2020 the battle of the septuagenarians - Trump vs Biden, Part 2

CtevenSrowder

CtevenSrowder wrote: »

I see this old chestnut is still doing the rounds.

What else would you call white supremacists and Nazis walking the streets?

Dyr

duploelabs wrote: »

Does the shooter have access to that information?

Did the shooter target those individuals based on that information or was their killing 'a happy little accident' and was deserved despite the victims already paying their dues for their crimes?

It makes it far, far more likely that the dead felons were, once again, deviating very far from normative social behaviour when they were offed in self defence, of course if you watched the footage you'd know that though. Convicted paedo with a history of violence chasing a teenager, I'm gonna say he was presenting a clear threat when the kid did a society a favour. Same with the low life wailing on the kid while the kid was on the ground.

Two dead bad guys and dude who was pointing a a gun at the kid loses half his arm. No stray rounds. Damn fine shooting if you ask me.

Dyr

Carfacemandog wrote: »

Of course it is. Had there been multiple marches literally organised by ISIS and Al Qaeda in a city during Obama's tenure under the guide of 'religious freedom' yet filled with ISIS banners and jihadist slogans etc, one of which resulted in terrorism and murder, there would have been uproar. The Unite the Right rallies were organised by outright white supremacists like Richard Spencer (of "heil Trump!" infamy) and even the KKK themselves.

You know Spencer is supporting Biden this time around, right? That means you should hate Biden, by your logic.

namloc1980

Bambi wrote: »

You know Spencer is supporting Biden this time around, right? That means you should hate Biden, by your logic.

I bet that point sounded really good in your head. You even put a little smilie face as you were so pleased with it. Bless.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.businessinsider.com/joe-biden-campaign-disavows-richard-spencer-endorsement-2020-8%3Famp&ved=0ahUKEwiq6PKt9cLrAhUhpHEKHVKuAzoQyM8BCCowAA&usg=AOvVaw3WrsQ1ZLZBbEXW3xnWgmSl&ampcf=1

Carfacemandog

Bambi wrote: »

You know Spencer is supporting Biden this time around, right? That means you should hate Biden, by your logic.

I see you appear to have completely missed the Biden campaign immediately doing what Trump refused to (and what his supporters defended him for refusing to do): completely rejected Spencer's endorsement.

https://www.timesofisrael.com/biden-campaign-strongly-rejects-endorsement-of-white-nationalist-richard-spencer/

“When Joe Biden says we are in a battle for the soul of our nation against vile forces of hate who have come crawling out from under rocks, you are the epitome of what he means,” campaign spokesman Andrew Bates said Sunday on Twitter, responding to a tweet by Spencer. “What you stand for is absolutely repugnant. Your support is 10,000% percent unwelcome here.”

Bambi

Bambi wrote: »

It makes it far, far more likely that the dead felons were, once again, deviating very far from normative social behaviour when they were offed in self defence, of course if you watched the footage you'd know that though. Convicted paedo with a history of violence chasing a teenager, I'm gonna say he was presenting a clear threat when the kid did a society a favour. Same with the low life wailing on the kid while the kid was on the ground.

Two dead bad guys and dude who was pointing a a gun at the kid loses half his arm. No stray rounds. Damn fine shooting if you ask me.

There's a video of the shooter punching a woman, deviating very far from normative social behaviour , no?

salmocab

[Deleted User] wrote: »

There's a video of the shooter punching a woman, deviating very far from normative social behaviour , no?

Well she looked like a liberal so presumably she deserved it.

It is pretty telling the type of people that are that after justifying the killings though. They're the exact type of poster that justifies police killings and like to pretend that BLM don't have legitimate grievances. Also the same type that rant about refugees etc but say the proud boys are great. It's pretty transparent.

Kidchameleon

Deleted User wrote: »

The man prosecuted of having sex with a minor occurred back in 2002 when he was 18. 18 years free of prosecution is somebody who has reformed.

