No need to. People in real life don't spout the bullshit to me you rightards do here.
So, that's a no. Thought so. Thanks for not lying about that.
That makes you a coward. The way that you only spout fighting words, when you are safely online.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
No need to. People in real life don't spout the bullshit to me you rightards do here.
So you can read the mind of a pedophile, huh?Yes, I do. His actions were clear. He was attacking Rittenhouse. ANyone not consumed by the desire to see a good man go to prison, can see that.
If you had any credibility as a poster, I'd agree..... but you don't.Dumbfuck, it's the job of the jury to use their discretion to decide what's reasonable. Ultimately, they may lean in what I'm thinking or they may lean towards what you're thinking. We'll find out at the conclusion of Rittenhouse's trial.
But claiming I'm lying because you disagree with me is as stupid has I accused you of lying for saying it's not murder.
Savvy?
Again, you have no idea what an unarmed man's intentions are for running after Rittenhouse. You are free to guess though.
Oh? You have these kinds of arguments with people face to face? I don't, but then I associate with very few conservatives. And the ones I do know aren't crazies like you conservative posting hereSo, that's a no. Thought so. Thanks for not lying about that.
That makes you a coward. The way that you only spout fighting words, when you are safely online.
If you had any credibility as a poster, I'd agree..... but you don't.
I don't believe you when you claim this is your honest opinion of the case, I believe you are a lying sack of shit, and a genuinely evil person who takes pleasure in the suffering of others.
So there's that.
So you can read the mind of a pedophile, huh?
You also don't necessarily chase someone to kill them.No guessing required. YOu can see him chasing Rittenhouse on video. His hostile intent is clear. You don't chase a man to give him a hug.
Listen to the video; how fast were the shots?No, it's not obviously false. Rosenbaum was face down when he was shot in the back.
It's about the only part of the Army I miss.Sure it is.
Excessive force is excessive force. It's not Rosenbaum's fault Rittenhouse didn't know how to properly use the gun he was illegally carrying, and panicked, lead him to shoot a man, face down, in the back.Listen to the video; how fast were the shots?
Did you know LA SWAT is deliberately trained not to shoot as fast as they are able in dynamic situations?
Do you know why?
You're one of those guys who says stupid shit like, "He ain't gonna do shit.....", to some girl right before you get knocked the fuck out, aren't you?No need to. People in real life don't spout the bullshit to me you rightards do here.
You also don't necessarily chase someone to kill them.
You haven't established that it was excessive.Excessive force is excessive force. It's not Rosenbaum's fault Rittenhouse didn't know how to properly use the gun he was illegally carrying, and panicked, lead him to shoot a man, face down, in the back.
A ridiculous fantasy, invented on the spot, by someone who has hit a brick wall.then the cops get sued and lose.
Again, the minute you nutters start firing on LEO's doing their jobs, is the minute people will stop putting up with your fetish.I disagree.
The state never has moral authority, it's just force.
And their only legitimacy comes from the consent of the people...... and the people are about done with the double standard bullshit. You going to see people start announcing the withdrawal of their consent by opening fire. (And no one can say they weren't warned.)
When I was in the military, about the only time I can ever remember any of those go-along-to-get-along-, ass-kissing, senior NCOs ever getting up the balls to publicly challenge the command, it was over double standards.
Nope, that's not a lie. It's what I believe. Rosenbaum, not a mob first charged Rittenhouse. Rittenhouse, who may or may not have hade the legal right to engage in self-defense, lost that right even if he had it when he shot Rosenbaum, face down, in the back. Wisconsin law is clear you can only use whatever force is necessary to stop a threat. You can't use excessive force. The others who then tried to stop Rittenhouse did so to disarm an active shooter.
LOL.....A ridiculous fantasy, invented on the spot, by someone who has hit a brick wall.
E6..... and then I punched a guy out. LOLAgain, the minute you nutters start firing on LEO's doing their jobs, is the minute people will stop putting up with your fetish.
Sounds like a guy who never made it past E-4