Twitter Attacks Lawyer Representing American Patriot, Kyle Rittenhouse

[freyasman]

Since when is a murderer a "patriot"?

Since Zimmerman???

Yup. The narrative of the right-wingers seems to be that a self-appointed upright, moral white man has a right to patrol American streets, heavily armed of course, and all people need to respect him and follow his commands. If somebody gets killed, the right-wingers will comb his background looking for any faults, even though the guy who killed him did not know him at all. In this case, they are trying to make a hero out of an out-of-town killer kid, who shot and killed one stranger, and then, when chased as news spread that he was a killer, killed another and gravely wounded a second person who were trying to stop him. If anyone is a "hero," it is the late Mr. Huber and the still-with-us Mr. Grosskreutz, horribly wounded who sacrificed themselves to bring down a killer.

Right-wingers will babble about the political parties of mayors and governors, but it simply does not apply. The Kenosha police were supposed to be clearing the streets and enforcing the curfew. They didn't do it. Result: two dead. One mutilated.

To go back to the murder of Trayvon Martin: Zimmerman could not have known anything about him when he murdered him. From my understanding, this teenager was sent to his dad because he had gotten into some trouble and his mom thought it best that he serve his "sentence" out of town where he could not have contact with the friends whom she thought were a bad influence on him.

I sure hope you don't have any children.

Being raised by someone as stupid as you are is a form of child abuse.

 

[progressive hunter]

he was running away because people saw him kill a man and those people were chasing him to stop him from killing anyone else

The irony there that you’re ok with them being vigilanties but not for Kyle? Hmm you are officially demofk!

wrong again

I'm not Ok with violence or vigilantism


You seem to be though since you think it's OK to violate gun laws.

I merely stated a fact and did not indicate whatsoever that I supported the people who chased Rittenhouse.

The fact is the primary cause of this incident was Rittenhouse breaking WI gun laws.

He added to the problem.

Better get used to them both.

The Future of American Policing

Written by: Greg Ellifritz I had two different friends send me messages last weekend requesting my thoughts on what policing is going to look like in the future. I thought about it quite

www.activeresponsetraining.net

From the link;

"Fewer and fewer people will want to be cops. That will further lower hiring and training standards. Tax revenue losses and “defunding efforts” will drive salaries down and make working conditions more difficult. The only folks who will become cops in the future are those people who have no other career options.


As more and more low quality candidates are hired, public trust for the police will further erode. The police will become continually more corrupt and inept until they are almost useless.


The really good cops (and a lot of former soldiers) will move on to better paying private security positions. The rich will hire those security people as bodyguards and neighborhood patrols.


The middle class and poor well have to contend with the corrupt police system or take care of things themselves (either by vigilante or gang action.)


This is essentially how it works in many third world countries. I have lots of experience traveling in Peru, so I’ll use the capital city of Lima as an example.


In the most affluent neighborhoods you don’t see many cops. But there are professional armed security guards at all banks, many public businesses and on roving patrol in marked vehicles in the neighborhood at night.


In the poorer neighborhoods, you don’t see many cops either. They’ll respond to something serious, but don’t expect them to investigate some kind of minor property crime without a significant bribe.


View attachment 385575

Most of the lower class residents ignore any petty criminal stuff. They band up with family or friends to handle any serious business. Sometimes the residents will pay the local criminal gangs to take care of such problems instead if they have some extra cash. The bad guy gets beaten or taken out. The cops don’t work hard to find the perpetrators of these crimes because they know exactly what is happening."

irrelevant.

And rittenhouse was not protecting his family or his property he was playing soldier while breaking the law.

There is no comparison with law abiding gun owners defending their homes to what Rittenhouse did.

You said you're not okay with vigilantism or violence; if this shit keeps up, you will get a lot more of both.

Defending your own home is not vigilantism

Taking a gun out of state carrying that gun illegally and shooting people is vigilantism


see the difference?

who did that??

try and stay on topic,,

Rittenhouse

pay attention

he didnt take a gun across state lines and he worked in that city 20 miles away,,yet to be determined he was carrying illegal,,,
and he didnt just shoot someone,,he defended himself from attackers,,,

lying about the facts doesnt help your narrative,,

He lives in Illinois

He took a rifle across state lines and carried it illegally in WI

Why don't you learn the facts instead of making shit up?

And he was breaking the law. IF he was a law abiding gun owner he would not have put himself in the position where he had to kill anyone.

You can't claim self defense in the commission of a crime.

he didnt take it across state lines,,or do you have proof that goes against the current facts,,,

if I'm running a stop sign I have a right to defend myself if someone is attacking me,,,


youre just a deranged moron that know if he doesnt lie he loses,,,

HE LIVES IN ILLINOIS

So where did the gun come from if not his home?

And he was breaking WI gun laws.

his friend in Wisconsin you stupid fuck,,educate yourself before talking again,,,

He said it was his rifle not his friend's rifle.

And regardless he was still carrying that weapon ILLEGALLY.

not according to the 2nd A,,,

thats why you criminals hate it so much,,,

Really?

I happen to be a law abiding gun owner with a concealed carry permit.

Because I am a law abiding gun owner I do not condone the breaking of state gun laws.

The open carry gun laws of WI have not been found to be unconstitutional by the Supreme Court. So in reality it is you who is wiping his ass with the Constitution when you support the breaking of laws.

all state gun laws violate the 2nd A federal law,,,or cant you read???

 

[Blues Man]

he was running away because people saw him kill a man and those people were chasing him to stop him from killing anyone else

The irony there that you’re ok with them being vigilanties but not for Kyle? Hmm you are officially demofk!

wrong again

I'm not Ok with violence or vigilantism


You seem to be though since you think it's OK to violate gun laws.

I merely stated a fact and did not indicate whatsoever that I supported the people who chased Rittenhouse.

The fact is the primary cause of this incident was Rittenhouse breaking WI gun laws.

He added to the problem.

Better get used to them both.

The Future of American Policing

Written by: Greg Ellifritz I had two different friends send me messages last weekend requesting my thoughts on what policing is going to look like in the future. I thought about it quite

www.activeresponsetraining.net

From the link;

"Fewer and fewer people will want to be cops. That will further lower hiring and training standards. Tax revenue losses and “defunding efforts” will drive salaries down and make working conditions more difficult. The only folks who will become cops in the future are those people who have no other career options.


As more and more low quality candidates are hired, public trust for the police will further erode. The police will become continually more corrupt and inept until they are almost useless.


The really good cops (and a lot of former soldiers) will move on to better paying private security positions. The rich will hire those security people as bodyguards and neighborhood patrols.


The middle class and poor well have to contend with the corrupt police system or take care of things themselves (either by vigilante or gang action.)


This is essentially how it works in many third world countries. I have lots of experience traveling in Peru, so I’ll use the capital city of Lima as an example.


In the most affluent neighborhoods you don’t see many cops. But there are professional armed security guards at all banks, many public businesses and on roving patrol in marked vehicles in the neighborhood at night.


In the poorer neighborhoods, you don’t see many cops either. They’ll respond to something serious, but don’t expect them to investigate some kind of minor property crime without a significant bribe.


View attachment 385575

Most of the lower class residents ignore any petty criminal stuff. They band up with family or friends to handle any serious business. Sometimes the residents will pay the local criminal gangs to take care of such problems instead if they have some extra cash. The bad guy gets beaten or taken out. The cops don’t work hard to find the perpetrators of these crimes because they know exactly what is happening."

irrelevant.

And rittenhouse was not protecting his family or his property he was playing soldier while breaking the law.

There is no comparison with law abiding gun owners defending their homes to what Rittenhouse did.

You said you're not okay with vigilantism or violence; if this shit keeps up, you will get a lot more of both.

