Violent Vigilantes Require Our Vigilence

caseyedwards

Well-Known Member
Messages
16,911
They were attacking him because he was an active shooter. Isn't that what you guys say people should do? I guess not when the shooter is a white supremacist and the people trying to keep him from shooting anyone else are protesting how this country treats Black people.


Sometimes the law has no common sense.
How do you decide active shooter in a riot? There was a horrible violent riot going on and someone else shot a gun. Then a bunch of people saw rittenhouse with a gun and try to disarm him. It being a violent riot you don’t know what they plan to do with that gun especially since guns are already going off.
 

MacMadame

Doing all the things
Messages
44,450
How do you decide active shooter in a riot? There was a horrible violent riot going on and someone else shot a gun. Then a bunch of people saw rittenhouse with a gun and try to disarm him. It being a violent riot you don’t know what they plan to do with that gun especially since guns are already going off.
:rolleyes:

Even Rittenhouse admits he shot that one guy before anyone attacked him.
 

Jot the Dot Dot

Headstrong Buzzard
Messages
4,130
They were attacking him because he was an active shooter. Isn't that what you guys say people should do? I guess not when the shooter is a white supremacist and the people trying to keep him from shooting anyone else are protesting how this country treats Black people.


Sometimes the law has no common sense.
Where is the evidence Rittenhouse is/was a white supremacist? All three of his victims were white.
 

love_skate2011

Well-Known Member
Messages
3,440
This is what happens when the media does not stay neutral, you are dictating people what you think and some gullible sheep would swallow it. Now the mob rule has awaken again, enjoy the riots from yours truly the blm, proud boys and co. from opposing sides.

What a bleak post 2022 for the dems, How long can Biden hold on, and Buttigieg or Kamala as the next in line. LMAO
I have asked some people and they said it wasnt even as bad as this before, makes you think why Trump is polling to win if he ran against these status quo.
 

skatingguy

Golden Team
Messages
9,999
This is what happens when the media does not stay neutral, you are dictating people what you think and some gullible sheep would swallow it. Now the mob rule has awaken again, enjoy the riots from yours truly the blm, proud boys and co. from opposing sides.

What a bleak post 2022 for the dems, How long can Biden hold on, and Buttigieg or Kamala as the next in line. LMAO
I have asked some people and they said it wasnt even as bad as this before, makes you think why Trump is polling to win if he ran against these status quo.
Wow, and I didn't think it was possible that anything could make less sense than your ramblings in the figure skating forums. I underestimated your ability to spew nonsense. Well done.
 

jenny12

Well-Known Member
Messages
7,444
Okay so, anyone who is following the trial in the killing of Ahmaud Arbery, is there any chance the defendants will be acquitted? I just want to be prepared. Can they make the same fcking claim of self-defense as Kyle Rittenhouse?

I hope not but it’s good sadly to be prepared for the worst. I think there’s even less defense for what McMichaels and Bryant did. There was no requirement that Arbery comply with them but I don’t know if they’re going to remove all that context and just focus on whose hands were on the gun.

I hate the fact there are guys like these three shits who think they have the right to go around and play cop but that’s what the entitlement mentality and white privilege gets you. The Rittenhouse verdict has already emboldened these types of guys. We don’t need more of this to say the very least.
 
Last edited:

BlueRidge

AYS's snark-sponge
Messages
59,156
I hope not but it’s good sadly to be prepared for the worst. I think there’s even less defense for what McMichaels and Bryant did. There was no requirement that Arbery comply with them but I don’t know if they’re going to remove all that context and just focus on whose hands were on the gun.

I hate the fact there are guys like these three shits who think they have the right to go around and play cop but that’s what the entitlement mentality and white privileged gets you. The Rittenhouse verdict has already emboldened these types of guys. We don’t need more of this to say the very least.
I was just reading an article that said armed [vigilante] patrols were common in that neighborhood. That is so frightening.

There has been a lot of focus on guns, as there of course needs to be, but it seems like there hasn't been enough push back on the laws that make it legal to murder people and get off by claiming self-defense, as the stand-your-ground laws but others as well.

