Like Tree64Likes

Gotta love the right to bear arms

Closed Thread
Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 LastLast
  1. #31

    A pretty complicated and sad situation, a 17 year old shouldn't be walking the streets carrying a semi automatic rifle, especially during such a volatile situation. I do not necessarily disagree with those who support the 2nd amendment in the USA, but such an important part of the constitution (it is the 2nd amendment) comes great responsibility and in this situation a teenager carrying a deadly weapon is not upholding the spirit of what was initially intended.


  2. #32

    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    猴山
    Posts
    23,652
    Quote Originally Posted by SirNotAppearing:
    Yes, Grosskruetz was pointing a gun at Rittenhouse for fear for his own life. The hero, or villain, is whoever shoots first, I guess.
    Are you suggesting the accused didn't point his gun at anyone until a gun was pointed at him?

    The villain is someone who took a gun to a riot.

  3. #33

    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    6,452
    Quote Originally Posted by East_coast:
    Are you suggesting the accused didn't point his gun at anyone until a gun was pointed at him?
    It's literally what Grosskreutz admitted under oath. That the crowd and him were chasing Rittenhouse and that Rittenhouse only shot once Grosskreutz pointed his gun at him.

    The villain is someone who took a gun to a riot.
    Grosskreutz right? The guy who was illegally carrying a gun at a riot and has a prior conviction for intoxicated use of a firearm.

  4. #34

    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    猴山
    Posts
    23,652
    Quote Originally Posted by mrgoodkat:
    It's literally what Grosskreutz admitted under oath. That the crowd and he were chasing Rittenhouse and that Rittenhouse only shot once Grosskreutz pointed his gun at him.
    At at other times in the riot?

    Quote Originally Posted by mrgoodkat:
    Grosskreutz right? The guy who was illegally carrying a gun at a riot and has a prior conviction for intoxicated use of a firearm.
    No anyone who brings a gun to a riot. Again the legal status of any gun is irrelevant as at the time no one was checking gun permits as the police were trying to restore order. Anyone who adopts vigilantism with a gun have chosen to significantly increase the chances they will shoot someone.

  5. #35

    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Pampanga, Philippines
    Posts
    29,763
    Original Post Deleted
    He is 17 FFS. Does he have parents?

    Bye mom just off to a riot with a semi automatic. OK love, don't be back too late. I mean I got up to trouble at 17 but a little scaled down from this
    hike and Cornmeal like this.

  6. #36

    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Around about
    Posts
    492
    Quote Originally Posted by hullexile:
    He is 17 FFS. Does he have parents?

    Bye mom just off to a riot with a semi automatic. OK love, don't be back too late. I mean I got up to trouble at 17 but a little scaled down from this
    This is what I mean by the US being a messed up place. Rittenhouse's actions are acceptable to many in the US, including the parents. The gun culture is insane. However, in that culture what Rittenhouse did was both understandable and legal! Both sides were right and both sides were wrong. I can't find much sympathy for Rosenbaum though (the media has mostly glossed over his background e.g here but not here). All parties made bad decisions. A 17 year old should not be out with a firearm facing criminals and rioters because bad things might happen.
    hike and hullexile like this.

  7. #37

    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    1,186

    The issue is that now this kid will grow up believing that bringing a gun to any situation as a legit way to solve conflict is acceptable and legal..
    What could possibly go wrong?

    I won't want to be his neighbour.

    SirNotAppearing likes this.

  8. #38

    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Around about
    Posts
    492
    Quote Originally Posted by alexdown:
    The issue is that now this kid will grow up believing that bringing a gun to any situation as a legit way to solve conflict is acceptable and legal..
    What could possibly go wrong?

    I won't want to be his neighbour.
    I expect he'll end up a Fox news pundit or Senator.
    Philips likes this.

  9. #39

    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    West of the sun
    Posts
    2,548
    Quote Originally Posted by East_coast:
    Are you suggesting the accused didn't point his gun at anyone until a gun was pointed at him?

    The villain is someone who took a gun to a riot.
    Too many guns, too much confusion. Add to that the way gun laws are written in Wisconsin and 29 other states and we could have very a similar court case with Grosskreutz as defendant for killing Rittenhouse had it gone down that way. He would be lauded in some media outlets for preventing a mass shooting event and damned in others for being an antifa nutjob killing a kid who was trying to restore order. This morning my view has altered a bit. There were a lot of people under 25 yrs old at the scene whose prefrontal cortex (decision-making center of the brain) had yet to be fully formed. Everything just seems tragic in so many ways. Yes, the first victim had a criminal past and was released from a mental institution that morning. Whatever his story, it probably involves a history that goes back to poverty and abuse as a child; he chased Kyle and threw a bag at him and was killed. After the initial death everyone there believed a mass shooter was in their midst and some tried to stop it. Kyle, in his mind, saw himself as an extension of law and order and shot to defend himself and get to safety. I can see why it took the jury three days.

  10. #40

    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    猴山
    Posts
    23,652
    Quote Originally Posted by SirNotAppearing:
    Kyle, in his mind, saw himself as an extension of law and order and shot to defend himself and get to safety.
    Self-deputization of law enforcement?

    So you can shoot anyone if you think you are enforcing the law and you think lethal force is needed?

    It looked like vigilantism regardless of the 'labels of legitimacy'.