Defending your own home is not vigilantism

Taking a gun out of state carrying that gun illegally and shooting people is vigilantism


see the difference?

who did that??

try and stay on topic,,

Rittenhouse

pay attention

he didnt take a gun across state lines and he worked in that city 20 miles away,,yet to be determined he was carrying illegal,,,
and he didnt just shoot someone,,he defended himself from attackers,,,

lying about the facts doesnt help your narrative,,

He lives in Illinois

He took a rifle across state lines and carried it illegally in WI

Why don't you learn the facts instead of making shit up?

And he was breaking the law. IF he was a law abiding gun owner he would not have put himself in the position where he had to kill anyone.

You can't claim self defense in the commission of a crime.

he didnt take it across state lines,,or do you have proof that goes against the current facts,,,

if I'm running a stop sign I have a right to defend myself if someone is attacking me,,,


youre just a deranged moron that know if he doesnt lie he loses,,,

HE LIVES IN ILLINOIS

So where did the gun come from if not his home?

And he was breaking WI gun laws.

his friend in Wisconsin you stupid fuck,,educate yourself before talking again,,,

He said it was his rifle not his friend's rifle.

And regardless he was still carrying that weapon ILLEGALLY.

And you're still only concerned with him, and not the attacker with the glock..... because this ain't about the law, is it?

You don't like the seeing the power of the mob destroyed with a few shots, it means you can't intimidate the people you hate...... and that really pisses you off.

Because the tread is about Rittenhouse not some other guy.

Rittenhouse was just as much a criminal as anyone else there that night who was breaking the law.

If you say otherwise you are a hypocrite.

 

[Blues Man]

he was running away because people saw him kill a man and those people were chasing him to stop him from killing anyone else

The irony there that you’re ok with them being vigilanties but not for Kyle? Hmm you are officially demofk!

wrong again

I'm not Ok with violence or vigilantism


You seem to be though since you think it's OK to violate gun laws.

I merely stated a fact and did not indicate whatsoever that I supported the people who chased Rittenhouse.

The fact is the primary cause of this incident was Rittenhouse breaking WI gun laws.

He added to the problem.

Better get used to them both.

The Future of American Policing

Written by: Greg Ellifritz I had two different friends send me messages last weekend requesting my thoughts on what policing is going to look like in the future. I thought about it quite

www.activeresponsetraining.net

From the link;

"Fewer and fewer people will want to be cops. That will further lower hiring and training standards. Tax revenue losses and “defunding efforts” will drive salaries down and make working conditions more difficult. The only folks who will become cops in the future are those people who have no other career options.


As more and more low quality candidates are hired, public trust for the police will further erode. The police will become continually more corrupt and inept until they are almost useless.


The really good cops (and a lot of former soldiers) will move on to better paying private security positions. The rich will hire those security people as bodyguards and neighborhood patrols.


The middle class and poor well have to contend with the corrupt police system or take care of things themselves (either by vigilante or gang action.)


This is essentially how it works in many third world countries. I have lots of experience traveling in Peru, so I’ll use the capital city of Lima as an example.


In the most affluent neighborhoods you don’t see many cops. But there are professional armed security guards at all banks, many public businesses and on roving patrol in marked vehicles in the neighborhood at night.


In the poorer neighborhoods, you don’t see many cops either. They’ll respond to something serious, but don’t expect them to investigate some kind of minor property crime without a significant bribe.


View attachment 385575

Most of the lower class residents ignore any petty criminal stuff. They band up with family or friends to handle any serious business. Sometimes the residents will pay the local criminal gangs to take care of such problems instead if they have some extra cash. The bad guy gets beaten or taken out. The cops don’t work hard to find the perpetrators of these crimes because they know exactly what is happening."

irrelevant.

And rittenhouse was not protecting his family or his property he was playing soldier while breaking the law.

There is no comparison with law abiding gun owners defending their homes to what Rittenhouse did.

You said you're not okay with vigilantism or violence; if this shit keeps up, you will get a lot more of both.

Defending your own home is not vigilantism

Taking a gun out of state carrying that gun illegally and shooting people is vigilantism


see the difference?

who did that??

try and stay on topic,,

Rittenhouse

pay attention

he didnt take a gun across state lines and he worked in that city 20 miles away,,yet to be determined he was carrying illegal,,,
and he didnt just shoot someone,,he defended himself from attackers,,,

lying about the facts doesnt help your narrative,,

He lives in Illinois

He took a rifle across state lines and carried it illegally in WI

Why don't you learn the facts instead of making shit up?

And he was breaking the law. IF he was a law abiding gun owner he would not have put himself in the position where he had to kill anyone.

You can't claim self defense in the commission of a crime.

he didnt take it across state lines,,or do you have proof that goes against the current facts,,,

if I'm running a stop sign I have a right to defend myself if someone is attacking me,,,


youre just a deranged moron that know if he doesnt lie he loses,,,

HE LIVES IN ILLINOIS

So where did the gun come from if not his home?

And he was breaking WI gun laws.

his friend in Wisconsin you stupid fuck,,educate yourself before talking again,,,

He said it was his rifle not his friend's rifle.

And regardless he was still carrying that weapon ILLEGALLY.

not according to the 2nd A,,,

thats why you criminals hate it so much,,,

Really?

I happen to be a law abiding gun owner with a concealed carry permit.

Because I am a law abiding gun owner I do not condone the breaking of state gun laws.

The open carry gun laws of WI have not been found to be unconstitutional by the Supreme Court. So in reality it is you who is wiping his ass with the Constitution when you support the breaking of laws.

all state gun laws violate the 2nd A federal law,,,or cant you read???

Only if the Supreme Court says they do.

That's how the system works in the US

Don't like it then get the fuck out.

 

[progressive hunter]

he was running away because people saw him kill a man and those people were chasing him to stop him from killing anyone else

The irony there that you’re ok with them being vigilanties but not for Kyle? Hmm you are officially demofk!

wrong again

I'm not Ok with violence or vigilantism


You seem to be though since you think it's OK to violate gun laws.

I merely stated a fact and did not indicate whatsoever that I supported the people who chased Rittenhouse.

The fact is the primary cause of this incident was Rittenhouse breaking WI gun laws.

He added to the problem.

Better get used to them both.

The Future of American Policing

Written by: Greg Ellifritz I had two different friends send me messages last weekend requesting my thoughts on what policing is going to look like in the future. I thought about it quite

www.activeresponsetraining.net

From the link;

"Fewer and fewer people will want to be cops. That will further lower hiring and training standards. Tax revenue losses and “defunding efforts” will drive salaries down and make working conditions more difficult. The only folks who will become cops in the future are those people who have no other career options.


As more and more low quality candidates are hired, public trust for the police will further erode. The police will become continually more corrupt and inept until they are almost useless.


The really good cops (and a lot of former soldiers) will move on to better paying private security positions. The rich will hire those security people as bodyguards and neighborhood patrols.


The middle class and poor well have to contend with the corrupt police system or take care of things themselves (either by vigilante or gang action.)


This is essentially how it works in many third world countries. I have lots of experience traveling in Peru, so I’ll use the capital city of Lima as an example.


In the most affluent neighborhoods you don’t see many cops. But there are professional armed security guards at all banks, many public businesses and on roving patrol in marked vehicles in the neighborhood at night.


In the poorer neighborhoods, you don’t see many cops either. They’ll respond to something serious, but don’t expect them to investigate some kind of minor property crime without a significant bribe.


View attachment 385575

Most of the lower class residents ignore any petty criminal stuff. They band up with family or friends to handle any serious business. Sometimes the residents will pay the local criminal gangs to take care of such problems instead if they have some extra cash. The bad guy gets beaten or taken out. The cops don’t work hard to find the perpetrators of these crimes because they know exactly what is happening."

irrelevant.

And rittenhouse was not protecting his family or his property he was playing soldier while breaking the law.

There is no comparison with law abiding gun owners defending their homes to what Rittenhouse did.

