Kyle Rittenhouse

[Fort Fun Indiana]

freyasman

Another fun little fact:

The little lie the child killer told about going there to provide "medical services" was a lie.

Ironically, the guy whose arm he shot is a trained medic who was there providing medical services to injured people.

It's pretty clear with are dealing with two levels of quality of people, here.

Yes, that is clear.

http://www.kenoshacountyeye.com/gaige.pdf

It's also clear that you are not on the side of the decent people.

Oh look, a link you never read. Do you think this somehow rectifies your error that was the complete foundation of your entire rant? It doesn't.

Got anything else?

You have a very twisted view of what traits are desirable in people.

That's neat. And you think you have a good argument that rests on:

- a lie
-an error
- and a link you never read

 

[DrLove]

The guy who got his bicep shot off was a felon with a handgun, actively attacking someone with it, when he was shot

False. Sorry. Maybe you didnt hear, but that wasnt true, and he had a perfectly legal license to carry.

Got anything else? I suppose not, since your entire diatribe rested on that error.

Really? I'd like a link to that.

Don't much care though, because I have stated more than once that I don't have any problem with felons having guns....... attacking someone with it, is still a crime though.
And he did.
On video.
And he hasn't been charged.



Why do you suppose that is, if not politics?
What other reason is there?

Dude ok with felons having guns ^ Dude be stoopid!

 

[freyasman]

attacking someone with it, is still a crime though.
And he did.
On video.

Liar. I would say you are making an error, but as you said, its on video. He was not assaulting Rittenhouse with his weapon.

You keep having to rely on lies and errors. That should be a strong clue that your arguments are kaput.

Rittenhouse is charged because he threatened people with an illegal firearm first. Prosecutors don't accept his later actions of shooting and killing those same people as self defense. Nor should they.

You better hope, for the poor kid's sake, his lawyers have much better arguments than you do.

It's amazing to me that you can watch the video of this event, and you see all this nonsense.

Your brain is broken.

 

[freyasman]

Why is he the only one being prosecuted?

I am not your assistant. Make your points.

Maybe it's because he is the only one who harmed and killed people? Good luck.

And maybe it's for political reasons.
The state wants a monopoly on force, and always seeks to punish anyone who uses force without their okay, whether justified or not.
If it is demonstrated that a riot can be put down by just a few men with rifles, then why do we need the state, then?
Why then, do we need police and DA's and judges and all the rest?



“The rifle itself has no moral stature, since it has no will of its own. Naturally, it may be used by evil men for evil purposes, but there are more good men than evil, and while the latter cannot be persuaded to the path of righteousness by propaganda, they can certainly be corrected by good men with rifles.” ― Jeff Cooper, Art of the Rifle

So you just better hope there are more “good men” with rifles than idiotic wannabes like Rittenhouse who shot and killed two unarmed men.

At least those employed by the state know law and can be held accountable. Vigilantes? Not so much. History is full of bad examp,es.

Did you really just state that agents of the state are held accountable for misconduct?

Wow........

Wow is right.

I said CAN BE. The system isn’t perfect but it is a hell of a lot better than a bunch vigilantes taking it upon themselves to be judge, jury and executioner.

Is it?

You sure about that?

Because I'm not, and based on the last year's worth of riots, neither are a lot of other folks.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

amazing to me that you can watch the video of this event, and you see all this nonsense.

Right, because you have displaced your morality, ethics, and reason in favor of political fetishes and bigotry.

Maybe you haven't noticed, but reality and your fantasies haven't exactly been lining up for a while now.

 

[freyasman]

and people can govern themselves quite well, left to their own devices

Then go somewhere and do it and leave civilized, educated people alone instead of pestering them with shit we laughed out of the room centuries ago.

We did.

And the statists followed us.

 

[freyasman]

and people can govern themselves quite well, left to their own devices

Then go somewhere and do it and leave civilized, educated people alone instead of pestering them with shit we laughed out of the room centuries ago.

And you're a poor excuse for "educated" or "civilized", IMO.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

We did.

And the statists followed us.

No you didn't. Damn you are weird.

 

[freyasman]

amazing to me that you can watch the video of this event, and you see all this nonsense.

Right, because you have displaced your morality, ethics, and reason in favor of political fetishes and bigotry.

Maybe you haven't noticed, but reality and your fantasies haven't exactly been lining up for a while now.

No, not really.


You're just really fucked in the head.

 

[freyasman]

We did.

And the statists followed us.

No you didn't. Damn you are weird.

You have a very strange perspective on the world, you know that?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

and people can govern themselves quite well, left to their own devices

Then go somewhere and do it and leave civilized, educated people alone instead of pestering them with shit we laughed out of the room centuries ago.

And you're a poor excuse for "educated" or "civilized", IMO.

Yes, cry it all out, son. I can understand your frustration in making an egregious error that was germane to your entire, idiotic rant, then having to lie about something that is 9n video for everyone to see, then having to furiously google for a link you never read to present as your reasons for the things you say.