There is no justifying child rape no matter how long ago it happened. Here is your "reformed" person moments before he was shot. Shouting racist abuse, acting aggressively, being physically abusive, inviting violence upon himself:

* Warning, the video contains use of the "N word"

I am not saying the shooter was right or that these people deserved to die. I am saying the shooter may have felt the need to defend himself.

Cody montana

salmocab wrote: »

Well she looked like a liberal so presumably she deserved it.

Classy.

Dyr

salmocab wrote: »

Well she looked like a liberal so presumably she deserved it.

She was assaulting a third party so we can say her political views have nothing to do with her getting the digs off the boy.

Do you think the paedo and domestic abuser were shot becuase they looked like liberals.

salmocab

Bambi wrote: »

She was assaulting a third party so we can say her political views have nothing to do with her getting the digs off the boy.

Do you think the paedo and domestic abuser were shot becuase they looked like liberals.

No they were shot because someone turned up with a gun and used it because he felt he could.
The boy certainly seems to be a hero beating up girls and shooting people. What an age to be alive.

duploelabs

Kidchameleon wrote: »

There is no justifying child rape no matter how long ago it happened. Here is your "reformed" person moments before he was shot. Shouting racist abuse, acting aggressively, being physically abusive, inviting violence upon himself:

* Warning, the video contains use of the "N word"

I am not saying the shooter was right or that these people deserved to die. I am saying the shooter may have felt the need to defend himself.

He's no legal right to carry that firearm or defend himself in that manner

salmocab

salmocab wrote: »

No they were shot because someone turned up with a gun and used it because he felt he could.
The boy certainly seems to be a hero beating up girls and shooting people. What an age to be alive.

Certain posters seem like they'd be justifying it, if he'd killed a dozen people, they'd still be justifying it. He's basically the archetype of a school shooter. Disaffected and happy to break laws as he views his cause to be righteous.

Billy Mays

Surely people don't actually believe neo nazi Richard "Heil Trump" Spencer when he says he's voting for Biden??!! :eek:

Carfacemandog

Billy Mays wrote: »

Surely people don't actually believe neo nazi Richard "Heil Trump" Spencer when he says he's voting for Biden??!! :eek:

Probably not, but they're happy to ignore Biden's campaign completely disavowing said support while also denouncing Spencer in order to push a narrative. Expect to see it brought up a few dozen times in this thread between now and November, with more or less zero acknowledgement when corrected and likely repeating the same fallacy shortly afterwards.

Timberrrrrrrr

Carfacemandog wrote: »

Probably not, but they're happy to ignore Biden's campaign completely disavowing said support while also denouncing Spencer in order to push a narrative. Expect to see it brought up a few dozen times in this thread between now and November, with more or less zero acknowledgement when corrected and likely repeating the same fallacy shortly afterwards.

They love to bring it up yet they seem to forget he was/is a massive supporter of Trump. Why were they not talking about him when he supported trump?

extra gravy

Bambi wrote: »

Two dead bad guys and dude who was pointing a a gun at the kid loses half his arm. No stray rounds. Damn fine shooting if you ask me.

Well done, you've summed up the kind of appalling atttitude shared by many gun toting Trump supporters by praising this deranged psycho as some kind of hero. And yet it's the "lefties" that condone violence apparently

LessOutragePlz

duploelabs wrote: »

He's no legal right to carry that firearm or defend himself in that manner

That's for a court of law to decide not you. We'll be waiting for a while to find out if he did actually break any laws and if he is guilty of any crimes.

duploelabs

LessOutragePlz wrote: »

That's for a court of law to decide not you. We'll be waiting for a while to find out if he did actually break any laws and if he is guilty of any crimes.

He crossed state lines with a firearm and is 17, are you in dispute of those facts?

LessOutragePlz

LessOutragePlz wrote: »

That's for a court of law to decide not you. We'll be waiting for a while to find out if he did actually break any laws and if he is guilty of any crimes.

He categorically broke laws, you have to be over eighteen to open carry. He also crossed state lines with a gun that he didn't own.

LessOutragePlz

duploelabs wrote: »

He crossed state lines with a firearm and is 17, are you in dispute of those facts?

