Of course. A childhood friend just posted a picture on social media of her 3 new guns. I jokingly asked why 3 if you only have 2 hands? She said, quite seriously, "because you can never have too many guns to protect yourself."

Oh I know. I just find it funny.

Where did accuse of it being you doing those things? (Apart from me being some lefty, which is very very funny to those who know me). Sorry I triggered you.

I know. It's like everyone is losing their minds in the US.

I'm sorry to ask this of you, but by chance is it possible for you to post a link to that video (again) that shows the kid being chased by the first guy that he had shot and killed? I guess I missed it when you had posted it here before, and I can't seem to find the post now. I had also looked online before for any kind of videos that show that first incident but hadn't been able to find anything.

But even if that first guy (who was shot and killed) did throw something at him and missed, I'm not sure that really justifies the kid shooting and killing him. The kid showed up at a protest with a loaded assault rifle and clearly was willing to use it at whatever moment he felt threatened. He also clearly felt that it is his right to shoot and kill people for burning cars. So he deliberately puts himself in a position like that, with a loaded gun, and then uses that as a means to feel justified in shooting three people. He even has photos of himself dressed as a police officer on his social media. In my opinion, the kid has an issue with not being able to understand that he isn't the police. And now the irony is, I guess, that he's sitting in a jail cell facing murder charges as well as charges for owning a dangerous weapon while under the age of 18.

What kind of society thinks it's okay for a 17-year old kid to show up at a protest with an assault rifle and then use that weapon to kill people? Not to mention just allowing a 17-year old kid to walk around the streets with a loaded assault rifle in the first place.

There are also pictures of him dressed up as a fireman. He worked as a community lifeguard and earlier that day, before the shooting, had volunteered to scrub graffiti from the walls of a high school. Here he is offering medical aid to protestors:

https://twitter.com/MarkDice/status/...ha-shooting%2F

Here he is in an interview before the shooting, stating his intentions for being there:

https://twitter.com/MarkDice/status/...ha-shooting%2F

I don't buy the narrative that he was there to taunt, harass, intimidate, or pick a fight with protestors. There doesn't seem to be any evidence of that, even if he was armed (which is legal in Wisconsin - the only illegality is his case was being a minor)

Here is the guy who first got shot, aggressively trying to pick a fight with the group of armed guys:

https://twitter.com/livesmattershow/...ha-shooting%2F

__________________
you are being programmed

Wow... Thanks for the videos.
It's kind of hard to tell what exactly is going on in there, but the one in slow-motion does help. So it was someone else from the crowd who had fired a gun (one shot) into the air, and then that is what caused Rittenhouse to shoot the guy who was chasing him, even though the guy chasing him isn't the one who had fired a gun.

So was this a case of the illusion of self-defense, then? I'm not sure how that's going to stand up in court. He was being chased but I'm not sure that justifies him shooting and killing the guy who was chasing him.

I think you're right that Rittenhouse's intentions may have been good, but he did still shoot three people and kill two of them with a loaded assault rifle that he chose to bring to a protest illegally. He is also apparently a member of "Police Lives Matter" according to his social media -- so therefore more than likely also against the BLM movement.

It just doesn't make sense to me that the police or anyone should think it's okay for a 17-year old kid to show up at a protest with a loaded assault rifle when he's clearly more-than-willing to use it if he feels threatened.

As for the other guy in the video, who ended up being killed after having said "Shoot me" earlier that day, well... He's obviously an idiot. To be honest, I think there were a LOT of idiots that night and that there are a LOT of idiots in the US in general. These people seem to act as though it's a street party or something or as though it's all just some kind of game. Yeah, it's "all fun and games until someone gets shot," I guess.

Well, what do you think the aggressive guy in the red shirt, who chased and later got shot by the 17 yr old, would have done if he had caught him? It doesnt appear as if he was trying to give him a hug. What would he have done with the kid's rifle? Potentially killed the 17 yr old and then opened fire on other 'militia'/vigilante type guys in the area.

If you attack someone with a lethal weapon, that person has to assume that you mean business and will use that weapon against them if given the opportunity to seize it from them. He had tried to flee but was seemingly backed into a bit of a corner between cars, and had heard a gun fire.

Poor kid - maybe not the brightest bulb in the bunch, and a bit misguided - but trying to be a good citizen it seems, though in way over his head.

As for being against BLM (to the point of being a premeditated murderer) because he was a social media supporter of Blue Lives Matter, thats just conjecture.

I don't think anyone is arguing that it's okay for a 17 year old to be walking the streets as a armed vigilante - it's a pretty sad state of affairs in America that it has come to this, and that 17 year old kids feel like they need to protect private property because government and police have failed to act. I think everyone agrees on that, whether or not they agree if he killed in self defense.

__________________
you are being programmed

But he was definitely not trying to be a good citizen, he was out for confrontation and he got in spades. Good citizens do not tool up and go out looking for trouble.

It is way past time to stop trying to justify this kind of nonsense. Anyone from any side that tools up and goes on the streets is absolutely not a good citizen.

You have no idea what his intentions were. As far as he has stated, he was there to protect the auto business and to administer 1st aid to injured people. He can be seen in the videos doing both. He was then attacked by an aggressive rioter, defended himself, and has been cast as someone 'out for confrontation'.

Of course that doesn't match with the video evidence where he is running away, trying to avoid confrontation, and ends up shooting all 3 in self defense when cornered or knocked to the ground.

The cops certainly made him feel as if he was being a good citizen in video from before the shooting- being told 'Thank you guys, we really appreciate that you're out here' and being given water. Your idea of being a good citizen and his/theirs must be very different...

__________________
you are being programmed

The shit is hitting the fan in Germany too now after those Berlin police officers in full military riot gear cold bloodedly murdered that woman.

But I bet that the difference will be that in Germany nobody riots, and the press get hand fed some manipulated story which they will not even question and these police officers will not lose their jobs or pensions or anything else.

I've not paid attention to any news over the last few days, was this during the protests planned for yesterday?

The police have now said she didn't actually die.

lol


Chicago looting proves Black America deserves reparations — here's why

I feel like I can't take either side anymore (in the US) because lately it seems like both sides have been wrong. I joked to my husband earlier that it's like watching two people in an insane asylum argue back and forth. "You're crazy!" "No, you're crazy!"

Maybe they're both crazy?

I think I need to stop reading the news for a while before I catch the crazy.

Now......... Back to this delicious spinach artichoke dip.

Hence my use of the word "silly".

Yes, encounters like this are used to justify police behavior.

However the question is how often they happen.

According to FBI statistics, 50-70 LEO's (Law Enforcement Officers) are killed violently (murdered) on duty in a typical year. With 700k LEO's (not counting backoffice staff, that should be another 300k) the risk for them to get murdered is something like 1:12'000. For comparison, the risk in Swiss construction (Hoch- und Tiefbau) is in the area of 1:8000 (Swiss construction is probably not the safest though).

Them Swiss contruction workers are an angry bunch if there's 1 in 8000 murdered a year. Is it when they present the bill?

It's a sad state of affairs if a 17 y.o. feels the need to protect properties and can get his hands on that type of gun. I feel sorry for his victims but I believe he's also a victim. At this age he definitely didn't have discernment...wonder why nobody sent him home so to speak. Where were the adults...

The Swiss are Ok. Or would be, rather, if they still worked constructions.
The angry foreigners are the problem, which is one of the reasons for the upcoming vote.



You heard it on EF first.

He isn't old enough to legally get a week beer, but he is old enough to buy a lethal weapon.

Rather than 'feels the need' I'd say it was 'use the excuse'.