Anyone else watching the Kyle Rittenhouse trial?

A

Applesauceisgood

Well-Known Member
Fogdog said:
fuzzy logic that.

The jury found Rittenhouse not guilty on all counts based upon instructions from the judge. @Applesauceisgood went way beyond that. Because you people have selective memory, I'll post what he said:

"The victim is Mr. Rittenhouse. He was violently attacked and his right to self-defense was reaffirmed under law. A just outcome."


Rittenhouse was found not guilty of all charges. That is fact. The "blah blah self defense affirmed" post by applejuice came from his cognitive bias and was not part of jury's opinion.
Click to expand...
The state was attempting to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Mr. Rittenhouse did not have the right to self-defense in this case. In other words, the jury decided that Mr. Rittenhouse acted in self-defense, and his right was affirmed.
 
BodegaBud

BodegaBud

Well-Known Member
printer said:
But did they bring guns thinking that they might use them? Next time they will. And that is not something the law in this case took into account. This has not made America more safe, it made it less safe. And that is not the purpose of the law.
Click to expand...

Yeah the one guy shot in the arm had a handgun he pulled on Kyle that he brought from out of state
 
m4s73r

m4s73r

Well-Known Member
CatHedral said:
Who had the guns at the times and places that matter? Does that help?
Click to expand...
Both... Kyle had a gun, third guy had a gun. Thats 2 sides having guns. The bigger issue is the third guy with the gun, he should have smoked kyle in the head after he killed the first 2.
 
H

Hiddengems

Well-Known Member
printer said:
Zero bearing. He was not there to protect his home. Why was he there with a rifle? Counter protesting?
Click to expand...
He had a rifle to protect himself while helping people in an area abandoned by police.

If the police could stop shooting unarmed people, maybe they'd have time to do their real job, keeping order.
 
piney420

piney420

Well-Known Member
m4s73r said:
So I should just never leave my house? Like I got to go to the grocery store and stuff.
Click to expand...
Huh? By carrying a gun you're not a willing target right? So you can go anywhere you want... i wasn't being sarcastic. All women should get a concealed permit and carry.
 
Fogdog

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
m4s73r said:
Thats where we must disagree. Slaughter works very well. And its not fantasy. This protest here was full of armed protesters. All I was saying is, if one side is going to show up armed, then the other side should as well. Otherwise, the unarmed side will be wiped out by the armed side. As American history keeps showing Might makes right. Has any of these peaceful protest changed anything? Or did change only seem to come after great violence?
Click to expand...
"slaughter works very well" good heavens.

How did that work out for Hitler? Or the Soviet Union? What you describe is nonsense. As if the US were some sort of isolated place where we can't compare our lot with others. Compare the US with other similar countries. Their democracies are are not in crisis. They aren't dealing with right wing vigilantes murdering people who oppose police brutality. What you are saying is exactly what white supremacists advocate. They want civil war and the destruction of this country's government.

No thanks, I'm not happy with the results of this trial but I'm not about to endorse street war as a corrective action. That would play right into the radical right's hands. I advocate that we put our justice system under bright lights and deal with the fascist threat that is growing there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top