Police shootings, vigilante shootings, and Black Lives Matter

Carfacemandog

AbusesToilets wrote: »

Proven violent past, based on him apparently intervening in a fight involving his sister, versus a convicted peadophile and a convicted domestic abuser. Right on.

As to your claim that we don't know what sparked the fight, it's readily apparent that Rosenbaum and BLM did. He clearly and repeatedly looked to escalate to physical confrontation. There is also clear evidence of a BLM member firing a pistol into the air. All of which has been posted in this thread and the one on AH previously.

Please continue your false assertions, in the face of clear evidence to the contrary.

Which "false assertions", that Kyle Rittenhouse beat the **** out of a girl? Given that you're the one here claiming to have video of something you don't, and who is trying to pass off your imagination as fact, that's a bit rich.

You have no idea if Kyle Rittenhouse sucker punched Rosenbaum like he did to that girl, or if Rosenbaum attacked him without provocation, or if Rittenhouse let off one of the shots heard before the shooting video began, or if Rosenbaum or anyone else did. Claims that you do know despite having no video evidence of what happened that led to Rittenhouse being chased, nor having been there yourself, are simply you making things up. This is a fact.

But yeah here's Kyle Rittenhouse and a gang of his mates beating the **** out of a girl if it's what you were calling claiming was a false assertion. Feel fee to continue to defend him on it, and the 'external power' that made him and a gang of his mates assault her.

https://twitter.com/kirkacevedo/status/1300136807405744129

Retr0gamer

AbusesToilets wrote: »

Anyone who thinks it's ok to destroy other people's property is utterly disgusting. Am I doing it right?

I'm not a sociopath so like to put one ahead of the other in importance. The one that is owned by big faceless business and can be replaced any time being the lesser of the two

AbusesToilets wrote: »

Glad to see you're following the example of BLM's leaders on condoning violence and destruction in the name of justice.

And true to form yet more strawman arguments.

AbusesToilets

Carfacemandog wrote: »

Which "false assertions", that Kyle Rittenhouse beat the **** out of a girl? Given that you're the one here claiming to have video of something you don't, and who is trying to pass off your imagination as fact, that's a bit rich.

You have no idea if Kyle Rittenhouse sucker punched Rosenbaum like he did to that girl, or if Rosenbaum attacked him without provocation, or if Rittenhouse let off one of the shots heard before the shooting video began, or if Rosenbaum or anyone else did. Claims that you do know despite having no video evidence of what happened that led to Rittenhouse being chased, nor having been there yourself, are simply you making things up. This is a fact.

But yeah here's Kyle Rittenhouse and a gang of his mates beating the **** out of a girl if it's what you were calling claiming was a false assertion. Feel fee to continue to defend him on it, and the 'external power' that made him and a gang of his mates assault her.

https://twitter.com/kirkacevedo/status/1300136807405744129

A video of a fight between teenagers, where it appears one is Rittenhouse's sister, that he intervenes in. Have you ever been in a fight in your life? Should you now be morally condemned for all time? You have any context to incident in the video of the fight, or are you so desperate for a gotcha moment that you don't even care?

Two felons, convicted of sexual assault and domestic battery, actively engaged in destruction and violence. Your attempts at whataboutery and moral equivalency are transparent and pathetic.

It's frankly astonishing the length you'll go to deny what's clearly posted. You realise everyone else can watch those videos. If you have a competing piece of evidence, by all means post it.

Potatoeman

You’re not going to get the full picture of anyone involved in these incidents on either side until the court cases. There’s a lot of spin from both sides.

AbusesToilets

Retr0gamer wrote: »

I'm not a sociopath so like to put one ahead of the other in importance. The one that is owned by big faceless business and can be replaced any time being the lesser of the two



And true to form yet more strawman arguments.

So you are arguing that it's ok for rioters to destroy communities with impunity. When the police have abandoned their duties, business owners shouldn't be allowed to defend their livelihoods. Would you say the same thing for a mob coming to burn you out of your home?

" Fire away lads, your right to loot is more important than my life"

Embarrassing

AbusesToilets

correct horse battery staple wrote: »

Destruction of property and premeditated murder are not in the same category of crimes, its not even in same ballpark. You have a few hundred years of law and punishment in US that would highlight the difference between the two. One does not excuse the other, I understand Russian trolls love resorting to whataboutism but this grade of whataboutism is taking the piss altogether.

Btw the Declaration of Independence (and now dollar bills) literally in its opening lines has this
"Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness"

There is no mention of property anywhere in this "sacred" document

Why do you hate America?

