Man Shot At Protest In Denver

You're trying to get an answer for something you don't even know the answer to yet. So you have already convicted Kyle...

No idea what you're rambling about. I'm just looking for some consistency on when it's acceptable to use deadly force against an aggressor and when it's not.

That's it.
Consistency, based on Drejka, convicts Dolloff.

I agree.

If I remember correctly, they ended up reversing the Drejka decision.

We also had some rightwingers here defending Drejka, saying that deadly force is acceptable when standing your ground.

On to Rittenhouse, how does his stand then? He wasn’t attacked by his aggressor, at least not yet.

Where exactly is the line between acceptable deadly force and unacceptable deadly force against a person who attacks you?
I think Rittenhouse is guilty of murder. But not for shooting in self defense, which he might have had a right to do, but for excessive force beyond self defense. Like shooting Rosenbaum in the back.
Was Rosenbaum armed ? The first incident, was it any different than the incident where he shot the guy in his forearm etc ? Otherwise did Kyle think that his life was in danger when Rosenbaum lunged for him, and yet missing him as Kyle spun around discharging his weapon to end the threat ??
Rosenbaum was not armed.

No. Which begs the question....why was that moron chasing someone with a gun. He didn't think the guy could turn and put him down ?
The guy was not all there, if you know what I mean.
 
So if I'm understanding this correctly, it's ok to shoot an unarmed person who is chasing you. But it's not ok to shoot someone who hits you and then attempts to pepper spray you.

Kind of a weird.

When exactly is it ok to use deadly force against an aggressor?
Rosenbaum wasn't just chasing Rittenhouse -- he lunged at him in a failed attempt to take his gun.

As far as Dolloff, I haven't seen evidence of which occurred first -- him getting pepper sprayed; or him drawing a firearm.
 
This is the guy that the news reporters said they hired as security right? Turns out - he wasn't licensed to be security - also not licensed to be ARMED security,. And DEFINITELY in love with anarchist commies at AntiFa...

The news dept BROUGHT this lunatic to an event...

If the victim has a family....they are now going to be very wealthy.

I'm sure they'd rather have him back.......
 
Maybe he shouldn't have hit the guy with a gun.

1602650598152.png
 
Don't hit someone in the face when you brought pepper spray to a gun fight.

Am I right 2nd amendment people?

*High Five*
 
Pepper spray can disable you long enough for someone to do whatever they like to you.
The still photos shots prove that the weapon was out and discharges before the mace was sprayed.

Hence the 1st Degree Murder charge.
I know, I was just pointing out that pepper spray will disable you. Some people think it can't.
It can, but if used in self defence (maybe to try and blind the shooter who is with the gun), then that would have been a good thing, but it didn't work in that situation unfortunately.
You know what really would have worked? Not picking a fight in the first place.
You got knowledge that this was the case or you making crap up in defence of the shooter ?? Give us a link to your claim.
The photo sequence and video of the dead man’s actions is reasonably clear but not conclusive.




Only if you are stoopid.
 
This is the guy that the news reporters said they hired as security right? Turns out - he wasn't licensed to be security - also not licensed to be ARMED security,. And DEFINITELY in love with anarchist commies at AntiFa...

The news dept BROUGHT this lunatic to an event...

If the victim has a family....they are now going to be very wealthy.

I'm sure they'd rather have him back.......

Wonder if this local station will admit their mistake at all.,. Guess I'll wait for lawyers to arrive on the scene...
 
This is the guy that the news reporters said they hired as security right? Turns out - he wasn't licensed to be security - also not licensed to be ARMED security,. And DEFINITELY in love with anarchist commies at AntiFa...

The news dept BROUGHT this lunatic to an event...

If the victim has a family....they are now going to be very wealthy.

I'm sure they'd rather have him back.......

Wonder if this local station will admit their mistake at all.,. Guess I'll wait for lawyers to arrive on the scene...

The station apparently has reputation of hard left wing stances and commentary on news.

It's not going to help them in court.
 
This video provides much more context. After watching this, I am confident that the shooter will be prosecuted and probably convicted of some degree of murder. It appears that, in spite of the police statement, that the shooter is aligned with antifa.




Denver cops are lying about the shooter and his motives----------things that make you go hmmmmmmmm...
 
Rittenhouse not only had a guy chasing him....he had multiple people chasing him.

