[ home ] [ pony / townhall / rp / canterlot / rules ] [ arch ]

/townhall/ - Townhall

A place for civilized animals
Name
Email
Subject
Comment
File
Flags  
Embed
Password (For file deletion.)

[Return][Go to bottom]

 No.10216[Last 50 Posts]

File: 1637358538861.jpg (128.23 KB, 1535x1023, 1535:1023, ritten-verdict-49.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google

I feel that this is a victory for the presumption of innocence and self-defense rights!  Do you agree?  [Edited in response to >>10217]

Edited to add (in response to >>10217): In this thread, please feel free to discuss:
(1) The Rittenhouse trial
(2) The presumption of innocence -- is it better than 100 guilty people walk free than 1 innocent be sentenced to death or life in prison?
(3) The right of self-defense, including what counts as provocation.
(4) Bicubic and bilinear scaling of images used as evidence in criminal trials.
(5) Any other related topics.

 No.10217

I don't want to stomp all over your mirth, but as a reminder, this is the discussion board, and threads need to include some kind of discussion prompt.  If you could edit this to be more of a discussion and include such a prompt that would be great.

 No.10218

>>10217
>>10217

Why is this thread even allowed? it's almost guaranteed to cause a fight?

 No.10219

File: 1637370880594.jpg (75.27 KB, 620x600, 31:30, medium.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google

>>10216
It was/is sorta a political case, in that people will tend to have a view that aligns with others on the left or right of the political spectrum.

Have these people really looked into the details of the case?  Probably not.  We obviously don't want people to be judged guilty or innocent in the court of memes.

And I've seen more memes than facts, so I'm not going to say much, except that  state-faith people now will believe Kyle Rittenhouse was a good guy with a gun.

 No.10220

As expected.

There's a lot of talk about this verdict leading to different events in terms of protests or possibly changes in behavior when it comes to demonstrators, but I don't believe that that at all will be the case.

Not that this verdict is meaningless. However, I expect that everything will go on in the U.S. socially and politically as usual.

 No.10223

File: 1637373609198.png (2.18 MB, 1086x1500, 181:250, 0d1d14b51bbd28a80df0c49655….png) ImgOps Google

>>10219
>Have these people really looked into the details of the case?
I have.  I watched a good amount of the trial itself. (PRO-TIP: It's very watchable at 2x speed and even 3x sometimes.)  And I've watched the video evidence.  From my perspective, the evidence doesn't come close to establishing beyond a reasonable doubt that Kyle violated the law.

 No.10224

>>10223
I should have made clear that I don't think everyone is uninformed, just many resharing Facebook posts.  Where would you say is the disconnect that makes this political?  That is, if...the events lead to a clear verdict of innocence, why the range of opinions?

 No.10225

File: 1637375674907.jpg (113.54 KB, 2048x1222, 1024:611, a025bde9d873ef4f9b3638ebba….jpg) ImgOps Exif Google

>>10224
>Where would you say is the disconnect that makes this political?  That is, if...the events lead to a clear verdict of innocence, why the range of opinions?
First, as you've noted, is ignorance of the facts, as well as ignorance of the law.  There's also the issue that Kyle is clearly a member of the red tribe, defending himself against members of the blue tribe, so people have prejudices based on which tribe they identify with.

 No.10226

As a personal reaction, I'm not at all surprised, but I'm still disappointed.

I'll say that this definitely makes me feel like I should get armed myself and should practice some kind of concealed carry.

America is a country in which the red tribe genuinely believes that political violence against all other tribes is not just inevitable but a good thing, and as someone who's not a member of the red tribe I really don't have much choice if the next Rittenhouse wants to take me out other than for me to prevent them using my own deadly force.

At any rate, the verdict certainly makes the work of self-defense organizations such as Antifa even more important and deserving of more public support. I'd think about giving money if I could. Huh.

 No.10228

A good ending to matters.
It’s always a problem when politics runs rampant, stamping all over justice.

>>10219
It’s not just state-faith people. I certainly have none myself, after all.

Especially given none of this ought to have happened in the first place, seeing as we had exceptionally clear evidence from the start.

 No.10229

>>10226
My advice if you’re worried about the next Rittenhouse is don’t chase someone down and attack them.

I think that would work better than carrying your own gun, and is far less likely to land you in jail for murder, should you end up shooting the guy you’re chasing down to attack.

 No.10230

On the whole, though, a regular minority person going to a synagogue or black church or LGBT community center or whatever else had to worry about being attacked or murdered by radical conservatives before the verdict, and would still have to worry afterward regardless of what happened.

This is a country full of Rittenhouses. What happens to any one of them doesn't change the wholesale problem. The only solution seems to be widespread self-defense. Make the next Rittenhouse afraid when he's approaching the next parish door.

Granted, a lot of radical conservatives are more than willing to martyr themselves for the nationalist cause, and so suffering would still be inevitable. Yet many of them would be deterred. And the next Rittenhouse might even be killed before he managed to find another victim past the first.

 No.10233

>>10230
What on earth do you think Rittenhouse did?

Have you seen any of the information on this case at all?
He didn’t go to any door of any kind. He was running away from his attackers in every instance.

Who told you such an absurd narrative? Whoever they are, they’re extremely irresponsible, given your rhetoric that seems to come as a result is so heavily full of tribalistic bloodshed and saber rattling.

 No.10235

>>10233
What's wrong with minority communities arming themselves in defense of the next Rittenhouse?

 No.10236

>>10235

Arming yourself is almost always a good idea, but there isn't necessarily reason to expect "a next Rittenhouse".  This was a pretty specific event that's never particularly safe and people would be better off avoiding.  And even if you're certain you need to attend a riot for one reason or another, this was a case of a white person killing other white people.  Minorities weren't harmed in this case.

 No.10237

>>10235
Nobody, minority or otherwise, should feel the need to “defend themselves” from Kyle, given Kyle acted purely in self defense.

By all means, everyone ought have a gun on hand, and I’d say it’d be swell if everyone carried, but I fail to see why you’d need to defend yourself from someone you chased down to attack.
And that is what is clearly shown in the video evidence of Kyle’s shooting.

Besides, he didn’t even shoot a minority.
This fearmongering is nonsensical, and contrary to the facts present of the case.

 No.10238

Yeah, the commentary on this case, including in this very thread, is a clear way of showing why more Americans need to be armed.

We're not one single America anymore. We're two Americas. Predators such as Rittenhouse and prey such as the men he devoured. The prey need to do what they can to protect themselves from the predators.

It's not nice to think about about. But when the next right-winger comes for you? Be ready.

 No.10239

>>10238
You are the third who has said this and I cannot for he life of me understand.

Did you not see the videos? Pay attention during the trial?

Has your side become so politically polarized as to see any actions, regardless of evidence, context, and reason, as evil purely due to the sides of camps one falls on?

You gives bleak look for the future. I had hope for a logical era of humanity as a result of he rise in video for events.
Maybe that was naive of me. Maybe even in the face of overwhelming evidence, zealots will believe as they wish, purely for the colors one wears.
Depressing notion. I don’t know that I’d want to participate in such a hopeless world.

 No.10240

>>10239
>You gives bleak look for the future. I had hope for a logical era of humanity as a result of he rise in video for events.
As a more positive data point: The 12 jurors in this case (probably a mix of Democrat-leaning and Republican-leaning) eventually all agreed on a NOT GUILTY verdict for Kyle.

 No.10241

>>10239
Basically every word that you said I'd like to send right back to you as a member of the right-wing side.

I can't see how you guys look at the world and come to conclusions that appear to me to have no relationship to context, ethics, evidence, facts, logic, reason, or whatever.

