police-involved shooting in Kenosha, WI...unrest ensues

[s0me0nesmind1]

That police chief is a dirt bag.

HE DUN AGREE WIT MAH OH PINION

Derfore, he a stupid doo doo hed.

 

[nickqt]

This kid and the group he showed up with seem to be there to instigate trouble. Where is slowbuck and his constant babbling about agitators?

Right-wing authoritarians don't care what words you use to describe a 17 year old out-of-state vigilante illegally open-carrying a rifle who kills a couple of political opponents.

Their description is the only one that counts, and he is a hero.

This means that all right-wing authoritarians are allowed to open carry rifles illegally and are allowed to kill people who they view as political opponents.

This is now a live fire "exercise".

Don't take my word for it, listen to the right-wing authoritarian media defending his actions.

Listen to the police chief in Kenosha.

Listen to the right-wing authoritarians on this message board.

Listen to the right-wing authoritarians who are armed and ready to take action.

When exercising your first amendment, political opponents will be exercising their second amendment.

 

[HomerJS]

HE DUN AGREE WIT MAH OH PINION

Derfore, he a stupid doo doo hed.

The chief's opinion is white privilege rules even when they kill people. We don't question whitey we just let them go home after murders.

He is a dirtbag

 

[s0me0nesmind1]

The chief's opinion is white privilege rules even when they kill people. We don't question whitey we just let them go home after murders.

He is a dirtbag

Once again, you flakes are just the ultimate in fascism wherein you state that if someone's opinion doesn't complete align with yours - then they must be racist.

christ you guys have mental issues.

It might educate you to realize that not everyone thinks at the same inept level that you do.

 

[HomerJS]

Once again, you flakes are just the ultimate in fascism wherein you state that if someone's opinion doesn't complete align with yours - then they must be racist.

christ you guys have mental issues.

It might educate you to realize that not everyone thinks at the same inept level that you do.

If you tell me the earth is flat that isn't racist no matter how stupid your opinion is.

If you tell me put a black guy in place of KR same circumstance the police would have let him just waltz by then your supply of crack is past it's expiration date.

In fact if I put up a poll I can guarantee <10% would think a black guy would have been allowed to leave. I can also guarantee you would be in that 10%

 

[Maxima1]

go look up rosenbaum in the wisconsin sex offender registry. (not that it fucking matters)

Of course, it matters. He had a nut case going after him. I love how everyone acts like Arbery had no choice but to suicide because of not knowing intent of strangers, yet this changes here.

It’s a wonder government bureaucracy efficiency increased 1000%. 😂

*inactive

Inmate Data Search

He was in illegal potion of a firearm. Why are you defending a criminal?

It looks like it’s just a misdemeanor. Liberals themselves are trying to reduce possession of guns and assaulting police to slaps on the wrist. That part isn’t really relevant unless you think felony murder is such a great concept anyway.

Do you know more than the police who have charged the kid with homicide? Are you somehow more informed then they are?

The kid has heavy hitters going up to bat for him. I wonder why?

There's a big difference in Mass killings and Mass shootings as how/who/why. You're cherry picking mass killings with that link.

The point is that it’s clear that the vast majority of shootings are limited. Why do cops need to be absolutely perfect for you guys, yet you think civilians can engage in assumptions to attempt deadly force on others (essentially guaranteeing worse outcomes)? I bet that biceps guy feels like a total fool now if he wasn’t around to see that maniac going after Kyle. And btw, I believe Gaige wanted to kill him. You don’t control a guy with a rifle with a gun in hand. He was going for the execution and now regrets that he wasn’t able to kill him, haha.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1299086141329563648

No he was not. He pointed his illegal weapon enough times at people until they tried to disarm him.

They tried to take his gun not kill him. That likely changed when KR shot the fist person.[/

If someone was being obnoxious with handling the gun, (and I bet some were harassing him as they probably thought he looked like an easy mark) why go suicide?

This isn’t self-defense, haha. If they wanted to get away from their perception of danger, the option was to move away from Kyle and tell the cops.

