LogFAQs > #959880084

LurkerFAQs, Active DB, DB1, DB2, DB3, DB4, DB5, DB6, DB7, DB8, Database 9 ( 09.28.2021-02-17-2022 ), DB10, DB11, DB12, Clear

Topic List	Page List: 1
Topic	Rittenhouse takes the stand.
PoundGarden 11/10/21 6:19:16 PM #269:	AssultTank posted... The crime he committed was having the gun illegally. That doesn't invalidate his right to self defense. Doesn't absolve him from consequences for killing someone in a situation that never would have existed had he not broken the law in the first place. Astonishing how the right doesn't apply that train of thought in this case. AssultTank posted... Honestly, the distance he had to travel is less than I used to travel for work every day. And all mine was still in Atlanta... The point that you're ignoring is that this was nowhere near him nor were those people an immediate threat to him. He went out of his way to play hero AssultTank posted... He didn't threaten anyone with it (Per testimony given by prosecution witnesses) until he was attacked. He sought to avoid the confrontation (Per testimony given by prosecution witnesses and the videos of the night) and only fired once he was cornered and still in danger (Per testimony given by prosecution witnesses and videos of the night). Literally none of that is vigilantism. Literally none of that is unreasonable use of force. The act itself was vigilantism. Did he or did he not go there to protect property that was not his? Holy shit. AssultTank posted... I think you need to rewatch the whole trial without your bias. I think you need to better understand the definition of crimes, because clearly you don't. You're insinuating teenagers can run around with guns protecting the neighborhood but it's not vigilantism until someone gets attacked lmao. Again, the act itself is a crime. Again: "I committed this crime because I put myself in considerable danger while committing another crime" is not a valid defense for homicide nor does it qualify as self defense. Which is why there's even a trial. If it was as simple as you Rittenhouse fans make it out to be, why is this even a discussion? --- "You go. I'm just going to stare at the lake and think about how I almost just killed a baby." <cite>PoundGarden posted [p:959880084] in Rittenhous... [t:79752524]...</cite> <quote>AssultTank posted... </cite> <quote>The crime he committed was having the gun illegally. That doesn't invalidate his right to self defense.</quote> Doesn't absolve him from consequences for killing someone in a situation that never would have existed had he not broken the law in the first place. Astonishing how the right doesn't apply that train of thought in this case. AssultTank posted... </cite> <quote>Honestly, the distance he had to travel is less than I used to travel for work every day. And all mine was still in Atlanta...</quote> The point that you're ignoring is that this was nowhere near him nor were those people an immediate threat to him. He went out of his way to play hero AssultTank posted... </cite> <quote>He didn't threaten anyone with it (Per testimony given by prosecution witnesses) until he was attacked. He sought to avoid the confrontation (Per testimony given by prosecution witnesses and the videos of the night) and only fired once he was cornered and still in danger (Per testimony given by prosecution witnesses and videos of the night). Literally none of that is vigilantism. Literally none of that is unreasonable use of force.</quote> The act itself was vigilantism. Did he or did he not go there to protect property that was not his? Holy shit. AssultTank posted... </cite> <quote>I think you need to rewatch the whole trial without your bias.</quote> I think you need to better understand the definition of crimes, because clearly you don't. You're insinuating teenagers can run around with guns protecting the neighborhood but it's not vigilantism until someone gets attacked lmao. Again, the act itself is a crime. Again: "I committed this crime because I put myself in considerable danger while committing another crime" is not a valid defense for homicide nor does it qualify as self defense. Which is why there's even a trial. If it was as simple as you Rittenhouse fans make it out to be, why is this even a discussion? --- "You go. I'm just going to stare at the lake and think about how I almost just killed a baby."</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1