It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Kyle rittenhouse is nothing more than a two bit thug.

page: 18
19
<< 15  16  17    19  20  21 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 31 2020 @ 04:19 AM
link   
a reply to: bastion


The video in the OP shows Kyle assualting a girl for no reason with several sucker punches?

If someone shoots him will they be hailed as a 'hero', do his past crimes negate his hero status or does the title only fit when the person fits an indivuals partisan views the same way judging people on past crimes does?

If Kyle Rittenhouse (or anyone for that matter) picks up a blunt force object and wields it as a weapon, pulls out a knife, pulls out a gun, or is attacking someone incapable of defending themselves, then yes, they can be shot in self defense. They can be stabbed in self defense. They can be brained with a brick in self defense.

It has nothing whatsoever to do with who a person is! Can people not understand that? If anyone is threatened with deadly force, that person then becomes legally able to use deadly force to repel their attacker. If anyone threatens someone with deadly force, they can have deadly force used against them.

There are only two questions here: who initiated the immediate attack, and did they use deadly force as was reasonably interpreted by the person who defended against them? Nothing else matters. All these other arguments are just mental twists and turns to try and steer people into identity politics. Politics does not matter. What happened six months ago does not matter. Who the attacker or the attackee voted for does not matter. Who is in power in the White House does not matter. What WaPo says does not matter.

So how about not making inane comments that only serve to showcase your intentional ignorance?

TheRedneck




posted on Aug, 31 2020 @ 05:27 AM
link   

originally posted by: Freeborn
a reply to: Guiltyguitarist

Ha ha ha.

STFU?

Tough guy eh?
Yet another keyboard warrior.
Zzzzzzzzz..........

What on earth brought that response on?
Triggered?

Couldn't make it up.



You could call it triggered. Or you could call it sick of wasting my mental energy reading futile whining on the internet.
Don’t like the law? Take it up with your legislators. Don’t come on here and bitch about something that we can’t change and wouldn’t change even if we could.

Oh you’re British? Wtf do you care? I stand by my original statement

edit on 31-8-2020 by Guiltyguitarist because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 31 2020 @ 06:18 AM
link   
Such tolerance on display by the left.

a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed



posted on Aug, 31 2020 @ 08:01 AM
link   

originally posted by: ThatDamnDuckAgain
a reply to: RAY1990

You should have read the whole thread before writing this reply, if you read it, you will notice that it later turned out that it wasn't the white shirt, but black shirt. Bastion posted a link to a collage of pictures that I reposted.


So he doesn't only hit women but he jumps them from behind.

It's somewhat irrelevant in my eyes, the action before the violence clearly indicates all of the males wanted to instigate violence. They're all guilty but the chap landing blows to the back of the head deserves more serious charges.

I have no bone in this scrap and I was just making an observation. However it's arguable that this person maybe should've been behind bars when the incidents people relate to this thread happened. I know little to nothing about the shootings people are talking about.



posted on Aug, 31 2020 @ 09:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: alldaylong
a reply to: Bloodworth




shoot sexual deviants and people with criminals histories out destroying property and assaulting people are usually considered a hero.



A self appointed Judge, Jury and executioner then ?

You need help.



What is this thread doing then, if not exactly that? How many here are ready to skin him alive without due process? This thread is just a hit piece and for the rest, I think TheRedneck formulated it the best.

You all jump to conclusions about him but where is the outrage about the crimes the three convicts did? One wasn't even allowed to posses that handgun.

These were rioters, they knew what they were doing there and they knew how it can end if you chase someone with a firearm into a corner. Look at the video for godske he had about a dozen people coming up to him and the first three had to learn the lesson self defense.

You don't get to chase someone down a road, hit him with solid objects and then be wide eyes open about being shot. They all had enough chances to back off and one used a ruse on him.

Get a grip man



posted on Aug, 31 2020 @ 09:48 AM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck

So you didn't watch the video the OP is about then? Please keep on topic.
edit on 31-8-2020 by bastion because: (no reason given)


P.s - See my post earlier in the thread where I contrasted hids actions in this video of him beating up a girl for no reason to him having composure in the other shooting. Helps to actually read the thread then lie about what I'm saying when your clearly ignorant of my previous comments adressing all that.
edit on 31-8-2020 by bastion because: (no reason given)


Gothmog said people who shoot assaulters (one of the deads past crimes) are heroes - I asked if someone shoots Kyle will they be called a hero due his past crime assaulting women? It's a fair question using the same logic as Gothmog to point of the obvious flaw in the claim.

This is why reading a thread is important rather than putting words in others mouths, failing to read a thread and claiming others are ignorant.
edit on 31-8-2020 by bastion because: (no reason given)

edit on 31-8-2020 by bastion because: (no reason given)

edit on 31-8-2020 by bastion because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 31 2020 @ 10:11 AM
link   
a reply to: bastion


So you didn't watch the video the OP is about then? Please keep on topic.

I answered your question; if doing so was off-topic, the question is off topic.

And yes, I wasted a few minutes of my life watching a grainy, low-res video that wouldn't matter in any case. SELF DEFENSE IS NOT RETROACTIVE!

I swear, are people really this clueless? Self defense means IF YOU ATTACK SOMEONE WITH DEADLY FORCE THEY CAN KILL YOU.

Now please, stop asking off topic (by your own assertion) and meaningless questions.

TheRedneck



posted on Aug, 31 2020 @ 10:25 AM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck

The you clearly never read my posts and you're clogging up the topic. I've already stated all that pages back.

The Question was posed to Gothmog not you. Gothmmog posted 'those who shoot prior assualters are considered heroes', he's a logical guy so I posed the question does the same logic apply to if someone shoots Kyle for his previous assault or does it cancel out him being worthy of hero status - it was on topic with Gothmog's claim and follows the discussion of how when crimes are or aren't relevant to events side topic that's been going on i recent pages.

I don't see how it's meaningless - I'm genuinely intruiged if the logical remains consistent and am interested in Gothmogs response as he's a logical fella and it adds to the ongoing debate.

Before you call me clueless - read my previous posts in the thread.



He certainly didn't have anything like that temper on the night he shot people so I guess he deserves some respect for growing up. If he'd behaved as he did in this video on the night of the shootings, he'd have fired several magazine worth into the crowd. Thankfully he showed more self-control than the average person, let alone a hormone-ridden 17 year old, and only shot those that were trying to attack him and would have likely killed him if he hadn't given their past criminal records.


So why are you claiming I don't understand he had the right to use deadly force again? As I'm completely lost..feel free to PM to avoid clogging up the thread even further with false acussations, putting words in my mouth like my questionis pointless when it was adressed to another user and you haven't been following the convo (we both do maths, we can both spot circular logic).

Grab a coffee - I'm a right canankerous soul til I have my second down me and you're not usually this jumpy.
edit on 31-8-2020 by bastion because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 31 2020 @ 10:39 AM
link   
a reply to: Guiltyguitarist


You could call it triggered.


Well, you're responses are very similar to that displayed by some 'leftists' that you and many other Republican/Libertarian like supporters are quick to criticise and accuse of being 'triggered' etc.
The similarities really are striking....but I don't expect you to admit that but self-honesty is an amazingly rare attribute around these parts nowadays.



.....Or you could call it sick of wasting my mental energy reading futile whining on the internet.


You know, different opinions.....the cornerstone of the democratic process.
Unfortunately yet again, respecting differences of opinions is another rare commodity on here these days.

One would have thought that those who come on a site dedicated to respectful discussion would understand that, but apparently not.



Don’t like the law? Take it up with your legislators.


I do.



Don’t come on here and bitch about something that we can’t change and wouldn’t change even if we could.


Again, isn't that the point of ATS?
Or would you prefer it to be some right-wing echo chamber where all you hear and read are identital viewpoints and perspectives?
And I'll post whatever I wish whilst trying to stay within T&C....do you wish to stop me?
Would you like to stop me?
I would love to see you try.....not from the safety of behind your monitor but in real life.

It seems to me that you wish to suppress anything and anyone you deem as 'leftist' and as contrary to your world viewpoint.
How very American of you.

Time for a disclaimer: I certainly don't consider myself 'leftist'....or 'right wing' or any other cliched, dogmatic, locked in, ideological mind set or belief system.



Oh you’re British? Wtf do you care?


Because I'm a human being and I have an opinion which I choose to express here on ATS.
Where is your problem with that?
Don't hold back, at least have the balls to say what you really mean.



I stand by my original statement


I wouldn't expect you to reconsider your viewpoint.....ever.


edit on 31/8/20 by Freeborn because: typo



posted on Aug, 31 2020 @ 11:05 AM
link   
a reply to: ThatDamnDuckAgain





What is this thread doing then


One thing it's not doing is executing people. Unlike Rittenhouse.