You said you're not okay with vigilantism or violence; if this shit keeps up, you will get a lot more of both.

Defending your own home is not vigilantism

Taking a gun out of state carrying that gun illegally and shooting people is vigilantism


see the difference?

who did that??

try and stay on topic,,

Rittenhouse

pay attention

he didnt take a gun across state lines and he worked in that city 20 miles away,,yet to be determined he was carrying illegal,,,
and he didnt just shoot someone,,he defended himself from attackers,,,

lying about the facts doesnt help your narrative,,

He lives in Illinois

He took a rifle across state lines and carried it illegally in WI

Why don't you learn the facts instead of making shit up?

And he was breaking the law. IF he was a law abiding gun owner he would not have put himself in the position where he had to kill anyone.

You can't claim self defense in the commission of a crime.

he didnt take it across state lines,,or do you have proof that goes against the current facts,,,

if I'm running a stop sign I have a right to defend myself if someone is attacking me,,,


youre just a deranged moron that know if he doesnt lie he loses,,,

HE LIVES IN ILLINOIS

So where did the gun come from if not his home?

And he was breaking WI gun laws.

his friend in Wisconsin you stupid fuck,,educate yourself before talking again,,,

He said it was his rifle not his friend's rifle.

And regardless he was still carrying that weapon ILLEGALLY.

not according to the 2nd A,,,

thats why you criminals hate it so much,,,

Really?

I happen to be a law abiding gun owner with a concealed carry permit.

Because I am a law abiding gun owner I do not condone the breaking of state gun laws.

The open carry gun laws of WI have not been found to be unconstitutional by the Supreme Court. So in reality it is you who is wiping his ass with the Constitution when you support the breaking of laws.

all state gun laws violate the 2nd A federal law,,,or cant you read???

Only if the Supreme Court says they do.

That's how the system works in the US

Don't like it then get the fuck out.

SCOTUS gives opinions not laws,,,

I wonder why so many like you are mad about trumps choices for SCOTUS,,,

might be because you know they can not follow the constitution and make choices you disagree with

 

[freyasman]

he was running away because people saw him kill a man and those people were chasing him to stop him from killing anyone else

The irony there that you’re ok with them being vigilanties but not for Kyle? Hmm you are officially demofk!

wrong again

I'm not Ok with violence or vigilantism


You seem to be though since you think it's OK to violate gun laws.

I merely stated a fact and did not indicate whatsoever that I supported the people who chased Rittenhouse.

The fact is the primary cause of this incident was Rittenhouse breaking WI gun laws.

He added to the problem.

Better get used to them both.

The Future of American Policing

Written by: Greg Ellifritz I had two different friends send me messages last weekend requesting my thoughts on what policing is going to look like in the future. I thought about it quite

www.activeresponsetraining.net

From the link;

"Fewer and fewer people will want to be cops. That will further lower hiring and training standards. Tax revenue losses and “defunding efforts” will drive salaries down and make working conditions more difficult. The only folks who will become cops in the future are those people who have no other career options.


As more and more low quality candidates are hired, public trust for the police will further erode. The police will become continually more corrupt and inept until they are almost useless.


The really good cops (and a lot of former soldiers) will move on to better paying private security positions. The rich will hire those security people as bodyguards and neighborhood patrols.


The middle class and poor well have to contend with the corrupt police system or take care of things themselves (either by vigilante or gang action.)


This is essentially how it works in many third world countries. I have lots of experience traveling in Peru, so I’ll use the capital city of Lima as an example.


In the most affluent neighborhoods you don’t see many cops. But there are professional armed security guards at all banks, many public businesses and on roving patrol in marked vehicles in the neighborhood at night.


In the poorer neighborhoods, you don’t see many cops either. They’ll respond to something serious, but don’t expect them to investigate some kind of minor property crime without a significant bribe.


View attachment 385575

Most of the lower class residents ignore any petty criminal stuff. They band up with family or friends to handle any serious business. Sometimes the residents will pay the local criminal gangs to take care of such problems instead if they have some extra cash. The bad guy gets beaten or taken out. The cops don’t work hard to find the perpetrators of these crimes because they know exactly what is happening."

irrelevant.

And rittenhouse was not protecting his family or his property he was playing soldier while breaking the law.

There is no comparison with law abiding gun owners defending their homes to what Rittenhouse did.

You said you're not okay with vigilantism or violence; if this shit keeps up, you will get a lot more of both.

Defending your own home is not vigilantism

Taking a gun out of state carrying that gun illegally and shooting people is vigilantism


see the difference?

who did that??

try and stay on topic,,

Rittenhouse

pay attention

he didnt take a gun across state lines and he worked in that city 20 miles away,,yet to be determined he was carrying illegal,,,
and he didnt just shoot someone,,he defended himself from attackers,,,

lying about the facts doesnt help your narrative,,

He lives in Illinois

He took a rifle across state lines and carried it illegally in WI

Why don't you learn the facts instead of making shit up?

And he was breaking the law. IF he was a law abiding gun owner he would not have put himself in the position where he had to kill anyone.

You can't claim self defense in the commission of a crime.

If it meets the standards for self defense, and this seems to by every metric, then it's not a crime.

OK so someone breaks into your house you point a shotgun at him he kills you first and you think he can claim self defense?

And btw, where is your outrage at the guy who was wounded?
He was carrying a pistol, and actively using it to attack someone, both in violation of the law..... why aren't you demanding he be arrested and prosecuted?


Because you don't really care what the law says do you?
This is about punishing someone for daring to stand up for themselves, that's all.


You're fucking trash, guy.
Stay clear of me or I'll leave your corpse out on the curb..... because I've killed a hell of a lot more people than that kid has.

I don't support law breaking of any kind and I have said that repeatedly.
You do.

If that person was carrying illegally he is just as much a criminal as Rittenhouse is.

See unlike you I am not a hypocrite.

But I haven't seen a single post from you demanding that he be arrested, or even questioning why not.

I'm not overly concerned with any laws but my own, but that doesn't mean I think the kid broke any; it doesn't seem like he did.
And you don't actually care either way; even if it's determined that he was legal all the way, you're still going to want him to fry.

And yes, you are a hypocrite.

 

[Blues Man]

he was running away because people saw him kill a man and those people were chasing him to stop him from killing anyone else

The irony there that you’re ok with them being vigilanties but not for Kyle? Hmm you are officially demofk!

wrong again

I'm not Ok with violence or vigilantism


You seem to be though since you think it's OK to violate gun laws.

I merely stated a fact and did not indicate whatsoever that I supported the people who chased Rittenhouse.

The fact is the primary cause of this incident was Rittenhouse breaking WI gun laws.

He added to the problem.

Better get used to them both.

The Future of American Policing

Written by: Greg Ellifritz I had two different friends send me messages last weekend requesting my thoughts on what policing is going to look like in the future. I thought about it quite

www.activeresponsetraining.net

From the link;

"Fewer and fewer people will want to be cops. That will further lower hiring and training standards. Tax revenue losses and “defunding efforts” will drive salaries down and make working conditions more difficult. The only folks who will become cops in the future are those people who have no other career options.


As more and more low quality candidates are hired, public trust for the police will further erode. The police will become continually more corrupt and inept until they are almost useless.


The really good cops (and a lot of former soldiers) will move on to better paying private security positions. The rich will hire those security people as bodyguards and neighborhood patrols.


The middle class and poor well have to contend with the corrupt police system or take care of things themselves (either by vigilante or gang action.)


This is essentially how it works in many third world countries. I have lots of experience traveling in Peru, so I’ll use the capital city of Lima as an example.


In the most affluent neighborhoods you don’t see many cops. But there are professional armed security guards at all banks, many public businesses and on roving patrol in marked vehicles in the neighborhood at night.


In the poorer neighborhoods, you don’t see many cops either. They’ll respond to something serious, but don’t expect them to investigate some kind of minor property crime without a significant bribe.


