So you are saying rittenhouse has the rifle in his hands pointing it at people? really i didn't see that, i only saw him point when he was being chased and then pointing it, i guess i should watch it again? got a link of what i should watch?
Merely pointing a gun at someone IS a threat of lethal force. It is, for all the person down-barrel knows, the last step before pulling the trigger. If you have to wait for a trigger to be pulled before you can finally call someone with a firearm an imminent lethal threat, then you basically have to wait to be dead.
Say the situation was Grosskreutz witnessed Mr Rittenhouse shoot Rosenbaum and moved toward him with weapon drawn - Rittenhouse fires as he did and missed - And then Grosskreutz fires back and kills Rittenhouse. Or ... skateboard guy witnessed Rittenhouse shoot Rosenbaum - he moves toward him with his skateboard - Rittenhouse fires as he did and misses - Skateboard guy bashes Rittenhouse head in with his skateboard and kills him. Both cases are grounds for acquittal on self defense claims, Correct?
Did Rosenbaum say whether KR had brandished the gun at him or others before their final altercation?So you are saying rittenhouse has the rifle in his hands pointing it at people? really i didn't see that, i only saw him point when he was being chased and then pointing it, i guess i should watch it again? got a link of what i should watch?
also brandishing just means showing not pointing a gun, if he has a gun slung around him its not brandishing a firearm, its already on display.Did Rosenbaum say whether KR had brandished the gun at him or others before their final altercation?
also brandishing just means showing not pointing a gun, if he has a gun slung around him its not brandishing a firearm, its already on display.
i dunno did he? is this some kinda rhetorical question? because i really dont know who pointed the gun at who first.. who ever it was gets shot and killed and other person is OK like the old west you let them draw first then you shoot them dead you are good to go! common sense is so expensive for you folks.
ok re watched the video, i guess it starts with rittenhouse running toward the police and the people chasing trying to kill him.. why not just follow him to the police and have them arrested.. oh wait because they are insane people roaming the streets..
also brandishing just means showing not pointing a gun, if he has a gun slung around him its not brandishing a firearm, its already on display.
i dunno did he? is this some kinda rhetorical question? because i really dont know who pointed the gun at who first.. who ever it was gets shot and killed and other person is OK like the old west you let them draw first then you shoot them dead you are good to go! common sense is so expensive for you folks.
ok re watched the video, i guess it starts with rittenhouse running toward the police and the people chasing trying to kill him.. why not just follow him to the police and have them arrested.. oh wait because they are insane people roaming the streets..
You mean you think shooting unarmed people in a different room is somehow self defense, but shooting a guy pointing a gun at you or who's beating you around the head and shoulders with a skateclub isn't?Part of 'the rioters' according to people like you; someone who crossed a line and had to be "stopped." Yeah, that one. Definitely not a magat Karen in the same mob attacking police and parading Confederate battle flags through the Capital building while politicians hid for their lives. Nah.
You lying sack of shit. When have i ever said i hate or dislike or even disagree with the 14th Amendment.This from the poster who openly hates the 14a and believes the 1a doesn't apply to any speech disagrees with... lol.
Nope, but she wasn't even in the same room with the shooter. How does that square with your views on Kyle Rittenhouse and his claims?Remind us where in the Capitol building she was shot again?
I'll save you the trouble. She was not on the opposite side of a blocked door. She was shot while climbing through the broken glass part of the door to the Speaker's Lobby. Any ideas how many barricades she had to cross to even get there?
LiarIt takes a ridiculous amount of bias to not see that Rittenhouse was one of those 'insane people roaming the streets.'
This isn't the old west, you just approve of political violence as long as it's your side doing the violence. It's too bad your parents didn't know enough to teach you that two wrongs don't make a right.
You mean you think shooting unarmed people in a different room is somehow self defense, but shooting a guy pointing a gun at you or who's beating you around the head and shoulders with a skateclub isn't?
You lying sack of shit. When have i ever said i hate or dislike or even disagree with the 14th Amendment.
Fourteenth Amendment
Fourteenth Amendment Annotated
Section 1
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
Section 2
Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice-President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.
Section 3
No Person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.
Section 4
The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.
Section 5
The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.
You are a lying shit fucking stain. Post where i've "hated" it you asshole
Taj you are a fucking moron. No really you are.
The difference between the two incidents, you stupid piece of shit traitor, is that in one incident a person with a gun was a) pointing their gun while doing their job b) was behind a door protecting people who were also doing their job c) was at their place of work when/when people had illegally entered the building through force d) gave a warning not to enter the barricaded room.
In the other incident we have someone with a gun who a) wasn’t from the city they were in b) was armed and threatening others c) was confronting/harassing people who had nothing to do with them d) had no authority.
I know understanding reality is hard for you but this act you keep doing where you ignore basic information isn’t doing you any favors.
Dude, while you're ranting that Taj is a traitor, he and the political propaganda machine behind him is figuring out how to get away with killing you for disagreeing with them.
And you don't see that. It's literally all they talk about, and we're discussing an incident where they're hoping to set a legal precedent for getting away with open season on liberals... and
I'm sorry, who's the fucking morons here?
Well, I keep getting more and more left as I age. I own a 9mm pistol and a bolt action rifle. I can't see myself doing that, though.I’ve already mentioned that the left should get guns and shoot a righty and simply claim it was self defense because according to their logic that’s all that’s needed to kill someone. So I’m well aware of what they are doing.
Well, I keep getting more and more left as I age. I own a 9mm pistol and a bolt action rifle. I can't see myself doing that, though.
I assume you aren't seriously advocating that, though.
Projecting liar is triggered again while continuing to project and lie. Shocker.You lying sack of shit. When have i ever said i hate or dislike or even disagree with the 14th Amendment...
...You are a lying shit fucking stain. Post where i've "hated" it you asshole
You openly oppose Section 1, as evidenced by literally every one of your posts, ALL of which reject the principle of equal protection of the equal.
Every single one of your posts reject that basic Constitutional principle. All of them.
Want to prove me wrong? Just point to one single example where you have argued here for equal protection of the laws. Just one.
Liar
I like a quote I saw somewhere.Taj you are a fucking moron. No really you are.
The difference between the two incidents, you stupid piece of shit traitor, is that in one incident a person with a gun was a) pointing their gun while doing their job b) was behind a door protecting people who were also doing their job c) was at their place of work when/when people had illegally entered the building through force d) gave a warning not to enter the barricaded room.
In the other incident we have someone with a gun who a) wasn’t from the city they were in b) was armed and threatening others c) was confronting/harassing people who had nothing to do with them d) had no authority.
I know understanding reality is hard for you but this act you keep doing where you ignore basic information isn’t doing you any favors.
Oh, he HAS denied saying it, and even challenged others to, "find and quote it", which they did.I mean, you do know that we have a record of you proposing to grenade women and babies trying to cross our border, right?
You still haven't rescinded that, at all.