• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."
  • Community Question: What makes a good motherboard?

Scum Makes Bail

Page 6 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

ch33zw1z

Lifer
Nov 4, 2004
31,490
10,248
146
lol It's baffling to me that you got so much likes for that.


The upshot is that Rittenhouse’s self-defense arguments may well go to a jury; and it’s not at all impossible that a jury might acquit him, except on the illegal underage possession of firearms charge. If that happens, the law on the books will have more or less been followed. But the gravitational pull of the right to bear arms will have made a mockery of our aspiration for the laws to make common sense. When there are guns involved, common sense goes out the window.
Why is it baffling?

Also, the tulsaworld article's point is very true, when guns are involved...common sense goes out the window. If you post the rest of the article, he points out that possessing the weapon itself creates the situation where the shooter can just claim he thought someone was going to take his gun and shoot him with it, which basically means he can go around shooting anyone he *thinks* will take his gun and shoot him. Our protection of certain gun owner's goes way out of common sense territory.

it's clear they felt empowered to do whatever, egg'd on by guns and police encouragement.

Both Rittenhouse and Dominick black should see jail time for their illegal gun activities, on top of other charges as well.

Look how much effort we put into white gun rights.

edit: In my intarweb travels this morning, I found this:

Video shows Kenosha shooter Kyle Rittenhouse punching a girl: report (nypost.com)

how saintly of him, lol
 
Last edited:

Maxima1

Diamond Member
Jan 15, 2013
3,272
640
126
Why is it baffling?

Also, the tulsaworld article's point is very true, when guns are involved...common sense goes out the window. If you post the rest of the article, he points out that possessing the weapon itself creates the situation where the shooter can just claim he thought someone was going to take his gun and shoot him with it, which basically means he can go around shooting anyone he *thinks* will take his gun and shoot him. Our protection of certain gun owner's goes way out of common sense territory.

it's clear they felt empowered to do whatever, egg'd on by guns and police encouragement.
The gist of that was that there can be no self-defense claim which is nonsense.

which basically means he can go around shooting anyone he *thinks* will take his gun and shoot him.
Not really. Didn't work for Reinoehl or Drejka.

edit: In my intarweb travels this morning, I found this:

Video shows Kenosha shooter Kyle Rittenhouse punching a girl: report (nypost.com)

how saintly of him, lol
lol Here we go again with combing the history for any bad looks. I can't confirm but people said that was his sister the girl he was punching was fighting. He does have sisters, so it makes sense that's a possibility.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Pohemi420

ch33zw1z

Lifer
Nov 4, 2004
31,490
10,248
146
The gist of that was that there can be no self-defense claim which is nonsense.
Sure, he can try, but doesn't mean the jury will buy it.


Not really. Didn't work for Reinoehl or Drejka.
It was your article you posted. Or did you only want the bottom piece to support some claim while ignoring the rest?

lol Here we go again with combing the history for any bad looks. I can't confirm but people said that was his sister the girl he was punching was fighting. He does have sisters, so it makes sense that's a possibility.
Yawn, I'll be sure to keep watch for your deep concern in others accounts. This kid went looking for a fight, and now people want to praise him as a hero. Looks like another angry kid who went as far as to illegally purchase weapons to make sure he was ready for that fight.

Not sure what your deal is here, but you seemed deeply invested in this. Even to the point of posting articles then disagreeing with the premise of the article because the bottom says what you like to hear.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pohemi420

QueBert

Lifer
Jan 6, 2002
21,704
214
106
lol Here we go again with combing the history for any bad looks. I can't confirm but people said that was his sister the girl he was punching was fighting. He does have sisters, so it makes sense that's a possibility.
This confuses me, a few pages back you were clearly bringing up the criminal history of the 2 people he shot and killed for a reason. But when someone points out Kyle punching the shit out of a woman it's "lol here we go again with the combing the history for any bad looks" And apparently since the girl he punched was maybe fighting his sister you feel that makes it okay? Interesting. I watched the video and saw a punk ass little boy hitting a female.
 

Maxima1

Diamond Member
Jan 15, 2013
3,272
640
126
Sure, he can try, but doesn't mean the jury will buy it.
And if they do it's all consistent with the law. You refuted what again? Practically everyone here is thinking he has no chance based on the absurd idea that because he is underage, he can't claim self-defense.

