Kyle Rittenhouse: Vigilante White Men

[Anonymous]

Nice straw man there. No, there is nothing racist about supporting the police. Most Americans support and back their police force. Don't confuse violent rioters with mainstream, fair-minded people (Biden supporters) who acknowledge that there is systemic racism in many police forces- pro police reform =/= anti-police.

Police reform measures like bodycams in every local police force in the country would weed out many bad actors for starters.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:" I don't think most people want to actually abolish the police so much as abolish the force that's there now and start anew. "

Why not simply abolish criminals?

+1. The most hilarious is the people who want to defund and abolish police after the first ones to cry for someone to call them lol

This is how stupid these people are. They had a defund the police rally and ask for police presence for their safety. You want to use the people for your safety who you are trying to abolish? You can make this stupidity up.

What are you talking abount? Where did this happen that violent, radical defund the police types asked for police protection?

Oh, that's right, you pulled that one out of your ass.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:" I don't think most people want to actually abolish the police so much as abolish the force that's there now and start anew. "

Why not simply abolish criminals?

+1. The most hilarious is the people who want to defund and abolish police after the first ones to cry for someone to call them lol

This is how stupid these people are. They had a defund the police rally and ask for police presence for their safety. You want to use the people for your safety who you are trying to abolish? You can make this stupidity up.

What are you talking abount? Where did this happen that violent, radical defund the police types asked for police protection?

Oh, that's right, you pulled that one out of your ass.

There was a cop who made a video about it. They requested his unit for security and a defund the police march.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Nice straw man there. No, there is nothing racist about supporting the police. Most Americans support and back their police force. Don't confuse violent rioters with mainstream, fair-minded people (Biden supporters) who acknowledge that there is systemic racism in many police forces- pro police reform =/= anti-police.

Police reform measures like bodycams in every local police force in the country would weed out many bad actors for starters.

PP here. I completely agree. I think there needs to be more training but that comes with increasing the budget, not defunding.

My comment was in response to the person who said that it will likely come out in trial that Kyle was a blue lives matter supporter. Like as if there was something wrong about supporting police.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nice straw man there. No, there is nothing racist about supporting the police. Most Americans support and back their police force. Don't confuse violent rioters with mainstream, fair-minded people (Biden supporters) who acknowledge that there is systemic racism in many police forces- pro police reform =/= anti-police.

Police reform measures like bodycams in every local police force in the country would weed out many bad actors for starters.

PP here. I completely agree. I think there needs to be more training but that comes with increasing the budget, not defunding.

My comment was in response to the person who said that it will likely come out in trial that Kyle was a blue lives matter supporter. Like as if there was something wrong about supporting police.

Everyone understands that the blue lives matter campaign is opposed to the black lives matter campaign. It's not simply supporting law enforcement. It's making a stand that police are right and black people protesting being killed by police are wrong. It's an adversarial organization. Which you fully know.

[Anonymous]

The Kenosha Police are the primary people at fault for this for sanctioning and encouraging a group of armed unorganized and untrained civilians when they should have told them to go home.

One of the vigilantes has said on Facebook that the Kenosha Police "told us that they were going to be pushing the protesters towards us because we could deal with them." I'm not linking to it because he is a Nazi.

Even if that didn't happen, the kid said his "job" was to protect a business, but even if business owners asked the fake militia to protect their businesses, they did not stay there together as security, outside the perimeter of the protests. They wandered around pretending to have authority when they had none, and the dumb kid walked solo into the protestors with a rifle and then panicked when protestors turned on him.

Bottom line, the pretend militia were idiots doing idiotic things and the police were idiots for supporting them and believing that the vigilantes would not do something stupid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What was wrong with Breonna Taylor?

Floyd wasn't a hero. Just a guy who didn't deserve a knee on his neck for almost 9 minutes.

Blake isn't a hero. Just a guy who shouldn't have been shot 7 times.

She made the fatal mistake of being a friend to a drug dealer. She didn't know it, but she was.

The drug dealer whose name was on the warrant they had, did not live anywhere near there. But because of crime in his neighborhood, he was ordering things on-line and having them delivered to Breonna Taylor's house and would regularly go over and pick up the packages from her house. The police flagged the house because this suspect was regularly visiting the house and getting packages delivered there and taking them away. The police suspected the house was a drop-off for drug supplies and drugs. But the suspect (who was actually already in police custody at the time of the raid) said that he was just getting shoes and clothes delivered there because packages were regularly heisted in his own neighborhood.

It's truly sickening that that was the reason she paid with her life. Because she was a nice person.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:" I don't think most people want to actually abolish the police so much as abolish the force that's there now and start anew. "

Why not simply abolish criminals?

+1. The most hilarious is the people who want to defund and abolish police after the first ones to cry for someone to call them lol

This is how stupid these people are. They had a defund the police rally and ask for police presence for their safety. You want to use the people for your safety who you are trying to abolish? You can make this stupidity up.

What are you talking abount? Where did this happen that violent, radical defund the police types asked for police protection?

Oh, that's right, you pulled that one out of your ass.

There was a cop who made a video about it. They requested his unit for security and a defund the police march.

That is not hypocritical, except to a dumbass. Defunding the police means stopping the militarization, the unjustified violence, the racial profiling and targeting, and the violent escalation by the police. In other words, get rid of the racist assholes and their behaviors. Providing security for the community, including for a march, is an appropriate role for the police.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I stopped reading here:

It is similar to getting rear-ended at a red light through zero fault of your own, but you were driving without a license or insurance. It automatically makes you at fault because you weren't even legally allowed to be driving.

That's not how it works.

You should have kept reading, Sparky. I'm a practicing attorney and you're right, that's not how that works. But his point still stands, in a civil case it COULD count as a mitigating factor and some percentage of the harm will be assigned to you depending and unless the defendant's actions were so egregious that no act of the plaintiff could have prevented the outcome.

I'm not criminal defense lawyer, but every other point he/she made is accurate.

To the assholes mocking him for being a paralegal: I've worked with many paralegals that could run circles around a lawyer. You're probably some bitter loser living in your parent's basement

The lack of insurance never gets admitted as evidence. It's not going to count as a mitigating factor. You'd have to get pretty creative to get lack of a license into evidence.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nice straw man there. No, there is nothing racist about supporting the police. Most Americans support and back their police force. Don't confuse violent rioters with mainstream, fair-minded people (Biden supporters) who acknowledge that there is systemic racism in many police forces- pro police reform =/= anti-police.

Police reform measures like bodycams in every local police force in the country would weed out many bad actors for starters.

PP here. I completely agree. I think there needs to be more training but that comes with increasing the budget, not defunding.

My comment was in response to the person who said that it will likely come out in trial that Kyle was a blue lives matter supporter. Like as if there was something wrong about supporting police.

Everyone understands that the blue lives matter campaign is opposed to the black lives matter campaign. It's not simply supporting law enforcement. It's making a stand that police are right and black people protesting being killed by police are wrong. It's an adversarial organization. Which you fully know.

The question will be whether Kyle, a not-too-bright 17 year old kid knew that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

That is not hypocritical, except to a dumbass. Defunding the police means stopping the militarization, the unjustified violence, the racial profiling and targeting, and the violent escalation by the police. In other words, get rid of the racist assholes and their behaviors. Providing security for the community, including for a march, is an appropriate role for the police.

Sounds more like reforming the police. "Defund" sounds like you don't want to pay for policing anymore. But I know we have a lot of people making the argument that, even though there was a perfectly good word like "reform" if that's what the protesters meant, they chose "defund" anyway even though they totally want to keep funding the police.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

That is not hypocritical, except to a dumbass. Defunding the police means stopping the militarization, the unjustified violence, the racial profiling and targeting, and the violent escalation by the police. In other words, get rid of the racist assholes and their behaviors. Providing security for the community, including for a march, is an appropriate role for the police.

Sounds more like reforming the police. "Defund" sounds like you don't want to pay for policing anymore. But I know we have a lot of people making the argument that, even though there was a perfectly good word like "reform" if that's what the protesters meant, they chose "defund" anyway even though they totally want to keep funding the police.

I think what really happened is that originally someone was trying to bridge the gap between abolitionists and reformers. As the movement became more mainstream, the abolitionists became a little embarrassing, but the movement didn't want to lose their support; so they kept saying "defund" while trying to make the implausible argument to critics that defunding has nothing to do with abolition.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nice straw man there. No, there is nothing racist about supporting the police. Most Americans support and back their police force. Don't confuse violent rioters with mainstream, fair-minded people (Biden supporters) who acknowledge that there is systemic racism in many police forces- pro police reform =/= anti-police.

