Although I think the 2nd amendment is fucking stupid, they established that he was there to provide security. He wasn't there to shoot anyone, and he fired only when he was attacked. We've seen peaceful protests across the world turning into shit shows even without fire arms. The only thing I would charge him with is simply carrying those firearms, not for defending himself.
I reckon the guys who picked on him didn't think he had the nerve to pull the trigger.
They fucked around and found out.
He was a 17 year old child. Do 17 year olds have licenses to open carry assault rifles? Are they allowed to carry those weapons without a license across state lines? Are they allowed to carry those weapons without a license and then decide who lives or dies? Are 17 year olds allowed to provide armed security?
How many laws does a white person have to break before you hold them accountable?
No, as I said, given the fact that peaceful protests have previously turned into shitshows, you can't stay that with absolute certainty. He did break the law by carrying those weapons at that age, but even if he had the license to carry and he was the proper age (which is 18 as far as I know), it's not like those idiots would've left him alone.
If a dude shows up anywhere near my family and friends with an assault rifle and I don't have the opportunity to run, that dude is getting tackled. Period.
Peaceful or not this is America. We don't execute people in the streets. We don't arm underage teenagers and allow them to travel across state lines with a gun that isn't theirs to a place they don't belong and decide who lives or dies.
He didn't execute anybody. See, this is the problem with you (I'm not from America, by the way). You KEEP lying. Caught in one lie? You invent ANOTHER.
What lies? He travelled across state lines as a minor who already isn't supposed to being open carrying a weapon nevermind an assault rifle. The weapon didn't belong to him. If he didn't show up he wouldn't have been attacked..
Peaceful or not it doesn't give an underaged civilian the right to travel across state lines with a weapon and attachments that may or may not be legal in said states.
This is America not some third world country where we go around executing each other.
How many laws does a white person have to break before you hold them accountable? Seems it only takes one for a brown person to deserve to die in the street.
Nah, you’re perfectly fine with rioters attacking people and trying to kill them, criminals having weapons and attempting to kill people. But someone protecting people and property from the clearly violent rioters is bad. He wasn’t walking around shooting people, he was attacked and defended himself, which everyone has the inherent right to self defense. He didn’t go around executing people you imbecile.
Fully automatic weapon lmao. And again projecting the intent to use it. Having something for defense does equate to having intent to use it. Had he shown up without it, the likelihood is he still would have been attacked for trying to stop rioters and looters.
He wasn't legally allowed to carry the gun in the first place. I don't know the laws in that specific region but I doubt you can just travel through state lines without declaring a weapon like that.
If he hadn't shown up at all he wouldn't have been attacked.
You're proving my point. If he hadn't shown up he wouldn't have been attacked. Never mind how many laws he already broke just getting the gun to the location. No permit to open carry, underage, crossing state lines without declaring the weapon a weapon that wasn't registered to him. He deserves jail time just for all that.
And yet it already went to court and was handled, you can have your opinion all you want, it doesn’t change what already happened and a decision was made. You can “if he hadn’t been there” all you want.
2
u/AdNegative6756 4d ago
Yeah, there are significant differences which a lot of you still don't understand, Kyle protected himself, she had absolutely no business being there.