For a civilized society the Kyle Rittenhouse situation would have been simple, even taking out racism and other critical factors. Kyle Rittenhouse, when faced with an unarmed man acting erratically should have retreated. He had that opportunity but the reactionary faction in US politics has erased that civilized alternative and claims individuals with guns (if they are white) can go where they want and then when someone else acts out because they have a gun they have no obligation to remove the threat but instead have every right to kill.

We do not have a civilized society at this time in the United States of America.
 

MacMadame

Doing all the things
Messages
44,450
Okay so, anyone who is following the trial in the killing of Ahmaud Arbery, is there any chance the defendants will be acquitted? I just want to be prepared. Can they make the same fcking claim of self-defense as Kyle Rittenhouse?
It depends on how good the prosecution is, I think. One of the news organizations (WaPo?) did a reconstruction of the day (using both video and cell phone records) and it was clear that those 3 men were hunting Arbery down. Therefore, Abery grabbing the gun was definitely in his self-defense. But I haven't heard anything that makes me think that reconstruction was part of the evidence. I hope that's just because we haven't heard a lot about his trial compared to Rittenhouse's.
 

BlueRidge

AYS's snark-sponge
Messages
59,156
It depends on how good the prosecution is, I think. One of the news organizations (WaPo?) did a reconstruction of the day (using both video and cell phone records) and it was clear that those 3 men were hunting Arbery down. Therefore, Abery grabbing the gun was definitely in his self-defense. But I haven't heard anything that makes me think that reconstruction was part of the evidence. I hope that's just because we haven't heard a lot about his trial compared to Rittenhouse's.
I've been reading snippets this morning. It seems like the prosecution brought up a lot of points that derail the defense claims.

But I think its going to depend on the jury. If to them three white men chasing down a black man looks like the white men were trying to keep their neighborhood safe and that they felt threatened by the black man so had to kill him, not much anyone can say.
 

b-man

Well-Known Member
Messages
1,348
I was just reading an article that said armed [vigilante] patrols were common in that neighborhood. That is so frightening.

There has been a lot of focus on guns, as there of course needs to be, but it seems like there hasn't been enough push back on the laws that make it legal to murder people and get off by claiming self-defense, as the stand-your-ground laws but others as well.

For a civilized society the Kyle Rittenhouse situation would have been simple, even taking out racism and other critical factors. Kyle Rittenhouse, when faced with an unarmed man acting erratically should have retreated. He had that opportunity but the reactionary faction in US politics has erased that civilized alternative and claims individuals with guns (if they are white) can go where they want and then when someone else acts out because they have a gun they have no obligation to remove the threat but instead have every right to kill.

We do not have a civilized society at this time in the United States of America.
Uh, Rittenhouse did retreat, as Rosenbaum was chasing him. That is Rosembaum, who had convictions for rape/sexually assaulting 5 boys ,, was shouting the N word, had recently been released from mental treatment. The self defense plea wasn't just claimed, its been verified on video, and looked at for three days by the jury and by half the country on TV. The last person Rittenhouse shot, Grosskreutz, admitted under cross examination he pointed a gun at Rittenhouse, and was only shot when he did so. All three men shot had criminal records.
 

Sparks

Well-Known Member
Messages
12,784

I've been reading snippets this morning. It seems like the prosecution brought up a lot of points that derail the defense claims.

But I think its going to depend on the jury. If to them three white men chasing down a black man looks like the white men were trying to keep their neighborhood safe and that they felt threatened by the black man so had to kill him, not much anyone can say.
Watching on CNN now. I agree with you.
 

Artistic Skaters

Drawing Figures
Messages
8,030
In the closing arguments for the Arbery trial, it sounds like the prosecution made a very persuasive case based on several points:
  • There has to be some real time evidential information in order to use the citizens' arrest defense, such as they watched him do the act for example like the guys who detained Brock Turner, or someone standing in the lobby who witnessed an armed bank robbery. The three men had none, as was confirmed by the testimony of the son who shot Arbery.
  • The citizens' arrest defense is invalid, because when they pursued and blocked him it was considered an attempted kidnapping which is one of the charges they are facing. So the three men were the actual felons that day and not Arbery.
  • Self defense is invalid since the three men were the ones commiting the actual crime at the time. The son testified he was never in fear of Arbery or thought he had a weapon during their pursuit, yet he chose to exit his car with a weapon to confront him anyway.

