Ritttenhouse Trial

[nursej22]

The Rittenhouse trial has begun in Kenosha, Wisconsin. The prosecution is presenting first, but apparently the defense argument will be self-defense. So a 17 year old travels out of state with his rifle to a demonstration because he fears for his life? 

 

[Cclm, LPN]

9 hours ago, MunoRN said:

Your suggestion seems to be that those who support abortion support abortion at 39 weeks. 

We argue, debate, it get's snippy at times no doubt, but that's way, way over the line

Yes it was a cheap shot. You knew what I meant. 

[toomuchbaloney]

11 minutes ago, Cclm said:

You demand sources and the first thing you do is criticize them. And/or try to assert them to your very own propaganda criteria. This is why I do not source often. You don't read and automatically dismiss them. 

It's a shame for a person who thinks their opinion is superior and the great propaganda finder would attack the source instead of the argument. 

Nonsense. I read your biased and inaccurate media sources and asked you a question because your citations don't support your assertions.  If you had read the actual articles that you offered you would be aware that they don't make the point you claim they make.  I'm know that because I read those articles.  That should be evident to any competent reader of my remarks. 

It's a shame that you continue to make claims based in your emotions and poorly informed opinions and then try to attack those who comment on the quality of your information or understanding. 

5 minutes ago, Cclm said:

Yes it was a cheap shot. You knew what I meant. 

Correct...your intentions are often much more transparent than you believe they are.

[toomuchbaloney]

10 minutes ago, Cclm said:

Does the cost matter? It was just a little bit damaged? People lost their businesses and sorry insurance doesn't make it okay. Not to mention the premiums they'll have to pay now for being located in a riot zone. 

It matters to the people who are trying to conflate personal or business loss with the costs associated with attacks on government buildings and proceedings.  No member here suggested that loss of property in a riot was OK...are you not reading the comments and don't know that or are you gas lighting?

What is a riot zone relative to property insurance and liability? The only Riot Zone I'm familiar with is a video game. 

[toomuchbaloney]

The Rittenhouse trial, coupled with the trial of the 3 guys that chased and killed Arbery pull a scab off the the history of vigilante justice in the USA.  We're going to have to have a conversation if we want to call ourselves a nation of law and order. 

https://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Justice/2021/1118/Vigilance-or-vigilantism-Old-laws-legacy-in-modern-US

Quote

In some ways, in the midst of police reforms, constitutional carry, and liberalized self-defense laws, it’s a picture of a country reverting to a past norm: The 19th-century doctrine of Manifest Destiny held that the United States was divinely authorized to spread capitalism and democracy throughout the American continents. The result was war with Mexico and mass violence against Indigenous people, justified by self-defense claims of white settlers.

 

[Tweety, BSN, RN]

Since this trial I'm processing how I feel about vigilantism.  

One the one hand if you have a business where there's been rioting and looting, you want to protect that property and you should have that right.  One the other hand like the couple that pointed the gun at the BLM protestors as they marched passed their house there was no cause for that, legal though it might have been.  So much could have gone wrong.

It's a sad state of affairs because in the 1960's protest got so much accomplished.  Since then we have more guns than people and the New Black Panthers armed themselves to protest in Atlanta.  Arm militias show up at protests in the form of Rittenhouse to protect people.  People spontaneously kill someone they perceive as a threat or an intruder.

So much can go wrong.  

[Cclm, LPN]

2 hours ago, toomuchbaloney said:

Nonsense. I read your biased and inaccurate media sources and asked you a question because your citations don't support your assertions.  If you had read the actual articles that you offered you would be aware that they don't make the point you claim they make.  I'm know that because I read those articles.  That should be evident to any competent reader of my remarks. 

It's a shame that you continue to make claims based in your emotions and poorly informed opinions and then try to attack those who comment on the quality of your information or understanding. 

Correct...your intentions are often much more transparent than you believe they are.

Humans have complex emotions. That's what separates us from other species. That fact you somehow feel superipr because apparently you do not have emotions which makes your opinion more valuable comes across as cold and disingenuous.  

Besides how can you determine someone's emotions behind a key bord?

[Cclm, LPN]

1 hour ago, Tweety said:

Since this trial I'm processing how I feel about vigilantism.  

One the one hand if you have a business where there's been rioting and looting, you want to protect that property and you should have that right.  One the other hand like the couple that pointed the gun at the BLM protestors as they marched passed their house there was no cause for that, legal though it might have been.  So much could have gone wrong.

It's a sad state of affairs because in the 1960's protest got so much accomplished.  Since then we have more guns than people and the New Black Panthers armed themselves to protest in Atlanta.  Arm militias show up at protests in the form of Rittenhouse to protect people.  People spontaneously kill someone they perceive as a threat or an intruder.

So much can go wrong.  

The couple had threats of killing them, killing their dog and raping the woman. They broke through a steel gate. They had no business there. 

I don't recall the couple actually pointing the weapons at the rioters. 

I personally would not have felt the need to brandish a weapon because these types are usually cowards that act tough in a group. 

2 hours ago, toomuchbaloney said:

The Rittenhouse trial, coupled with the trial of the 3 guys that chased and killed Arbery pull a scab off the the history of vigilante justice in the USA.  We're going to have to have a conversation if we want to call ourselves a nation of law and order. 

https://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Justice/2021/1118/Vigilance-or-vigilantism-Old-laws-legacy-in-modern-US

 

Perhaps dems should stop defending and disabling police and let them do their jobs? We should add that to the conversation as well. 

[Cclm, LPN]

2 hours ago, toomuchbaloney said:

It matters to the people who are trying to conflate personal or business loss with the costs associated with attacks on government buildings and proceedings.  No member here suggested that loss of property in a riot was OK...are you not reading the comments and don't know that or are you gas lighting?

What is a riot zone relative to property insurance and liability? The only Riot Zone I'm familiar with is a video game. 

A area in which has experienced multiple riots with damage for a false pretence Not okay but not as bed? 

So it's not as bad to destroy private citizens property as long as you don't break a few windows and trespass on government property for a false pretence? 

[toomuchbaloney]

2 minutes ago, Cclm said:

A area in which has experienced multiple riots with damage for a false pretence Not okay but not as bed? 

So it's not as bad to destroy private citizens property as long as you don't break a few windows and trespass on government property for a false pretence? 

I don't know what you are talking about or implying but it doesn't seem to have anything to do with the Rittenhouse trial. 

[toomuchbaloney]

44 minutes ago, Cclm said:

Humans have complex emotions. That's what separates us from other species. That fact you somehow feel superipr because apparently you do not have emotions which makes your opinion more valuable comes across as cold and disingenuous.  

Besides how can you determine someone's emotions behind a key bord?

You've assigned feelings to me before but that is not the topic at hand and only reflects your attempts to make this personal.  How do you determine my feelings from behind your keyboard?

40 minutes ago, Cclm said:

Perhaps dems should stop defending and disabling police and let them do their jobs? We should add that to the conversation as well

How does your misunderstanding about American police reform relate to the topic of Rittenhouse?

[Cclm, LPN]

2 hours ago, toomuchbaloney said:

I don't know what you are talking about or implying but it doesn't seem to have anything to do with the Rittenhouse trial. 

You've never heard about the Kenosha riots and the duper evil Jan 6 insurrection?

[Cclm, LPN]

2 hours ago, toomuchbaloney said:

You've assigned feelings to me before but that is not the topic at hand and only reflects your attempts to make this personal.  How do you determine my feelings from behind your keyboard?

How does your misunderstanding about American police reform relate to the topic of Rittenhouse?

I don't assign  your feelings or accuse you of being emotional.