That's a lot of falling on your face in just a couple pages. So cry it all out, i can take it.

 

[Coyote]

Why is he the only one being prosecuted?

I am not your assistant. Make your points.

Maybe it's because he is the only one who harmed and killed people? Good luck.

And maybe it's for political reasons.
The state wants a monopoly on force, and always seeks to punish anyone who uses force without their okay, whether justified or not.
If it is demonstrated that a riot can be put down by just a few men with rifles, then why do we need the state, then?
Why then, do we need police and DA's and judges and all the rest?



“The rifle itself has no moral stature, since it has no will of its own. Naturally, it may be used by evil men for evil purposes, but there are more good men than evil, and while the latter cannot be persuaded to the path of righteousness by propaganda, they can certainly be corrected by good men with rifles.” ― Jeff Cooper, Art of the Rifle

So you just better hope there are more “good men” with rifles than idiotic wannabes like Rittenhouse who shot and killed two unarmed men.

At least those employed by the state know law and can be held accountable. Vigilantes? Not so much. History is full of bad examp,es.

Did you really just state that agents of the state are held accountable for misconduct?

Wow........

Wow is right.

I said CAN BE. The system isn’t perfect but it is a hell of a lot better than a bunch vigilantes taking it upon themselves to be judge, jury and executioner.

Is it?

You sure about that?

Because I'm not, and based on the last year's worth of riots, neither are a lot of other folks.

Yup. I am sure of that.

Ahmaud Arbery’s alleged killer was vigilante relied upon by cops: report

A Georgia cop anointed the man charged with killing unarmed jogger Ahmaud Arbery as an unofficial neighborhood watchdog, according to a new report. “Your neighbor … is Greg McMichael. Greg is…

nypost.com

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Why is he the only one being prosecuted?

I am not your assistant. Make your points.

Maybe it's because he is the only one who harmed and killed people? Good luck.

And maybe it's for political reasons.
The state wants a monopoly on force, and always seeks to punish anyone who uses force without their okay, whether justified or not.
If it is demonstrated that a riot can be put down by just a few men with rifles, then why do we need the state, then?
Why then, do we need police and DA's and judges and all the rest?



“The rifle itself has no moral stature, since it has no will of its own. Naturally, it may be used by evil men for evil purposes, but there are more good men than evil, and while the latter cannot be persuaded to the path of righteousness by propaganda, they can certainly be corrected by good men with rifles.” ― Jeff Cooper, Art of the Rifle

So you just better hope there are more “good men” with rifles than idiotic wannabes like Rittenhouse who shot and killed two unarmed men.

At least those employed by the state know law and can be held accountable. Vigilantes? Not so much. History is full of bad examp,es.

Did you really just state that agents of the state are held accountable for misconduct?

Wow........

Wow is right.

I said CAN BE. The system isn’t perfect but it is a hell of a lot better than a bunch vigilantes taking it upon themselves to be judge, jury and executioner.

Is it?

You sure about that?

Because I'm not, and based on the last year's worth of riots, neither are a lot of other folks.

Yup. I am sure of that.

Ahmaud Arbery’s alleged killer was vigilante relied upon by cops: report

A Georgia cop anointed the man charged with killing unarmed jogger Ahmaud Arbery as an unofficial neighborhood watchdog, according to a new report. “Your neighbor … is Greg McMichael. Greg is…

nypost.com

And these two winners:

 

[Canon Shooter]

Pause this it at 1:03 in this video. Notice that the tackler's torso is not facing the ball carrier. It's actually facing the ground, not the ball carrier. It's facing away from the ball carrier.



Yet obviously he still made the tackle, because regardless of the fact that he wasn't facing the ball carrier, his momentum carried him into the ball carrier.

Understand now? Or no?

Mother of God you're reaching, and you're failing.

First, off, we're talking about someone being shot in the back, not being tackled in a football game. Second, if the tackler's back had been facing the ball carrier, he never would've made the tackle. He would've been no threat. That would've been an appropriate comparison. But, that comparison only proves you wrong, so you want nothing to do with it...

 

[freyasman]

and people can govern themselves quite well, left to their own devices

Then go somewhere and do it and leave civilized, educated people alone instead of pestering them with shit we laughed out of the room centuries ago.

And you're a poor excuse for "educated" or "civilized", IMO.

Yes, cry it all out, son. I can understand your frustration in making an egregious error that was germane to your entire, idiotic rant, then having to lie about something that is 9n video for everyone to see, then having to furiously google for a link you never read to present as your reasons for the things you say.

That's a lot of falling on your face in just a couple pages. So cry it all out, i can take it.

I can't seem to find any definite link to whether he is a felon or not; can you?

And you claiming self-defense isn't, doesn't make it so.

 

[freyasman]

Why is he the only one being prosecuted?

I am not your assistant. Make your points.

Maybe it's because he is the only one who harmed and killed people? Good luck.

And maybe it's for political reasons.
The state wants a monopoly on force, and always seeks to punish anyone who uses force without their okay, whether justified or not.
If it is demonstrated that a riot can be put down by just a few men with rifles, then why do we need the state, then?
Why then, do we need police and DA's and judges and all the rest?



