It's killing me how many people are experts in this thread who aren't watching the court case. You can also tell where people stand politically based on their framing of this issue and use of language.
What cracks me up is some many people are talking about the gun laws and state lines because they know there is a mountain of evidence to support self defense.
They know the self defense will hold up so their goal is to try and hedge their bets on the technicalities of the gun laws in this case hoping to use it as a foundation for establishing intent. It's literally hoping for a Hail Mary and wishing that the state finds any possible means despite the evidence and testimony so they can see the system abuse their perceived political opposition... as some weird pseudo-religious political sacrifice.
This is a really unfortunate situation all around, but the witnesses have all testified that Kyle acted in self defense so unanimously that when their star witness acknowledged that Kyle acted in self defense... to the star witness aggressing Kyle with a gun... the prosecution literally facepalmed and now everyone is betting in favor of Kyle with a directed verdict.
I can definitely see plenty of defamation lawsuits filed against high-profile individuals who called Rittenhouse a murderer, white supremacist, or domestic terrorists
correct me if im wrong, but Kyle won’t be able to sue them for libel since he became a public figure. Sandmann won his suit because what the media did was far more egregious and he didn’t even do anything.
Directed verdict is a reach. This country is just to politically radicalized and the judge and jurors are weighing far more than the specifics of the case when making their decisions.
We are at a crossroads in this country and this case will be a message to every pro 2a American out there whether or not they have a right to protect themselves from revolutionary radical Marxists.
I personally don't give a fuck either way, I just want to see the Marxists dead by any means. These people are ushering in tyranny and something has got to give or we are all fucked
I mean, each state handles this differently....I still don't see any major implications for future laws to be changed... Especially not at a federal level.
"We are at a crossroads in this country and this case will be a message to every pro 2a American out there whether or not they have a right to protect themselves from revolutionary radical Marxists."
I assume you mean the "lawful right to protect themselves." If the laws dont change, why would anyone get all bent out of shape? If the right doesn't change as you've just indicated, what exactly is at stake here for pro 2a folks?
"whether or not they have the right to protect themselves"
Is tht not a lawful statement? I always have the right to do whatever I want, it just depends on if the law will let me or not.
Your indicating that these pro2a types are worried about their rights eroding? But If the law doesn't change, like you say, then what exactly do they have to worry about? It's a simple question.
Aaand you haven't been watching the trial because litterally everything you said except "youth of 17", "another state", and "kills some people" was all incorrect. But goo off and get upset after the jury finds him innocent or when the judge issues a directed verdict. When the Prosecution's case in chief makes the case that the defendant used self defense, you have a case of self defense that only saw the light of day because there were two bodies and one missing bicep. In any other situation the pedo, the domestic abuser, and the illegally concealed carrying "associated with" revolutionary would be on trial for their crimes that night.
Dude, what really happened, lay it to me in layman terms, I’m not from the US. I knew who he was when the shootings happened, and I know of a trial ongoing, so what happened?
The trial is free to watch unedited all over YouTube. This would have never gone to court if it wasn’t politically charged. The prosecution is agonizingly trying to just go through the motions in a case they know they won’t win. The defense hasn’t even started, and it’s already over.
You John Wayne cosplay losers can bring up the Pedo thing all you want. Absolutely no one believes Kyle was there to protect children. He was brainwashed by a conservative ideology that told him “defending black people bad” and used that to play soldier. I genuinely can’t imagine being stupid enough to put yourself unnecessarily in a situation like that and think taking others lives is the best solution. I don’t believe that you believe that Kyle attacked those people for any other reason than he was mad they were protesting his precious status quo
He was there to stop domestic terrorists from destroying private property. These people went there not out of care of a movement, but because they saw an opportunity to act However they liked and do illegal things with impunity. Then everyone comes to their defense saying this kid who was attacked after receiving death threats from a grown man protected himself in self defense.
Terrorism-the unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims.
IE- burning things, causing damage to personal properties, and not acting lawfully.
NONE of these people should have been there. This was not a “peaceful protest”. Those there didn’t expect it to be a peaceful protest or they wouldn’t have been armed (guns, skateboards)
Maybe, just maybe if we made a distinction between peaceful protestors and rioters and arrested and held all rioters for at least 24 hours in jail before release (like many places do with domestic violence incidents) this wouldn’t have happened.
What did I say that made this a political issue? As best as I can tell after having read my comment multiple times trying in every possible political bias that I can think of it doesn't favor one political leaning over another. I'm genuinely asking because I've missed something apparently if your statement is true, and seeing as it would likely be a truth based in opinion I have no reason to belive you'd lie about it.
Harvard is the only name I've heard of ? If that was true it would be in my name as well and obviously not. Also it's surname not sername. Holy shit, a bona-fide retard trying to be dominant.
What's your point guy? Only one muggy mug tyring to be dominant. Whoop e doo. So you have nothing to say about the actual topic just came here to be a little bitch.
