• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

BREAKING: 'Jump Kick Man' who attacked Kyle Rittenhouse identified as violent career criminal

OpportunityCost said:
She was wearing a short skirt, she was asking for it....right?

Victim blaming is despicable.
Click to expand...

He was a victim by choice. He didn't have to be there. Never should have been there, because he had no business being there.

You'll excuse me if I don't lose any sleep over the fact that you think I am despicable. I don't give a single, solitary **** how you view me.
 
Ouroboros said:
He didn’t “complain” about having been attacked; he defended himself in court against a trumped up charge of murder. And he won, which fills MadLibs with deep fear that they might not always get treated with kid gloves when they riot.
Click to expand...

If they riot, they should not be treated with kid gloves.

If they show up to stir shit up, like Rittenhouse did, they should also not be treated with kid gloves, despite the fact that Rittenhouse was.
 
Superfly said:
He was a victim by choice. He didn't have to be there. Never should have been there, because he had no business being there.

You'll excuse me if I don't lose any sleep over the fact that you think I am despicable. I don't give a single, solitary **** how you view me.
Click to expand...
Nope. You keep missing the point. He had as much right to be there as the protesters and more right than those that were vandalizing and trying to destroy property.

Nor did I say you were despicable, I said your post was---because it was.
 
OpportunityCost said:
Nope. You keep missing the point. He had as much right to be there as the protesters and more right than those that were vandalizing and trying to destroy property.

Nor did I say you were despicable, I said your post was---because it was.
Click to expand...

Well I think your placing a vigilante on a pedestal is despicable, so we're even.
 
Superfly said:
Oh, I see. So it's OK for you to accuse me of things, but when the shoe is on the other foot, it's not.

You assuming that poor little Rittenhouse was just there for protection is a distortion, and I think YOU are well aware of that.

He was there to **** shit up. Why else would he have been there? He was a child with no property to protect.
Click to expand...
Point of fact, you have stated repeatedly that Rittenhouse didn't belong there, but didn't address that multiple other people didn't belong there either, until pressed to do so. Another point of fact, the three people Rittenhouse shot, all three were actually there to stir shit up, burn down property, attack others and just be violent.

I am not characterizing him as poor or little, he made some foolish choices, but was still within his rights. All three of the people shot were not within their rights, and were not there to protest, they were there to riot.

I didn't accuse you of anything, I noted your absence of being judgmental towards people actually there to riot. You can knock off the animus, its not going to get you anywhere.
 
Superfly said:
Well I think your placing a vigilante on a pedestal is despicable, so we're even.
Click to expand...
I think you are unable to read what I am typing. I am not doing any such thing, Rittenhouse has rights, despite his foolish decisions.

No pedestal, just an acknowledgment that if you act in a violent and threatening way towards someone armed, expect to get shot. The mistake they made is I don't believe they expected him to shoot.
 
OpportunityCost said:
Point of fact, you have stated repeatedly that Rittenhouse didn't belong there, but didn't address that multiple other people didn't belong there either, until pressed to do so. Another point of fact, the three people Rittenhouse shot, all three were actually there to stir shit up, burn down property, attack others and just be violent.

I am not characterizing him as poor or little, he made some foolish choices, but was still within his rights. All three of the people shot were not within their rights, and were not there to protest, they were there to riot.

I didn't accuse you of anything, I noted your absence of being judgmental towards people actually there to riot. You can knock off the animus, its not going to get you anywhere.
Click to expand...

I don't give a **** whether I "get anywhere" with you.

He had no more business being there than the rioters did. None of them belonged there. The rioters, if they were there to riot and loot, should not have been there, and do far more harm than good with regards to what should be a peaceful protest. Rittenhouse also had no business being there. He had no business or property to protect. He didn't even live in the same state. He made a conscious effort to cross state lines to stir up shit, and if the rioters did the same, then they, too, are wrong.
 
Superfly said:
I don't give a **** whether I "get anywhere" with you.

He had no more business being there than the rioters did. None of them belonged there. The rioters, if they were there to riot and loot, should not have been there, and do far more harm than good with regards to what should be a peaceful protest. Rittenhouse also had no business being there. He had no business or property to protect. He didn't even live in the same state. He made a conscious effort to cross state lines to stir up shit, and if the rioters did the same, then they, too, are wrong.
Click to expand...
He lived 20 minutes away, the arbitrary state line doesn't mean much in that context.

I have to ask, if police won't break up the rioting and local politicians won't, what the heck are citizens supposed to do? Are they supposed to allow their livelihoods, their businesses, their homes to be destroyed and just say "oh well"? That frustration and empathy to that frustration is why he went there.