View attachment 385575

Most of the lower class residents ignore any petty criminal stuff. They band up with family or friends to handle any serious business. Sometimes the residents will pay the local criminal gangs to take care of such problems instead if they have some extra cash. The bad guy gets beaten or taken out. The cops don’t work hard to find the perpetrators of these crimes because they know exactly what is happening."

irrelevant.

And rittenhouse was not protecting his family or his property he was playing soldier while breaking the law.

There is no comparison with law abiding gun owners defending their homes to what Rittenhouse did.

You said you're not okay with vigilantism or violence; if this shit keeps up, you will get a lot more of both.

Defending your own home is not vigilantism

Taking a gun out of state carrying that gun illegally and shooting people is vigilantism


see the difference?

who did that??

try and stay on topic,,

Rittenhouse

pay attention

he didnt take a gun across state lines and he worked in that city 20 miles away,,yet to be determined he was carrying illegal,,,
and he didnt just shoot someone,,he defended himself from attackers,,,

lying about the facts doesnt help your narrative,,

He lives in Illinois

He took a rifle across state lines and carried it illegally in WI

Why don't you learn the facts instead of making shit up?

And he was breaking the law. IF he was a law abiding gun owner he would not have put himself in the position where he had to kill anyone.

You can't claim self defense in the commission of a crime.

he didnt take it across state lines,,or do you have proof that goes against the current facts,,,

if I'm running a stop sign I have a right to defend myself if someone is attacking me,,,


youre just a deranged moron that know if he doesnt lie he loses,,,

HE LIVES IN ILLINOIS

So where did the gun come from if not his home?

And he was breaking WI gun laws.

his friend in Wisconsin you stupid fuck,,educate yourself before talking again,,,

He said it was his rifle not his friend's rifle.

And regardless he was still carrying that weapon ILLEGALLY.

not according to the 2nd A,,,

thats why you criminals hate it so much,,,

Really?

I happen to be a law abiding gun owner with a concealed carry permit.

Because I am a law abiding gun owner I do not condone the breaking of state gun laws.

The open carry gun laws of WI have not been found to be unconstitutional by the Supreme Court. So in reality it is you who is wiping his ass with the Constitution when you support the breaking of laws.

all state gun laws violate the 2nd A federal law,,,or cant you read???

Only if the Supreme Court says they do.

That's how the system works in the US

Don't like it then get the fuck out.

SCOTUS gives opinions not laws,,,

I wonder why so many like you are mad about trumps choices for SCOTUS,,,

might be because you know they can not follow the constitution and make choices you disagree with

SCOTUS rules on the Constitutionality of laws.

Unconstitutional laws are struck down by SCOTUS

You really need to learn how things work in this country.

And where have I ever mentioned Trump or his choices for SCOTUS?

Stop making shit up

 

[Blues Man]

he was running away because people saw him kill a man and those people were chasing him to stop him from killing anyone else

The irony there that you’re ok with them being vigilanties but not for Kyle? Hmm you are officially demofk!

wrong again

I'm not Ok with violence or vigilantism


You seem to be though since you think it's OK to violate gun laws.

I merely stated a fact and did not indicate whatsoever that I supported the people who chased Rittenhouse.

The fact is the primary cause of this incident was Rittenhouse breaking WI gun laws.

He added to the problem.

Better get used to them both.

The Future of American Policing

Written by: Greg Ellifritz I had two different friends send me messages last weekend requesting my thoughts on what policing is going to look like in the future. I thought about it quite

www.activeresponsetraining.net

From the link;

"Fewer and fewer people will want to be cops. That will further lower hiring and training standards. Tax revenue losses and “defunding efforts” will drive salaries down and make working conditions more difficult. The only folks who will become cops in the future are those people who have no other career options.


As more and more low quality candidates are hired, public trust for the police will further erode. The police will become continually more corrupt and inept until they are almost useless.


The really good cops (and a lot of former soldiers) will move on to better paying private security positions. The rich will hire those security people as bodyguards and neighborhood patrols.


The middle class and poor well have to contend with the corrupt police system or take care of things themselves (either by vigilante or gang action.)


This is essentially how it works in many third world countries. I have lots of experience traveling in Peru, so I’ll use the capital city of Lima as an example.


In the most affluent neighborhoods you don’t see many cops. But there are professional armed security guards at all banks, many public businesses and on roving patrol in marked vehicles in the neighborhood at night.


In the poorer neighborhoods, you don’t see many cops either. They’ll respond to something serious, but don’t expect them to investigate some kind of minor property crime without a significant bribe.


View attachment 385575

Most of the lower class residents ignore any petty criminal stuff. They band up with family or friends to handle any serious business. Sometimes the residents will pay the local criminal gangs to take care of such problems instead if they have some extra cash. The bad guy gets beaten or taken out. The cops don’t work hard to find the perpetrators of these crimes because they know exactly what is happening."

irrelevant.

And rittenhouse was not protecting his family or his property he was playing soldier while breaking the law.

There is no comparison with law abiding gun owners defending their homes to what Rittenhouse did.

You said you're not okay with vigilantism or violence; if this shit keeps up, you will get a lot more of both.

Defending your own home is not vigilantism

Taking a gun out of state carrying that gun illegally and shooting people is vigilantism


see the difference?

who did that??

try and stay on topic,,

Rittenhouse

pay attention

he didnt take a gun across state lines and he worked in that city 20 miles away,,yet to be determined he was carrying illegal,,,
and he didnt just shoot someone,,he defended himself from attackers,,,

lying about the facts doesnt help your narrative,,

He lives in Illinois

He took a rifle across state lines and carried it illegally in WI

Why don't you learn the facts instead of making shit up?

And he was breaking the law. IF he was a law abiding gun owner he would not have put himself in the position where he had to kill anyone.

You can't claim self defense in the commission of a crime.

If it meets the standards for self defense, and this seems to by every metric, then it's not a crime.

OK so someone breaks into your house you point a shotgun at him he kills you first and you think he can claim self defense?

And btw, where is your outrage at the guy who was wounded?
He was carrying a pistol, and actively using it to attack someone, both in violation of the law..... why aren't you demanding he be arrested and prosecuted?


Because you don't really care what the law says do you?
This is about punishing someone for daring to stand up for themselves, that's all.


You're fucking trash, guy.
Stay clear of me or I'll leave your corpse out on the curb..... because I've killed a hell of a lot more people than that kid has.

I don't support law breaking of any kind and I have said that repeatedly.
You do.

If that person was carrying illegally he is just as much a criminal as Rittenhouse is.

See unlike you I am not a hypocrite.

But I haven't seen a single post from you demanding that he be arrested, or even questioning why not.

I'm not overly concerned with any laws but my own, but that doesn't mean I think the kid broke any; it doesn't seem like he did.
And you don't actually care either way; even if it's determined that he was legal all the way, you're still going to want him to fry.

And yes, you are a hypocrite.

BEcause it is not the subject of the thread.

Tell you what start a thread on all the people who broke laws in WI and I'll say the same thing I say here.

ALL Criminals should serve time.

Because unlike you I think the law applies to EVERYONE.

If Rittenhouse was not illegally carrying a rifle in WI I wouldn't have a problem.

But the fact is he was carrying a rifle illegally in WI.

 

[progressive hunter]

he was running away because people saw him kill a man and those people were chasing him to stop him from killing anyone else

The irony there that you’re ok with them being vigilanties but not for Kyle? Hmm you are officially demofk!

wrong again

I'm not Ok with violence or vigilantism


You seem to be though since you think it's OK to violate gun laws.

I merely stated a fact and did not indicate whatsoever that I supported the people who chased Rittenhouse.

The fact is the primary cause of this incident was Rittenhouse breaking WI gun laws.

He added to the problem.

Better get used to them both.

The Future of American Policing

Written by: Greg Ellifritz I had two different friends send me messages last weekend requesting my thoughts on what policing is going to look like in the future. I thought about it quite

www.activeresponsetraining.net

From the link;

"Fewer and fewer people will want to be cops. That will further lower hiring and training standards. Tax revenue losses and “defunding efforts” will drive salaries down and make working conditions more difficult. The only folks who will become cops in the future are those people who have no other career options.


As more and more low quality candidates are hired, public trust for the police will further erode. The police will become continually more corrupt and inept until they are almost useless.


The really good cops (and a lot of former soldiers) will move on to better paying private security positions. The rich will hire those security people as bodyguards and neighborhood patrols.


The middle class and poor well have to contend with the corrupt police system or take care of things themselves (either by vigilante or gang action.)


This is essentially how it works in many third world countries. I have lots of experience traveling in Peru, so I’ll use the capital city of Lima as an example.


In the most affluent neighborhoods you don’t see many cops. But there are professional armed security guards at all banks, many public businesses and on roving patrol in marked vehicles in the neighborhood at night.


In the poorer neighborhoods, you don’t see many cops either. They’ll respond to something serious, but don’t expect them to investigate some kind of minor property crime without a significant bribe.


View attachment 385575

Most of the lower class residents ignore any petty criminal stuff. They band up with family or friends to handle any serious business. Sometimes the residents will pay the local criminal gangs to take care of such problems instead if they have some extra cash. The bad guy gets beaten or taken out. The cops don’t work hard to find the perpetrators of these crimes because they know exactly what is happening."

irrelevant.

And rittenhouse was not protecting his family or his property he was playing soldier while breaking the law.

There is no comparison with law abiding gun owners defending their homes to what Rittenhouse did.

You said you're not okay with vigilantism or violence; if this shit keeps up, you will get a lot more of both.

Defending your own home is not vigilantism

Taking a gun out of state carrying that gun illegally and shooting people is vigilantism


see the difference?

who did that??

try and stay on topic,,

Rittenhouse

pay attention

he didnt take a gun across state lines and he worked in that city 20 miles away,,yet to be determined he was carrying illegal,,,
and he didnt just shoot someone,,he defended himself from attackers,,,

lying about the facts doesnt help your narrative,,

He lives in Illinois

He took a rifle across state lines and carried it illegally in WI

Why don't you learn the facts instead of making shit up?

And he was breaking the law. IF he was a law abiding gun owner he would not have put himself in the position where he had to kill anyone.

You can't claim self defense in the commission of a crime.

If it meets the standards for self defense, and this seems to by every metric, then it's not a crime.

OK so someone breaks into your house you point a shotgun at him he kills you first and you think he can claim self defense?

And btw, where is your outrage at the guy who was wounded?
He was carrying a pistol, and actively using it to attack someone, both in violation of the law..... why aren't you demanding he be arrested and prosecuted?


Because you don't really care what the law says do you?
This is about punishing someone for daring to stand up for themselves, that's all.


You're fucking trash, guy.
Stay clear of me or I'll leave your corpse out on the curb..... because I've killed a hell of a lot more people than that kid has.

I don't support law breaking of any kind and I have said that repeatedly.
You do.

If that person was carrying illegally he is just as much a criminal as Rittenhouse is.

See unlike you I am not a hypocrite.

But I haven't seen a single post from you demanding that he be arrested, or even questioning why not.

I'm not overly concerned with any laws but my own, but that doesn't mean I think the kid broke any; it doesn't seem like he did.
And you don't actually care either way; even if it's determined that he was legal all the way, you're still going to want him to fry.

And yes, you are a hypocrite.

BEcause it is not the subject of the thread.

Tell you what start a thread on all the people who broke laws in WI and I'll say the same thing I say here.

ALL Criminals should serve time.

Because unlike you I think the law applies to EVERYONE.

If Rittenhouse was not illegally carrying a rifle in WI I wouldn't have a problem.

But the fact is he was carrying a rifle illegally in WI.

his carrying that rifle is the same as running a stop sign,,,

and thankfully he was carrying it or he would be dead,,

 

[Blues Man]

he was running away because people saw him kill a man and those people were chasing him to stop him from killing anyone else

The irony there that you’re ok with them being vigilanties but not for Kyle? Hmm you are officially demofk!

wrong again

I'm not Ok with violence or vigilantism


You seem to be though since you think it's OK to violate gun laws.

I merely stated a fact and did not indicate whatsoever that I supported the people who chased Rittenhouse.

The fact is the primary cause of this incident was Rittenhouse breaking WI gun laws.

He added to the problem.

Better get used to them both.

The Future of American Policing

Written by: Greg Ellifritz I had two different friends send me messages last weekend requesting my thoughts on what policing is going to look like in the future. I thought about it quite

www.activeresponsetraining.net

From the link;

"Fewer and fewer people will want to be cops. That will further lower hiring and training standards. Tax revenue losses and “defunding efforts” will drive salaries down and make working conditions more difficult. The only folks who will become cops in the future are those people who have no other career options.


As more and more low quality candidates are hired, public trust for the police will further erode. The police will become continually more corrupt and inept until they are almost useless.


The really good cops (and a lot of former soldiers) will move on to better paying private security positions. The rich will hire those security people as bodyguards and neighborhood patrols.


The middle class and poor well have to contend with the corrupt police system or take care of things themselves (either by vigilante or gang action.)


This is essentially how it works in many third world countries. I have lots of experience traveling in Peru, so I’ll use the capital city of Lima as an example.


In the most affluent neighborhoods you don’t see many cops. But there are professional armed security guards at all banks, many public businesses and on roving patrol in marked vehicles in the neighborhood at night.


In the poorer neighborhoods, you don’t see many cops either. They’ll respond to something serious, but don’t expect them to investigate some kind of minor property crime without a significant bribe.


View attachment 385575

Most of the lower class residents ignore any petty criminal stuff. They band up with family or friends to handle any serious business. Sometimes the residents will pay the local criminal gangs to take care of such problems instead if they have some extra cash. The bad guy gets beaten or taken out. The cops don’t work hard to find the perpetrators of these crimes because they know exactly what is happening."

irrelevant.

And rittenhouse was not protecting his family or his property he was playing soldier while breaking the law.

There is no comparison with law abiding gun owners defending their homes to what Rittenhouse did.

You said you're not okay with vigilantism or violence; if this shit keeps up, you will get a lot more of both.

Defending your own home is not vigilantism

Taking a gun out of state carrying that gun illegally and shooting people is vigilantism


see the difference?

who did that??

try and stay on topic,,

Rittenhouse

pay attention

he didnt take a gun across state lines and he worked in that city 20 miles away,,yet to be determined he was carrying illegal,,,
and he didnt just shoot someone,,he defended himself from attackers,,,

lying about the facts doesnt help your narrative,,

He lives in Illinois

He took a rifle across state lines and carried it illegally in WI

Why don't you learn the facts instead of making shit up?

And he was breaking the law. IF he was a law abiding gun owner he would not have put himself in the position where he had to kill anyone.

You can't claim self defense in the commission of a crime.

If it meets the standards for self defense, and this seems to by every metric, then it's not a crime.

OK so someone breaks into your house you point a shotgun at him he kills you first and you think he can claim self defense?

And btw, where is your outrage at the guy who was wounded?
He was carrying a pistol, and actively using it to attack someone, both in violation of the law..... why aren't you demanding he be arrested and prosecuted?


Because you don't really care what the law says do you?
This is about punishing someone for daring to stand up for themselves, that's all.


You're fucking trash, guy.
Stay clear of me or I'll leave your corpse out on the curb..... because I've killed a hell of a lot more people than that kid has.

I don't support law breaking of any kind and I have said that repeatedly.
You do.

If that person was carrying illegally he is just as much a criminal as Rittenhouse is.

See unlike you I am not a hypocrite.

But I haven't seen a single post from you demanding that he be arrested, or even questioning why not.

I'm not overly concerned with any laws but my own, but that doesn't mean I think the kid broke any; it doesn't seem like he did.
And you don't actually care either way; even if it's determined that he was legal all the way, you're still going to want him to fry.

And yes, you are a hypocrite.

BEcause it is not the subject of the thread.

Tell you what start a thread on all the people who broke laws in WI and I'll say the same thing I say here.

ALL Criminals should serve time.

Because unlike you I think the law applies to EVERYONE.

If Rittenhouse was not illegally carrying a rifle in WI I wouldn't have a problem.

But the fact is he was carrying a rifle illegally in WI.

his carrying that rifle is the same as running a stop sign,,,

and thankfully he was carrying it or he would be dead,,

NOPE.

If he obeyed WI gun laws his life never would have been in danger.

Once again it was his decision to break the law that put him in danger.

If you run a stop sign and run over and kill a person you are at fault for the death because you chose to break the law and run the stop sign

 

[freyasman]

he was running away because people saw him kill a man and those people were chasing him to stop him from killing anyone else

The irony there that you’re ok with them being vigilanties but not for Kyle? Hmm you are officially demofk!

wrong again

I'm not Ok with violence or vigilantism


You seem to be though since you think it's OK to violate gun laws.

I merely stated a fact and did not indicate whatsoever that I supported the people who chased Rittenhouse.

The fact is the primary cause of this incident was Rittenhouse breaking WI gun laws.

He added to the problem.

Better get used to them both.

The Future of American Policing

Written by: Greg Ellifritz I had two different friends send me messages last weekend requesting my thoughts on what policing is going to look like in the future. I thought about it quite

www.activeresponsetraining.net

From the link;

"Fewer and fewer people will want to be cops. That will further lower hiring and training standards. Tax revenue losses and “defunding efforts” will drive salaries down and make working conditions more difficult. The only folks who will become cops in the future are those people who have no other career options.


As more and more low quality candidates are hired, public trust for the police will further erode. The police will become continually more corrupt and inept until they are almost useless.


The really good cops (and a lot of former soldiers) will move on to better paying private security positions. The rich will hire those security people as bodyguards and neighborhood patrols.


The middle class and poor well have to contend with the corrupt police system or take care of things themselves (either by vigilante or gang action.)


This is essentially how it works in many third world countries. I have lots of experience traveling in Peru, so I’ll use the capital city of Lima as an example.


In the most affluent neighborhoods you don’t see many cops. But there are professional armed security guards at all banks, many public businesses and on roving patrol in marked vehicles in the neighborhood at night.


In the poorer neighborhoods, you don’t see many cops either. They’ll respond to something serious, but don’t expect them to investigate some kind of minor property crime without a significant bribe.


View attachment 385575

Most of the lower class residents ignore any petty criminal stuff. They band up with family or friends to handle any serious business. Sometimes the residents will pay the local criminal gangs to take care of such problems instead if they have some extra cash. The bad guy gets beaten or taken out. The cops don’t work hard to find the perpetrators of these crimes because they know exactly what is happening."

irrelevant.

And rittenhouse was not protecting his family or his property he was playing soldier while breaking the law.

There is no comparison with law abiding gun owners defending their homes to what Rittenhouse did.

You said you're not okay with vigilantism or violence; if this shit keeps up, you will get a lot more of both.

Defending your own home is not vigilantism

Taking a gun out of state carrying that gun illegally and shooting people is vigilantism


see the difference?

who did that??

try and stay on topic,,

Rittenhouse

pay attention

he didnt take a gun across state lines and he worked in that city 20 miles away,,yet to be determined he was carrying illegal,,,
and he didnt just shoot someone,,he defended himself from attackers,,,

lying about the facts doesnt help your narrative,,

He lives in Illinois

He took a rifle across state lines and carried it illegally in WI

Why don't you learn the facts instead of making shit up?

And he was breaking the law. IF he was a law abiding gun owner he would not have put himself in the position where he had to kill anyone.

You can't claim self defense in the commission of a crime.

If it meets the standards for self defense, and this seems to by every metric, then it's not a crime.

OK so someone breaks into your house you point a shotgun at him he kills you first and you think he can claim self defense?

And btw, where is your outrage at the guy who was wounded?
He was carrying a pistol, and actively using it to attack someone, both in violation of the law..... why aren't you demanding he be arrested and prosecuted?


Because you don't really care what the law says do you?
This is about punishing someone for daring to stand up for themselves, that's all.


You're fucking trash, guy.
Stay clear of me or I'll leave your corpse out on the curb..... because I've killed a hell of a lot more people than that kid has.

I don't support law breaking of any kind and I have said that repeatedly.
You do.

If that person was carrying illegally he is just as much a criminal as Rittenhouse is.

See unlike you I am not a hypocrite.

But I haven't seen a single post from you demanding that he be arrested, or even questioning why not.

I'm not overly concerned with any laws but my own, but that doesn't mean I think the kid broke any; it doesn't seem like he did.
And you don't actually care either way; even if it's determined that he was legal all the way, you're still going to want him to fry.

And yes, you are a hypocrite.

BEcause it is not the subject of the thread.

Tell you what start a thread on all the people who broke laws in WI and I'll say the same thing I say here.

ALL Criminals should serve time.

Because unlike you I think the law applies to EVERYONE.

If Rittenhouse was not illegally carrying a rifle in WI I wouldn't have a problem.

But the fact is he was carrying a rifle illegally in WI.

Oh bullshit....

Save your fucking weak denials for someone else, I got your number, punk.

You're just trash who wants to see a youngster suffer for ruining your fun.

 

[Blues Man]

he was running away because people saw him kill a man and those people were chasing him to stop him from killing anyone else

The irony there that you’re ok with them being vigilanties but not for Kyle? Hmm you are officially demofk!

wrong again

I'm not Ok with violence or vigilantism


You seem to be though since you think it's OK to violate gun laws.

I merely stated a fact and did not indicate whatsoever that I supported the people who chased Rittenhouse.

The fact is the primary cause of this incident was Rittenhouse breaking WI gun laws.

He added to the problem.

Better get used to them both.

The Future of American Policing

Written by: Greg Ellifritz I had two different friends send me messages last weekend requesting my thoughts on what policing is going to look like in the future. I thought about it quite

www.activeresponsetraining.net

From the link;

"Fewer and fewer people will want to be cops. That will further lower hiring and training standards. Tax revenue losses and “defunding efforts” will drive salaries down and make working conditions more difficult. The only folks who will become cops in the future are those people who have no other career options.


As more and more low quality candidates are hired, public trust for the police will further erode. The police will become continually more corrupt and inept until they are almost useless.


The really good cops (and a lot of former soldiers) will move on to better paying private security positions. The rich will hire those security people as bodyguards and neighborhood patrols.


The middle class and poor well have to contend with the corrupt police system or take care of things themselves (either by vigilante or gang action.)


This is essentially how it works in many third world countries. I have lots of experience traveling in Peru, so I’ll use the capital city of Lima as an example.


In the most affluent neighborhoods you don’t see many cops. But there are professional armed security guards at all banks, many public businesses and on roving patrol in marked vehicles in the neighborhood at night.


In the poorer neighborhoods, you don’t see many cops either. They’ll respond to something serious, but don’t expect them to investigate some kind of minor property crime without a significant bribe.


View attachment 385575

Most of the lower class residents ignore any petty criminal stuff. They band up with family or friends to handle any serious business. Sometimes the residents will pay the local criminal gangs to take care of such problems instead if they have some extra cash. The bad guy gets beaten or taken out. The cops don’t work hard to find the perpetrators of these crimes because they know exactly what is happening."

irrelevant.

And rittenhouse was not protecting his family or his property he was playing soldier while breaking the law.

There is no comparison with law abiding gun owners defending their homes to what Rittenhouse did.

You said you're not okay with vigilantism or violence; if this shit keeps up, you will get a lot more of both.

Defending your own home is not vigilantism

Taking a gun out of state carrying that gun illegally and shooting people is vigilantism


see the difference?

who did that??

try and stay on topic,,

Rittenhouse

pay attention

he didnt take a gun across state lines and he worked in that city 20 miles away,,yet to be determined he was carrying illegal,,,
and he didnt just shoot someone,,he defended himself from attackers,,,

lying about the facts doesnt help your narrative,,

He lives in Illinois

He took a rifle across state lines and carried it illegally in WI

Why don't you learn the facts instead of making shit up?

And he was breaking the law. IF he was a law abiding gun owner he would not have put himself in the position where he had to kill anyone.

You can't claim self defense in the commission of a crime.

If it meets the standards for self defense, and this seems to by every metric, then it's not a crime.

OK so someone breaks into your house you point a shotgun at him he kills you first and you think he can claim self defense?

And btw, where is your outrage at the guy who was wounded?
He was carrying a pistol, and actively using it to attack someone, both in violation of the law..... why aren't you demanding he be arrested and prosecuted?


Because you don't really care what the law says do you?
This is about punishing someone for daring to stand up for themselves, that's all.


You're fucking trash, guy.
Stay clear of me or I'll leave your corpse out on the curb..... because I've killed a hell of a lot more people than that kid has.

I don't support law breaking of any kind and I have said that repeatedly.
You do.

If that person was carrying illegally he is just as much a criminal as Rittenhouse is.

See unlike you I am not a hypocrite.

But I haven't seen a single post from you demanding that he be arrested, or even questioning why not.

I'm not overly concerned with any laws but my own, but that doesn't mean I think the kid broke any; it doesn't seem like he did.
And you don't actually care either way; even if it's determined that he was legal all the way, you're still going to want him to fry.

And yes, you are a hypocrite.

BEcause it is not the subject of the thread.

Tell you what start a thread on all the people who broke laws in WI and I'll say the same thing I say here.

ALL Criminals should serve time.

Because unlike you I think the law applies to EVERYONE.

If Rittenhouse was not illegally carrying a rifle in WI I wouldn't have a problem.

But the fact is he was carrying a rifle illegally in WI.

Oh bullshit....

Save your fucking weak denials for someone else, I got your number, punk.

You're just trash who wants to see a youngster suffer for ruining your fun.

No I want people who break the law to be treated like the criminals they are.

You don't

 

[progressive hunter]

he was running away because people saw him kill a man and those people were chasing him to stop him from killing anyone else

The irony there that you’re ok with them being vigilanties but not for Kyle? Hmm you are officially demofk!

wrong again

I'm not Ok with violence or vigilantism


You seem to be though since you think it's OK to violate gun laws.

I merely stated a fact and did not indicate whatsoever that I supported the people who chased Rittenhouse.

The fact is the primary cause of this incident was Rittenhouse breaking WI gun laws.

He added to the problem.

Better get used to them both.

The Future of American Policing

Written by: Greg Ellifritz I had two different friends send me messages last weekend requesting my thoughts on what policing is going to look like in the future. I thought about it quite

www.activeresponsetraining.net

From the link;

"Fewer and fewer people will want to be cops. That will further lower hiring and training standards. Tax revenue losses and “defunding efforts” will drive salaries down and make working conditions more difficult. The only folks who will become cops in the future are those people who have no other career options.


As more and more low quality candidates are hired, public trust for the police will further erode. The police will become continually more corrupt and inept until they are almost useless.


The really good cops (and a lot of former soldiers) will move on to better paying private security positions. The rich will hire those security people as bodyguards and neighborhood patrols.


The middle class and poor well have to contend with the corrupt police system or take care of things themselves (either by vigilante or gang action.)


This is essentially how it works in many third world countries. I have lots of experience traveling in Peru, so I’ll use the capital city of Lima as an example.


In the most affluent neighborhoods you don’t see many cops. But there are professional armed security guards at all banks, many public businesses and on roving patrol in marked vehicles in the neighborhood at night.


In the poorer neighborhoods, you don’t see many cops either. They’ll respond to something serious, but don’t expect them to investigate some kind of minor property crime without a significant bribe.


View attachment 385575

Most of the lower class residents ignore any petty criminal stuff. They band up with family or friends to handle any serious business. Sometimes the residents will pay the local criminal gangs to take care of such problems instead if they have some extra cash. The bad guy gets beaten or taken out. The cops don’t work hard to find the perpetrators of these crimes because they know exactly what is happening."

irrelevant.

And rittenhouse was not protecting his family or his property he was playing soldier while breaking the law.

There is no comparison with law abiding gun owners defending their homes to what Rittenhouse did.

You said you're not okay with vigilantism or violence; if this shit keeps up, you will get a lot more of both.

Defending your own home is not vigilantism

Taking a gun out of state carrying that gun illegally and shooting people is vigilantism


see the difference?

who did that??

try and stay on topic,,

Rittenhouse

pay attention

he didnt take a gun across state lines and he worked in that city 20 miles away,,yet to be determined he was carrying illegal,,,
and he didnt just shoot someone,,he defended himself from attackers,,,

lying about the facts doesnt help your narrative,,

He lives in Illinois

He took a rifle across state lines and carried it illegally in WI

Why don't you learn the facts instead of making shit up?

And he was breaking the law. IF he was a law abiding gun owner he would not have put himself in the position where he had to kill anyone.

You can't claim self defense in the commission of a crime.

If it meets the standards for self defense, and this seems to by every metric, then it's not a crime.

OK so someone breaks into your house you point a shotgun at him he kills you first and you think he can claim self defense?

And btw, where is your outrage at the guy who was wounded?
He was carrying a pistol, and actively using it to attack someone, both in violation of the law..... why aren't you demanding he be arrested and prosecuted?


Because you don't really care what the law says do you?
This is about punishing someone for daring to stand up for themselves, that's all.


You're fucking trash, guy.
Stay clear of me or I'll leave your corpse out on the curb..... because I've killed a hell of a lot more people than that kid has.

I don't support law breaking of any kind and I have said that repeatedly.
You do.

If that person was carrying illegally he is just as much a criminal as Rittenhouse is.

See unlike you I am not a hypocrite.

But I haven't seen a single post from you demanding that he be arrested, or even questioning why not.

I'm not overly concerned with any laws but my own, but that doesn't mean I think the kid broke any; it doesn't seem like he did.
And you don't actually care either way; even if it's determined that he was legal all the way, you're still going to want him to fry.

And yes, you are a hypocrite.

BEcause it is not the subject of the thread.

Tell you what start a thread on all the people who broke laws in WI and I'll say the same thing I say here.

ALL Criminals should serve time.

Because unlike you I think the law applies to EVERYONE.

If Rittenhouse was not illegally carrying a rifle in WI I wouldn't have a problem.

But the fact is he was carrying a rifle illegally in WI.

his carrying that rifle is the same as running a stop sign,,,

and thankfully he was carrying it or he would be dead,,

NOPE.

If he obeyed WI gun laws his life never would have been in danger.

Once again it was his decision to break the law that put him in danger.

If you run a stop sign and run over and kill a person you are at fault for the death because you chose to break the law and run the stop sign

not if those people are trying to kill you,,,

 

[Invisibleflash]

Kyle Rittenhouse lead defense lawyer John Pierce locked out of Twitter over tweet advocating for his client

Twitter's censorship of Rittenhouse's defense team continues.

reclaimthenet.org

"Twitter locked the account of John Pierce, the lead defense lawyer for Kyle Rittenhouse, over a tweet comparing Rittenhouse to the “unknown patriot” who fired the opening shot of the Battle of Concord on April 19th, 1775 that started the American Revolutionary War. This is the second time in two days that a lawyer on Rittenhouse’s defense team has been censored by Twitter. On September 1, defense lawyer Lin Wood was locked out of his account after advocating for his client. Twitter later reinstated the account, admitting the suspension was a mistake."

View attachment 384419

All the guy said is that Kyle will go down in history along side of the patriot who fired the shot heard around the world -- what Kyle did was just that important....and he will be remembered along side of other Revolutionary patriots like Crispus Attucks and Peter Salem....

Twitter is actively trying to censor the defense efforts of Kyle and violating the free speech of him and his legal defense team -- it is past time now that Trump nationalizes Twitter and Facebook so everyone's speech can be heard, no government censorship -- except for socialist liberal lies and propaganda...no more shutting down people's political speech, no more deleting QAnon posts just because JFK Jr. is still alive and will announce his support for Trump in 2020 -- Now there is some political speech that does need to be cracked down on, like speech that disagrees with real Americans -- and I trust the Trump admin will decide what is best when it comes to that....

Listen, filthy dems can only accept the party line. You have 2 choices with the filthy dems. You either do it their way...or you do it their way.

God help us if the filthy dems are ever successful at disarming the right. Once they would have all the guns, no doubt they would put the right in retraining camps with Antifa as the prison (torture) guards.

 

[Care4all]

Since when is a murderer a "patriot"?

Since Zimmerman???

Yup. The narrative of the right-wingers seems to be that a self-appointed upright, moral white man has a right to patrol American streets, heavily armed of course, and all people need to respect him and follow his commands. If somebody gets killed, the right-wingers will comb his background looking for any faults, even though the guy who killed him did not know him at all. In this case, they are trying to make a hero out of an out-of-town killer kid, who shot and killed one stranger, and then, when chased as news spread that he was a killer, killed another and gravely wounded a second person who were trying to stop him. If anyone is a "hero," it is the late Mr. Huber and the still-with-us Mr. Grosskreutz, horribly wounded who sacrificed themselves to bring down a killer.

Right-wingers will babble about the political parties of mayors and governors, but it simply does not apply. The Kenosha police were supposed to be clearing the streets and enforcing the curfew. They didn't do it. Result: two dead. One mutilated.

To go back to the murder of Trayvon Martin: Zimmerman could not have known anything about him when he murdered him. From my understanding, this teenager was sent to his dad because he had gotten into some trouble and his mom thought it best that he serve his "sentence" out of town where he could not have contact with the friends whom she thought were a bad influence on him.

Republicans respond in self defense, democrats think republicans can just be attacked lol and we must accept it lol

Yeah, attacked with a plastic bag is life threatening!!!

 

[Jitss617]

Since when is a murderer a "patriot"?

Since Zimmerman???

Yup. The narrative of the right-wingers seems to be that a self-appointed upright, moral white man has a right to patrol American streets, heavily armed of course, and all people need to respect him and follow his commands. If somebody gets killed, the right-wingers will comb his background looking for any faults, even though the guy who killed him did not know him at all. In this case, they are trying to make a hero out of an out-of-town killer kid, who shot and killed one stranger, and then, when chased as news spread that he was a killer, killed another and gravely wounded a second person who were trying to stop him. If anyone is a "hero," it is the late Mr. Huber and the still-with-us Mr. Grosskreutz, horribly wounded who sacrificed themselves to bring down a killer.

Right-wingers will babble about the political parties of mayors and governors, but it simply does not apply. The Kenosha police were supposed to be clearing the streets and enforcing the curfew. They didn't do it. Result: two dead. One mutilated.

To go back to the murder of Trayvon Martin: Zimmerman could not have known anything about him when he murdered him. From my understanding, this teenager was sent to his dad because he had gotten into some trouble and his mom thought it best that he serve his "sentence" out of town where he could not have contact with the friends whom she thought were a bad influence on him.

Republicans respond in self defense, democrats think republicans can just be attacked lol and we must accept it lol

Yeah, attacked with a plastic bag is life threatening!!!

What was in the bag? Why was he chasing him? Why did they shoot at him? Why did you guys have poles?

 

[Care4all]

Since when is a murderer a "patriot"?

Since Zimmerman???

Yup. The narrative of the right-wingers seems to be that a self-appointed upright, moral white man has a right to patrol American streets, heavily armed of course, and all people need to respect him and follow his commands. If somebody gets killed, the right-wingers will comb his background looking for any faults, even though the guy who killed him did not know him at all. In this case, they are trying to make a hero out of an out-of-town killer kid, who shot and killed one stranger, and then, when chased as news spread that he was a killer, killed another and gravely wounded a second person who were trying to stop him. If anyone is a "hero," it is the late Mr. Huber and the still-with-us Mr. Grosskreutz, horribly wounded who sacrificed themselves to bring down a killer.

Right-wingers will babble about the political parties of mayors and governors, but it simply does not apply. The Kenosha police were supposed to be clearing the streets and enforcing the curfew. They didn't do it. Result: two dead. One mutilated.

To go back to the murder of Trayvon Martin: Zimmerman could not have known anything about him when he murdered him. From my understanding, this teenager was sent to his dad because he had gotten into some trouble and his mom thought it best that he serve his "sentence" out of town where he could not have contact with the friends whom she thought were a bad influence on him.

Republicans respond in self defense, democrats think republicans can just be attacked lol and we must accept it lol

Yeah, attacked with a plastic bag is life threatening!!!

What was in the bag? Why was he chasing him? Why did they shoot at him? Why did you guys have poles?

So you shoot somebody 3 or 4 times in the head and kill them, because you don't know what's in the plastic bag? Oh yeah, that makes perfect sense!

 

[Jitss617]

Since when is a murderer a "patriot"?

Since Zimmerman???

Yup. The narrative of the right-wingers seems to be that a self-appointed upright, moral white man has a right to patrol American streets, heavily armed of course, and all people need to respect him and follow his commands. If somebody gets killed, the right-wingers will comb his background looking for any faults, even though the guy who killed him did not know him at all. In this case, they are trying to make a hero out of an out-of-town killer kid, who shot and killed one stranger, and then, when chased as news spread that he was a killer, killed another and gravely wounded a second person who were trying to stop him. If anyone is a "hero," it is the late Mr. Huber and the still-with-us Mr. Grosskreutz, horribly wounded who sacrificed themselves to bring down a killer.

Right-wingers will babble about the political parties of mayors and governors, but it simply does not apply. The Kenosha police were supposed to be clearing the streets and enforcing the curfew. They didn't do it. Result: two dead. One mutilated.

To go back to the murder of Trayvon Martin: Zimmerman could not have known anything about him when he murdered him. From my understanding, this teenager was sent to his dad because he had gotten into some trouble and his mom thought it best that he serve his "sentence" out of town where he could not have contact with the friends whom she thought were a bad influence on him.

Republicans respond in self defense, democrats think republicans can just be attacked lol and we must accept it lol

Yeah, attacked with a plastic bag is life threatening!!!

What was in the bag? Why was he chasing him? Why did they shoot at him? Why did you guys have poles?

So you shoot somebody 3 or 4 times in the head and kill them, because you don't know what's in the plastic bag? Oh yeah, that makes perfect sense!

Kyle was retreating. He ran out of any place to run and he didn’t want to be physically hurt under the constitution we have a right to self-defense.. also don’t forget Rosenblum was not supposed to be around any minors because he raped one.. Kyle shot his dick off lol Kyle deserves a medal of freedom he deserves a statue he’s a hero

 

[jc456]

No I want people who break the law to be treated like the criminals they are.

Then why weren’t any of the assholes taking bats to innocent cars arrested? All caught on tape too! Sure you are

 

[jc456]

So you shoot somebody 3 or 4 times in the head and kill them, because you don't know what's in the plastic bag? Oh yeah, that makes perfect sense

No evidence of that at all. Have a nice day