Here is Wisconsin statute on provocation and self-defense:

2010 Wisconsin Code :: Chapter 939. Crimes--general provisions. :: 939.48 Self-defense and defense of others.

law.justia.com

939.48(2)

(2) Provocation affects the privilege of self-defense as follows:

939.48(2)(a)

(a) A person who engages in unlawful conduct of a type likely to provoke others to attack him or her and thereby does provoke an attack is not entitled to claim the privilege of self-defense against such attack, except when the attack which ensues is of a type causing the person engaging in the unlawful conduct to reasonably believe that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm. In such a case, the person engaging in the unlawful conduct is privileged to act in self-defense, but the person is not privileged to resort to the use of force intended or likely to cause death to the person's assailant unless the person reasonably believes he or she has exhausted every other reasonable means to escape from or otherwise avoid death or great bodily harm at the hands of his or her assailant.

Definitely arguable, too, he regained it as he withdrew and was cornered by the prison-hardened maniac. And it appears an agitator fired at least one shot to possibly try to escalate the situation, though possibly also foolish thought he was helping deescalate.

939.48(2)(b)

(b) The privilege lost by provocation may be regained if the actor in good faith withdraws from the fight and gives adequate notice thereof to his or her assailant.

 

[nickqt]

Once again, you flakes are just the ultimate in fascism wherein you state that if someone's opinion doesn't complete align with yours - then they must be racist.

christ you guys have mental issues.

It might educate you to realize that not everyone thinks at the same inept level that you do.

Nobody, take a breath.

It's not fascism to call a racist a racist.

It is fascism when you defend authorities, and children, murdering political opponents.

Get a grip, Nobody. You're the fascist.

 

[soundforbjt]

Of course, it matters. He had a nut case going after him. I love how everyone acts like Arbery had no choice but to suicide because of not knowing intent of strangers, yet this changes here.

It’s a wonder government bureaucracy efficiency increased 1000%. 😂

*inactive

Inmate Data Search

It looks like it’s just a misdemeanor. Liberals themselves are trying to reduce possession of guns and assaulting police to slaps on the wrist. That part isn’t really relevant unless you think felony murder is such a great concept anyway.



The kid has heavy hitters going up to bat for him. I wonder why?



The point is that it’s clear that the vast majority of shootings are limited. Why do cops need to be absolutely perfect for you guys, yet you think civilians can engage in assumptions to attempt deadly force on others (essentially guaranteeing worse outcomes)? I bet that biceps guy feels like a total fool now if he wasn’t around to see that maniac going after Kyle. And btw, I believe Gaige wanted to kill him. You don’t control a guy with a rifle with a gun in hand. He was going for the execution and now regrets that he wasn’t able to kill him, haha.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1299086141329563648

If someone was being obnoxious with handling the gun, (and I bet some were harassing him as they probably thought he looked like an easy mark) why go suicide?

This isn’t self-defense, haha. If they wanted to get away from their perception of danger, the option was to move away from Kyle and tell the cops.

Here is Wisconsin statute on provocation and self-defense:

2010 Wisconsin Code :: Chapter 939. Crimes--general provisions. :: 939.48 Self-defense and defense of others.

law.justia.com

939.48(2)

(2) Provocation affects the privilege of self-defense as follows:

939.48(2)(a)

(a) A person who engages in unlawful conduct of a type likely to provoke others to attack him or her and thereby does provoke an attack is not entitled to claim the privilege of self-defense against such attack, except when the attack which ensues is of a type causing the person engaging in the unlawful conduct to reasonably believe that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm. In such a case, the person engaging in the unlawful conduct is privileged to act in self-defense, but the person is not privileged to resort to the use of force intended or likely to cause death to the person's assailant unless the person reasonably believes he or she has exhausted every other reasonable means to escape from or otherwise avoid death or great bodily harm at the hands of his or her assailant.

Definitely arguable, too, he regained it as he withdrew and was cornered by the prison-hardened maniac. And it appears an agitator fired at least one shot to possibly try to escalate the situation, though possibly also foolish thought he was helping deescalate.

939.48(2)(b)

(b) The privilege lost by provocation may be regained if the actor in good faith withdraws from the fight and gives adequate notice thereof to his or her assailant.

Check out post #739 and explain that info. Your hero shot him in the back, just like his heros on the Kenosha PD did to Blake.