In particular: think about Ahmaud Aubery, Jacob Blake, George Floyd, Breonna Taylor, and quite a lot more.

You guys look at the situation of victim upon victim over the past few years with smiles as wide as the Grand Canyon and see absolutely nothing wrong.

In the case of even direct video evidence, you guys look at what people like me see as cold-blooded executions or attempts at executions and have absolutely no objections.

Given all this, can you really be surprised that those who aren't right-wing will disagree with the right-wing on this Rittenhouse case as well? We're divided. We just are.

And when it comes to the general right-wing considering the alt-right and its gangs of Klansman, neo-Nazis, et al to all be part of the "Republican big tent" in good standing such that alt-right actions can't be criticized or else that means giving up "owning the libs"... is it any wonder that it seems that the right-wing and everybody else can't co-exist with it comes to having the same ethics and logic?

 No.10242

>>10241
Kyle did not shoot Ahmad Aubery. Kyle did not shoot Jacob Blake. Kyle did not shoot Breonna Taylor. Kyle did not shoot George Floyd.

You would hang a man for the crimes of others, and expect me to accept this?
Hell no.
Hanging someone for the crimes of others is what tyrants and dictators do. It’s what unjust monsters do, desperate to shove a scapegoat into frame.

If you’d do the same, then when you claim to want justice for Floyd, Blake, Aubrey, and Taylor, what you are is a liar.
Justice is not what you’re after. You’re after blood, and you don’t care from what innocent it is spilled.

 No.10243


 No.10244

>>10241
>cold-blooded executions
Seriously, did you even watch the videos of the incident?  Kyle was retreating from Joseph Rosenbaum and didn't fire until Rosenbaum caught up with him and was grabbing at his rifle.  That is far from a 'cold-blooded execution'.

>>10241
>attempts at executions
If Kyle had been attempting to execute Grosskreutz, then he wouldn't have stopped shooting after he disarmed Grosskreutz.

>>10241
>In particular: think about Ahmaud Aubery, Jacob Blake, George Floyd, Breonna Taylor, and quite a lot more.
>
>You guys look at the situation of victim upon victim over the past few years with smiles as wide as the Grand Canyon and see absolutely nothing wrong.
What on earth makes you think that about me?  Maybe you should actually ask us about we think instead of being so prejudiced against us.  Personally I see all the deaths you mentioned as tragedies.

 No.10245

>>10244
I see all of the deaths as part of a horrifically evil system working as its designed: one in which the right-wing specifically, and whites in general, live in a supreme status over other races and viewpoints.

And any time somebody calls for racial equality and police reform, they're shouted down by the right-wing, to the point where nothing's been done over the past few years despite herculean efforts in Congress.

White skin and conservative viewpoints shouldn't allow somebody to get away with murder.

Black Lives Matter.

 No.10246

File: 1637389584951.jpg (24.55 KB, 246x359, 246:359, 1636995527605.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google

>>10245
>White skin and conservative viewpoints shouldn't allow somebody to get away with murder.
Kyle didn't murder anyone; his killings were lawful self-defense.  If you complain that Kyle was treated more favorably due to his race, then the problem is not that Kyle was treated too leniently, but rather that similarly situated blacks are treated too harshly.

 No.10247

>>10246
>Kyle didn't murder anyone; his killings were lawful self-defense.
Disagree.

>If you complain that Kyle was treated more favorably due to his race, then the problem is not that Kyle was treated too leniently, but rather that similarly situated blacks are treated too harshly.
It's both, at the same time. Whites are treated overly leniently in America for both horrible and minor crimes while blacks are treated overly harshly for both horrible and minor crimes. All of the above.

And America has, by and large, the right-wing to thank for basically every single effort to reform law enforcement and criminal justice systems dying. Whether it's prohibiting asset seizures under flimsy pretexts or lifting qualified immunity, the right wing "No!" is so loud that you can probably hear it in outer space. All in the name, it seems, of the nationalism that apparently fuels conservativism in the age of Trump: all as a matter of identity politics for the right-wing.

If this was a normal country under the normal rule of law without horrific maltreatment, then Rittenhouse would be in jail with Blake, Floyd, Taylor, and others being alive and well with their families.

 No.10248

>>10247
>>10247
Well, at the very least, the prosecution failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that it wasn't self-defense.

 No.10249

>>10248
Yep, just like case after case going back to Emmett Till.

 No.10250

>>10243
>Rittenhouse verdict was message to white youth: If you believe Black lives matter, your life means nothing
>it's not okay for the judicial system to be blatantly and obviously stacked against people of color
>What we are witnessing is a system functioning as designed and protecting those it was designed for.

Jesus. Well, it's basically what I was getting at, unfortunately.  
I'm going to be blunt, here: What you're linking, while saying "black lives matter", is a bunch of absolute deranged sociopaths monsters who'd ignore the facts of reality in order to condemn a kid and encourage a miscarriage of justice purely because it does not align with their partisan tribal politics.

If this is what "black lives matter" means to you, then unfortunately, I have to oppose that movement, for the same exact reasons I would oppose Naziism.
We do not need racial extremists ruling on their political lines, rather than truth, justice, or basic fundamental liberties.

I'm sad that you'd align yourself with such disgusting people.

 No.10251

>>10245
>I see all of the deaths as part of a horrifically evil system working as its designed:
By protecting the fundamental right to self defense?

If that's "evil", then call me Satan, because 'good' is a horrible state of affairs.

>White skin and conservative viewpoints shouldn't allow somebody to get away with murder.
It wasn't murder. It was self defense.

You have a right to self defense.

 No.10252

>>10250
>>10251
I don't expect the cause of racial equality and creating a small, limited government under the objective rule of law with civil rights to be that popular of a cause, least of all with the right-wing that opposes all of that expanding in strength daily.

At the end of the day, though, I'd rather go down believing in love over hate.

White skin and conservative viewpoints shouldn't allow somebody to get away with murder.

Black Lives Matter.

 No.10253

>>10247
>Disagree.
Well, fortunately, the law sides against you in this matter.
People have a fundamental right to self defense.
It's wrong to stand against that right.
If people are chasing you down to attack you, putting your life at risk, swinging blunt objects at your head or aiming a gun at your head, you damn well ought be able to defend yourself.
If you can't, there's no justice in our system.

>If this was a normal country under the normal rule of law without horrific maltreatment, then Rittenhouse would be in jail with Blake, Floyd, Taylor, and others being alive and well with their families.
If you had your way, Rittenhouse wouldn't've been able to defend himself in the first place.
His head would've been smashed into the curb, and you would've clapped, saying that as a member of the wrong tribe, justice was served.

Sorry if I don't particularly like brownshirt rhetoric. Self defense is a universal right.

 No.10254

>>10253
If I had my way, then Rittenhouse and people like him wouldn't be able to enact their domestic terrorism in the first place, ideally. He'd not be able to have a gun due to failing to be a normal law-abiding adult citizen in the first place. I'd say.

If he did decide to go out hunting for innocents to kill, then I'd have preferred that the first innocent Rittenhouse attacked had succeeded in stopping him in his quest before he managed to keep on murdering more victims.

Same with Dylann Roof and other Rittenhouses in the past.

 No.10255

>>10252
It wasn't murder, and that you think it was betrays your own biases.
We have the video to prove it was not murder.

I wonder what you'd do in Kyle's positions.
Would you keep to your beliefs, you claim here, and let yourself have your brain splattered against the asphalt?
Or would it be a case of 'rules for thee but not for me'? Would it suddenly be okay for you to defend yourself, because you belong to the right tribe, with the right skin color?

My money's on the latter.