Please show where premeditated murder occured and where I argued in support of it. I find it hilarious that you and other supporters are so quick to defend the rights of a mob to riot and destroy a community, while at the same time speaking of justice. Where is the justice for the business owners whose life investments have been erased? Where is the justice for the workers out of a job because their work has been looted and forced to shut down? Where is the justice for people terrorised in their homes for having the temerity of making a comfortable for themselves?

You want to throw some ****e about me hating America, why do you hate society? It seems you are against the most basic tenets of it, that one should be safe and free from terror

AbusesToilets

correct horse battery staple wrote: »

That will be illustrated in a court of law, law and order remember?

So far we have clear evidence of a young man travelling far away with a military grade weapon to deliberately shoot people. The prosecutors can make their case, it is not my job.



But you do hate America, I pointed out that the founding document of United States puts life above all else with no mention of property. Same goes for the Constitution, and hundreds of years of case law precedent.

Why do you continue to equate destruction of property (yes it is a crime) to be on the same level as premeditated murder possibly the most egregious crime in criminal law, maybe equivalent to Treason, which of course Trump is very much also involved in.

Yawn. You argument is as empty as your morals. You are lying about the incident involving Rittenhouse, as we have ample evidence of what his intentions were in traveling to Kenosha. Namely cleaning graffiti and later protecting a business from rioters. The group that did actually travel with a view to commiting violence. As clearly evidenced by the behaviour of Rosenbaum and others in multiple videos. A group who were likely illegally armed, given the many felons present in their group. So why do insist on lying again and again?

No murder took place at all imo, and I'm pretty confident that the court case will show that. What you have made clear is how utterly morally bankrupt you are, that you would give so little care for the lives ruined by these rioters.

AbusesToilets

correct horse battery staple wrote: »

Did the shop owners get shot? Did they happen to be black and shot 7 times each?

Death is a very final event, destruction of property is not ...

We get it, you support the rioting and destruction of property.

Potatoeman

correct horse battery staple wrote: »

Did the shop owners get shot? Did they happen to be black and shot 7 times each?

Death is a very final event, destruction of property is not ...

John Ward was shot dead by Paddy Nally over repeated break ins. There was huge support for him and political pressure not to charge him with murder.

If it’s your property, it fine and many people would have no issue killing thieves. So life isn’t always seen as more valuable than property.

AbusesToilets

correct horse battery staple wrote: »

Nope i clearly wrote that yes it is a crime but nowhere near the same level of crime as premeditated murder. You continue to try to equate both.

BTW you support bounties and murder of US services personel by supporting Trump's continued treason crime. so to quote yourself it shows

Again, there's no premeditated murder, but continue to lie about that.

Given my personal background, your efforts at trying to get a raise out of my by accusing me of being un-American is genuinely hilarious.

Quin_Dub

Agree to disagree and move on please.

rossie1977

Once again how far does Rittenhouse get if he is black. Do you think the police just let him walk back up the street rifle in tow...

Retr0gamer

AbusesToilets wrote: »

So you are arguing that it's ok for rioters to destroy communities with impunity. When the police have abandoned their duties, business owners shouldn't be allowed to defend their livelihoods. Would you say the same thing for a mob coming to burn you out of your home?

" Fire away lads, your right to loot is more important than my life"

Embarrassing

No I'm not arguing with you at all because all you can come out with are strawman arguments like this one and the one previously. There's nothing to argue about because I never made those arguments. Anyway you have made your mind up. You're a lost cause.

Same strawman garbage from you again talking about us supporting the looting and rioting. Nobody said that. There's a difference to the right to protest which people are talking about.

So stop embarassing yourself and educate yourself.

AbusesToilets

Retr0gamer wrote: »

No I'm not arguing with you at all because all you can come out with are strawman arguments like this one and the one previously. There's nothing to argue about because I never made those arguments. Anyway you have made your mind up. You're a lost cause.

Same strawman garbage from you again talking about us supporting the looting and rioting. Nobody said that. There's a difference to the right to protest which people are talking about.

So stop embarassing yourself and educate yourself.

Are you calling yourself a straw man, because those are your arguments. You've made your position quite clear at this point.

Carfacemandog

rossie1977 wrote: »

Once again how far does Rittenhouse get if he is black. Do you think the police just let him walk back up the street rifle in tow...

Below is what Clay Higgins, a House Representative from Louisiana thinks. This is from within the last 48 hours, which Facebook have since deleted for inciting violence.

It is telling that Clay Higgins managed to find one of the only black militias to include a picture of at the bottom, rather than any of the huge numbers of white militias that have been active and on the streets during this time.