I'm not talking about victims 2 and 3, I'm just talking about the first guy. He only had one guy chasing him at that time and he shot him.

In the case of the guy in Denver, please don't tell me that a guy with a can of mase (1 guy standing back) is the same situation.

They share a similarity.

In the Florida incident, aggressor pushed Drejka to the ground. In this Denver case, the aggressor struck Dolloff in the face. Both Drejka and Dolloff responded with deadly force.

The question is: when is it acceptable to use deadly force against an aggressor?

You're fine with Rittenhouse using deadly force. You're not fine with Dolloff using deadly force. You haven't stated your opinion on Drejka. What, specifically, makes these different?
Rittenhouse was attacked by a felon who threatened to kill him, dolloff pulled a gun on the victim and then the victim tried to use his mace to defend himself, Drejka had a habit of going after morons who illegally parked in handicapped spaces and was yelling at the g/f of the guy that attacked him-- The antifa and blm are violent terrorists---they attack and murder all the time. Clearly the two cases involving them is self defense---------Drejka case you could atleast spin it to some degree saying that he instigated and since he is white that he be blamed. Jury may have felt that all his victim did was try to protect his welfare g/f and their 4 welfare check kids from an armed man yelling at them.
 
This is the guy that the news reporters said they hired as security right? Turns out - he wasn't licensed to be security - also not licensed to be ARMED security,. And DEFINITELY in love with anarchist commies at AntiFa...

The news dept BROUGHT this lunatic to an event...

If the victim has a family....they are now going to be very wealthy.

I'm sure they'd rather have him back.......

Wonder if this local station will admit their mistake at all.,. Guess I'll wait for lawyers to arrive on the scene...







If the reports are true, Pinkerton is the company that's going to take the hit. If the moron had no Guard card, and no CCW, he was not qualified in any way to do the job.

The perp also appears to have a pretty extensive record of violence, which, if true, would have made him a Prohibited Person.

Which adds another felony to his plate.
 
Communism is an idea Joe. ANTIFA IS AN ORGANIZATION.
ok...who's their leader? Where is their membership roster? How many chapters are there?
Great. Now tell me the same info for white supremacists.

Post #66
So, no.
Good God. In my post I said white supremacy is an idea, an ideology, not a group. Like Antifa. But hey, ignore what I posted, because you are so stuck on "but how come you dont criticize the other side" you can't admit when you are wrong. Another confirmation that discussion with you is a pointless waste of time.
I wasn't going to play hunt a post on my phone. When I reference an old post I at least copy the available link.

And where did I say you were wrong? I was simply asking your opinion on it to see if the same. You know, clarify your point so we can discuss it.

You assume way too much and get mad at your assumptions of things I've not done.

So your time wasting is far more often you bitching at me for shit I've never said. You get very VERY upset when I try to single things down and determine your mindset.

THAT makes our discussions pointless. But as usual, it's never you.
 
Rittenhouse not only had a guy chasing him....he had multiple people chasing him.

I'm not talking about victims 2 and 3, I'm just talking about the first guy. He only had one guy chasing him at that time and he shot him.

In the case of the guy in Denver, please don't tell me that a guy with a can of mase (1 guy standing back) is the same situation.

They share a similarity.

In the Florida incident, aggressor pushed Drejka to the ground. In this Denver case, the aggressor struck Dolloff in the face. Both Drejka and Dolloff responded with deadly force.

The question is: when is it acceptable to use deadly force against an aggressor?

You're fine with Rittenhouse using deadly force. You're not fine with Dolloff using deadly force. You haven't stated your opinion on Drejka. What, specifically, makes these different?
Rittenhouse was attacked by a felon who threatened to kill him, dolloff pulled a gun on the victim and then the victim tried to use his mace to defend himself, Drejka had a habit of going after morons who illegally parked in handicapped spaces and was yelling at the g/f of the guy that attacked him-- The antifa and blm are violent terrorists---they attack and murder all the time. Clearly the two cases involving them is self defense---------Drejka case you could atleast spin it to some degree saying that he instigated and since he is white that he be blamed. Jury may have felt that all his victim did was try to protect his welfare g/f and their 4 welfare check kids from an armed man yelling at them.
"Rittenhouse was attacked by a felon who threatened to kill him"

He did? Quote his threat...
 
I really can't wait until the point in time that the country can exist without armed men shouting at each other in opposing protests.
 

Forum List

Back
Top