 No.10256

>>10255
If I was Kyle:

1. I wouldn't believe that other groups are inferior to my own group just because they were born different in the first place.

2. I wouldn't believe that political violence is acceptable to take out other people just because they're so different from me.

3. I wouldn't go out actively looking for trouble, heading into a riot zone actively hunting for opponents to kill as a part of my view that "politics is war".

4. When I finally came upon an opponent that was hostile to me, I wouldn't goad them into a physical conformation and then execute them.

5. I wouldn't keep on murdering additional opponents while enjoying a kind of thrill for doing something so illicit.

 No.10257

>>10254
>If I had my way, then Rittenhouse and people like him wouldn't be able to enact their domestic terrorism in the first place, ideally.
It's "domestic terrorism" to defend a place, yet not "domestic terrorism" to destroy a place.
Interesting, that.


BLM's destroy millions of people's livelihoods, have been responsible for the deaths of far more than Kyle, all in the name of their political ideology. All to achieve their political ends.
Yet they aren't terrorists.
If you stand against them, defend people's livelihoods, decide that violent mobs of cultists shouldn't destroy innocent people's property with impunity in the name of a rapist like Jacob Blake, apparently somehow that makes you the terrorist.

>If he did decide to go out hunting for innocents to kill,
By objective fact, he did not.
This is proven because he fled from those who ATTACKED HIM.

You presume otherwise because, frankly, you're a racist.
You see his skin color, and his politics, and that's enough for you.
It's disgusting.

 No.10258

I can't really add anything that much that wasn't already talked about by the Martin Luther King Jr. family, though:

https://twitter.com/BerniceKing/status/1461842485320290306

We shall overcome.

Black lives matter.

 No.10259

>>10256
>1. I wouldn't believe that other groups are inferior to my own group just because they were born different in the first place.
Kyle doesn't believe this. The people he shot were white.

You seem to be the only person who looks on this with a racial lens.
The only person who's given any evidence for bigotry in their judgements, is you.

>2. I wouldn't believe that political violence is acceptable to take out other people just because they're so different from me.
Kyle didn't do this. Every single person ATTACKED Kyle. We have video evidence to demonstrate that this is OBJECTIVELY the case, as much as you want to change history.

This isn't some fascistic state, and you aren't Hitler. You don't get to decide what does and does not happen, regardless of evidence.
Thank god, we live in a place that still values the truth. Which is why Rittenhouse got off on all charges.

>3. I wouldn't go out actively looking for trouble, heading into a riot zone actively hunting for opponents to kill as a part of my view as "politics is war".
Kyle didn't do that either.
Kyle went to defend his community.
He had family there. He worked there. He visited there regularly.

The man illegally carring a handgun who aimed it at Kyle's head before getting his arm shot drove further to attend the riot than Kyle did.

>4. When I finally came upon an opponent that was hostile to me, I wouldn't goad them down and then execute them.
Kyle never did this.
Rosenbaum, however, did.
He, in fact, said explicitly "Shoot me n****r", threatened to kill people, actively attempted to start fights.
It seems in all likelihood he was an angry and suicidal pedophile, out to vent his frustrations and didn't care what happened to him.

>5. I wouldn't keep on murdering.
Shooting people who attack you isn't murder.
If you get a blunt object swung at your head, you can shoot them.
If someone points a gun at your head, you can shoot them.

 No.10260

>>10258
Disgusting that such awful people would drag MLK's name through the mud like that.
What reprehensible vampires.

MLK'd never condemn a kid to the lynch mob just because of his race.
He stood actively against that.
That you and these monsters would dance on his grave, using his name to attempt to prop up your racist ideology, is the most disrespectful thing I've ever seen.

 No.10261

>>10260
... are you seriously not mentally understanding that the statement literally came from Martin Luther King Jr.'s own family?

Just scroll.

 No.10262

>>10261
Yes, and what they're doing is horrible.
They should be ashamed of themselves.
King would've never wanted this kind of racial separation. He sure as hell wouldn't stand against self defense, purely because a kid happened to be white.
Seems they're a bunch of vampires perfectly happy to exploit MLK's name for their own ends. Reprehensible.

 No.10263

>>10262
At some point it ought to at least slightly sink in that the view of the Rittenhouse case shared by you and other of the political right-wing isn't what people who aren't right-wing believe.

Which isn't a surprise, as has been said, since you guys looked at incidents such as George Floyd's murder and come to opinions that we view as wholly separate from reality.

We're two different nations: the right-wing and everybody else.

 No.10264

>>10263
I pray that's not the case.
That people can see literal video evidence, and not care about someone's political allegiance or race.

People like you make me wonder if that's the case.
It seems you'd rather have mob justice dictated on race and tribe, rather than truth.
Personally I don't want to live in the new Nazi state you wish to create.

 No.10265

>>10264
Every word that you said applies to your own tribe, at least through my eyes as somebody who's not right-wing.

I can't understand how you guys want mob justice based on race and other forms of identity politics rather than the truth. I can't understand why Kyle Rittenhouse being politically of the right and having white skin makes him wear such an incredible halo in your eyes. But it does.

In comparison terms, I can't understand how you guys can look at George Floyd and think ("Yeah, screw him, he deserved to die") while with Kyle Rittenhouse you're at ("Oh, that poor defenseless baby having to kill to save his own life").

The evidence screams to me otherwise.

But I'm not right-wing. Our reality outside of the right-wing bubble is just different. Alas.

 No.10266

>>10265
We have the video.
Kyle was attacked in every instance.
You don't give a shit, because he's white.

Fortunately, the country is not run by racist pieces of shit like yourself.
Kyle was let free, because at the end of the day, the evidence demonstrated he was innocent. The video showed Rosenbaum attacked him first. The video showed they chased him down, knocked him over, swung a skateboard at his head, aimed a gun at him, before he shot.

This is the facts of the case. Hell, we knew this at the time.
And yet you still don't give a damn.

https://twitter.com/trbrtc/status/1298842098163216384

 No.10267

>>10266
At the end of the day, if his white skin and conservative politics are going to give him a halo in your eyes and the eyes of other right-wingers, there's nothing that can be done by people like me who believe in equality and civil rights to take away that halo.

You guys' identity politics are a wall that can't be overcome.

We live in two Americas.

Fortunately, more and more prey like myself are getting armed to defend against predators of the likes of Rittenhouse who want to see us dead.

We won't go quietly into the night. We will act in self-defense. Count on it.

 No.10268

File: 1637392949800.jpg (42.6 KB, 637x327, 637:327, Capture.JPG) ImgOps Exif Google

>>10267
What gives him a "halo" is the objective reality demonstrated by video evidence.
He was attacked, every single time.
If at the end of the day, his white skin and conservative politics give him a horn and a forked tail to you and those like you, there's nothing that can be done by people like me who believe in equality under the law and basic human rights to change that racial view of politics.

Your identity politics makes it so you cannot even accept video proof.
You refuse to believe your lying eyes, and instead rely on his politics and his race.

As you say, we live in two Americas. One predicated on truth and justice.
The other cult-like adherence to racial and political affiliation.
Thankfully, not everyone buys into your rhetoric. There are plenty of folk of all creeds and walks of life, all races and religions, that stand against you and your repeat of history's mistakes.

Turns out being able to accept video evidence and absolute proof isn't relegated to any one race, contrary to your belief.

 No.10269

>>10268
At the end of the day, though, I think that me and people like me who believe in truth, justice, equality, civil rights, and everything else will win out in the end against people like you in the right-wing bubble world.

Kyle isn't a saint just because of his white skin and political beliefs. People like me who believe in equality and human rights don't care about the identity politics of your side. We want fairness. Eventually, we will get fairness.

In the long run. The right-wing can't kill all of us. Even if they try and keep trying.

We shall overcome.

Black lives matter.

 No.10270

File: 1637393464165.jpg (51.31 KB, 680x646, 20:19, EjE-YXwWkAMDvs7.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google

>>10269
Doubt it. The jury's reached their verdict, based on the evidence, and ruled in Kyle's favor.
Not guilty on all accounts, just like the video showed.

Kyle isn't a saint just because of his white skin and political beliefs.
He's simply not guilty of murder because of the objective reality of the evidence, which is readily available for anyone to see.

If 'fairness' to you is imprisoning people because they happen to be the wrong race and of the wrong tribe, I pray you never get your 'fairness'.
Seems less 'fair' to me, more fascism and group-guilt.

Fortunately, there's a lot more of us regular folk who value truth, justice, and human rights, than there are of you racial collectivist nutjobs who'd rather we all be hung if we dare vote wrong.

 No.10271

The way I understand the controversy:
1. Kyle seemed to have placed himself in a position of danger while carrying a gun. So it may have been correctly decided that it was sef defence at the moment, nobody should drive towards a protest to interfere while carrying a gun.
Let's hope this won't set a precedent for vigilantes showing up at a protest to start shooting and claiming self defense later.

2. In the racial tensions, black people are getting shot for appearing "too threatening", even if they're unarmed and people will all defend them getting shot. Kyle Ritterhouse, as a white person, actually shot a few people and got off scott-free. Plus, I understood there was another case recently where a black person shot some white people as self defense and it was not decided in his favour. But that's at least what I understood from it.

Kind of wondering if there will be a new wave of heavy protests over this. (and if there will be more shootings like this)

 No.10272

>>10270
I really can't say anything better than the Martin Luther King Jr. family:

https://twitter.com/BerniceKing/status/1461842485320290306

At the end of the day, you right-wing sociopaths and your dream of endless white supremacy will wither away. It's inevitable. Truth will win. Love will win. Nonviolence will win. Facts will win. Justice will win. Kindness will win. Human rights will win.

You right-wingers might keep trying to exterminate us. To silence us. To deprive us of our basic humanity. To make sure that we can't have civil rights. You want America to be a fascist dictatorship in which anybody who doesn't support right-wing ideology gets the boot, eventually. But you'll fail.

We're here. We're proud. We're human. We're living.

There's more of us, normal people who aren't of the right-wing, then there are of you. That's just a fact. And younger generations are even more and more racially mixed, more religiously mixed, and more: causing you guys serious heart-burn and worse. It'll get worse for you.

We shall overcome.

Black lives matter.(USER WAS BANNED FOR THIS POST)

 No.10273

File: 1637393844419.webm (2.94 MB, 1598737546046.webm) ImgOps Google

>>10271
He had family there, worked there, and regularily visited. It was his community.
Doesn't seem too strange to want to protect your community. Even if it's not safe to you, personally, that's not much a good reason not to do it.
I certainly'd be hard pressed if I knew people's livelihoods were being destroyed in my local area not to want to go and help as best I could.
It's not like he provoked the fights, or even stayed put when they happened. He was fleeing from his attackers every single time he shot.

> actually shot a few black people and got off scott-free.
Literally not true.
If someone's told you that, they're a liar.
None of the people Kyle shot were white. He shot a white child rapist, a wife beater, and a thief, but no white folk among them.
White people are just as capable of attacking other white people as any other race.

 No.10274

File: 1637393951601.jpg (182.17 KB, 1125x1440, 25:32, 1598734287619.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google

>>10272
I wonder if Bernice King said anything to the families of the kids Rosenbaum anally raped.
Probably wistful thinking, right?

I don't want white supremacy.
I want equal treatment under the law. Racism is wrong, in all its forms.
As to truth, I agree, truth will win. As it has in Kyle's case. Facts will win, as it has in Kyle's case. Justice will win, as it has in Kyle's case. Human rights will win, as it has in Kyle's case.

Keep chanting your cult-like mantra.
Totally doesn't make you look more and more like a sociopathic fascist.

 No.10275

>>10274
Do you on the right-wing seriously ever think twice about how you repeatedly call Jews, black people, disabled people, transgender people, and the like "fascists" and "Nazis"?

And how being a liberal and a Democrat is always the same as being "fascists" and "Nazis"?

Serious question: do you guys have even the slightest understanding of what those terms mean? Of what the historical tyrants believed in? Of what groups they targeted?

You guys really think that you're the anti-Nazis in America right now and all of those depressed, working-class, regular Joes who happen to be born black, gay, Jewish, et cetera are the evil monsters under your bed?

You guys really think that Klansmen and other people of the alt-right are actually the anti-Nazis? And that their victims are the real Nazis? Really?

Do you ever wonder how weird your reversals make you sound to normal people?

Martin Luther King Jr.'s surviving family is a Nazi cult, then, I guess. Got it. *rolls eyes*

 No.10276

File: 1637394485843.jpg (48.22 KB, 720x720, 1:1, 1598580980613.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google

>>10275
I'm not invested in what particular race, religion, physical ability, or sexual orientation someone is.
That seems to be something you're obsessed with. Part of why I call you a nazi. After all, one of the big selling points to them was their identitarian collectivism.

I'm fine regarding my fellow humans as simply that: Fellow humans.
You're the one who wants separate treatments based on race.

>Seriously question: do you guys have even the slightest understanding of what those terms mean? Of what the historical tyrants believed in? Of what groups they targeted?
Yes, actually.
Particularily, Zeev Sternhell's work on the subject, studying the roots of fascism, and how it developed from its marxist origins.

>You guys really think that you're the anti-Nazis in America right now and all of those depressed, working-class, regular Joes who happen to be born black, gay, Jewish, et cetera are the evil monsters under your bed?
Not at all.
Again; You're the one invested in race, orientation, religion, and gender.

I've known many people from many walks of life. Some agree with me, some don't, but they still understand video evidence, and they still treat their fellow human with respect and dignity that they deserve, not some racialized justice you desire.
They've been many things, whether white, black, asian, native american, hispanic, gay, bi, jewish, trans, it really doesn't matter.
None of those things determine your politics.
Your race doesn't dictate who you are as a person. Only a racist thinks it does.

 No.10277

>>10276
So you really are so ideologically blind that you completely flip things?

Wanting equality makes you a Nazi. Supporting the Martin Luther King Jr. family makes you a Nazi. Not being of the political right-wing makes you a Nazi. Being a victim of bigotry and discrimination wanting it to end makes you a Nazi. Supporting rule of law makes you a Nazi. And so on.

To be honest, your removal from reality makes me very, very glad that I probably live far away from you since you appear to be so detached that you sincerely sound dangerous to me. Like were the two of us in a minor fender-bender car accident you'd be very, very likely to want to assault me as a result. Or such.

It's also genuinely depressing that you're likely well-armed, since you're pathologically blinded such that you can't tell the difference between people who aren't like you and a dangerous monster.

I shouldn't be surprised, though.

 No.10278

File: 1637395234534.jpg (93.66 KB, 750x692, 375:346, Egb0ZR7U4AgBIcF.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google

>>10277
I don't think someone who refuses to accept video evidence of a justified shooting has place to call anyone ideologically blind.

>Wanting equality makes you a Nazi.
Depends on what you mean by equality.
Equality of outcome, against some oppressor class, by any means necessary? Yeah, pretty much. You create a devil, and justify your actions against them accordingly. Textbook Naziism.

"Equality" isn't my goal in and of itself.
Justice is.
Equality happens to be the means to justice, as you must have a level standard for all, fairly applied, for a just society.
But that's only under the law.

Inequality is the natural side effect of a free society. Humans are not cut of the same cloth. A great poet, engineer, artisan, philosopher, whatever you desire, can come from anywhere.
But not everyone is such. That's the nature of things. We all have different interests, different wills, different confidences, different desires.

I myself am poorer than my brother. Is that because my brother was privileged where I am not?
Of course not.
It's merely that he values money more, invests it accordingly, works harder than I do, because I do not care that much for wealth.

>Supporting the Martin Luther King Jr. family makes you a Nazi
Nah, doesn't have anything to do with it.
I'm just disgusted that they ended up being vampiric hacks, preying off MLK's name to push for an agenda he would've never believed in.

That doesn't make you a Nazi. Racial collectivism and an abandonment of rights does.

> Not being of the political right-wing makes you a Nazi.
Right and left are largely nebulous.
Today's right wing, was yesteryear's liberal, fighting now for the rights enshrined in our constitution that are by large accepted.
Suppose it's just old enough to become a 'conservative' value. Or perhaps the labels are meaningless to begin with, just used for political convenience.

> Being a victim of bigotry and discrimination wanting it to end makes you a Nazi.
Depends.
Do you want it to end, through racial collectivism and authoritarianism?
Then yeah.
I'm sure many Germans blamed the Jews for some slight.
I'm sure many of them had some ancedote to justify their hatred.
Doesn't make it right. It's wrong to collectivize justice. To harm innocent people because of the actions of others, as you wish to do.

>Supporting rule of law makes you a Nazi.
Rule of law?
You're really going to claim that?
BLM's running rampant through the street, looting and burning and assaulting as they go, and you're claiming rule of law?

Suppose you're more disconnected from reality than I thought.

>To be honest, your removal from reality makes me very, very glad that I probably live far away from you since you appear to be so detached that you sincerely sound dangerous to me.
Well, I suppose I might be.

If you charged at me and swung a skateboard at my head, I can confidently say, I would definitely shoot you.

I'm sorry, but your race and politics don't come in to it.
It doesn't matter who does that. Anyone who puts my life in danger like that would be shot. That's just how it works, equally, for all individuals.

 No.10279

>>10278
Given that you're apparently the sort of person who'd look at me, judge me based on my appearance as well as whatever snippets you think of can determine my identity group status, and then kill me openly in """"self-defense"""" because you perceive me as a """"Nazi""""... I do think that, yes, you frankly sound extremely dangerous.

I'll quite honestly say that I'm not a gun owner now but I've long been seriously considering owning a gun in order to kill people like you before you kill me first.

 No.10280

>>10279
You've clearly listened to nothing I've said, then.

Again; It doesn't matter to me what you look like.
You could look like the devil himself, and I'd still do nothing to you so long as you didn't do anything back.
I make a point of pride on this. I'm downright spiteful about it. The principle matters to me.
Everyone, no matter who, should be given the presumption of innocence.
More than that, everyone, no matter who, should have their rights respected.

I would not kill you unless you, like Rosenbaum, attacked me.
If you drew a gun and aimed it at me, yes, I would shoot you, and I would be right to do so,.
If you swung a skateboard at my head, yes, I would shoot you, and I would be right to do so.

> I've long been seriously considering owning a gun in order to kill people like you before you kill me first.
Look at what you're saying! You're literally admitting to what you accuse me of.
You are actually saying you'd go out to murder people in cold blood, because you think they'd come after you.
You are actually saying that, because I have the audacity to say I'd defend myself, you're thinking about getting a gun to murder people like me.

No wonder you find yourself in the company of people like Rosenbaum, who anally rape children.
Doesn't matter, so long as he's for the party. Any immorality can be excused, right?

 No.10281

>>10280
Given that you and people like you define "self-defense" as the pre-emptive elimination of those who're perceived as a potential threat, meaning in practical terms anybody who you or people like you sufficiently dislike to a large enough amount might end up lying dead after they cross your path... well, yes, I maybe should be armed.

I'd rather not live in a world where I need to genuinely fear for my life for being attacked by radical conservatives who see me as an evil threat to them just for being born different (or for praying to the wrong God, or for rooting for the wrong sports team, or whatever else), but I guess that's life. That's America. I can't enter a synagogue without worrying about you or somebody like you blowing it up, burning it down, shooting it to pieces, or et cetera. Same thing for a historically black church. Or an LGBT community center.

Hell, given the trends of street murders in the U.S. when it comes to back corners at might, even going to someplace like the grocery store might be fatal.

But listen to this genuine plea:

Instead of me having to live my life in fear of being murdered by you or somebody like you, and me arming myself as a response to your right-wing ideology, couldn't you or somebody like you be... nicer?

Instead of you and people like you living in paranoia about me and people like me being the horrific monsters under your bed out to eat your soul, thus making me have the very rational fear for my safety, couldn't you drop the hatred and simple recognize me as a fellow... human being?

 No.10282

File: 1637396503370.jpg (56.91 KB, 821x532, 821:532, Capture.JPG) ImgOps Exif Google

>>10281
>Given that you and people like you define "self-defense" as the pre-emptive elimination of those who're perceived as a potential threa
I don't.
Everyone who Rittenhouse shot actually attacked him.
He had a gun aimed at him.
He had a skateboard swung at his head.

You're just making stuff up now.

>I'd rather not live in a world where I need to genuinely fear for my life for being attacked by radical conservatives who see me as an evil threat to them just for being born different
OK, great news, you don't live in that world.
Congrats.

>can't enter a synoguge without worrying about you or somebody like you blowing it up, burning it down, shooting it to peices, or et cetera.
Bro, my rifle's Israeli made. It'd be pretty messed up to shoot up a synagogue with that.

Besides, I don't think I'm going to be chased down and attacked by a synagogue any time soon. Pretty sure they still lack legs, you know?

>Instead of me having to live my life in fear of being murdered by you or somebody like you, and me arming myself as a response to your right-wing ideology, couldn't you or somebody like you be... nicer?
How would you suggest I do that?

Because I try to explain, I'll only shoot you if you attack me.
And you hear that and say "dear god, he's going to kill me no matter what, I have to kill him first".

I fail to see how much nicer I could be in the circumstances.

 No.10283

>>10282
To be honest, every word that you say seem to make it only more clear that I'm in danger because of you and people like you: that I need to be armed to kill you and people like you when you try to kill me first.

 No.10284

>>10283
>And my reason to believe this highly unlikely claim is... what?
It's 'highly unlikely' to you that I'll only defend myself if attacked?

Well, leaving aside presumption of innocence, or everything I've said... How about because it'd be illegal, and get me thrown in jail?

Shooting someone who hasn't attacked me would be murder.
It's why Kyle was not ultimately deemed guilty, after all everyone who he shot attacked him.

 No.10285

>>10284
>How about because it'd be illegal, and get me thrown in jail?

What country do you think you're living in? I'm a multiple minority. My family is poor. I'm poor. I live in a state with significant unsolved crime rates. I live in a general city complex with significant unsolved crime rates.

I know with absolute certainty if you were to kill me outside of politics, like to just rob my wallet or whatever, you'd get away with it.

If you actually got caught, my multiple minority status would make your claims of self-defense a hella compelling. You're the fine upstanding non-minority TRUE AMERICAN GUN OWNER (TM). You'd get away with it. Come on.

And if for whatever reason you did get in trouble despite killing me in """"self-defense"""" you'd be a GIGANTIC CONQUERING HERO in the eyes of your fellow right-wingers, who'd send you literally thousands upon thousands of dollars in support. Not to mention that you'd get job offers and the like out the wazoo as well.