Not sure what your deal is here, but you seemed deeply invested in this. Even to the point of posting articles then disagreeing with the premise of the article because the bottom says what you like to hear.
It was your article you posted. Or did you only want the bottom piece to support some claim while ignoring the rest?
I don't have to agree with everything he says in there. For instance, he talks only about using the gun against him, which isn't even correct, since it's imminent death or great bodily harm from more than a means by gun. So I don't know why he's stating Kyle can only fear what they do with the rifle.

Yawn, I'll be sure to keep watch for your deep concern in others accounts. This kid went looking for a fight, and now people want to praise him as a hero. Looks like another angry kid who went as far as to illegally purchase weapons to make sure he was ready for that fight.
Yes, you totally established that he wanted a fight to escalate into a shooting. Totally. He isn't even aware at the time Rosenbaum happens to see him. What did you think about evidence that Trayvon liked to get into fights? I bet you thought at the time that was too prejudicial for the court room.


This confuses me, a few pages back you were clearly bringing up the criminal history of the 2 people he shot and killed for a reason. But when someone points out Kyle punching the shit out of a woman it's "lol here we go again with the combing the history for any bad looks" And apparently since the girl he punched was fighting his sister you feel that makes it okay? Interesting.I watched the video and saw a punk ass little boy hitting a female.
What's so confusing? People want to suggest to me that Kyle must have wanted to engage in criminality (murder at that!) because of the illegal gun charge and really tenuous stuff like punching the girl. Okay. So let's do a comparison. Both Rosenbaum and Huber have clearly worse records. I also pointed out how suicidal Rosenbaum's actions seemed and surprise, surprise -- he got out of the hospital that day after almost killing himself. No wonder why it seemed like he just wanted to throw his life away.
 

Juiblex

Senior member
Sep 26, 2016
304
105
116
So all we've got is that someone was trying to disarm rittenhouse and was shot but rittenhouse is guilty of murder because he shouldn't have a gun in the first place? And any body who disagrees is a moron stupid etc? Do I have that right?
 

ch33zw1z

Lifer
Nov 4, 2004
31,490
10,248
146
And if they do it's all consistent with the law.
That's what we like to tell ourselves. Jury's have found innocent people guilty and guilty people innocent, and it's been "consistent with the law" at those times too. American's fight against common sense gun laws all the time. However, I live in MA, and I think our gun laws are quite reasonable and allow for self defense when the situation warrants it. My state also has a duty to retreat instead of stand your ground, but that's those libtards for ya, with their elitist attitudes and low gun death rates.


You refuted what again?
What was I supposed to be refuting? Can you point to where I said I was? I was simply commenting on the article that you cherry picked a piece of that says what you want to hear.

Practically everyone here is thinking he has no chance based on the absurd idea that because he is underage, he can't claim self-defense.
And? Where did I specifically say that?


I don't have to agree with everything he says in there. For instance, he talks only about using the gun against him, which isn't even correct, since it's imminent death or great bodily harm from more than a means by gun. So I don't know why he's stating Kyle can only fear what they do with the rifle.
Surely you agree with the main point tho, when guns are involved common sense goes out the window.

Yes, you totally established that he wanted a fight to escalate into a shooting. Totally. He isn't even aware at the time Rosenbaum happens to see him.
Guns aren't devices of peace, theyre devices of fear. When used as "peace keeping" tools, they're just devices of compliance, out of fear. Numbers don't lie, when guns are available, death is more likely to happen.

What did you think about evidence that Trayvon liked to get into fights? I bet you thought at the time that was too prejudicial for the court room.
*tweet* whatabout on the play. I never said anything about introducing his girl hitting into the case. This is you jumping to conclusions because you're being very defensive, likely due to some emotional attachment to some part of this case.

What's so confusing? People want to suggest to me that Kyle must have wanted to engage in criminality (murder at that!) because of the illegal gun charge and really tenuous stuff like punching the girl. Okay. So let's do a comparison. Both Rosenbaum and Huber have clearly worse records. I also pointed out how suicidal Rosenbaum's actions seemed and surprise, surprise -- he got out of the hospital that day after almost killing himself. No wonder why it seemed like he just wanted to throw his life away.
Illegal gun possession is criminal behavior, why are you trying to frame it as not? The girl punching thing I simply found in passing, and kinda lol'd because based on the little I knew (know more now tho) said this guy was just a hero's hero, and real American. Well, I guess that's kinda true, considering the amount of pro USA apparel he don's.

Look at you tho, bringing up a person's past into the thread then attacking others for simply stumbling across a NYPost (out of all places) article that shows Rittenhouse repeatedly sucker punching his "sister", lol.

