• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Rittenhouse verdict poll

Page 24 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

What is most severe charge you believe Rittenhouse will be convicted of?

  • Intentional Homicide

    Votes: 1 1.2%

  • Reckless Homicide

    Votes: 13 16.0%

  • Reckless Endangerment

    Votes: 11 13.6%

  • Illegal Weapon possession

    Votes: 10 12.3%

  • No verdict - hung jury or mistrial

    Votes: 24 29.6%

  • Not Guilty on all charges

    Votes: 22 27.2%
  • Total voters
    81
  • Poll closed .
HumblePie said:
Did you watch the trial or even know the evidence of the KR case? There was no vigilantism at all. Kyle was one of HUNDREDS carrying guns for protection that night. Many were also protestors doing so legally. It was the 5th night where previous nights had seen quite a few buildings burned down. He was out the 4th day and the 5th cleaning up streets of graffiti and trash. On the 5th day, the guys from Car Source ask if he and friends wouldn't mind cleaning around their place and maybe help out in being around to prevent further arson that already burned one of their lots down. Carrying a gun is not vigilantism. He along with many others from the area or in nearby communities all pitched in that night to help keep places from burning down with their mere presence. Which is why the 5th night had no burned down buildings. It was also the last night of the riots as well there during that time for that reason too.

By all the evidence, Kyle was ambushed, attacked, and was forced to defend himself when he used every opportunity to defuse situations or flee. That is not vigilantism. For reference here is the definition of that.

www.merriam-webster.com

Definition of VIGILANTISM

the policy or practice of vigilantes… See the full definition
www.merriam-webster.com www.merriam-webster.com

He was not trying to capture or punish anyone for any crime at all during the 2 days there. Self defense when people attack you is not vigilantism. It is literally ludicrous to think that at all.
Click to expand...
Ambushed? Bullshit! Out of the hundreds of gun carriers, KR is the only one who shot and killed an unarmed man because he threw a plastic bag at him and "threatened" to take his gun and use it on him.. aka he was threatened by the unarmed man that said he was going to take the threat KR was holding, the fucking ar-15, and have that same fucking threat turned back on him.. I guess an unarmed man is not allowed to feel threatened by a gun wilding punk. So what did KR do, the man who was holding the actual gun, the actual threat? He shot the unarmed man using the logic and maturity of a child, which does not excuse him murdering someone. The other two people where acting in response to KR shooting and killing someone. So don't fucking manipulate shit and say he was ambushed. He brought it all on himself. And the only reason he got off was the way the law is written in that state, and the bias judge who paved the way for his aquittal.
 
HumblePie said:
Did you watch the trial or even know the evidence of the KR case? There was no vigilantism at all. Kyle was one of HUNDREDS carrying guns for protection that night. Many were also protestors doing so legally. It was the 5th night where previous nights had seen quite a few buildings burned down. He was out the 4th day and the 5th cleaning up streets of graffiti and trash. On the 5th day, the guys from Car Source ask if he and friends wouldn't mind cleaning around their place and maybe help out in being around to prevent further arson that already burned one of their lots down. Carrying a gun is not vigilantism. He along with many others from the area or in nearby communities all pitched in that night to help keep places from burning down with their mere presence. Which is why the 5th night had no burned down buildings. It was also the last night of the riots as well there during that time for that reason too.

By all the evidence, Kyle was ambushed, attacked, and was forced to defend himself when he used every opportunity to defuse situations or flee. That is not vigilantism. For reference here is the definition of that.

www.merriam-webster.com

Definition of VIGILANTISM

the policy or practice of vigilantes… See the full definition
www.merriam-webster.com www.merriam-webster.com

He was not trying to capture or punish anyone for any crime at all during the 2 days there. Self defense when people attack you is not vigilantism. It is literally ludicrous to think that at all.
Click to expand...
See...this is what happens when YouTube tells you the facts compared to ACTUALLY watching the trial. Kyle was never hired nor spoke to any owners of the Car Source lots.
 
soundforbjt said:
See...this is what happens when YouTube tells you the facts compared to ACTUALLY watching the trial. Kyle was never hired nor spoke to any owners of the Car Source lots.
Click to expand...


Lol that guy swears he’s the smartest guy on the forum when in reality he’s in the top ten of the dumbest posters here.
 
Imagine thinking what Kyle Rittenhouse did was not vigilantism. And also thinking you have a sharp legal mind. I mean, maybe you agree that he stated he wanted to shoot people, went with a gun to a protest, pretended to be a medic, shot people, then call his friend to gloat about it, but you're okay with it. It. But it's still vigilantism.

These people are nuts.
 
Last edited:
Its funny how conservatives are OK with hundreds of people carrying guns so long as they are white and straight and claim to be Christian.
The protestors at Charlottesville had no weapons and when a douche bag drove over a bunch of liberals the wannabe nazis of America cheered like brain damaged monkey's.
 
shortylickens said:
And what I feared would happen, has happened:

www.newsweek.com

Woman Shot, Killed After Aiming Gun at Biker She Hit With Her Car: Police

The motorcyclist shot the 35-year-old librarian after following her home, where she pointed a gun at him.
www.newsweek.com www.newsweek.com

People are using the self-defense excuse when it was not self defense. They had no legal right to chase her down. They arent police. And because she ran away from them they cannot call it self-defense. They should have called the cops and she would be sitting in jail right now for fleeing the scene of an accident and reckless endangerment and probably speeding.
Instead they CREATED a situation at her house where she was forced to defend herself.

America really is full of selfish self-centered people and its not gonna survive. We are going to collapse from the inside, like Rome.
Click to expand...

Ruh roh

Kyle VS. Chad

Tommy johnson on Twitter: "Lubbock Texas man was killed trying to pick up his son https://t.co/UZskkixS0v" / Twitter
 
Lanyap said:
Looks like KR created trouble in GQP paradise.

www.huffpost.com

QAnon Believers Rattled After Kyle Rittenhouse Calls Extremist Lawyer Lin Wood 'Insane'

Prominent figures in the far-right conspiracy group turned on the acquitted gunman after followers had previously embraced him.
www.huffpost.com www.huffpost.com
Click to expand...
It doesn't seem like it would matter. Couldn't they just say that Rittenhouse joined the conspiracy for a not guilty verdict? Does it have to come from the main Q to be believed? Aren't there lower case q's that handle run of the mill setbacks like this?
We're talking about people with limited understanding, it doesn't seem like it would take much to clear this up and get them back on the right crazy track.
 
Greenman said:
It doesn't seem like it would matter. Couldn't they just say that Rittenhouse joined the conspiracy for a not guilty verdict? Does it have to come from the main Q to be believed? Aren't there lower case q's that handle run of the mill setbacks like this?
We're talking about people with limited understanding, it doesn't seem like it would take much to clear this up and get them back on the right crazy track.
Click to expand...

U asking for a friend?
 
its been so long that a lot of facts have been lost or distorted during this fiasco.
Can anyone remind me who called for armed citizens to show up in Kenosha? was it a pundit or a politician?
 
Greenman said:
It doesn't seem like it would matter. Couldn't they just say that Rittenhouse joined the conspiracy for a not guilty verdict? Does it have to come from the main Q to be believed? Aren't there lower case q's that handle run of the mill setbacks like this?
We're talking about people with limited understanding, it doesn't seem like it would take much to clear this up and get them back on the right crazy track.
Click to expand...

Yes, there does seem to be limited understanding about how the Qanon grifters are trying to run off with the funds they raised for Kyle's defense.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top