It is even more telling that Clay Higgins has previously identified with and encouraged others to join white) militias with ties to white supremacism: https://www.desmogblog.com/2018/10/18/congressman-clay-higgens-gas-industry-three-percenters

It continues to get more telling when Clay Higgins has ties to more than just one militia with ties to white supremacism, and has attended and spoken at their rallies: https://www.bayoubrief.com/2018/08/13/captain-of-the-militia/

It is also very much worth noting that Clay Higgins is a former police officer.

Tell me how

AbusesToilets wrote: »

Are you calling yourself a straw man, because those are your arguments. You've made your position quite clear at this point.

All looting is unacceptable.
All looters should be prosecuted.
Shooting at someone is not a reasonable response to looting.

AbusesToilets

Tell me how wrote: »

All looting is unacceptable.
All looters should be prosecuted.
Shooting at someone is not a reasonable response to looting.

Shooting at someone because they are attacking you with a deadly weapon, however, is.

Retr0gamer

AbusesToilets wrote: »

Shooting at someone because they are attacking you with a deadly weapon, however, is.

Like a skateboard?

Manic Moran

Tell me how wrote: »

Shooting at someone is not a reasonable response to looting.

Rooftop Koreans disagree with you. So do a few business owners from this year in places like Atlanta and San Antonio.

It may not be their lives they are being deprived of, but it often is their livelihoods or their life’s work. There is a reason that they are often shown distraught after having received the attentions of looters. Who are rioters or looters to destroy the lives of others?

Tell me how

Manic Moran wrote: »

Rooftop Koreans disagree with you. So do a few business owners from this year in places like Atlanta and San Antonio.

It may not be their lives they are being deprived of, but it often is their livelihoods or their life’s work. There is a reason that they are often shown distraught after having received the attentions of looters. Who are rioters or looters to destroy the lives of others?

I categorically disagree with looting, but to make excuses for lethal force being used on people doing it is just that, making excuses and an acceptance of that would explain why America, more than any other developed country in the world has seen an increasing level of paranoia and violence as more and more take the approach of shooting first, asking questions later. It has not worked.

Quin_Dub

Manic Moran wrote: »

Rooftop Koreans disagree with you. So do a few business owners from this year in places like Atlanta and San Antonio.

It may not be their lives they are being deprived of, but it often is their livelihoods or their life’s work. There is a reason that they are often shown distraught after having received the attentions of looters. Who are rioters or looters to destroy the lives of others?

Indeed , and had the guys with guns in Kenosha been on the roof of properties or even on Private property carrying out that defence then the story would be a bit different I suspect.

However they weren't, they were out on the public streets walking around acting as a "para-military" force.

I suspect that that difference might be crucial in any upcoming legal proceedings.

Potatoeman

Quin_Dub wrote: »

Indeed , and had the guys with guns in Kenosha been on the roof of properties or even on Private property carrying out that defence then the story would be a bit different I suspect.

However they weren't, they were out on the public streets walking around acting as a "para-military" force.

I suspect that that difference might be crucial in any upcoming legal proceedings.

Or crossing state lines with an automatic weapon on a public street like Rittenhouse.

Carfacemandog

Potatoeman wrote: »

Or crossing state lines with an automatic weapon on a public street like Rittenhouse.

Rittenhouse is claiming he didn't cross state lines with the gun, which then brings up the question of where he got it and who is supplying people with AR15s to roam the streets with.

Potatoeman

Carfacemandog wrote: »

Rittenhouse is claiming he didn't cross state lines with the gun, which then brings up the question of where he got it and who is supplying people with AR15s to roam the streets with.

Has to be registered, if it’s not then that’s even more charges.

Dyr

Manic Moran wrote: »

Rooftop Koreans disagree with you. So do a few business owners from this year in places like Atlanta and San Antonio.

It may not be their lives they are being deprived of, but it often is their livelihoods or their life’s work. There is a reason that they are often shown distraught after having received the attentions of looters. Who are rioters or looters to destroy the lives of others?

The National Guard needs a Rooftop Korean regiment in each state

GreeBo

AbusesToilets wrote: »

It's a different circumstance, the officer didn't feel it was sufficiently threatening of a situation presumably.

So when he said "I'll fúcking kill you" that wasnt a threat?

GreeBo

Carfacemandog wrote: »

I'm confused, is he threatening people like Kyle or BLM?

AbusesToilets

Retr0gamer wrote: »

Like a skateboard?

Or a fist, or a can of soup in a bag. More people per year are killed in the US by fists than rifles, FYI

Retr0gamer

What about protesters that turn up with tins of soup?

Potatoeman

Retr0gamer wrote: »

What about protesters that turn up with tins of soup?

They get thrown in the can.