The Angry Violent Right

[BigRedBuster]

3 minutes ago, Archy1221 said:

Said teenager was attacked by a convicted child molester (on video) and shooter said child molester was trying to take gun.

 

teenager was running away, TOWARDS the police to turn himself in, and was attacked by a felon trying to hit him in the head with the side of his skateboard.  Try stupid things, get a stupid prize.  Teenager then gets a gun pulled on him by a third convicted felon who is not allowed to carry the gun.  Teenager gets shot off and felon gunman gets one less bicep.  I don’t have a problem with someone defending his own life.  He just shouldn’t have put himself in that position to close to rioting felons. 
 

I would not advise my teenage son to go to a riot armed with a gun.  Bad things tend to happen. 

Thanks for proving the MAGA crowd would justify it.  

[Moiraine]

24 minutes ago, Archy1221 said:

Said teenager was attacked by a convicted child molester (on video) and shooter said child molester was trying to take gun.

 

teenager was running away, TOWARDS the police to turn himself in, and was attacked by a felon trying to hit him in the head with the side of his skateboard.  Try stupid things, get a stupid prize.  Teenager then gets a gun pulled on him by a third convicted felon who is not allowed to carry the gun.  Teenager gets shot off and felon gunman gets one less bicep.  I don’t have a problem with someone defending his own life.  He just shouldn’t have put himself in that position to close to rioting felons. 
 

I would not advise my teenage son to go to a riot armed with a gun.  Bad things tend to happen. 

 

 

What if a child molester or a felon with a skateboard had attacked Seung-Hui Cho as he was entering a classroom? Or Omar Mateen as he was entering a night club? It's funny how you do all these mental gymnastics, including irrelevant details about these people, when there are protestors against police violence involved but when there's been a mass shooting or attempted mass shooting I'm sure you praise anyone who tried to stop them as a hero. Yet here you are calling these people stupid. You have no idea what this kid would have done if people hadn't harassed him.

We can't have this both ways. We can't expect armed teachers in schools to stop mass shootings and praise them as heroes if they stop it or lessen the damage, then turn around and call unarmed people idiots when they try to stop people with guns, just because those people with guns are anti-liberal. We can't know these gun wavers weren't would-be mass shooters.

 

IMO self defense should be off the table if you bring a gun into a crowd and act threatening. People should be able to assume you are a potential mass shooter at that point and subdue you without legal repercussions, and you should lose the self defense argument if you shoot them.

[Archy1221]

1 hour ago, BigRedBuster said:

Thanks for proving the MAGA crowd would justify it.  

You are welcome.  And for the record, I also said he shouldn’t have been there in the first place.  

[Archy1221]

1 hour ago, Moiraine said:

 

 

What if a child molester or a felon with a skateboard had attacked Seung-Hui Cho as he was entering a classroom? Or Omar Mateen as he was entering a night club? It's funny how you do all these mental gymnastics, including irrelevant details about these people, when there are protestors against police violence involved but when there's been a mass shooting or attempted mass shooting I'm sure you praise anyone who tried to stop them as a hero. Yet here you are calling these people stupid. You have no idea what this kid would have done if people hadn't harassed him.

We can't have this both ways. We can't expect armed teachers in schools to stop mass shootings and praise them as heroes if they stop it or lessen the damage, then turn around and call unarmed people idiots when they try to stop people with guns, just because those people with guns are anti-liberal. We can't know these gun wavers weren't would-be mass shooters.

 

IMO self defense should be off the table if you bring a gun into a crowd and act threatening. People should be able to assume you are a potential mass shooter at that point and subdue you without legal repercussions, and you should lose the self defense argument if you shoot them.

Extremely stupid analogies.  Did Omar Mateen actively engage all his victims, or was he just carrying a weapon, walking around a nightclub  and only shot the people who first attacked him? Of course you know the answer so I won’t bother typing. 
Did the VT shooter actively engage all his victims or was he just defending himself in each instance against people actively attacking him first.  Of course you know that answer to.  Were those two terrible events anything at all like Kenosha. Of course not.  Compete nonsensical garbage to suggest otherwise. 
 

you are the one doing mental gymnastics trying to come up with a comparable example to worst humans on the planet and completely whiffed.   
 

The kid had done nothing wrong at all during the night until child molester #1 decided to chase him down, threaten to kill him, while trying to take his gun  (same clown btw who got in peoples faces earlier in the night telling everyone to “shoot me n word”). After shooting that idiot, the kid was actively running to the police to tell them what happened.  No one else needed to do anything.  He was literally going to the police.  

[deedsker]

48 minutes ago, Archy1221 said:

 

The kid had done nothing wrong at all during the night.

Wrong. He already shot someone before the events you described. “The mob” coming for him is tracking him down because he has already shot someone and they are trying to prevent him from getting away.

[Archy1221]

2 minutes ago, BlitzFirst said:

I will say this, whether or not there was a 'child molester' coming after him is absolutely NOT relevant because killing someone with a criminal record...regardless of what it is...is still murder.  So you should probably drop that argument because it isn't relevant.  Also, continuing to discuss what crimes that the people who died are guilty of does nothing for or against Kyle Rittenhouse or his intentions/case...but it makes you sound like a person trying to justify the forcible taking of a human life.  That's pretty low in my opinion.

I was stating facts about the people in question of the night in question.  Never once did I say those scums should be killed for protesting or killed for their prior transgressions against children. 
 

I’m no lawyer, but I am of the belief that killing someone in self defense is not murder.
 

and for the third time now so the people in the back of room can hear, a HS kid should not have been at a riot with a gun.  Leave it to the owners of the property and the police.  

[Archy1221]

7 minutes ago, BlitzFirst said:

 

 

Stating facts that are irrelevant for what reason?  What does it have to do with anything?  Why state those facts at all when they have no bearing to the argument?

 

I also believe that killing someone in self defense is not murder.

We are actually pretty close to agreement all around on this issue so not sure why you are arguing with me

[teachercd]

18 hours ago, Moiraine said:

 

 

What if a child molester or a felon with a skateboard had attacked Seung-Hui Cho as he was entering a classroom? Or Omar Mateen as he was entering a night club? It's funny how you do all these mental gymnastics, including irrelevant details about these people, when there are protestors against police violence involved but when there's been a mass shooting or attempted mass shooting I'm sure you praise anyone who tried to stop them as a hero. Yet here you are calling these people stupid. You have no idea what this kid would have done if people hadn't harassed him.

We can't have this both ways. We can't expect armed teachers in schools to stop mass shootings and praise them as heroes if they stop it or lessen the damage, then turn around and call unarmed people idiots when they try to stop people with guns, just because those people with guns are anti-liberal. We can't know these gun wavers weren't would-be mass shooters.

 

IMO self defense should be off the table if you bring a gun into a crowd and act threatening. People should be able to assume you are a potential mass shooter at that point and subdue you without legal repercussions, and you should lose the self defense argument if you shoot them.

As an anti-gun person, I am totally for this.

 

I would go as far as to say that if you carry in public that the police should be called on you immediately.  If everything checks out, great.  Go back to playing wild wild west.  If one thing is out of order, anything at all, you lose your gun.  I mean anything.    Taillight out, expired plates, anything. 

[HuskermanMike]

5 hours ago, BlitzFirst said:

 

When someone is gunned down, it's poor form to insist that any crimes they committed previously that did not contribute to the death are relevant.

 

You are stating non relevant facts in order to illicit a reaction.  That's trolling and it's against the board rules.

 

Placing labels upon victims of violent crime is really poor form and if you continue to do it, makes me think you are trying to troll people versus having civil discussion.  I want to believe you're here for civil discussion.  Help me out.

 

If you want to continue to debate here and not make it on everyone's ignore list and become invisible, I'd recommend some candor and tact. 

 

But yes, we are in agreement on the overall argument.

He is not trolling. What reactions is he getting out of people? I just believe you do not like what he says and that is totally fine. Calling it trolling is not right and is taking this a little too far. From my view, the discussion is civil and has some nice back and forth. 

