Page 17 of 29 FirstFirst ... 7151617181927 ... LastLast
Results 161 to 170 of 288

Thread: Rittenhouse Verdict

  1. #161
    Simpleton Alan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    8,341
    Quote Originally Posted by frugal-one View Post
    If an active shooter we all hope someone will take them down so no more lives are lost.
    Yes we do hope someone will take down an active shooter, but in this case does that term actually apply? Are you an active shooter if you're retreating to the nearest police line after stopping a person attempting to inflict death or serious bodily harm upon yourself? If you're beaten with rocks and skateboards and have someone pointing a firearm at your head, all while you're retreating from the first violent encounter, does the active shooter term still apply or is that just a way to imply that he is a threat to persons unknown and deserves everything he gets?

    In this case, Rittenhouse was lucky that so many people had taken Rob's long time advice about carrying a fully charged cell phone at protests in order to document activities. The huge volume of footage available made easy work for the jury in deciding the case in spite of all the self-serving narratives from those trying to push a racist or political agenda.
    "Things should be made as simple as possible, but not one bit simpler." ~ Albert Einstein

  2. #162
    Senior Member beckyliz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Topeka, KS
    Posts
    862
    Same courtroom - Chrystul Kizer is awaiting trial or killing the man who raped and trafficked her. Hope she can use the defense. https://www.npr.org/2021/11/22/10579...r-self-defense
    "Do not accumulate for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust destroy and thieves break in and steal. But accumulate for yourselves treasure in heaven, where moth and rust do not destroy, and thieves do not break in and steal. For where your treasure is, your heart is also." Jesus

  3. #163
    Senior Member bae's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Offshore
    Posts
    10,063
    Quote Originally Posted by Alan View Post
    No, self defense for anyone attacked by someone attempting to inflict death or serious injury. Just as it's always been.
    It impresses me how many people seem upset with the idea.

  4. #164
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    3,811
    Quote Originally Posted by Alan View Post
    Yes we do hope someone will take down an active shooter, but in this case does that term actually apply? Are you an active shooter if you're retreating to the nearest police line after stopping a person attempting to inflict death or serious bodily harm upon yourself? If you're beaten with rocks and skateboards and have someone pointing a firearm at your head, all while you're retreating from the first violent encounter, does the active shooter term still apply or is that just a way to imply that he is a threat to persons unknown and deserves everything he gets?

    In this case, Rittenhouse was lucky that so many people had taken Rob's long time advice about carrying a fully charged cell phone at protests in order to document activities. The huge volume of footage available made easy work for the jury in deciding the case in spite of all the self-serving narratives from those trying to push a racist or political agenda.
    So you think it was ok that a 17 year old from IL comes to WI to “help” by carrying an assault weapon? Just wondering….

  5. #165
    Senior Member catherine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Vermont
    Posts
    12,752
    I've sat on a jury and decided the fate of someone who threatened an innocent civilian, and it's not easy. In fact, it was traumatic for me. I think the point here is that the legal facts and implications have to be separated from feelings and biases.

    Some of what we are reacting to is a direct impact of what has been portrayed in the media: what we are reacting to is not the legality of the verdict--it's the smugness of Rittenhouse after the trial; it's the fact that as parents, many of us would not support our 17 year-old walking around in an incendiary environment with an AR-15; it's the reaction of many Conservatives that this is a big win for 2nd amendment rights.

    It is maddening, but I do think the frustration is the culture divide and not the actual verdict. Objectively,none of us can say how the jury came to their verdict. If we had been there, we might have arrived at the same verdict. The maddening part is the peripheral questions about what led to this event. In my world, my 17 year old would never have even seen an AR-15, never mind brandish one at an event where their maturity would probably not align with the skills needed to navigate the event. But that's not a legal defense.
    "Do any human beings ever realize life while they live it--every, every minute?" Emily Webb, Our Town
    www.silententry.wordpress.com

  6. #166
    Simpleton Alan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    8,341
    Quote Originally Posted by frugal-one View Post
    So you think it was ok that a 17 year old from IL comes to WI to “help” by carrying an assault weapon? Just wondering. His intent seems dubious.
    Yes, I think it was ok for a 17 year old to help out in WI, it was well documented that he helped remove graffiti from buildings and extinguished at least one fire. I too live just a few miles from a state line and see no issue with helping out in Northern KY, it's part of my home area. As for the 'assault weapon' thing, I probably would not show up with an AR15, but then again I don't own one. I probably would show up with my 'assault pistol' for self defense purposes, those rioters are often very violent in addition to being destructive.
    "Things should be made as simple as possible, but not one bit simpler." ~ Albert Einstein

  7. #167
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    3,811
    Yeah, there were people there burning dumpsters… The local police should have handled the situation on their own. Surprises me, that you, as a former cop would encourage vigilantes.

  8. #168
    Senior Member catherine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Vermont
    Posts
    12,752
    Quote Originally Posted by Alan View Post
    those rioters are often very violent in addition to being destructive.
    I wonder why?
    "Do any human beings ever realize life while they live it--every, every minute?" Emily Webb, Our Town
    www.silententry.wordpress.com

  9. #169
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    7,126
    Quote Originally Posted by frugal-one View Post
    Yeah, there were people there burning dumpsters…
    They burned $50,000,000 worth of dumpsters? That’s a lot of garbage.

  10. #170
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    3,811
    Quote Originally Posted by LDAHL View Post
    They burned $50,000,000 worth of dumpsters? That’s a lot of garbage.
    So? The local police would (and should) have handled the situation.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •