Summer of 2020---The Civil Unrest Thread--Read OP Before Posting (in memory of George Floyd)

[Long n Left]

8 hours ago, Califan007 said:

 

 

So can judges reference the bible when instructing jurors?...It doesn't seem like that would be allowed. Any lawyers here who can help me understand how that's possible?

I was wondering the same. Separation of church and state? Setting himself up for recusal? At least giving the prosecution grounds for mistrial/appeal I’d think.

 

The blinding thing about both of these trials is the amount of whiteness.

[PokerPacker]

19 hours ago, China said:

 

I wonder if the jurors would have grounds to sue the judge for forcing them to sit through sermon as a captive audience.

[CjSuAvE22]

For those of you following the Rittenhouse trial, yes he was an idiot for going across state borders with a an ar15 to "defend" property of some guy that probably could buyout his own family 15 times over, he did break the law of having the gun and being under age and I know its angering that people died because of him, but after looking at the videos posted on the internet how can you guys argue he wasn't acting in self defense? You literally have him running away and being chased down by another idiot WHY CHASE DOWN SOMEONE WITH A GUN? He then proceeds to throw a plastic bag with something in it at the guy, then you hear shots fired by SOMEONE ELSE in the area to which point Richard Mcginis (Prosecutions witness) even testifies that Rosenbaum (First guy charging at Rittenhouse while hes running away) lunges toward Rittenhouse, now stop and think for a second if someone is lunging toward you do you not have the right to defend yourself?

 

Ok now to the second instance of the night which I don't think the trial has officially gotten to, essentially you have Rittenhouse running away while calling 911 to say that he has just shot someone while running away more people get involved they yell things like "CRANIUM THAT BOY" leading up to Gaige Grosskreutz running up to and chasing after Rittenhouse, now during this scenario the next shots that are fired from Rittenhouse AFTER the initial shots that hit Rosenbaum, are toward a man/boy/whatever thats running up to him and trying to kick him while hes down these two shots miss the guy who kicks Rittenhouse as he backs off Rittenhouse another male Anthony Hubert is seen swinging his skateboard at Rittenhouse and attempts to grab rittenhouses gun and is then subsequently shot once, to which point Rosenbaum approaches Rittenhouse with his hands up with a gun in his hand then makes a quick gesture/lunge toward him and is shot in the arm. 

 

This is all caught on video I just want to see how you guys don't think this is self defense, yes he should not be carrying an ar15 around like that and hes a moron for doing that and he should be charged for that crime and convicted no question, but the three victims in this case all chased after someone and subsequently lost their life they put themselves in harms way by doing so especially when someone is trying to run away from them. I know ill get about 30 thumb downs on this post but go look at the video for yourselves theres a good breakdown about the situation from a liberal commentator YouTube it "destiny Rittenhouse" its very in depth...ill try posting the link, I don't see how you can argue that this isn't a self defense case.
 

 

Edited November 6, 2021 by CjSuAvE22

[skinsmarydu]

It doesn't matter if it's self defense.  It started with "underage person illegally in possession of a firearm".  His (and his mother's) actions put him where he is.  

[CjSuAvE22]

23 minutes ago, skinsmarydu said:

It doesn't matter if it's self defense.  It started with "underage person illegally in possession of a firearm".  His (and his mother's) actions put him where he is.  

So you are saying because he illegally had a firearm, the actions of everyone else involved doesn't matter? Why chase the guy down hes clearly running away, after the first victim is shot he immediately calls 911...and is then chased down again for whatever reason and is attacked with a skateboard is kicked while hes on the ground you don't think that at all gives him justification to use the firearm hes carrying to defend himself especially in the second instance where the guy had a pistol? I think he should definitely go to jail but this isn't murder like a lot of people are trying to claim it is in my opinion. Had he not been chased I don't think anyone would have gotten hurt again thats an assumption its not fact but there are also no facts to support chasing down someone with an ar-15 especially in such a hostile environment, I do think however he should go to Jail for the firearm charge.

Edited November 6, 2021 by CjSuAvE22

[Burgold]

23 hours ago, Long n Left said:

I was wondering the same. Separation of church and state? Setting himself up for recusal? At least giving the prosecution grounds for mistrial/appeal I’d think.

 

The blinding thing about both of these trials is the amount of whiteness.

The judge is without question exhibiting bias in this case. I mean just the fact that lawyers can't call those shot victims, but that the judge encourages the lawyers to use the term rioters and looters instead is clearly designed to paint Rittenhouse in a more sympathetic light.

[skinsmarydu]

No, what I'm saying is that if his mother hadn't driven him across a state line with an illegal firearm (to defend a business whose owner he did not know, iirc) he wouldn't have been kicked or beaten with a skateboard.  

Because those poor decisions were made then, he has to defend what he did now.  He could just be another college kid, but he made a choice & became a defendant.  

And as Burgold noted, he's getting enough of a break from the judge.  

[Burgold]

One possibility to think about is premeditation. Why did he bring the gun? Why did he cross state lines? Did he think he was going into a violent area where he expected he would need to be violent?

 

In other words, if I hear there’s a brawl in my neighborhood and my response is to run and grab my gun then while my intention may not be to kill, I am going in prepared to do violence. 
 

Besides, if his goal were truly to be part of a shield wall protecting businesses then he would have been standing guard in a group not marching around trying to intimidate. 

[CjSuAvE22]

53 minutes ago, skinsmarydu said:

No, what I'm saying is that if his mother hadn't driven him across a state line with an illegal firearm (to defend a business whose owner he did not know, iirc) he wouldn't have been kicked or beaten with a skateboard.  

 

So by this theory its ok to throw stuff, hit with , kick, point a gun at, someone whom is carrying a gun then, because you don't know if the person is carrying it illegally or not at that point in time, and all the blame should be on Rittenhouse since he was illegally carrying the weapon in the first place? Im just trying to understand the thought process. Because if thats what you are saying I respectfully disagree, if I see someone with a gun im walking away. 

[CjSuAvE22]

 

9 minutes ago, Burgold said:

 

Besides, if his goal were truly to be part of a shield wall protecting businesses then he would have been standing guard in a group not marching around trying to intimidate. 

There is a lot of debate about what happened prior to any video evidence of the situation about what was going on he could have been standing ground or he could have been marching around intimidating , but what I see is a guy with a gun trying to get away and being chased by someone who subsequently gets shot and then being chase by two more people who also subsequently get shot. I think this kid is a moron for going to these protests especially with an AR-15 and should serve the full 9 months for the dangerous weapon charge as well as be charged the $200 dollar fine, but all three victims in this case IN MY OPINION put themselves in harms way by chasing him, but everyone is entitled to their opinion in these things so I respect how you feel I just feel differently. 

[Llevron]

8 minutes ago, CjSuAvE22 said:

 

There is a lot of debate about what happened prior to any video evidence of the situation about what was going on he could have been standing ground or he could have been marching around intimidating , but what I see is a guy with a gun trying to get away and being chased by someone who subsequently gets shot and then being chase by two more people who also subsequently get shot. I think this kid is a moron for going to these protests especially with an AR-15 and should serve the full 9 months for the dangerous weapon charge as well as be charged the $200 dollar fine, but all three victims in this case IN MY OPINION put themselves in harms way by chasing him, but everyone is entitled to their opinion in these things so I respect how you feel I just feel differently. 

You can use your same logic in reverse. He put everyone there in harms way by breaking the law and being there with a gun. That’s the impetus of this situation. His actions directly lead to the situation he was in. You should be able to admit that. It is a fact, not an opinion. Had he not broken the law initially, he would not have shot anyone. Period. No debate. 

 

And remember you can’t call them victims anymore 🧐

[TradeTheBeal!]

Police chase people with guns all the time.  If your shoot the police that are chasing you, it’s not “self-defense”.

[CousinsCowgirl84]

8 minutes ago, TryTheBeal! said:

Police chase people with guns all the time.  If your shoot the police that are chasing you, it’s not “self-defense”.

You thought this was a good argument?

[TradeTheBeal!]

Just now, CousinsCowgirl84 said:

You thought this was a good argument?

I was referencing an above argument that the killer was justified because he was “being chased” by a guy with a skateboard.

 

Which is a bad argument that I extrapolated out to its logical conclusion to an even worse argument.  Try to keep up.

[CjSuAvE22]

9 minutes ago, TryTheBeal! said:

I was referencing an above argument that the killer was justified because he was “being chased” by a guy with a skateboard.

 

Which is a bad argument that I extrapolated out to its logical conclusion to an even worse argument.  Try to keep up.

Nobody said hes "justified", I said it can be self defense...

[skinsmarydu]

A "self defense" argument is an affirmative defense of "justifiable homicide".  

Just stop. 

[CousinsCowgirl84]

56 minutes ago, TryTheBeal! said:

I was referencing an above argument that the killer was justified because he was “being chased” by a guy with a skateboard.

 

Which is a bad argument that I extrapolated out to its logical conclusion to an even worse argument.  Try to keep up.

Ah, trying to out bad take someone. Ohkay I guess….

Edited November 6, 2021 by CousinsCowgirl84

[Burgold]

1 hour ago, CjSuAvE22 said:

Nobody said hes "justified", I said it can be self defense...

If it’s self defense then it’s justified. Can’t have it both ways. 

[CjSuAvE22]

7 minutes ago, Burgold said:

If it’s self defense then it’s justified. Can’t have it both ways. 

Ok i agree, still you see someone with a gun and chase after him thats on you... you see someone with a gun kick him whiles hes on the ground thats on you..you see someone with a gun smack him with your skateboard then attempt allegedly to grab for the gun thats on you...and you point your gun at someone with a gun thats also on you. Now is be guilty of stuff outside of those aforementioned situations like carrying a firearm A minor absolutely, eitherway low iq individuals involved every step of the way.

[Burgold]

1 hour ago, CjSuAvE22 said:

Ok i agree, still you see someone with a gun and chase after him thats on you... 

I don't entirely disagree with this, but it does make me question the series of events. If I see a person with a gun and I am unarmed (Hell, even if I'm armed) it's really likely I'm not going to charge them unless I'm protecting someone or feel really threatened and think it's my only chance to survive. I mean one of the oldest cliches is "Don't bring a knife to a gunfight" What state of mind must you be in to bring a skateboard to a gun fight?

 

In other words, unless everyone who went after Rittenhouse was insane it makes no sense for them to randomly and without provocation take him on. Now, I don't know what Rittenhouse did before the video started shooting. I don't know what the protestors did before the video, but I know something happened if for no other reason than this incident seems to be singular. There weren't dozens or hundreds of instances of the "mob" going after White people and brutalizing, murdering, and being wantonly attacking them. There weren't dozens of instances in openly armed individuals being attacked and overwhelmed by rioters.

 

Something happened here to escalate this. Something happened that was bad enough or scary enough to make these people think they had to go after someone with a gun. Something desperate enough had to happen for people armed with a skateboard to take on a guy with a military grade weapon.

 

I mean, seriously, would you charge after a guy with an AR-15 armed with only your fists or a skateboard? What would it take for you to do so?

Edited November 6, 2021 by Burgold

[CjSuAvE22]

1 minute ago, Burgold said:

 

 

I mean, seriously, would you charge after a guy with an AR-15 armed with only your fists or a skateboard? What would it take for you to do so?

The events that transpired with the police killings had people riled up enough in my opinion, this entire situation was a recipe for disaster. I really do wish congress votes to remove ar-15s from civilian purchase, you don't need such a high powered gun as a private citizen, nor do you need an ar15 if you are a hunter in fact I know many people that hunt that don't own ar15s.

[TradeTheBeal!]

44 minutes ago, CousinsCowgirl84 said:

Ah, trying to out bad take someone. Ohkay I guess….

You should be familiar with the technique.  It’s how the tailgate evolved you from the feral wolf-girl we found living in the hollow behind the Food Lion into the mostly presentable member of genteel society you are today.

[CousinsCowgirl84]

12 minutes ago, TryTheBeal! said:

You should be familiar with the technique.  It’s how the tailgate evolved you from the feral wolf-girl we found living in the hollow behind the Food Lion into the mostly presentable member of genteel society you are today.

 

🤔 

[Llevron]

12 minutes ago, TryTheBeal! said:

You should be familiar with the technique.  It’s how the tailgate evolved you from the feral wolf-girl we found living in the hollow behind the Food Lion into the mostly presentable member of genteel society you are today.

I feel like I don’t get enough credit for this sometimes but I can always count on you Beal

 

🤟🏾

[Larry]

8 hours ago, CjSuAvE22 said:

So you are saying because he illegally had a firearm, the actions of everyone else involved doesn't matter?

I'll go there. 
 

Yes. 
 

No, you do not get to spend (I assume) more than an hour intentionally seeking out what you hope is going to be a lethal confrontation with thousands of other people, because you disagree with their political views, and then yell "Hey, one of them moved in my direction, so I opened fire and defended myself."

 

The principal of self defense assumes a person who was attacked while minding his own business. Not someone who went out of his way to seek out trouble, and escalate it.