 

 

[teachercd]

48 minutes ago, HuskermanMike said:

He is not trolling. What reactions is he getting out of people? I just believe you do not like what he says and that is totally fine. Calling it trolling is not right and is taking this a little too far. From my view, the discussion is civil and has some nice back and forth. 

 

 

What a troll post!

 

 

 

I kid I Kid.

[Moiraine]

An example of racism is going to lengths to make yourself believe a teenage white kid is innocent after killing someone and a teenage Black kid is guilty after getting killed by someone.

[teachercd]

1 hour ago, Moiraine said:

An example of racism is going to lengths to make yourself believe a teenage white kid is innocent after killing someone and a teenage Black kid is guilty after getting killed by someone.

If you kill someone, you should be killed.  

 

Self defense, sure...that is great.  But if you are out looking to get into a firefight, you should be killed.  

 

 

[Moiraine]

On 11/25/2020 at 11:55 PM, Archy1221 said:

Extremely stupid analogies.  Did Omar Mateen actively engage all his victims, or was he just carrying a weapon, walking around a nightclub  and only shot the people who first attacked him? Of course you know the answer so I won’t bother typing. 
Did the VT shooter actively engage all his victims or was he just defending himself in each instance against people actively attacking him first.  Of course you know that answer to.  Were those two terrible events anything at all like Kenosha. Of course not.  Compete nonsensical garbage to suggest otherwise. 
 

you are the one doing mental gymnastics trying to come up with a comparable example to worst humans on the planet and completely whiffed.   
 

The kid had done nothing wrong at all during the night until child molester #1 decided to chase him down, threaten to kill him, while trying to take his gun  (same clown btw who got in peoples faces earlier in the night telling everyone to “shoot me n word”). After shooting that idiot, the kid was actively running to the police to tell them what happened.  No one else needed to do anything.  He was literally going to the police.  

 

 

 

It isn't much relevant what he did throughout the day. You are coming at it from the perspective of someone who already knows what happened. People put in a situation where someone is running around wielding a rifle in a crowd aren't aware of what he did in the preceding hours or what his intentions are. They're aware someone is waving a gun around in that moment. What they are also aware of is there have been a lot of mass shootings in the news lately, and it shouldn't be a surprise if their reaction is to assume the person is a potential mass shooter. Again, you can't have it both ways without being a hypocrite, where depending on the person's politics you say they're stupid for engaging someone with a gun, and then turn around and call someone a hero if they engage someone with a gun. And, imo, the person waving the gun around, who decided to bring it into an area with a crowd, shouldn't be able to make the same claim of self defense as someone defending themselves in their own home from an intruder.

Because of the increase in mass shootings it should not be legal to open carry anywhere, and if you do so and then shoot someone there should be heavy repercussions. That has no impact on this case, obviously, but it's stupid that morons like Rittenhouse can wave a rifle around in the middle of a protest and then claim self defense if it agitates someone into action, in this environment of an increase of madmen with guns.

[teachercd]

You should never be able to have a gun in public in plain sight.  

 

I would even go as far as to say that you should not be allowed to purchase a gun and ammo at the same time/location.  

[Archy1221]

20 hours ago, BlitzFirst said:

 

When someone is gunned down, it's poor form to insist that any crimes they committed previously that did not contribute to the death are relevant.

 

You are stating non relevant facts in order to illicit a reaction.  That's trolling and it's against the board rules.

 

Placing labels upon victims of violent crime is really poor form and if you continue to do it, makes me think you are trying to troll people versus having civil discussion.  I want to believe you're here for civil discussion.  Help me out.

 

If you want to continue to debate here and not make it on everyone's ignore list and become invisible, I'd recommend some candor and tact. 

 

But yes, we are in agreement on the overall argument.

Oh please spare me.   I have never once heard you call out anyone on this board when they respond to me in trolling or attacking manner.  
 

calling me Mr. Bunker, insinuating I am a racist, and I hear nothing from you.

 

And maybe it is relevant that those people had a criminal records because it shows they could be predisposed to violence.  I didn’t see any people with non-violent records attack the shooter. Maybe having a violent record does matter