He didn't cross state lines with a firearm he borrowed it from a friend that had the firearm in Wisconsin.

"In his statement, Pierce said the weapon Rittenhouse used in the shootings “did not cross state lines,” when Rittenhouse traveled from his home in Illinois to Wisconsin. Pierce would not say Saturday whose weapon it is or how it came to be in the possession of a 17 year old, which resulted in a weapons charge in addition to the homicide charges. “I’m not going to comment on the specifics of the litigation, but the weapon did not cross state lines,” Pierce said."

https://www.forbes.com/sites/karenrobinsonjacobs/2020/08/29/lawyer-illinois-teen-charged-with-kenosha-shootings-kyle-rittenhouse-a-scapegoat-who-may-fight-extradition/

I'm no legal eagle but I've people mention that there is a law allowing 16 years and above to open carry that rifle that he had.

LessOutragePlz

[Deleted User] wrote: »

He categorically broke laws, you have to be over eighteen to open carry. He also crossed state lines with a gun that he didn't own.

False he did not carry the weapon across state lines.

They will also be arguing that he was allowed to open carry the weapon as he is eligible to be a member of a militia.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/karenrobinsonjacobs/2020/08/29/lawyer-illinois-teen-charged-with-kenosha-shootings-kyle-rittenhouse-a-scapegoat-who-may-fight-extradition/

"Pierce also said he plans to fight that charge based on the argument that at 17, Rittenhouse would be eligible to be part of a “well regulated Militia,” that is protected by the Constitution."

LessOutragePlz

LessOutragePlz wrote: »

He didn't cross state lines with a firearm he borrowed it from a friend that had the firearm in Wisconsin.

"In his statement, Pierce said the weapon Rittenhouse used in the shootings “did not cross state lines,” when Rittenhouse traveled from his home in Illinois to Wisconsin. Pierce would not say Saturday whose weapon it is or how it came to be in the possession of a 17 year old, which resulted in a weapons charge in addition to the homicide charges. “I’m not going to comment on the specifics of the litigation, but the weapon did not cross state lines,” Pierce said."

https://www.forbes.com/sites/karenrobinsonjacobs/2020/08/29/lawyer-illinois-teen-charged-with-kenosha-shootings-kyle-rittenhouse-a-scapegoat-who-may-fight-extradition/

I'm no legal eagle but I've people mention that there is a law allowing 16 years and above to open carry that rifle that he had.

The open carry law is 18 years old, there's not some bizarre exception for AR-15 rifles. If you're gonna claim there is, you need to back it up.

LessOutragePlz

[Deleted User] wrote: »

The open carry law is 18 years old, there's not some bizarre exception for AR-15 rifles. If you're gonna claim there is, you need to back it up.

See my previous post if they can prove he was a member of the militia then he would be allowed to open carry as a 17 year old.

Kidchameleon

Black Live Matter supporters cheer as Trump supporter dies from gunshot wound on the streets of Portland

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/article.cfm?c_id=2&objectid=12360719

LessOutragePlz

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Black Live Matter supporters cheer as Trump supporter dies from gunshot wound on the streets of Portland

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/article.cfm?c_id=2&objectid=12360719

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P72LzvfQkdY

Here's some of them cheering after a police officer was knocked out by an object thrown by one of the "peaceful" protesters.

namloc1980

LessOutragePlz wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P72LzvfQkdY

Here's some of them cheering after a police officer was knocked out by an object thrown by one of the "peaceful" protesters.

Why are you trying to conflate constitutionally protected protesters and violent thugs??

LessOutragePlz

namloc1980 wrote: »

Why are you trying to conflate constitutionally protected protesters and violent thugs??

Not trying to conflate anything. There are clearly some protesters carrying out actions that aren't constitutionally protected.

extra gravy

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Black Live Matter supporters cheer as Trump supporter dies from gunshot wound on the streets of Portland

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/article.cfm?c_id=2&objectid=12360719

You were victim blaming earlier and thanking a post that praised a killer's shooting skills. You're in no position to take the moral high ground here.