Just now, I found a part 2 to the video, and a group of dudes confront him immediately after watching him beat on the girl from behind. I got a chuckle outta that too

Alleged Video of Kenosha Shooter Kyle Rittenhouse Fighting a Girl - Wow Video | eBaum's World

eBaum's world, out of all places, I forgot that place existed.

Might I suggest you consider not everyone is out to get you, lest you end up like Rittenhouse.
 
Last edited:

Viper1j

Diamond Member
Jul 31, 2018
3,241
2,197
106

The success or failure of a potential courtroom self-defense claim, however, could hinge on questions about the teen’s actions before he fired and details that have yet to emerge, defense lawyers in Wisconsin said. As in other states, the law in Wisconsin allows people to use guns to defend themselves against serious threats, but there are exceptions to that right.
By your reasoning, a bank robber could legitimately claim self-defense for shooting a cop, because the cop tried to take the gun away from him, or shot at him first.
 

Starbuck1975

Lifer
Jan 6, 2005
14,604
1,861
126
By your reasoning, a bank robber could legitimately claim self-defense for shooting a cop, because the cop tried to take the gun away from him, or shot at him first.
Not really, because the bank robber was committing a crime and the police officer is acting in his lawful duty, although given the whole police reform discussion, a person robbing a bank should not necessarily result in a lethal response from police. Also, the Rittenhouse situation is complex. The kid went to clean graffiti, he also entered the community as an illegally armed vigilante, he “thought” he was helping. A situation escalated to lethal force. Given the sequence of events, I do believe he acted in self defense, but he shouldn’t have been armed or in that situation to begin with. This is why I’ve never been a fan of open carry. A private citizen shouldn’t use the military tools of the trade any more than they should be able to just walk into a factory and start operating heavy machinery. Rittenhouse needs to face charges for obtaining an illegal firearm.
 

IronWing

No Lifer
Jul 20, 2001
60,776
13,569
136
So all we've got is that someone was trying to disarm rittenhouse and was shot but rittenhouse is guilty of murder because he shouldn't have a gun in the first place? And any body who disagrees is a moron stupid etc? Do I have that right?
Rittenhouse went to Kenosha to shoot people and he did just that so, yes, you are correct. Rittenhouse was so determined to shoot people that he arranged an illegal gun purchase so that he would have the means to carry out his plan to shoot people.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pohemi420

Fenixgoon

Lifer
Jun 30, 2003
27,313
2,161
126
Rittenhouse went to Kenosha to shoot people and he did just that so, yes, you are correct. Rittenhouse was so determined to shoot people that he arranged an illegal gun purchase so that he would have the means to carry out his plan to shoot people.


Evidence of that? Last I saw, there was lots of debate over whether him possessing the rifle was legal (due to varying state laws), but I didn't see anything indicating he had arranged an illegal purchase.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
70,710
20,070
136
Evidence of that? Last I saw, there was lots of debate over whether him possessing the rifle was legal (due to varying state laws), but I didn't see anything indicating he had arranged an illegal purchase.
Someone is currently under felony indictment for conducting the straw purchase for him. He 100% arranged an illegal purchase.

 

Viper1j

Diamond Member
Jul 31, 2018
3,241
2,197
106
Evidence of that? Last I saw, there was lots of debate over whether him possessing the rifle was legal (due to varying state laws), but I didn't see anything indicating he had arranged an illegal purchase.
He gave the money to his buddy to purchase the weapon, because he knew he couldn't legally purchase that because he wasn't old enough.

It doesn't get much clearer than that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pohemi420

Pohemi420

Diamond Member
Oct 2, 2004
3,142
777
136
lol They just responded defending felony murder, going by criminal record etc., and you even upvoted it. People previously tried to say Kyle hitting a girl supported that he had ill-motive. This shit is comical.



Says the guy who assigns violent motive to anyone who obtains a gun illegally. You literally said to me he was guaranteed to do multiple crimes because of it. This shit is hilarious.

Hahahaha Here is what Obama said about illegal gun possession hahahaha :

But Obama said Thursday that he now differentiates the mere illegal possession of a firearm with "a situation where somebody has engaged in armed robbery and shot somebody."

"What I've done is to try to screen out folks who seem to have a propensity for violence," he said. "Our focus really has been on people who we think were overcharged and people who we do not believe have a propensity towards violence."





Using this logic, whenever burglaries happen by multiple black persons and their black buddy dies, you are for prosecuting the black guy who survived with felony murder right? This is why I said your ilk like felony murder then.

