BLM, or WLM? [MOD WARNING: FIRST POST]

BattleCorp

BattleCorp wrote: »

Stone clearly was the one who initiated the violence in that case so I've no problem with what the people attending the funeral did.

Who initiated the violence in Rittenhouse's case? From the video it looks like the rioters did that by chasing Rittenhouse and throwing stuff at him. If the first shooting was self defence, then so too was the second and third shooting.

Rittenhouse by illegally carrying a weapon into a volatile situation.

BattleCorp

RasTa wrote: »

He shot the first dude 5 times, people chased him. He shot two more.

He's fecked. Madness he wasn't arrested on the spot.

Here's a witness statement from a reporter who witnessed the first shooting. He says Rittenhouse was being chased and got cornered in a parking lot and someone went for his gun and Rittenhouse shot him.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gGb3Qv4_gZI&feature=emb_logo

Self defence in my book.

Tell me how

superflyninja wrote: »

Are you serious? So there are no riots over there? It's all 100 percent peaceful and the problem is angry conservatives?

Why don't you give me a percentage of what you think the total number of marches there have been which have turned violent out of all of those which have been held?

Or, what percentage of people attending the marches do you think have engaged in violence?

What way do you think the angry conservatives would be happy with people drawing attention to the plight of a certain sector of society when the above ways have been varied and have all been viewed as being unacceptable.

Broadstone Bob

Deleted User wrote: »

Rittenhouse by illegally carrying a weapon into a volatile situation.

Class A misdemeanour. If he is found guilty its a max 10k fine and/or max 9 months in prison.

TomTomTim

Tell me how wrote: »

Why don't you give me a percentage of what you think the total number of marches there have been which have turned violent out of all of those which have been held?

Or, what percentage of people attending the marches do you think have engaged in violence?

What way do you think the angry conservatives would be happy with people drawing attention to the plight of a certain sector of society when the above ways have been varied and have all been viewed as being unacceptable.

Honestly, it's unquantifiable. People like pretend otherwise though. The reality is though that there was been much chaos, which leaves a stink around the whole movement, regardless of the peaceful aspect. People like you who are apologist for the chaos, are just as guilty. If you and the movement as a whole put in effort to dissociate yourselves from the bad apples, you'd have a point, yet I see very little of that.

superflyninja

Tell me how wrote: »

Why don't you give me a percentage of what you think the total number of marches there have been which have turned violent out of all of those which have been held?

Or, what percentage of people attending the marches do you think have engaged in violence?

What way do you think the angry conservatives would be happy with people drawing attention to the plight of a certain sector of society when the above ways have been varied and have all been viewed as being unacceptable.

Can you give an accurate percentage?
So if for example 10000 people peacefully protest and 1% riot that's fine by you is it? How many businesses have been destroyed by that 1%? How much violence has been committed?
The "angry conservatives" are clearly speaking about the riots not the peaceful protests. That police have been told to stand down in certain cities is amazing. You start to damage property,loot or commit violence then you are no longer a peaceful protester you are a criminal.

CertifiedSimp

Oh dear, the BLM crowd have put a guillotine outside the White House. Look at how many upvotes this post has.

So so many lefties support this kind of disgusting act. They cry and whinge about the alt right and fascists yet they turn up insinuating that they want to behead the president of the United States.

These are the good guys?

Reddit also is symbolic of the lefty media. They allow this to be posted yet if this was a "far right" group doing this for Biden or Pelosi they'd ban it under "advocating hate" rule they have.

https://www.reddit.com/r/pics/comments/ihzaiq/a_guillotine_has_been_put_in_front_of_the_fencing/

Gerry Hatrick

BattleCorp wrote: »

Here's a witness statement from a reporter who witnessed the first shooting. He says Rittenhouse was being chased and got cornered in a parking lot and someone went for his gun and Rittenhouse shot him.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gGb3Qv4_gZI&feature=emb_logo

Self defence in my book.

It's self defence in any reasonable persons book.

Broadstone Bob

Broadstone Bob wrote: »

Class A misdemeanour. If he is found guilty its a max 10k fine and/or max 9 months in prison.

If someone is trying to stop you after you killed someone, you can continue shooting and killing in ‘self-defense'.

Is that how it works?

Gerry Hatrick

CertifiedSimp wrote: »

Oh dear, the BLM crowd have put a guillotine outside the White House. Look at how many upvotes this post has.

So so many lefties support this kind of disgusting act. They cry and whinge about the alt right and fascists yet they turn up insinuating that they want to behead the president of the United States.

These are the good guys?

Reddit also is symbolic of the lefty media. They allow this to be posted yet if this was a "far right" group doing this for Biden or Pelosi they'd ban it under "advocating hate" rule they have.

https://www.reddit.com/r/pics/comments/ihzaiq/a_guillotine_has_been_put_in_front_of_the_fencing/

Now imagine the utter (rightful) outrage of the lefty liberal mob if a right leaning grouping produced a noose at a march or gathering. Lead story on every network.

Gerry Hatrick

Gerry Hatrick wrote: »

It's self defence in any reasonable persons book.

C'mon, Gerry. Don't let you idealogy get in the way of facts. If this is self defence, then if a mass murderer is on the prowl and a citizen and this citizen tries to disarm the mass shooter, then by your idealogy, the mass shooter can then shoot the person trying to disarm him in "self defence"

Tell me how

TomTomTim wrote: »

Honestly, it's unquantifiable. People like pretend otherwise though. The reality is though that there was been much chaos, which leaves a stink around the whole movement, regardless of the peaceful aspect. People like you who are apologist for the chaos, are just as guilty. If you and the movement as a whole put in effort to dissociate yourselves from the bad apples, you'd have a point, yet I see very little of that.

And your good self, as with others here, if you had been around in previous times, I have no doubt, (despite the claims you'll no doubt come out with) that you would have been arguing against the abolition of segregation and the 15th amendment.

BattleCorp

Deleted User wrote: »

If someone is trying to stop you after you killed someone, you can continue shooting and killing in ‘self-defense'.

Is that how it works?

You are talking like it's 100% clear that Rittenhouse murdered those people. It's not 100% clear.

Check out the video in my post #2553. It's a witness statement from someone who witnessed the first shooting. The first shooting seems like self-defence based on the reporters eye witness testimony.

Kyle defended himself after the first attack and defended himself after the second attack. Both instances look like self-defence to me.

Gerry Hatrick

TomTomTim wrote: »

Honestly, it's unquantifiable. People like pretend otherwise though. The reality is though that there was been much chaos, which leaves a stink around the whole movement, regardless of the peaceful aspect. People like you who are apologist for the chaos, are just as guilty. If you and the movement as a whole put in effort to dissociate yourselves from the bad apples, you'd have a point, yet I see very little of that.

BLM need to look at how the Islamic community has distanced itself from the radical nutjobs and go a similar path. The violence which is being supported from the democrats is going to lose them the election. Don't know if that possible though as BLM seem to have a high percentage of violent criminals within their ranks.

superflyninja

Tell me how wrote: »

And your good self, as with others here, if you had been around in previous times, I have no doubt, (despite the claims you'll no doubt come out with) that you would have been arguing against the abolition of segregation and the 15th amendment.

That is just ridiculous.

BattleCorp

Deleted User wrote: »

C'mon, Gerry. Don't let you idealogy get in the way of facts. If this is self defence, then if a mass murderer is on the prowl and a citizen and this citizen tries to disarm the mass shooter, then by your idealogy, the mass shooter can then shoot the person trying to disarm him in "self defence"

They are not the same.

Here's a question for you.

If a mob is chasing you, trying to do you harm, should you be allowed to defend yourself? Straightforward question.

BattleCorp

Deleted User wrote: »

If someone is trying to stop you after you killed someone, you can continue shooting and killing in ‘self-defense'.

Is that how it works?

If the first shooting is in self-defence, and people continue to attack you, then yes, you can continue to defend yourself.

shutup

shutup wrote: »

I do mean it. I’ve watched it 30 times laughing my head off. Rioting is disgraceful. Theres now two less rioters to worry about. Hopefully this puts off more criminals attacking people and bullying average people going about their day.

It's people who vocalise their issues in the manner you are doing now, who make being "right leaning" people like myself seem extreme.

If indeed you do find yourself watching a man kill another man on repeat, all the while laughing uncontrollably, seek help. If you don't, yet decided it would be good to rankle people on a discussion board by saying that you do, seek help.

It's not shocking. It's not funny. It's just detrimental to conversation.

BattleCorp

BattleCorp wrote: »

You are talking like it's 100% clear that Rittenhouse murdered those people. It's not 100% clear.

Check out the video in my post #2553. It's a witness statement from someone who witnessed the first shooting. The first shooting seems like self-defence based on the reporters eye witness testimony.

Kyle defended himself after the first attack and defended himself after the second attack. Both instances look like self-defence to me.

I believe the first incidence there was a shot fired in the air and there was concern that Rittenhouse had fired it. Hence, the reason that people were chasing him. It is completely Rittenhouse's fault. He was in possession of a gun illegally that night in Kenosha, he let himself get isolated, he shot people trying to disarm him after he had shot somebody in the head. He is an idiot who thought he was the big man and now he is going to spend a LONG time in prison (deservedly).

Maybe it will put manners on him and he can learn to respect the law.

Tell me how

superflyninja wrote: »

Can you give an accurate percentage?
So if for example 10000 people peacefully protest and 1% riot that's fine by you is it? How many businesses have been destroyed by that 1%? How much violence has been committed?
The "angry conservatives" are clearly speaking about the riots not the peaceful protests. That police have been told to stand down in certain cities is amazing. You start to damage property,loot or commit violence then you are no longer a peaceful protester you are a criminal.

Given that estimates (in june) suggested that between 15M and 26M had protested, and if we go with a figure of 20M for that time (and ignore all the protests that have gone on since), If 10,000 people had rioted, it would be a percentage of 0.05%. So, if these figures are correct, are the protests, in your view, violent protests?

And so, I can comfortably say that I condone any violence, but that the amount of violence which has been carried out over the last few months, do not invalidate the purpose of the protests. At all.

riffmongous

Deleted User wrote: »

C'mon, Gerry. Don't let you idealogy get in the way of facts. If this is self defence, then if a mass murderer is on the prowl and a citizen and this citizen tries to disarm the mass shooter, then by your idealogy, the mass shooter can then shoot the person trying to disarm him in "self defence"

Indeed that's why the self defence claim is nonsense. The protesters are the ones who had a right to self defence when this lunatic showed up first.

BattleCorp

BattleCorp wrote: »

They are not the same.

Here's a question for you.

If a mob is chasing you, trying to do you harm, should you be allowed to defend yourself? Straightforward question.

If he hadn't been illegally carrying a weapon, nobody would have died.

The reason he was been chased was because he had shot someone in the head and they wanted to disarm him.

Tell me how

BattleCorp wrote: »

They are not the same.

Here's a question for you.

If a mob is chasing you, trying to do you harm, should you be allowed to defend yourself? Straightforward question.

Chasing you because you are armed with a deadly weapon.

That's ignoring the use of the word 'mob' as well. When do people go from protesters to being members of a mob?

weldoninhio

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I believe the first incidence there was a shot fired in the air and there was concern that Rittenhouse had fired it. Hence, the reason that people were chasing him. It is completely Rittenhouse's fault. He was in possession of a gun illegally that night in Kenosha, he let himself get isolated, he shot people trying to disarm him after he had shot somebody in the head. He is an idiot who thought he was the big man and now he is going to spend a LONG time in prison (deservedly).

Maybe it will put manners on him and he can learn to respect the law.

I actually hope he gets life times three.

Then a presidential pardon, just to see the absolute meltdown on the left.

Tell me how

Think the evidence of police collusion with the activities of vigilante gangs is going to get a lot of attention in the coming weeks.

If it was happening in South America, the US (formerly, when they had some standing) would be speaking out to denounce it.

When this was happening in Northern Ireland, there was no confusion as to how illegal it was.

weldoninhio

weldoninhio wrote: »

I actually hope he gets life times three.

Then a presidential pardon, just to see the absolute meltdown on the left.

Don't think Joe Biden will be pardoning him.

RasTa

BattleCorp wrote: »

Here's a witness statement from a reporter who witnessed the first shooting. He says Rittenhouse was being chased and got cornered in a parking lot and someone went for his gun and Rittenhouse shot him.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gGb3Qv4_gZI&feature=emb_logo

Self defence in my book.

5 times isn't self defence. You could argue against the other two people he shot but not the first person.

He's even on his phone saying he just killed somebody.

Sudden Valley

Wisconsin is a swing state right? So I would be guessing that Biden is walking a tightrope in what he can say about anything of these incidents.
The whole BLM movement is a bit fascinating at the moment because they don't see to have a clear objectives other then escalating tensions when a black person is killed by police.
At least some posters are going mad about Antifa anymore!

Tell me how

CertifiedSimp wrote: »

Oh dear, the BLM crowd have put a guillotine outside the White House. Look at how many upvotes this post has.

So so many lefties support this kind of disgusting act. They cry and whinge about the alt right and fascists yet they turn up insinuating that they want to behead the president of the United States.

These are the good guys?

Reddit also is symbolic of the lefty media. They allow this to be posted yet if this was a "far right" group doing this for Biden or Pelosi they'd ban it under "advocating hate" rule they have.

https://www.reddit.com/r/pics/comments/ihzaiq/a_guillotine_has_been_put_in_front_of_the_fencing/

Do you really need a lesson in the symbolism of a guillotine versus a noose?

One, since the time of the French revolution is commonly used in imagery where the populace is objecting to the behaviour of the government, the other where a very particular and identifiable sector of society is targeted in extra judicial killings.

The connotations around both are very different, and widely understood. The Yellow Vest protests in France saw the same thing being done.

RasTa

An autopsy found that Rosenbaum was shot five times -- in the right groin, back, left hand, left thigh and right side of his forehead

Self defence, eh?