 

[HomerJS]

This is for all the people celebrating and making excuses for the killer Kyle Rittenhouse. Here is the girlfriend of one of the heroes from that night. Anthony Huber a skateboarder tried to throw himself on top of KR after he killed his first victim. Here is her testimony. Now that people on the right are celebrating KR there will be copycats.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1298950950099529728

 

[HurleyBird]

From the link:
Shot in the back may mess up his self defense claim.

It doesn't help, but I'm guessing it won't amount to much.

In the video, the first shot you hear is the guy with a handgun that shoots into the air. Then you hear four louder shots in quick succession which are definitely Rittenhouse's. Then a bit of a pause, then three more shots which are less loud than the prior four. Those three shots are probably the pistol, or perhaps another gun altogether.

The indictment says that the victim was trying to grab the rifle when Rittenhouse opened fire. The victim was shot in four locations plus one that went through his hand, which seems to line up well with the four shots heard on the video. One of the shots shattered the victim's pelvis, after which the victim would have immediately begun to collapse. The shot in the back is most likely due to the victim collapsing while Rittenhouse is discharging the rifle. Since there is little delay between the four discharges, and the victim was evidently facing Rittenhouse when the first round was fired, the shot to the back shouldn't amount to much.

The exception to all of this is if those last three rounds actually came from Rittenhouse. Assuming that's the case, and assuming those rounds were aimed anywhere other than the air, then that in itself could be damning to Rittenhouse's defense, and probably fatal to it in the event one can be tied to the back wound.

 

[ElFenix]

Of course, it matters. He had a nut case going after him.

standard and intentional practice of dehumanization of victims. it's the same thing as the cops releasing any negative details about the people they've shot. true or not.

The kid has heavy hitters going up to bat for him. I wonder why?

bootlickers defend fellow bootlickers, film at 11.

 

[Starbuck1975]

This kid and the group he showed up with seem to be there to instigate trouble. Where is slowbuck and his constant babbling about agitators?

Was scanning the thread and caught your passive aggressive drivel.

I stated earlier in the thread that anyone out after curfew that night was an agitator looking for conflict. There is no justification for vigilantes, arsonists, militias, looters, rioters or anarchists to take to the streets. All are agitators.

 

[HomerJS]

Was scanning the thread and caught your passive aggressive drivel.

I stated earlier in the thread that anyone out after curfew that night was an agitator looking for conflict. There is no justification for vigilantes, arsonists, militias, looters, rioters or anarchists to take to the streets.

You may be correct but there was only one that killed people.

 

[Starbuck1975]

You may be correct but there was only one that killed people.

Yes and that person should face charges, same as the person who assaulted and nearly killed the motorist in Portland. The same as the person or people who assaulted that elderly gentleman who tried to protect a business from being destroyed.

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

So how about this, throw all of them in prison. Two on firearms charges (one for two counts of manslaughter), two on assault? Maybe put them all in the same cell so they can talk about it for the next few years?

 

[soundforbjt]

Here's some info on Kyle:

Rittenhouse dropped out of high school during the 2017-18 school year, according to a statement from a school district official sent to The Washington Post.

In videos on his TikTok account, which has just 25 followers, he is seen assembling and disassembling a rifle and what appears to be a shotgun.

“Bruh, I’m just tryna be famous,” he says on his TikTok bio page.

 

[zzyzxroad]

[

Was scanning the thread and caught your passive aggressive drivel.

I stated earlier in the thread that anyone out after curfew that night was an agitator looking for conflict. There is no justification for vigilantes, arsonists, militias, looters, rioters or anarchists to take to the streets. All are agitators.

LOL.. scanning the thread.

How is it passive aggressive troll? I've told you I think you are a joke and never attempt to have honest conversations.

 

[Starbuck1975]

[

LOL.. scanning the thread.

How is it passive aggressive troll? I've told you I think you are a joke and never attempt to have honest conversations.

Irony

 

[zzyzxroad]

Irony

So not going to answer my question troll?

 

[woolfe9998]

Here's some info on Kyle:

"Bruh, I'm just tryna be famous" sounds about right for this guy. He thought he'd be some sort of "hero," at least to the like minded.

He may or may not be guilty of homicide(s) here, but I'm betting he'll at least get hit for the underage gun charge and probably brandishing/assault for pointing his gun at protesters. Meaning at a minimum the felony will preclude him from becoming a cop which is clearly his aspiration.