 No.10286

>>10285
Fair enough. I suppose I assumed it would be a case where I called the police after, since that's usually what you do following a shooting in self defense.

If we're talking raw murder, well, I suppose you'd just have to trust me, like you do every other person you deal with.
Beats living life as one of those schitzophrenic types fearing gangstalkers around every corner.

>my multiple minority status would make your claims of self-defense a hella compelling.
Maybe you're in a place with real low percentages of minorities, but, nah, my area's pretty diverse.
I don't think it'd matter.

But I grant, I have much higher faith in humanity than you. I don't think everyone's racist as you are, after all.

 No.10287

>>10286
At any rate, I guess the only conclusion is that I need to arm myself sometime in terms of self-defense against you and people like, and honestly this makes me rather mad in a highly impotent sort of way.

I'd really rather not have to kill you before you kill me, even if you consider me due to your right-wing ideology the monster under your bed and that cannot be helped.

It would be nice to not live in a world where I don't have to be worried about radical conservatives ending my life.

But that's not America in 2021.

To be honest I think that I'm genuinely too "soft" of a person to actually defend myself even if I had a gun as if my magic and the situation was ideal in a material sense for shooting back, I just don't have the raw hatred of humanity and desire to cause pain to others for my own enjoyment that appears weirdly common among Americans.

Oh, well.

 No.10288

File: 1637397515371.jpg (39.47 KB, 559x422, 559:422, EgfaeG1UcAEOeQx.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google

>>10287
> I guess the only conclusion is that I need to arm myself sometime in terms of self-defense against you and people like,
Why?
Haven't we just established that unless you attack me, I'm going to do nothing to you?

>It would be nice to not live in a world where I don't have to be worried about radical conservatives ending my life.
Well, take the lesson of Rosenbaum.
Don't fuck around, and you won't find out.

Leave people alone instead. Don't attack them. Problem solved.

 No.10289

>>10288
Except that you right-wing conservatives are pathologically not capable of leaving people like us "alone".

I can't even do something basic like go to a public speaking event at a local synagogue without first having to register as a security precaution online and then when the actual event happens pass by a police presence beside the main doors.

I don't agree that this is just how America has to be now and forever.

There's a future possible where anybody can just waltz right into any religious institution with a smile and a handshake.

I hope to live to see it.

And that's not even getting into the whole thing about you people trying to have us fired from our jobs, forced out of our homes, denied health care, prevented from exercising our 2nd amendment rights, kept from running for office, and so on.

 No.10290

>>10289
>Except that you conservatives are pathologically not capable of leaving people like us "alone".
Again, you go with group-guilt.
You are a very hateful person. That hatred has caused you to judge folk for things they've not done.

I don't deign to know what's going on in your area, with your temple, but that certainly doesn't happen here. Nobody has security on any places of worship, near as I can tell. Maybe the megachurches across the boarder.
Frankly, if it came down to it, they probably wouldn't need it. Plenty of folk carry, after all.

Might I suggest getting away from the cities, where such is necessary?
Seems they cause a lot of toxicity in more ways than one.

 No.10291

>>10290
At the very least, I hope that you and people like you are at least happy with all of the pain and suffering you cause.

I don't know what it's like to derive joy from other people's misfortune, my brain isn't wired for that, but I've heard that so many Americans are like that.

I hope you're happy. And that people like you are happy. I hope that the tears taste good.

As for your claims about "hate", I can assure that whatever you see from us is the tiniest sliver of a fraction from what is given to us by you and people like you.

And, as for the point of the thread, I vow again that the next time a Rittenhouse wants to do this he'll likely face somebody willing to fight back in self-defense.

We're not lambs to the slaughter.

 No.10292

>>10291
What pain and suffering have I ever caused?
Again, you judge me for things I've not done, because you've the stance that collective guilt is acceptable.
You need to let go of your hatred, man.

>I can assure that whatever you see from us is the tiniest sliver of a fraction from what is given to us by you and people like you.
What hatred have I even given you?
Again; You really are quick to judge me for things I've not done, purely because I'm of the wrong tribe.

Doesn't that remind you of someone?
Wasn't there a guy who did exactly that, exterminated huge swaths of people, because they belonged to a tribe he blamed, despite them personally doing nothing wrong?

 No.10293

>>10291
>>10292
It's 20th November. Transgender Remembrance Day. A day to recall the memories of those killed for their status. Their lives destroyed because of you and people like you.

In my own case, I vow to not be the next statistic.

When you and people like you come for us, we'll be ready.

The next Rittenhouse might not be a corpse, but at some point an eventual Rittenhouse will be.

 No.10294

>>10293
The fuck did I ever do to trans people?
I literally don't care about what they want to do at all. They can do whatever. They can be called whatever they want.
My entire stance is just "I don't care". How've I ever destroyed anything of theirs?

At no point in this entire thread have I said anything of any kind negative about trans folk.
What an absurd thing to cry about.

 No.10295

>>10292
>Wasn't there a guy who did exactly that, exterminated huge swaths of people, because they belonged to a tribe he blamed, despite them personally doing nothing wrong?

Has it ever occurred to you that being a bigot, a Klansman, a Nazi, et al is literally something that somebody can stop doing on a dime?

And that that identity is based entirely on beliefs and actions, not status?

That literally all it takes. Just say "I don't want to hurt anyone." And avoid hurting anyone. That's it. Easy as easy can be.

That you can't tell the difference between that and being hated due to being born black, born gay, born trans, born Jewish, et al is rather disturbing.

If you're going to accuse me of being a bigot against bigots, a Nazi against Nazi, a Klansman against Klansmen, and so on, then like... I don't even know, man.

I don't think that radical conservatives should be denied any rights in America. Go to your Proud Boy training camps. Buy your sheets for the cross lightings in random forest enclaves where only the squirrels watch. Set up your weird underground websites sharing shitty ripoff metal music. Whatever.

Just don't either enact political violence against me in the streets or otherwise engage in coercive violence by having government subject me to coercive violence.

That's it.

Don't hurt me. Don't get the state to hurt me. The end.

Why can't you and people like you understand this?

 No.10296

>>10295
>And that that identity is based entirely on beliefs and actions, not status?
I agree entirely.

Which is why I say you're a nazi.
You're, after all, a racial collectivist, who doesn't seem to value the rights of those you've decried as the enemy.

You fit the bill.

>I don't think that radical conservatives should be denied any rights in America
Self defense is a right.

 No.10297

>>10296
I can't even.

I know that in your right-wing bubble world being anti-Nazi makes you a Nazi, but it's just... well...

I mean... there's a whole regular world out there, man, with regular people that you can exist in.

 No.10298

>>10297
>literal I can't even
Jeez, buddy. It ain't hard.

The Nazis were racial collectivists who didn't care about the rights of their enemies.
You are a racial collectivist who doesn't care about the rights of your enemies.
It's that simple.

Look, just stop judging people for shit they haven't done.
Problem solved!
Suddenly, you'll be able to treat others like a decent human being, instead of as you currently do.
Who knows, maybe it'll help get rid of that paranoid delusions you hang on to.

 No.10299

>>10296
>Self defense is a right.

I know that you and people like you view "self-defense" as justifying pre-emptive attack upon people different than you, so we're just going to have to agree to disagree on whether or not "self-defense is a right".

Hence why I need to own a gun to protect myself in self-defense against you and people like you.

 No.10300

>>10298
Again with the "people who want equality and justice with the rule of law and no prejudice are the real racists and Nazis", "being anti-white-supremacy just makes you anti-white", "the real anti-Nazis are the alt-right", "antifa are Nazis", et al conservatives talking points...