Was he short sighted? Certainly. But to state he had no business there is categorically false, its a judgment, and it ignores his right to travel freely. Should he have been there? Probably not.
 
lurchadams said:
Oooh.. more right-wing boogymen. First we have their "Antifa" fantasy, now, we have "Jump kick man". So scary Boo!
Click to expand...
What? You know this is a real person who was described during the trial and shown on video attacking Rittenhouse, right?
 
j brown's body said:
You know, he was attacked because he was armed.

Knowing this, would you advise your kid to take his gun to a riot?
Click to expand...
Not important for this case. Whether he was armed or not, he was attacked, and has no bearing on this case. The video evidence acquitted him of any crime according to the jury. I agree with the jury based on the evidence and the law. If my kid, 17, was going to attempt to put out fires, wash graffiti from buildings and help the injured, I would instruct him or her to take a weapon to the riot of people that hate him because he's or she's white. Also, make sure it is not concealed so that it is legal based on the laws of the state. I would also advise him or her to leave a place where they may be attacked if they can before using the weapon. Try and get away first. That is what KR did according to the video evidence.
 
Moon said:
What? You know this is a real person who was described during the trial and shown on video attacking Rittenhouse, right?
Click to expand...
Sure. But what has not been reported is the failed attack by, "Fall and poop his pants man".
 
j brown's body said:
Or the rioters bring guns too. Smart.
Click to expand...

Grosskreutz brought a gun, also illegal, and the media didn’t care. I don’t believe he was charged either, so yeah, what’s to stop rioters from bringing guns irregardless? Not that a lot of people haven’t already died thanks to politically motivated police downsizing.
 
Superfly said:
If they riot, they should not be treated with kid gloves.

If they show up to stir shit up, like Rittenhouse did, they should also not be treated with kid gloves, despite the fact that Rittenhouse was.
Click to expand...

The prosecution tried that nonsense, and it got flushed like the poop it was.
 
Ouroboros said:
Grosskreutz brought a gun, also illegal, and the media didn’t care. I don’t believe he was charged either, so yeah, what’s to stop rioters from bringing guns irregardless? Not that a lot of people haven’t already died thanks to politically motivated police downsizing.
Click to expand...

Right. So why support a guy for taking a gun to a riot? It only escalates the tension. We run the risk of both sides bringing them and then, more deaths. Mature people should seek to de-escalate tense situations, not escalate them. Rittenhouse is a foolish kid. Making a hero of him, approving of his actions, only serves to encourage escalationing violence.
 
j brown's body said:
Right. So why support a guy for taking a gun to a riot? It only escalates the tension. We run the risk of both sides bringing them and then, more deaths. Mature people should seek to de-escalate tense situations, not escalate them. Rittenhouse is a foolish kid. Making a hero of him, approving of his actions, only serves to encourage escalationing violence.
Click to expand...
Why, its almost like you are saying police should actually do something. I bet if they did and DAs followed through on charges, this bullshit would stop. Sounds like a plan, doesn't it?
 
j brown's body said:
Right. So why support a guy for taking a gun to a riot? It only escalates the tension. We run the risk of both sides bringing them and then, more deaths. Mature people should seek to de-escalate tense situations, not escalate them. Rittenhouse is a foolish kid. Making a hero of him, approving of his actions, only serves to encourage escalationing violence.
Click to expand...

I don’t deem him a hero, but he’s not societally obligated to hunker down and avoid trouble because Mad Libs like to flatter themselves that they’re on the side of the disenfranchised. The escalation of violence had already happened once local authorities told cops not to rein in the rowdies who were milling about the night looking for trouble. Given that a number of innocents died or were injured during the Summer of Hate, I don’t concede that no violence would have transpired in Kenosha if Rittenhouse had just stayed home. That’s an assumption that one can’t logically make, looking at the records of the attackers. All that counts in my book is whether KR made a reasonable attempt to avoid trouble. The fact that he, an openly armed man, got so much interference from these wastrels indicates that they were going to harm someone that night. So the presence of KR was of negligible effect, except in the minds of partisans who favor violent protests.
 
j brown's body said:
Or the rioters bring guns too. Smart.
Click to expand...


Grosskreutz had a gun with him. So it's not like rioters were unarmed. It just turns out that Kyle Rittenhouse was a better gunman than Grosskreutz. The good guy won. Short and simple. I don't get these moans and groans when bad things happen to bad people.
 
Bodhisattva said:
Jump Kick Man sounds so cool... in a retro way.
Click to expand...
Well it's his name, because nobody knows if some radio dude is just making shit up. It sounds like some superhero...
Are we gonna have a thread about some unsubstantiated rumor?
 
jpevans said:
Well it's his name, because nobody knows if some radio dude is just making shit up. It sounds like some superhero...
Are we gonna have a thread about some unsubstantiated rumor?
Click to expand...


at the 14 second mark you will see jump kick man doing his thang
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom