Kyle Rittenhouse: Vigilante White Men

[Anonymous]

Right wingers are whiny little brats. They need accountability.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Right wingers are whiny little brats. They need accountability.

Aren't you mature?
Who specifically needs accountability? Accountability for what exactly?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can’t believe anyone wants to defend an underage, unemployed high school dropout who routinely drove without a license, broke a curfew to be present during a riot, illegally carried a firearm to the riot because he anticipated confrontations, told a reporter his “job” was to protect people, habitually stretches the truth, and killed two people. He had no training or experience in providing security. He was just a kid with a history of being bullied and belittled, who liked guns and cops, and fantasized about having authority and a being a hero. He shouldn’t have been in illegal possession of a gun. He shouldn’t have been on the streets with rioters. Had he obeyed the law, there wouldn’t have been any shootings.

It’s no surprise that the people he shot were not denizens of Kenosha; they were violating the curfew too by being out there on the streets during looting, destruction of property, and clashes between different groups. Law abiding citizens were off the streets at that point. People don’t have to mourn the passing of two predators, but their criminal histories were unknown by Rittenhouse and didn’t factor into his shooting them.

Years ago, a woman snuck into the zoo when it was closed and somehow got into the lion enclosure. She was killed by the animals. Had she brought an AR15 with her and gunned the lions down when they started to attack her, would you call that self defense and say she shouldn’t be convicted of any crimes? That’s essentially what Rittenhouse did. Being out on the streets past curfew was illegal. Skirmishes with other people who didn’t respect the law and were out rioting was obviously predictable, which is why Rittenhouse brought a firearm, even though it was illegal for him to do so. He got the confrontation he sought out, and killed people as a result.

The real problem is that you don’t want to defend him. The law is supposed to apply to everyone with equal force. Whether youre Mother Theresa herself or the worst dregs of our society. KR did a lot of things wrong that night, but they have little or no bearing on his self defense claim. Just like the police don’t get to choke you to death just because you allegedly passed out counterfeit money, other people don’t get to violate your personal safety just because you are somewhere you shouldn’t be doing something that you shouldn’t be doing. Whether you’re an underage kid drinking in a bar on a fake ID, or unreasonably speeding done the highway, or a 17 year old idiot who showed up armed to a riot after curfew, you still have rights.

This whole criminal case has been a travesty and embarrassment. And we haven’t even talked about the fact that websites like Facebook and gofundme prohibited him from fund raising for his defense.

Whether you do it formally or informally, reserving society’s sympathies and/or legal protections for politically favored individuals is a very dangerous precedent to set because some day others will be in power.

This thread is very illuminating to me and it makes me reconsider the sincerity of the criminal justice reform movement. The very same people who would tell us we live in a systematically oppressive carceral state under a militarized police force all of a sudden have no problem locking up and throwing away the key in this case. Hell, I haven’t even heard that favored talking point about how at 17 his brain wasn’t fully developed yet.

Bravo!!!

The last paragraph is so true. And, given the tweet yesterday by Hakeem Jeffries, it is absolutely spot on.

Both of you seem confused.

1. I am in very much in favor of police reform. I don't think it is reasonable for police to do things like violently throw non-violent offenders to the ground, suffocate them with a knee to the neck, dislocate shoulders and break arms like the granny with alzheimers who was picking flowers. Or any of the interactions with the mentally ill that police unnecessarily turned violent. Or to shoot and kill people like Philandro Castile, who was legally carrying a gun. There are a lot of things in policing that MUST CHANGE.

2. I ALSO believe that anyone who engages in murder, violent crime, gun crime, needs to be arrested, prosecuted, convicted with sentencing that removes them from society and put in prison.

There is absolutely no conflict there whatsoever.

Nice job moving the goalposts. I hope you didn’t hurt your back.

You said you couldn’t believe anybody wanted to defend him based on a long list of stuff, most of which had absolutely nothing to do with the events of that night. In your mind, things like dropping out of high school and driving without a license make one not worthy of being defended. I do not believe that somebody who believes high school graduation is somehow relevant to the question of whether an accused criminal is worthy of defense is also putting forth a good faith argument on criminal justice reform.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can’t believe anyone wants to defend an underage, unemployed high school dropout who routinely drove without a license, broke a curfew to be present during a riot, illegally carried a firearm to the riot because he anticipated confrontations, told a reporter his “job” was to protect people, habitually stretches the truth, and killed two people. He had no training or experience in providing security. He was just a kid with a history of being bullied and belittled, who liked guns and cops, and fantasized about having authority and a being a hero. He shouldn’t have been in illegal possession of a gun. He shouldn’t have been on the streets with rioters. Had he obeyed the law, there wouldn’t have been any shootings.

It’s no surprise that the people he shot were not denizens of Kenosha; they were violating the curfew too by being out there on the streets during looting, destruction of property, and clashes between different groups. Law abiding citizens were off the streets at that point. People don’t have to mourn the passing of two predators, but their criminal histories were unknown by Rittenhouse and didn’t factor into his shooting them.

Years ago, a woman snuck into the zoo when it was closed and somehow got into the lion enclosure. She was killed by the animals. Had she brought an AR15 with her and gunned the lions down when they started to attack her, would you call that self defense and say she shouldn’t be convicted of any crimes? That’s essentially what Rittenhouse did. Being out on the streets past curfew was illegal. Skirmishes with other people who didn’t respect the law and were out rioting was obviously predictable, which is why Rittenhouse brought a firearm, even though it was illegal for him to do so. He got the confrontation he sought out, and killed people as a result.