“The rifle itself has no moral stature, since it has no will of its own. Naturally, it may be used by evil men for evil purposes, but there are more good men than evil, and while the latter cannot be persuaded to the path of righteousness by propaganda, they can certainly be corrected by good men with rifles.” ― Jeff Cooper, Art of the Rifle

So you just better hope there are more “good men” with rifles than idiotic wannabes like Rittenhouse who shot and killed two unarmed men.

At least those employed by the state know law and can be held accountable. Vigilantes? Not so much. History is full of bad examp,es.

Did you really just state that agents of the state are held accountable for misconduct?

Wow........

Wow is right.

I said CAN BE. The system isn’t perfect but it is a hell of a lot better than a bunch vigilantes taking it upon themselves to be judge, jury and executioner.

Is it?

You sure about that?

Because I'm not, and based on the last year's worth of riots, neither are a lot of other folks.

Yup. I am sure of that.

Ahmaud Arbery’s alleged killer was vigilante relied upon by cops: report

A Georgia cop anointed the man charged with killing unarmed jogger Ahmaud Arbery as an unofficial neighborhood watchdog, according to a new report. “Your neighbor … is Greg McMichael. Greg is…

nypost.com

Who?

 

[Muhammed]

Pause this it at 1:03 in this video. Notice that the tackler's torso is not facing the ball carrier. It's actually facing the ground, not the ball carrier. It's facing away from the ball carrier.



Yet obviously he still made the tackle, because regardless of the fact that he wasn't facing the ball carrier, his momentum carried him into the ball carrier.

Understand now? Or no?

Mother of God you're reaching, and you're failing.

First, off, we're talking about someone being shot in the back, not being tyackled in a football game. Second, if the tackler's back had been facing the ball carrier, he never would've made the tackle. He would've been no threat. That would've been an appropriate comparison. But, that comparison only proves you wrong, so you want nothing to do with it...

Rosenbaum was charging at Kyle just like that football player.

Also, someone's back doesn't need to be facing you in order for you shoot them in the back, jackass.

To prove this to yourself, stand several feet way from your kitchen table. Imagine that the top surface of your tabletop is the back of an attacker who is rushing towards you.

The attacker is not facing you, it's facing away from you towards the floor and it's back is facing away from you towards the ceiling. Now see if you can shoot a picture of the table top with your Cannon.

If you can, that's proof that someone does not need to be facing you to be a threat, and you could shoot that threat in the back.

Anyone who thinks that a gunshot wound to the back constitutes evidence that the shooting wasn't in self-defense is a fucking moron.

 

[freyasman]

Why is he the only one being prosecuted?

I am not your assistant. Make your points.

Maybe it's because he is the only one who harmed and killed people? Good luck.

And maybe it's for political reasons.
The state wants a monopoly on force, and always seeks to punish anyone who uses force without their okay, whether justified or not.
If it is demonstrated that a riot can be put down by just a few men with rifles, then why do we need the state, then?
Why then, do we need police and DA's and judges and all the rest?



“The rifle itself has no moral stature, since it has no will of its own. Naturally, it may be used by evil men for evil purposes, but there are more good men than evil, and while the latter cannot be persuaded to the path of righteousness by propaganda, they can certainly be corrected by good men with rifles.” ― Jeff Cooper, Art of the Rifle

So you just better hope there are more “good men” with rifles than idiotic wannabes like Rittenhouse who shot and killed two unarmed men.

At least those employed by the state know law and can be held accountable. Vigilantes? Not so much. History is full of bad examp,es.

Did you really just state that agents of the state are held accountable for misconduct?

Wow........

Wow is right.

I said CAN BE. The system isn’t perfect but it is a hell of a lot better than a bunch vigilantes taking it upon themselves to be judge, jury and executioner.

Is it?

You sure about that?

Because I'm not, and based on the last year's worth of riots, neither are a lot of other folks.

Yup. I am sure of that.

Ahmaud Arbery’s alleged killer was vigilante relied upon by cops: report

A Georgia cop anointed the man charged with killing unarmed jogger Ahmaud Arbery as an unofficial neighborhood watchdog, according to a new report. “Your neighbor … is Greg McMichael. Greg is…

nypost.com

And these two winners:

And what did these 2 do wrong?

Nothing except not allow the mob to have it's way, right?







It seems anyone who gets in the mob's way is suddenly the worst thing ever, as far as you're concerned.
That's pretty telling.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

I can't seem to find any definite link to whether he is a felon or not; can you?

Oh, well then, you cant claim he was a felon in illegal possession of a firearm, can you?. But Rittenhouse being there illegally and possessing a gun illegally are facts we do know.

So, starting to understand why he was the only one charged?

My claims don't dictate the reality of the universe? Oh my, what an excellent point!

 

[DrLove]

We did.

And the statists followed us.

No you didn't. Damn you are weird.

Hopefully you have known this for awhile