 

[Zorba]

WaPo's video construction of the night. WTF is up with cops encouraging vigilantes?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/video/national/tracing-kyle-rittenhouses-actions-the-night-of-the-shootings-in-kenosha-wis/2020/08/28/6c24b27c-2c5c-4dde-88f5-4d829bb3e992_video.html

 

[nickqt]

"Bruh, I'm just tryna be famous" sounds about right for this guy. He thought he'd be some sort of "hero," at least to the like minded.

He may or may not be guilty of homicide(s) here, but I'm betting he'll at least get hit for the underage gun charge and probably brandishing/assault for pointing his gun at protesters. Meaning at a minimum the felony will preclude him from becoming a cop which is clearly his aspiration.

If anything, his murdering of political opponents puts him at the top of a lot of lists of many PD's.

 

[dawp]

standard and intentional practice of dehumanization of victims. it's the same thing as the cops releasing any negative details about the people they've shot. true or not.


bootlickers defend fellow bootlickers, film at 11.

high profile case like this, a lot of lawyers would represent him pro bono just to add a notch on the belt.

 

[HurleyBird]

No idea about case law, but it looks like in a purely textualist context, Rittenhouse did not break the law by open carrying with a rifle as a 17 year old.

Count 6 of the indictment:

The above-named defendant on or about Tuesday, August 25, 2020, in the City of Kenosha,
Kenosha County, Wisconsin, being a person under 18 years of age, did go armed with a
dangerous weapon, contrary to sec. 948.60(2)(a), 939.51(3)(a) Wis. Stats., a Class A
Misdemeanor, and upon conviction may be fined not more than Ten Thousand Dollars ($10,000),
or imprisoned not more than nine (9) months, or both.

939.51 lists the different types of misdemeanours and their penalties. 939.51(3)(a) points to a class A misdemeanour and "a fine not to exceed $10,000 or imprisonment not to exceed 9 months, or both." 948.60(2)(a) is the statute Rittenhouse allegedly violates. However, 948.60(3) lists exceptions. I've bolded the pertinent text.

948.60  Possession of a dangerous weapon by a person under 18.
(1)  In this section, “dangerous weapon" means any firearm, loaded or unloaded; any electric weapon, as defined in s. 941.295 (1c) (a); metallic knuckles or knuckles of any substance which could be put to the same use with the same or similar effect as metallic knuckles; a nunchaku or any similar weapon consisting of 2 sticks of wood, plastic or metal connected at one end by a length of rope, chain, wire or leather; a cestus or similar material weighted with metal or other substance and worn on the hand; a shuriken or any similar pointed star-like object intended to injure a person when thrown; or a manrikigusari or similar length of chain having weighted ends.
(2) 
(a) Any person under 18 years of age who possesses or goes armed with a dangerous weapon is guilty of a Class A misdemeanor.
(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.
(d) A person under 17 years of age who has violated this subsection is subject to the provisions of ch. 938 unless jurisdiction is waived under s. 938.18 or the person is subject to the jurisdiction of a court of criminal jurisdiction under s. 938.183.
(3) 
(a) This section does not apply to a person under 18 years of age who possesses or is armed with a dangerous weapon when the dangerous weapon is being used in target practice under the supervision of an adult or in a course of instruction in the traditional and proper use of the dangerous weapon under the supervision of an adult. This section does not apply to an adult who transfers a dangerous weapon to a person under 18 years of age for use only in target practice under the adult's supervision or in a course of instruction in the traditional and proper use of the dangerous weapon under the adult's supervision.
(b) This section does not apply to a person under 18 years of age who is a member of the armed forces or national guard and who possesses or is armed with a dangerous weapon in the line of duty. This section does not apply to an adult who is a member of the armed forces or national guard and who transfers a dangerous weapon to a person under 18 years of age in the line of duty.
(c) This section applies only to a person under 18 years of age who possesses or is armed with a rifle or a shotgun if the person is in violation of s. 941.28 or is not in compliance with ss. 29.304 and 29.593. This section applies only to an adult who transfers a firearm to a person under 18 years of age if the person under 18 years of age is not in compliance with ss. 29.304 and 29.593 or to an adult who is in violation of s. 941.28.