The real problem is that you don’t want to defend him. The law is supposed to apply to everyone with equal force. Whether youre Mother Theresa herself or the worst dregs of our society. KR did a lot of things wrong that night, but they have little or no bearing on his self defense claim. Just like the police don’t get to choke you to death just because you allegedly passed out counterfeit money, other people don’t get to violate your personal safety just because you are somewhere you shouldn’t be doing something that you shouldn’t be doing. Whether you’re an underage kid drinking in a bar on a fake ID, or unreasonably speeding done the highway, or a 17 year old idiot who showed up armed to a riot after curfew, you still have rights.

This whole criminal case has been a travesty and embarrassment. And we haven’t even talked about the fact that websites like Facebook and gofundme prohibited him from fund raising for his defense.

Whether you do it formally or informally, reserving society’s sympathies and/or legal protections for politically favored individuals is a very dangerous precedent to set because some day others will be in power.

This thread is very illuminating to me and it makes me reconsider the sincerity of the criminal justice reform movement. The very same people who would tell us we live in a systematically oppressive carceral state under a militarized police force all of a sudden have no problem locking up and throwing away the key in this case. Hell, I haven’t even heard that favored talking point about how at 17 his brain wasn’t fully developed yet.

Bravo!!!

The last paragraph is so true. And, given the tweet yesterday by Hakeem Jeffries, it is absolutely spot on.

Both of you seem confused.

1. I am in very much in favor of police reform. I don't think it is reasonable for police to do things like violently throw non-violent offenders to the ground, suffocate them with a knee to the neck, dislocate shoulders and break arms like the granny with alzheimers who was picking flowers. Or any of the interactions with the mentally ill that police unnecessarily turned violent. Or to shoot and kill people like Philandro Castile, who was legally carrying a gun. There are a lot of things in policing that MUST CHANGE.

2. I ALSO believe that anyone who engages in murder, violent crime, gun crime, needs to be arrested, prosecuted, convicted with sentencing that removes them from society and put in prison.

There is absolutely no conflict there whatsoever.

Nice job moving the goalposts. I hope you didn’t hurt your back.

You said you couldn’t believe anybody wanted to defend him based on a long list of stuff, most of which had absolutely nothing to do with the events of that night. In your mind, things like dropping out of high school and driving without a license make one not worthy of being defended. I do not believe that somebody who believes high school graduation is somehow relevant to the question of whether an accused criminal is worthy of defense is also putting forth a good faith argument on criminal justice reform.

You’re responding to multiple different posters. I wrong the long post you’re talking about, but you’re responding to a different poster about her desire for CJ reform.

[Anonymous]

Bottom line: some of you haven’t watched the trial or seen the video evidence. And it shows. Get educated or shut up.

[Anonymous]

Tucker is a savage. “Joseph Rosenbaum died as he had lived, trying to touch an unwilling minor.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Tucker is a savage. “Joseph Rosenbaum died as he had lived, trying to touch an unwilling minor.”

That’s pure gold.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Tucker is a savage. “Joseph Rosenbaum died as he had lived, trying to touch an unwilling minor.”

That’s pure gold.

That was a great Tucker segment.

[Anonymous]

[vimeo]

Anonymous wrote:Right wingers are whiny little brats. They need accountability.

I wanted to give him something to cry about. This pi$$ ant's crocodile tears are going to get him off. I would give him life without parole to be served in solitary confinement.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:[vimeo]

Anonymous wrote:Right wingers are whiny little brats. They need accountability.

I wanted to give him something to cry about. This pi$$ ant's crocodile tears are going to get him off. I would give him life without parole to be served in solitary confinement.

For defending himself against several left wing thugs who were willing and able to snuff his life out?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Bottom line: some of you haven’t watched the trial or seen the video evidence. And it shows. Get educated or shut up.

The trial has been rigged for Rittenhouse.

The trial has been rigged for Rittenhouse.

The trial has been rigged for Rittenhouse.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:[vimeo]

Anonymous wrote:Right wingers are whiny little brats. They need accountability.

I wanted to give him something to cry about. This pi$$ ant's crocodile tears are going to get him off. I would give him life without parole to be served in solitary confinement.

It’s rigged. He’s getting off.

Always remember the only principle of the GOP: “Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect.” Francis Wilhoit

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bottom line: some of you haven’t watched the trial or seen the video evidence. And it shows. Get educated or shut up.

The trial has been rigged for Rittenhouse.

The trial has been rigged for Rittenhouse.

The trial has been rigged for Rittenhouse.

The judge was appointed by a democrat and the prosecutor got reamed because he was an idiot.

[Anonymous]

The punk put himself in a situation he couldn’t handle because he had no business going there to play out his vigilante fantasy. The police have to learn not to coddle right wing idiots who show up armed looking for an excuse to shoot a n-word.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The punk put himself in a situation he couldn’t handle because he had no business going there to play out his vigilante fantasy. The police have to learn not to coddle right wing idiots who show up armed looking for an excuse to shoot a n-word.

+1
This is what Kyle was there for. For those who would say “BuT aLl HiS victims were White;” don’t overlook what panic does to a brain. He didn’t get the victims he wanted, but he sure made plenty of trouble.