The other point is the claim that Kyle is being reckless even though most cops wouldn't even have let Rosenbaum within 20 ft after Kyle turned and shots were fired from the man with the pistol. Kyle let him get right at the barrel. Kyle's shots all near Rosenbaum. In contrast, the boyfriend didn't identify target and said that the leg hit was a "warning shot". That actually had a tangible consequence. I've said that it was a gray area with him, but it's hilarious how everyone who doesn't want to prosecute the boyfriend thinks reckless homicide and endangerment of others is open and shut with Kyle. What was Kyle suppose to do with a mentally unstable man who wanted to get at his gun? You want to just say, "misdemeanor murder!"????? Or will you give me an explanation why Rosenbaum had a right to disarm Kyle. All this discussion yet Rosenbaum's "self-defense" case is hardly established.



The law allows people to go out with rifles. Kyle gets misdemeanor for straw purchase, but even then I think he might be able to make an affirmative defense on it possibly, since states have done this even for felony possession. Even if you provoke someone, Wisconsin even has an out for that. You're basically suggesting to ignore the provocation statutes etc. This is all emotional.

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.




Maybe so, but the other reasons why liberals react like this is because they don't like the idea of carrying around rifles. So if not skin color, you want to ignore Wisconsin law because it suits the feels.
lol Now I'm a Trumper. This is the same idiocy that Kyle wanted to murder because: 1) He had gloves on 2) He hit a girl 3) He is in illegal possession of a gun etc. etc..
Anyway, is someone going to try to explain why Rosenbaum had a right to try to take the gun from Kyle? Or is the position going to be that Kyle's in legal jeopardy for everything (i.e. analogous to felony murder) because of the misdeamnor gun possession? That's now how this shit works FYI.
And if they do it's all consistent with the law. You refuted what again? Practically everyone here is thinking he has no chance based on the absurd idea that because he is underage, he can't claim self-defense.
I don't have to agree with everything he says in there. For instance, he talks only about using the gun against him, which isn't even correct, since it's imminent death or great bodily harm from more than a means by gun. So I don't know why he's stating Kyle can only fear what they do with the rifle.
Yes, you totally established that he wanted a fight to escalate into a shooting. Totally. He isn't even aware at the time Rosenbaum happens to see him. What did you think about evidence that Trayvon liked to get into fights? I bet you thought at the time that was too prejudicial for the court room.
What's so confusing? People want to suggest to me that Kyle must have wanted to engage in criminality (murder at that!) because of the illegal gun charge and really tenuous stuff like punching the girl. Okay. So let's do a comparison. Both Rosenbaum and Huber have clearly worse records. I also pointed out how suicidal Rosenbaum's actions seemed and surprise, surprise -- he got out of the hospital that day after almost killing himself. No wonder why it seemed like he just wanted to throw his life away.
Dishonest. Grasping at straws, making stupid assumptions, and still assigning false statements to others. Fuck off, shithead.
 
Nov 8, 2012
18,110
3,666
136
By your reasoning, a bank robber could legitimately claim self-defense for shooting a cop, because the cop tried to take the gun away from him, or shot at him first.
Winner of stupid quote of the year 2020?

Definitely a finalist for sure. Everyone who liked it gets credit as well.
 

Fenixgoon

Lifer
Jun 30, 2003
27,313
2,161
126
Someone is currently under felony indictment for conducting the straw purchase for him. He 100% arranged an illegal purchase.

He gave the money to his buddy to purchase the weapon, because he knew he couldn't legally purchase that because he wasn't old enough.

It doesn't get much clearer than that.
yeah that's pretty open and shut. jesus :( :(
 

UNCjigga

Lifer
Dec 12, 2000
22,683
4,962
136
So all we've got is that someone was trying to disarm rittenhouse and was shot but rittenhouse is guilty of murder because he shouldn't have a gun in the first place? And any body who disagrees is a moron stupid etc? Do I have that right?
Not murder, unless a DA can prove that Rittenhouse went to Kenosha with the purpose of “killing some Antifa” (I don’t think that’s what happened.)

But likely manslaughter.
 

Juiblex

Senior member
Sep 26, 2016
304
105
116
Rittenhouse went to Kenosha to shoot people and he did just that so, yes, you are correct. Rittenhouse was so determined to shoot people that he arranged an illegal gun purchase so that he would have the means to carry out his plan to shoot people.
That's a leap. Is that normal for you?
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY