• 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!

[W:2221][W: 821] [W:15] Rittenhouse Verdict

ClaraD said:
Did you happen to catch the relevant section Black is charged under and why Rittenhouse's thrown out charge and acquittal on the others is irrelevant
Click to expand...
Black’s charge is wrongful because black didn’t supply Rittenhouse a short barreled rifle and thus Black is not guilty of violating the law for the exact same reason Kyle wasn’t guilty of possessing it. Oh and Judge Schroeder is hearing Blacks case too
 
One way to think about it was if it was the other way round where Rosenbaum killed Rittenhouse, then would Rosenbaum be charged with murder for escalating the tension and chasing him or would he be charged with accidental manslaughter in overreacting to the brandishing of a rifle that was potentially being aimed at him? If it'd be the latter charge then there's something wrong either with Rittenhouse for showing the weapon or with the current laws in America for permitting people to flaunt weapons in public. Furthermore without a badge or a police uniform there's really no way a casual civilian could know the background and trustworthiness of someone walking around with a gun. An unsuspecting civilian can't really rely on statistics of gun owners either seeing as it's not too difficult for unregulated guns to be bought second-hand by anyone.
 
Moderator's Warning:
Yet another merge. Please notice the inthread warnings at posts 15 and 821.
 
EMNofSeattle said:
That’s exactly who needs to be in jail. I’d rather let out gang members and put far left journos in their place for a year or two. Maybe it will be good for them. Break them out of their bubble. These corporations have so much money damages is nothing unless the puntitive fine is so large it puts them in bankruptcy
Click to expand...
I don't agree with this, put them in the poor house
 
GummyVitamins said:
The vigilantes were the ones who got shot. If anything, Rittenhouse reduced the likelihood of vigilantes running amok in the future.
You're allowed to kill people trying to kill or seriously harm you. The video evidence confirmed this well beyond any reasonable doubt.
Rittenhouse's actions have always been legal. The confusing part is why charges were ever brought in the first place or why anyone evaluating the evidence could ever convict.
Click to expand...
I plan to buy stock in The Body Bag Sector...
and sit back and watch the carnage...
gonna be better than football...
-Peace
 
EMNofSeattle said:
He literally flashes a picture of Kyle Rittenhouse on the ad.

It’s so hilarious because liberals will still cry about the Willie Horton ad as carrying coded racist messages and are now scrambling to deny flashing Rittenhouses photo on an ad about “white supremacy” isn’t actually calling him a white supremacist
Click to expand...
So just to be clear, Biden made that video, or was it his handler's you all keep suggesting are running the show?
 
TurtleDude said:
while prosecutors have a great deal of discretion, I believe a 42 USC 1983 claim against Binger et al has some merit. there has to be some repercussions for filing such a bogus set of charges and then losing
Click to expand...
I knew it wouldn't end with the verdict.
 
GummyVitamins said:
Binger is a disgrace to himself and the profession. Since we're now in the habit of taking people's law licenses away I think it's time they eat one of their own and make sure Binger and Kraus can never again attempt to railroad another defendant.
Click to expand...
Another one.
 
EMNofSeattle said:
He literally flashes a picture of Kyle Rittenhouse on the ad.

It’s so hilarious because liberals will still cry about the Willie Horton ad as carrying coded racist messages and are now scrambling to deny flashing Rittenhouses photo on an ad about “white supremacy” isn’t actually calling him a white supremacist
Click to expand...
yep, rittenhouse flashed on the screen after the kluckkkers
so, how do you know his reference to white supremacists was directed at rittenhouse rather than the earlier televised kluckkkers?
 
TurtleDude said:
some claim he did the same thing in the Chauvin trial. I think Rittenhouse has at least a plausible defamation claim against senile Joe
Click to expand...
Sitting Presidents can be sued aka.....billary clinton

Biden lied big time about Rittenhouse.....called him a white supremacist with no evidence to support that....aka defamation....aka lawsuit aka big bucks for
Rittenhouse.
 
pocket aces said:
I knew it wouldn't end with the verdict.
Click to expand...
there are several things that need to be resolved

1) did Black violate some law

2) was Rittenhouse slandered, libeled or defamed by numerous politicians, public figures and members of the media, and if so, how much damages is he entitled to

3) did the Prosecution team violate ethical rules (obviously IMHO) and Rittenhouse's constitutional rights and do these violations merit redress
 
RealityNow said:
you don't know any of that... you are just talking to be talking...
Click to expand...
actually, i believe this has now been proven by the unanimous verdict by a jury of 12

but you are invited to show otherwise
 
Phys251 said:
Good, because some righties want more riots. A few of them so that they can be the next Rittenhouse.
Click to expand...
Oh and the wannabe militia forums are piping hot with excitement right now. Don't go on there, it'll make you puke buckets.

The precedence has been set.

One of the victims Kyle shot, but not dead was a righty who believed in the right to be armed. He thought he was protecting people trying to disarm an active shooter that night. He lived to tell about it, but, I wonder if he still thinks our gun laws are worth it now that he has no use of his arm because half his bicep was blown away by Kyle and our justice system condoned it.
 
SkyFox76 said:
So just to be clear, Biden made that video, or was it his handler's you all keep suggesting are running the show?
Click to expand...
It was literally approved by his campaign committee and Biden has refused to back away from this ad so I don’t see how it matters. You can claim Biden didn’t personally write the ad, I don’t believe it matters
 
Ginger Ale said:
Oh and the wannabe militia forums are piping hot with excitement right now. Don't go on there, it'll make you puke buckets.

The precedence has been set.

One of the victims Kyle shot, but not dead was a righty who believed in the right to be armed. He thought he was protecting people trying to disarm an active shooter that night. He lived to tell about it, but, I wonder if he still thinks our gun laws are worth it now that he has no use of his arm because half his bicep was blown away by Kyle and our justice system condoned it.
Click to expand...
He didn’t believe he was stopping an active shooter.
 
TurtleDude said:
there are several things that need to be resolved

1) did Black violate some law

2) was Rittenhouse slandered, libeled or defamed by numerous politicians, public figures and members of the media, and if so, how much damages is he entitled to

3) did the Prosecution team violate ethical rules (obviously IMHO) and Rittenhouse's constitutional rights and do these violations merit redress
Click to expand...
Already cited the law to you. Seems clear he did

(b) Except as provided in par. (c), any person who intentionally sells, loans or gives a dangerous weapon to a person under 18 years of age is guilty of a Class I felony.
(c) Whoever violates par. (b) is guilty of a Class H felony if the person under 18 years of age under par. (b) discharges the firearm and the discharge causes death to himself, herself or another.
 
Ginger Ale said:
Oh and the wannabe militia forums are piping hot with excitement right now. Don't go on there, it'll make you puke buckets.

The precedence has been set.

One of the victims Kyle shot, but not dead was a righty who believed in the right to be armed. He thought he was protecting people trying to disarm an active shooter that night. He lived to tell about it, but, I wonder if he still thinks our gun laws are worth it now that he has no use of his arm because half his bicep was blown away by Kyle and our justice system condoned it.
Click to expand...
He was in violation of the law by carrying a concealed weapon. He also had a prior Misdemeanor A conviction (I believe it was being intoxicated while possessing a firearm). What was his reason to bring a handgun (illegally) to a riot? he lost the use of his arm because he was slower than the guy he tried to shoot
 
If we were to forget that it was a protest and imagine that it was a just guy a following a small group of pedestrians down the pavement while having a gun in his hand and wavering it aimlessly, then more people would probably agree that this would be menacing behaviour. Protesting is legal and so the protest itself isn't very relevant from a self-defence standpoint.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom