17 year old shouldn’t have been there, armed, in a dangerous situation. It seems like that’s your main point. Unfortunately that doesn’t tell us whether he is guilty or innocent in the deaths of 2 individuals. And that’s my main point. He is innocent on self defense grounds. All individuals, regardless of age, have a right to use force to protect themselves, including deadly force.
 

MplsGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 4, 2017
Messages
28,900
Reaction score
7,238
Points
113
whether he is guilty or innocent in the deaths of 2 individuals. And that’s my main point. He is innocent on self defense grounds.
I guess the court will get to see actual evidence , as opposed to your making things up based on your hyper-biased desires.
 

howeda7

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
58,200
Reaction score
13,875
Points
113
Say he's 21 then. In terms of how we condone use of deadly force, is it good policy to encourage untrained, armed people to travel to areas of civil unrest to play cop? I mean, if it goes wrong, the guy with the gun can just shoot people! This wasn't a guy protecting his neighborhood, he chose to go the trouble.
Mind you, most of the damage done in my neighborhood was done by suburban kids there for the lulz, lighting fires and such, so maybe we should encourage some teenagers from Somerset to pop them between the eyes.
Are you suggesting that private police forces would be a bad idea?
 

saintpaulguy

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 21, 2009
Messages
10,251
Reaction score
4,820
Points
113
I think we agree that a 17 year old shouldn’t have been there, armed, in a dangerous situation. It seems like that’s your main point. Unfortunately that doesn’t tell us whether he is guilty or innocent in the deaths of 2 individuals. And that’s my main point. He is innocent on self defense grounds. All individuals, regardless of age, have a right to use force to protect themselves, including deadly force.
Yes, that is in fact my main point. That, and his behavior should not be emulated. There was/is a tendency to make him into a folk hero, and it drives me nuts.
 

Section2

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
50,166
Reaction score
4,308
Points
113
I guess the court will get to see actual evidence , as opposed to your making things up based on your hyper-biased desires.
I’ve seen the video evidence of 2 of the 3. Very clear. If a MAGA was chasing an antifa loser who was armed, and the antifa loser had reason to fear for their life and fired in self defense, I’d argue on their behalf too. You and the rest of your prog buddies would change their assessment of the situation in that case. So who exactly is hyper biased?
 

FormerFatOL

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 21, 2009
Messages
739
Reaction score
644
Points
93
Leftists HATE it when an armed civilian spoils their perfectly good riot. More gun control baby!
 

Section2

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
50,166
Reaction score
4,308
Points
113
Yes, that is in fact my main point. That, and his behavior should not be emulated. There was/is a tendency to make him into a folk hero, and it drives me nuts.
I don’t find anything to disagree with. I said from the start, I’m glad people stepped up to defend against the rioters. I wish it didn’t have to be that way. And I really wish it wasn’t a 17 year old kid who did it. But regardless how he got into the situation, his use of force was appropriate and controlled.
 



Section2

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
50,166
Reaction score
4,308
Points
113
Are you suggesting that private police forces would be a bad idea?
Seems like your party is pretty convinced that public police forces are a total failure. So maybe take it up with them before getting cute.
 




Top Bottom