Do you guys really not realize that people who aren't of the right-wing, which is by-the-way the vast majority of the country, don't believe in the "No, you!" style of communication?

 No.10301

>>10299
>I know that you and people like you view "self-defense" as justifying pre-emptive attack upon people different than you,
I don't.
I've never once said I do.
YOU are the ONLY person who has said this,.

You're pinning a crime to me that not only have I not done, but that YOU YOURSELF have done.

>>10279
>"I'll quite honestly say that I'm not a gun owner now but I've long been seriously considering owning a gun in order to kill people like you before you kill me first."

Not only are you a liar, you're a hypocrite to boot.

 No.10302

>>10301
Yes, I think that akin to many other minorities I need to arm myself to kill the likes of you and people like you first before you can murder me and people like me, after you and people like you attack me and people like me. Actual self-defense. That's what's been said over and again.

This is in contrast to "right-wing self-defense", which goes something like "I believe that Bob is antifa, therefore I will shoot Bob in the chest because he's got his hand placed in a way in his coat pocket to where it looks like he's got a weapon instead of a wallet or smartphone".

 No.10303

>>10300
You do not want equality and justice with the rule of law.
You've made that clear given your stance on Kyle Rittenhouse.
You've made it clear given your statements in >>10279

> "being anti-white-supremacy just makes you anti-white"
No, but being a racist does make you racist, regardless of what race it's to.

It's not your opposition to white supremacy that I say makes you a nazi.
It's your racial collectivism. I don't care what race it's for. I don't care what race you make your scapegoat. It's not important.

>Do you guys really not realize that people who aren't of the right-wing, which is by-the-way the vast majority of the country, don't believe in the "No, you!" style of communication?
You do not have room to speak of "NO U", when you pull shit like >>10299

You've accused me of something that, again, you alone have done.
You alone have said that you would murder someone in cold blood preemptively.
That is YOUR position. Yet you claimed I view self defense as that.

The claims of "no u" fall off me like water, because I can objectively demonstrate my claims.
I can provide links.
I can give you quotes.

You've provided nothing. All you have is dishonesty, fabrications, and lies.
I've meanwhile provided evidence, at every turn.

 No.10304

>>10302
Then you admit, you are the one who wants to preemptively kill people and consider that to be 'self defense'.
Not me.

I am opposed to such behavior. But thank you for once again demonstrating my point.
You would act just as the Nazis would.
When you were done, there would be a mass grave miles long.
All the while, you'd insist, the people you've shoveled into the graves were the real mass murderers, even as they've done nothing to you.

>This is in contrast to "right-wing self-defense", which goes something like "I believe that Bob is antifa, therefore I will shoot Bob in the chest because he's got his hand placed in a way in his coat pocket to where it looks like he's got a weapon instead of a wallet or smartphone".
Again, this is YOUR fucking positon.
Not mine.

You've explicitly said that you'd murder me in cold blood because of your deluded paranoia insisting that one day I might kill you.
That is YOUR position.

You are a liar, and a murderer, and I sincerely hope you are not allowed to get a gun.
Thank God there are honest men and women willing to stand up to fascist scumbags like yourself, who'd more than happily line millions into death camps for being of the wrong tribe.
You are a disgusting individual, and I do hope you get the help you desperately need before you hurt someone. With luck, when you try your murderous intent, there will be someone to stop you, as a response to your ACTIONS, not to some fantastical paranoia.

 No.10305

>>10303
Are you getting mad?

Does the fact that I've said that I'd maybe defend myself against you and people like you when you and people like you attack in the future get under your skin a little bit?

Because I don't really care if you're getting mad, facts are facts.

I'm not armed. Now. But, to be honest, every post of yours is cementing the fact I should probably have something in the apartment to blow the brains out of next radical conservative who tries to make me into a statistic. Self-defense (REAL self-defense) is important.

 No.10306

>>10304
Ah!

So hearing that a minority member might fight back against you and people like you has gotten under your skin, and quite so!

I can't say that I'm glad that you're angry, but I'm happy that at the very least there seems to be some kind of a political awakening going on in your mind a little bit.

We're not lambs to the slaughter.

Me and people like me are getting armed, and when you and people like you come after us, we will act in self-defense.

Fascists such as yourself won't win. In the end. Justice wins. Equality wins. Human rights wins. Love wins. Democracy wins. Goodness wins. It'll happen.

 No.10307

>>10305
I am mad that you've accused me of what you yourself are saying, yes.

I am mad that you're so blind to your own statements, you'd think I'd believe something so absurd as preemtpive murder, even as you advocate for it yourself.

I am mad because monsters like yourself are responsible for the death of men like Aaron Danielson, in cold-blooded ambushes, as a result of your cult like paranoia.

I am mad because you echo the path of the Brownshirts, and don't even realize it.

I am mad because you'd murder your fellow humans without a second's thought, certain that your delusions are apt.

I am mad because this has happened before, and yet you ignore the voices of the long dead.

It's not defense to murder someone in cold blood because you believe they may one day do something.
You, sir, are a disgusting individual. And I sincerely hope there is an honest man nearby when you try to do your killing, and I pray his aim is true when you draw your gun.

>Because I don't really care if you're getting mad, facts are facts.
I agree. But I am the sole person providing them.
I have quoted you.
You have not.
I have provided video.
You have not.

 No.10308

>>10306
You deluded little sociopath, you understand nothing.

I do not give a fuck if you're a minority.
That's no damn justification.
Being a minority is no excuse for cold blooded murder.
It was wrong when Hitler did it, it's wrong when you did it.

If you really want to kill a fascist, get that gun and put it against your own temple.

I will never "come after" you.  But you have already explicitly said you'd murder me because of some paranoid fear.
That was YOUR word.
I have explicitly said the reverse.
YOU have said YOU would murder ME

Hell, if I could, I'd report you to the police for it.
After all, you have as objective fact made threats of murder against your fellow man. For nothing other than a difference of politics.

Deluded psychopaths like you have murdered millions, and here you are, saying you want to do it again.
No lessons from history. No evidence will dissuade you. You'll just march people back into death camps, certain of your own glory.

It's disgusting.

 No.10309

>>10307
I can't say that I enjoy you being mad, but I'm glad that you're getting something profound, like I said before.

You guys just won't win.

You won't keep America a white supremacist nation with massive suffering and a lack of human rights, and you won't succeed in stopping future democratic advancement.

You guys certainly won't manage to enact a fascist dictatorship even if so many of you advocate for it openly.

If your blackshirts come knocking on behalf of your dictator-for-life Republican President, asking if there are any transgender people or the like hiding somewhere, there will be resistance. Fighting back. Count on it.

And when it comes to political violence on the streets, there will be shooting back. Fighting back. Resistance. We're not just idle victims. We can defend ourselves. The next Dylan Roof or Kyle Rittenhouse or whomever might get away with it, but at some point one of them won't. And more bloodshed will be prevented.

In the end, love will win. And everything associated with love will also win. Count on it.

I'm not going to be a statistic. And neither will the rest of us. We matter.

 No.10310

>>10309
You've explicitly said that you'd murder me in cold blood.

I am not a fascist. I do not want a white supremacy. Hell, I don't even know what race I am, because it doesn't fucking matter.
I don't want a dictatorship. I don't want anyone in power for life.

I am very simply a firm believer in freedom and liberty as guaranteed by human rights, many of which were enshrined in our constitution.

Remember this: Despite everything you say, you call me out for actions of some nebulous group you define, I call you out for things you've actually said and done.
You blame me for the actions of some group. You say you'd murder me in cold blood, not because of anything I said or would do, but because of the politics I have and what you ascribe as a result.