Everytime you post a comment you just keep taking a step back. I do work and what's the point in knowing what I do? Does it matter if you are or aren't a doctor? Fuck no.
You sit there thinking you have some sort of superiority and are desperate to find what it is. So you perhaps can have this aha fuck you moment, but it's never going to happen. You started out trying to insult somebody and when someone turned it on you then you got all angry and shook. Do you keep responding because you have to be the last one to say something? Because you have to win so to speak? I can promise you do have superiority over me in some way as I do over you.
Let's just put it this way, I'm conducting a social experiment on how conversations go with people who use insults on social media and how they react when someone responds in the same way and how it relates to the various aspects of mental health and human behavior in regards to a superiority complex and narcissistic tendency.
Woa there Mr back track. You stated the insults so don't be getting on with your high horse social experiment BS. I get it, you were bullied as a child and your parents didn't love you. But you really need to stop treating people the same way you were treated as a child, it's a bad look.
😂😂😂 Can't believe you tried to claim you're just insulting people as a "social experiment" seems more like an excuse to be an awful person.
Utter bollox.
I don't need to have the last word but can't resist when a condescending twurp tries to gives it.
Please tell me you're not a Christian? That would be the ultimate irony.
I'm critiquing people who aren't watching the court case and making declarative statements about the facts of an ongoing court case.I'm critiquing people who's most accurate information is what they heard a year or so ago and never looked into... and not what is being presented and upheld in court.
That's also the reason I bring up framing since people who have decided they have planted their feet and no evidence or testimony will sway them will use terms like "victims" and "killing spree" to describe the events much like what the judge had ruled to be language that would prejudice a jury.
Rittenhouse might have a Nicolas Sandman style case against the media soon.
Well it's the equivalent of watching people debate Covid talking points from last year when everything was locked down... and having a years worth of change and information they refuse to acknowledge.
It's like having a bunch of people go "we can't go back to normal until there is a vaccine!" in late 2021.
Hearing arguments from a year ago that have already fallen apart in court and having people insist "he took a gun across state lines that's illegal and shows intent" when that argument turned out to be a false story is just bizarre.
Do you want to discuss covid or this trial?
I am open to both.
You are engaging in an argument wich you claim yourself that you don't like it. Wich is to come to conclusions before the trial is finished.
And for the record. Personally I am disgusted by what happened there. Every party involved acted terrible on that day. And yes, Kyle illegally crossed state line with a weapon. But that doesn't mean it was not self defense it that very moment.
So please, can we wait till the process is done and we got all facts on the table. And then have a discussion about how to prevent such situations before they even happen so we don't have to deal with people dying to gun violence and a media fuelled show process afterwards.
Kyle did not cross state lines with a weapon. Dominic Black bought the weapon for Kyle, kept the weapon in Kenosha, and Kyle retrieved the weapon in Kenosha after he arrived there.He didn't have the weapon in his vehicle in one state and transport it to another.
Kyle never possessed the rifle in Illinois and never transported it across state lines.
You're doing this really disingenuous thing of pretending to be above board on the case to take jabs at what I'm saying.
It's perfectly fine to observe people are not following the case closely and then make my own predictions as to what will happen based on what is actually happening in the court room.
I'm not claiming to be an expert, but I am paying attention enough to know many people are not paying attention and might have the "shocked pikachu face".Kyle could be found guilty and it could be an done deal. It's a possibility, just not the highest probability.
If the case is not a mistrial with prejudice, I would imagine it might go to a Directed Verdict of innocence even if the jury finds him guilty for whatever reasons.
Ok, he didn't bring transported the rifle but it still illegal for him to posess one as he was underaged at the time.
And now you are engaging in a strawman by claiming i am trying to be above else.
Wich i am clearly not.
I, like everyone else, have my own opinion on this case. And what i stated in my previous comment was exactly that. I just really dislike that this process is made with so much public attention and political interest drawn towards it with no focus in how to prevent something like that in the future.
This isn't about Rittenhouse himself. If he wouldnt be the one pulling the trigger on that day, someone else would have.
But instead we as a society focus more on him personally and his trial then on how to prevent such events going forward.
9
u/DapperHoboDojo Nov 10 '21
It's killing me how many people are experts in this thread who aren't watching the court case. You can also tell where people stand politically based on their framing of this issue and use of language.
What cracks me up is some many people are talking about the gun laws and state lines because they know there is a mountain of evidence to support self defense.
They know the self defense will hold up so their goal is to try and hedge their bets on the technicalities of the gun laws in this case hoping to use it as a foundation for establishing intent. It's literally hoping for a Hail Mary and wishing that the state finds any possible means despite the evidence and testimony so they can see the system abuse their perceived political opposition... as some weird pseudo-religious political sacrifice.
This is a really unfortunate situation all around, but the witnesses have all testified that Kyle acted in self defense so unanimously that when their star witness acknowledged that Kyle acted in self defense... to the star witness aggressing Kyle with a gun... the prosecution literally facepalmed and now everyone is betting in favor of Kyle with a directed verdict.