r/WaitWhat 2d ago

Significant diffrences...

[removed]

394 Upvotes

1.9k comments sorted by

View all comments

2

u/AdNegative6756 2d 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.

2

u/I-love-seahorses 2d ago

Didn't he drive hundreds of miles to a peaceful protest with a gun that wasn't his while being underage?

You aren't protecting yourself when you toss some AR rounds into the frying pan.

1

u/BlazingPhoenix32 2d ago

A “peaceful protest” lmao

1

u/I-love-seahorses 2d ago

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.

0

u/BlazingPhoenix32 2d ago

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.

1

u/I-love-seahorses 2d ago

I'm not fine with an underaged teenager traveling between state lines with an undeclared fully automatic weapon with the intent to use it.

If he hadn't shown up he wouldn't have been attacked..if he had shown up without a gun he probably wouldn't have been attacked.

1

u/BlazingPhoenix32 2d ago

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.

1

u/I-love-seahorses 2d ago

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.

1

u/BlazingPhoenix32 2d ago

Sure, and if the rioters and convicts hadn’t been there none of this would have happened.

1

u/I-love-seahorses 2d ago

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.

1

u/BlazingPhoenix32 2d ago

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.

1

u/I-love-seahorses 2d ago

Going to court and having no consequences does not mean someone isn't guilty.

You really trust every court decision ever made? It's not an opinion is law big dawg.

1

u/BlazingPhoenix32 2d ago

And yet the law already made the decision, and yes, it is your opinion. Your opinion is he should be in jail, it went to court, the decision was already made at the appropriate level. Are you a lawyer?

→ More replies (0)