Police reform measures like bodycams in every local police force in the country would weed out many bad actors for starters.

PP here. I completely agree. I think there needs to be more training but that comes with increasing the budget, not defunding.

My comment was in response to the person who said that it will likely come out in trial that Kyle was a blue lives matter supporter. Like as if there was something wrong about supporting police.

Everyone understands that the blue lives matter campaign is opposed to the black lives matter campaign. It's not simply supporting law enforcement. It's making a stand that police are right and black people protesting being killed by police are wrong. It's an adversarial organization. Which you fully know.

The question will be whether Kyle, a not-too-bright 17 year old kid knew that.

Now you're saying Kyle was too stupid to know what he was doing? Your little child soldier vigilante hero is also an idiot, you think?

Make up your mind if he's a hero who somehow KNEW that the people he was killing were real baddies who needed off the street, or just some low IQ dummy who got caught up in something too big for his feeble mind.

Or maybe he is a teenager who should have been at home, instead of carousing with amped up adults at 2 am in a city where he didn't belong, carrying the deadliest of weapons. Maybe he was getting radicalized by bad people and his parents encouraged him all the way. Maybe they should be charged, too, for encouraging their child to become a killer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I stopped reading here:

It is similar to getting rear-ended at a red light through zero fault of your own, but you were driving without a license or insurance. It automatically makes you at fault because you weren't even legally allowed to be driving.

That's not how it works.

You should have kept reading, Sparky. I'm a practicing attorney and you're right, that's not how that works. But his point still stands, in a civil case it COULD count as a mitigating factor and some percentage of the harm will be assigned to you depending and unless the defendant's actions were so egregious that no act of the plaintiff could have prevented the outcome.

I'm not criminal defense lawyer, but every other point he/she made is accurate.

To the assholes mocking him for being a paralegal: I've worked with many paralegals that could run circles around a lawyer. You're probably some bitter loser living in your parent's basement

Not a bitter loser here and I've worked with a lot of lawyers and paralegals. They mostly don't sound like that and the one or two who did were often wrong.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nice straw man there. No, there is nothing racist about supporting the police. Most Americans support and back their police force. Don't confuse violent rioters with mainstream, fair-minded people (Biden supporters) who acknowledge that there is systemic racism in many police forces- pro police reform =/= anti-police.

Police reform measures like bodycams in every local police force in the country would weed out many bad actors for starters.

PP here. I completely agree. I think there needs to be more training but that comes with increasing the budget, not defunding.

My comment was in response to the person who said that it will likely come out in trial that Kyle was a blue lives matter supporter. Like as if there was something wrong about supporting police.

Everyone understands that the blue lives matter campaign is opposed to the black lives matter campaign. It's not simply supporting law enforcement. It's making a stand that police are right and black people protesting being killed by police are wrong. It's an adversarial organization. Which you fully know.

The question will be whether Kyle, a not-too-bright 17 year old kid knew that.

Now you're saying Kyle was too stupid to know what he was doing? Your little child soldier vigilante hero is also an idiot, you think?

Make up your mind if he's a hero who somehow KNEW that the people he was killing were real baddies who needed off the street, or just some low IQ dummy who got caught up in something too big for his feeble mind.

Or maybe he is a teenager who should have been at home, instead of carousing with amped up adults at 2 am in a city where he didn't belong, carrying the deadliest of weapons. Maybe he was getting radicalized by bad people and his parents encouraged him all the way. Maybe they should be charged, too, for encouraging their child to become a killer.

I am not a ring winger, I don't think he's any kind of hero, and looking at his background and history and I do thing he is dumb and strongly suspect he has mental health issues. I also suspect a lot of people in the militias are a lot like him which is exactly why I don't want them running around far from home at 2 AM.

That said, I find it extremely disturbing that you assume I am a right winger simply because I think this kid really is stupid. Which seems to be fairly obvious, even if you are a right winger, don't you think? If you jump to conclusions so readily based on a single sentence that doesn't have any political implication, what does that say about your ability to look at this objectively?