Based on this text, Rittenhouse is only in violation of 948.60 if he's armed with a weapon other than a rifle or shotgun (he's armed with a rifle), or if he's in violation of 941.28, or if he is in violation of 29.304 and 29.593.

941.28 prohibits possession of a short-barreled rifles and shotguns. No problem for Rittenhouse there.

941.28  Possession of short-barreled shotgun or short-barreled rifle.
(1)  In this section:
(a) “Rifle" means a firearm designed or redesigned, made or remade, and intended to be fired from the shoulder or hip and designed or redesigned and made or remade to use the energy of a propellant in a metallic cartridge to fire through a rifled barrel a single projectile for each pull of the trigger.
(b) “Short-barreled rifle" means a rifle having one or more barrels having a length of less than 16 inches measured from closed breech or bolt face to muzzle or a rifle having an overall length of less than 26 inches.
(c) “Short-barreled shotgun" means a shotgun having one or more barrels having a length of less than 18 inches measured from closed breech or bolt face to muzzle or a shotgun having an overall length of less than 26 inches.
(d) “Shotgun" means a weapon designed or redesigned, made or remade, and intended to be fired from the shoulder or hip and designed or redesigned and made or remade to use the energy of a propellant in a fixed shotgun shell to fire through a smooth bore either a number of ball shot or a single projectile for each single pull of the trigger.
(2) No person may sell or offer to sell, transport, purchase, possess or go armed with a short-barreled shotgun or short-barreled rifle.
(3) Any person violating this section is guilty of a Class H felony.
(4) This section does not apply to the sale, purchase, possession, use or transportation of a short-barreled shotgun or short-barreled rifle to or by any armed forces or national guard personnel in line of duty, any peace officer of the United States or of any political subdivision of the United States or any person who has complied with the licensing and registration requirements under 26 USC 5801 to 5872. This section does not apply to the manufacture of short-barreled shotguns or short-barreled rifles for any person or group authorized to possess these weapons. The restriction on transportation contained in this section does not apply to common carriers. This section shall not apply to any firearm that may be lawfully possessed under federal law, or any firearm that could have been lawfully registered at the time of the enactment of the national firearms act of 1968.
(5) Any firearm seized under this section is subject to s. 968.20 (3) and is presumed to be contraband.

Section 29.304 places restrictions on the use of firearms for various age groups, but says nothing about 17 year olds, only 16 and under. So at this point, Rittenhouse did not violate the letter of the law, since the predicate 29.304 (false) and 29.593 (?) evaluates false.

29.304  Restrictions on hunting and use of firearms by persons under 16 years of age.
(1)  Persons under 12 years of age.
(a) Prohibition on hunting. No person under 12 years of age may hunt with a firearm, bow and arrow, or crossbow.
(b) Restrictions on possession or control of a firearm. No person under 12 years of age may have in his or her possession or control any firearm unless he or she is enrolled in the course of instruction under the hunter education program and he or she is carrying the firearm in a case and unloaded to or from that class under the supervision of his or her parent or guardian, or by a person at least 18 years of age who is designated by the parent or guardian, or is handling or operating the firearm during that class under the supervision of an instructor.
(c) Restrictions on obtaining hunting approval. Except as provided under par. (d), no person under 12 years of age may obtain any approval authorizing hunting.
(d) Restrictions on validity of certificate of accomplishment. A person under 12 years of age may obtain a certificate of accomplishment if he or she complies with the requirements of s. 29.591 (4) but that certificate is not valid for the hunting of small game until that person becomes 12 years of age.
(2) Persons 12 to 14 years of age.
(a) Restrictions on hunting. No person 12 years of age or older but under 14 years of age may hunt unless he or she is accompanied by his or her parent or guardian, or by a person at least 18 years of age who is designated by the parent or guardian.
(b) Restrictions on possession or control of a firearm. No person 12 years of age or older but under 14 years of age may have in his or her possession or control any firearm unless he or she:
1. Is accompanied by his or her parent or guardian or by a person at least 18 years of age who is designated by the parent or guardian; or
2. Is enrolled in the course of instruction under the hunter education program and is carrying the firearm in a case and unloaded to or from that class or is handling or operating the firearm during that class under the supervision of an instructor.
(3) Persons 14 to 16 years of age.
(a) Restrictions on hunting. No person 14 years of age or older but under 16 years of age may hunt unless he or she:
1. Is accompanied by his or her parent or guardian or by a person at least 18 years of age who is designated by the parent or guardian; or
2. Is issued a certificate of accomplishment that states that he or she successfully completed the course of instruction under the hunter education program or has a similar certificate, license, or other evidence satisfactory to the department indicating that he or she has successfully completed in another state, country, or province a hunter education course recognized by the department.
(b) Restrictions on possession or control of a firearm. No person 14 years of age or older but under 16 years of age may have in his or her possession or control any firearm unless he or she:
1. Is accompanied by his or her parent or guardian or by a person at least 18 years of age who is designated by the parent or guardian;
2. Is enrolled in the course of instruction under the hunter education program and is carrying the firearm in a case and unloaded to or from that class or is handling or operating the firearm during that class under the supervision of an instructor; or
3. Is issued a certificate of accomplishment that states that he or she successfully completed the course of instruction under the hunter education program or has a similar certificate, license, or other evidence satisfactory to the department indicating that he or she has successfully completed in another state, country, or province a hunter education course recognized by the department.
(4) Parental obligation. No parent or guardian of a child under 16 years of age may authorize or knowingly permit the child to violate this section.
(4m) Hunting mentorship program. The prohibition specified in sub. (1) (a) and the restrictions specified in subs. (1) (b) to (d), (2), and (3) do not apply to a person who is hunting with a mentor and who complies with the requirements specified under s. 29.592.
(5) Exception.
(a) Notwithstanding subs. (1) to (3), a person 12 years of age or older may possess or control a firearm and may hunt with a firearm, bow and arrow, or crossbow on land under the ownership of the person or the person's family if no license is required and if the firing of firearms is permitted on that land.
(b)
1. In this paragraph, “ target practice" includes trap shooting or a similar sport shooting activity regardless of whether the activity involves shooting at a fixed or a moving target.
2. The restrictions on the possession and control of a firearm under sub. (1) do not apply to a person using a firearm in target practice if he or she is accompanied by his or her parent or guardian or by a person at least 18 years of age who is designated by the parent or guardian.

29.593 is only concerned with hunting licences, so this too evaluates false.

29.593  Requirement for certificate of accomplishment to obtain hunting approval.
(1) 
(a) Except as provided under subs. (2), (2m) and (3), and s. 29.592 (1), no person born on or after January 1, 1973, may obtain any approval authorizing hunting unless the person is issued a certificate of accomplishment under s. 29.591.
(b) A certificate of accomplishment issued to a person for successfully completing the course under the bow hunter education program only authorizes the person to obtain a resident archer hunting license, a nonresident archer hunting license, a resident crossbow hunting license, or a nonresident crossbow hunting license.
(2) A person who has a certificate, license, or other evidence that is satisfactory to the department indicating that he or she has successfully completed in another state, country, or province a hunter education course recognized by the department may obtain an approval authorizing hunting.
(2m) A person who has a certificate, license, or other evidence that is satisfactory to the department indicating that he or she has successfully completed in another state, country, or province a bow hunter education course recognized by the department may obtain an archer hunting license or crossbow hunting license.
(3) A person who successfully completes basic training in the U.S. armed forces, reserves or national guard may obtain an approval authorizing hunting.
(4) A person who is subject to sub. (1) may prove compliance with sub. (1) when submitting an application for an approval authorizing hunting by presenting any of the following:
(a) His or her certificate of accomplishment issued under s. 29.591.
(b) An approval authorizing hunting that was issued to him or her under this chapter within 365 days before submitting the application.
(c) An approval authorizing hunting that was issued to him or her under this chapter for a hunting season that ended within 365 days before submitting the application.

At least based on the plain text of the law Rittenhouse should be found innocent of count 6. Which isn't to say that the plain text is always the final arbiter, but this will be the argument his defence raises.

 

[Starbuck1975]

So not going to answer my question troll?

If you’re going to call someone out, show some maturity by tagging or quoting them. At the very least read the thread, because I already addressed your disingenuous concern. You may now return to the peanut gallery.