It was also reported the judge planned to give the jury specific instructions that there had to be actual recognition of a felony not the theoreticals posed by the defense. "We've had a rash of crimes in our neighborhood and have never seen this guy running in our area" blah blah blah. Part of the son's testimony were about someone breaking into their car, but when cross examined he testified there was another suspect for those things not Arbery.

This case seems much stronger without the awful loopholes in the written laws like the Rittenhouse case. For ex: a defense expert in the WI case testified the law provided an authority for self defense to a gun wielder that it did not provide to someone just using fists, skateboard, etc. This is very bad for citizens like me who are willing to defend our homes and bodies with a large dog and baseball bat compared to the gun wielding enthusiasts.
 

Judy

Well-Known Member
Messages
3,379
In the closing arguments for the Arbery trial, it sounds like the prosecution made a very persuasive case based on several points:
  • There has to be some real time evidential information in order to use the citizens' arrest defense, such as they watched him do the act for example like the guys who detained Brock Turner, or someone standing in the lobby who witnessed an armed bank robbery. The three men had none, as was confirmed by the testimony of the son who shot Arbery.
  • The citizens' arrest defense is invalid, because when they pursued and blocked him it was considered an attempted kidnapping which is one of the charges they are facing. So the three men were the actual felons that day and not Arbery.
  • Self defense is invalid since the three men were the ones commiting the actual crime at the time. The son testified he was never in fear of Arbery or thought he had a weapon during their pursuit, yet he chose to exit his car with a weapon to confront him anyway.

It was also reported the judge planned to give the jury specific instructions that there had to be actual recognition of a felony not the theoreticals posed by the defense. "We've had a rash of crimes in our neighborhood and have never seen this guy running in our area" blah blah blah. Part of the son's testimony were about someone breaking into their car, but when cross examined he testified there was another suspect for those things not Arbery.

This case seems much stronger without the awful loopholes in the written laws like the Rittenhouse case. For ex: a defense expert in the WI case testified the law provided an authority for self defense to a gun wielder that it did not provide to someone just using fists, skateboard, etc. This is very bad for citizens like me who are willing to defend our homes and bodies with a large dog and baseball bat compared to the gun wielding enthusiasts.
From that video all I saw was a young man jogging down the street and being hunted, attacked and killed. It's disgusting. I hope the right verdict is reached.
 

Sparks

Well-Known Member
Messages
12,784
Breaking: Travis McMichael - the man who shot and killed Ahmaud Arbery - has been found guilty on all nine charges in the jogger’s death.
More: Gregory McMichael, one of three men accused of killing 25-year-old Ahmaud Arbery, has been found guilty of felony murder. McMichael now faces a maximum sentence of life in prison without the possibility of parole.
 

jenny12

Well-Known Member
Messages
7,444
Breaking: Travis McMichael - the man who shot and killed Ahmaud Arbery - has been found guilty on all nine charges in the jogger’s death.
More: Gregory McMichael, one of three men accused of killing 25-year-old Ahmaud Arbery, has been found guilty of felony murder. McMichael now faces a maximum sentence of life in prison without the possibility of parole.

It is a relief to see the correct verdict. My thoughts are with the Arbery family.
 

Artistic Skaters

Drawing Figures
Messages
8,030
That's two out of three cases this week with the Charlottesville verdict. So all is not lost.

I wonder if it will give Rittenhouse something to consider while he continues his "winning" tour with Carlson, Trump and company. Hopefully enough voters will think about his case, address the terribly written stand-your-ground laws and the allowances we make for young immature stupid boys to do anything they want with guns. It will take action by voters because most of the legislatures aren't going to voluntarily address it.
 
Last edited:

Users who are viewing this thread

Top
Do Not Sell My Personal Information