You bang the drums and scream of coming bloodshed just as the Nazis did. You are a Brownshirt, and that's the simple fact of the matter.
So do the right thing, according to you. "Preemtively" kill the fascist. Go get that gun, and put it against your own head. The only one to say they'd violate the rights of others here in this thread is you, after all.

 No.10311

>>10310
Alas, I don't speak or read Hebrew, but I still feel like what I should say in closing to the whole rambling quasi-discussion is:

אל נלך כצאן לטבח!
נכון, חלשים אנו וחסרי-מגן, אולם התשובה היחידה לאויב היא התנגדות!
אחים! מוטב ליפול כלוחמים בני-חורין מלחיות בחסד מרצחים.
להתגונן! עד הנשימה האחרונה.

 No.10312

>>10311
Defend until the last breath.
Not attack and murder in cold blood.

If you are truly Jewish, then you ought read in to the matter.
Murder's wrong, bro.
There's no "preemtive' about it. If you kill someone before they've done anything to you, you're rightfully going to hell for it.

 No.10313

File: 1637437329023.jpg (144.1 KB, 738x1000, 369:500, acf51d40ed3d84afb9e18d98e8….jpg) ImgOps Exif Google

"This idea that only white people are allowed to avail themselves of the claim of self-defense, or that they can largely just do whatever and get away with it by claiming self-defense, is absurd", and here are many examples of black people getting acquitted on the grounds of self-defense:
https://twitter.com/AmySwearer/status/1461801378137919489

 No.10314

File: 1637449474593.jpg (137.59 KB, 1280x904, 160:113, large.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google

>>10225
Thank you for the response.  :)

I'm tempted to research this as I'm seeing a lot of conflicting reports.  But it's one of those things where the facts probably don't matter -- if someone is reporting bad facts on Facebook, they are not going to welcome clarification -- knowing the truth will just be annoying, I think.  And race/guns/politics -- I feel like a bystander to these topics.

I know...that makes me boring.  (I do have some issues I care a great deal about, but they are just not things most identify with.)

 No.10315

File: 1637450802839.png (701.52 KB, 1280x916, 320:229, large.png) ImgOps Google

>>10216
>(2) The presumption of innocence -- is it better than 100 guilty people walk free than 1 innocent be sentenced to death or life in prison?

At the state-faith level, all who are punished by state power are guilty, since guilt or innocence is only sufficiently determined by state authority.  I just have to get that out of the way to avoid confusion, the question can only be answered reasonably based on another standard of guilt or innocence, probably a kind of folk standard.

The justice system seems to have two purposes: 1) maintain societal order, and 2) serve as a secular force to punish evildoers.  Suppose some might say a third purpose is to serve special interests and make a bunch of people money, but few would bring that up as something to be optimized.

Probably the factor [innocent convicted/guilty allowed to go free] is determined in practice by what people complain  more about -- criminals or state injustice.  I can't give a formula, I'm afraid.

 No.10316

>>10272
>At the end of the day, you right-wing sociopaths and your dream of endless white supremacy will wither away.

So there's a lot wrong with saying this, calling half the nation sociopaths and then threatening them is not nice, but also fundamentally this provides nothing to the discussion on the discussion board where we're supposed to remain civil and not instigate fights and yell about how much we hate each other.  Issuing a ban for this.

 No.10317

Can somebody explain to me at a deep psychological level why for the political right ending the life of another human being is enjoyable and a thing to be celebrated?

Like why is some human being's expiration a positive thing that creates happiness the same way of eating a nice chocolate cookie or whatever?

Assuming for the sake of argument that somebody attacked me in a clear-cut way where I ended their life in self-defense, I just... I can't even to begin to imagine that I would enjoy that situation. I can't even begin to imagine that I would look back at the situation fondly. I can't even begin to imagine that I would think of this as a positive life experience that made me a better person.

If anything, I would wish upon wish that something had changed in that person's life such that we had never met. And then I would have wished that I had gone through my life without the death of another of God's creatures at my hands. I can't imagine the slightest how that would affect my physical and mental health besides.

This is a genuine question. Can someone explain the right-wing mind to me?

And this is setting aside all of the insanely painful and horrific aspects of the case, just to be clear, in context.

 No.10318

File: 1637453921537.jpg (308.24 KB, 1280x960, 4:3, large.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google

>>10317
The modes of carrying out vengeance and appropriate targets can be political, but I think the feeling is common enough.

Granted, one of the seven deadly sins and certainly toxic in excess.

 No.10319

File: 1637459352765.jpg (97.1 KB, 675x630, 15:14, 142932406922.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google

>>10317
>Can somebody explain to me at a deep psychological level why for the political right ending the life of another human being is enjoyable and a thing to be celebrated?
Well, I'm politically right-of-center, but I don't think that any of Kyle's killing are 'a thing to be celebrated'.  Personally, I would have preferred that Rosenbaum had been kept in that mental hospital so that Kyle didn't need to kill him in self-defense.

But to answer your question of why some might celebrate a killing, I think a hypothesis can be found in evolution and game theory.  In iterated cooperative problems like the iterated Prisoner's Dilemma, tit-for-tat generally works well as a strategy.  So, it makes sense that an urge for punishing defectors would emerge evolutionarily.

 No.10320

>>10317
It's not at all unique to the right, and it wasn't in Kyle's case.
He very clearly didn't enjoy doing it.

Whether in self defense or not, some people don't mind it, and some people outright enjoy it.
Michael Reinoehl certainly didn't seem to care that he had murdered a man in cold blood in an ambush, for example.
And he's not right wing.
The idea this is unique to the right, even setting aside this notion you hold it was the case in Kyle's case, is a fabrication of your own biases.

 No.10321

>>10314
If you're interested in the facts, you could always check out the trial itself.
Most the videos I had posted prior were also shown there.
There were a few livestreams of the event as it went on, which turned up as evidence. Part of why the attempt at prosecution seems so egregious to many, the video existed early on and seemed to clearly show self defense

 No.10323

>>10322
I suppose getting banned repeatedly for inflammatory and obviously inaccurate rants doesn't serve much a lesson for you,  huh?

Conservatives aren't invested in utopian nonsense.
That's directly contrary to the term to begin with.
I'm sorry the idea of your political enemies having rights offends you so much.

 No.10324

File: 1637702500899.jpg (63.71 KB, 650x844, 325:422, 1002098144-photo-u1.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google

>(1) The Rittenhouse trial
Shouldn't have gotten this much publicity, nor gone on this long. Was pretty clearly self defense. Should he have been out there? Not really. But the people attacking a kid with a gun should've known better than to attack.

>(2) The presumption of innocence -- is it better than 100 guilty people walk free than 1 innocent be sentenced to death or life in prison?
Weird wording. Guilty of what, jaywalking? Possession of an ounce of cocaine? Sure, not really equivalent to a life. But because no perfect system exists we have to hope a jury of our peers makes the proper choice in these matters. That without a reasonable doubt the person is guilty. If the prosecution can't prove it then that's on them. Personally I hate any type of prosecutor that relies on emotion than actual evidence. Had to deal with Jury Duty twice with that.

>(3) The right of self-defense, including what counts as provocation.
Do I consider a kid helping put out fires and washing graffiti with a gun at his waist provocation? No. Did the protestors? Probably. But even if he did, they shouldn't have chased after him.


>(4) Bicubic and bilinear scaling of images used as evidence in criminal trials.
No.


[]
[Return] [Go to top]
[ home ] [ pony / townhall / rp / canterlot / rules ] [ arch ]