You all jump to conclusions about him but where is the outrage about the crimes the three convicts did?


They where not convicts. A convict is someone who is serving a prison sentence. How did Rittenhouse know these people had past criminal records, so he could specifically target them ? Who told him ? Did he guess or just get lucky ? Can you answer me that?

Here's a vid of your " Hero " beating up a girl. Probably just about his level.

thesource.com...

Got anything else to say ?



posted on Aug, 31 2020 @ 11:08 AM
link   
a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

He's an idiot kid. He may be truly screwy with a police officer fantasy. Heck, he could be a future deep stater if he's really into authoritarianism. He may even have been groomed by them and sent on his merry way depending on who gave him that rifle and who took him there. It sure seemed like he was looking for a confrontation, hoping for a chance to play cop and good guy.
But the real thugs, the lowlifes, the scum, the criminals were the bozos he shot. One started the confrontation and Rittenhouse apparently shot him in self defense. Then another went after him chasing him and assaulted him and he got shot. Down goes bozo number two. Then finally the punk name Grosskelter tries to hit him with a skateboard and has a handgun pointed at him. He nearly loses his arm when he gets shot and laments at not killing the kid. All three of these scumbags were criminals. The one, Rosenbaum was a true lowlife, a sex offender. They weren't there doing good, they weren't defending anybody, they were there to cause violence. Grosskelter had a weapons charge and was a burglar. The other one had an assault charge, attempted strangulation and abduction. Rittenhouse was a stupid kid. These were adults and very bad people. But the mSM keeps pushing the fake news about them as victims.



posted on Aug, 31 2020 @ 11:20 AM
link   

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed


It's sad there are hundreds if not thousands of posts hailing young Kyle as a hero, so after viewing this has anyone changed their minds ?


Can you post one that shows him as a hero?

I think the vast majority talk about whether he was in self defense or not. Just being there in the position he was I see as a bad choice on all sides. If he was there at one property and wasn't roaming around, I don't know why, then ya he was doing work to make sure the property was not looted destroyed.

Now saying that...Everyone out there on the streets are there for a reason.... The first guy he shot was looking for a fight, looking to hurt someone, and he got Kyle in his sights that he chased a good distance to take his gun and whatever else he could do.

Bad decision on his part...As was the other two that came at him too as he sat on the ground after being knocked down.

In the end the only question to answer is whether he shot in self defense or not...



posted on Aug, 31 2020 @ 11:21 AM
link   
I think what is just so amazing to me is that although it seems to be typical here, is we have the thread on Ahmed Arbery. He was not committing a crime, if at best trespassing. He was chased by men with guns and vehicles that may have even have struck him.

The overwhelming posts were that he should never have defended himself. He should have kept running. Since it was shown he was blocked in, there were actual posts saying he should have run in a ditch or trespassed to other properties. When it was found out he basically did run in a ditch, it was actually said he could have found a spot to swim away. The posts stated the man doing the chasing was using self defense by killing Arbery.

Yet now here, the man being chased had every right to defend himself. I'm not stating whether he did or didn't. I think that kind of falls to whether the first killing was self defense or murder. My point is the double standard on the right course of action which appears to be because of who the the person being chased is.

I am not the only one who sees this hypocrisy, right?



posted on Aug, 31 2020 @ 11:26 AM
link   

originally posted by: bastion

Gothmog said people who shoot assaulters (one of the deads past crimes) are heroes - I asked if someone shoots Kyle will they be called a hero due his past crime assaulting women? It's a fair question using the same logic as Gothmog to point of the obvious flaw in the claim.

This is why reading a thread is important rather than putting words in others mouths, failing to read a thread and claiming others are ignorant.


Looked like a high school love spat..what was up with the fuzzy slippers on the one girl lol.



posted on Aug, 31 2020 @ 11:30 AM
link   
Honestly, their is no way to know for sure what motivated him to be at the protests. Likewise, the same can be said for every other person in attendance.

This is what I do know:

1 - He was there.

2 - He was openly brandishing his weapon.

3 - The first victim had gotten very confrontational with the shooter earlier that night.

4 - The first victim can be seen chasing the shooter.

5 - The first victim threw a heavy object, meant as a weapon, at the shooter.

6 - Shots were fired and the first victim was hit during the chase.

7 - The shooter stayed on the scene until realizing that doing so would undoubtedly lead to more bloodshed.

8 - He began running with, at least, a dozen angry protesters giving chase.

9 - He fell to the ground and was struck with a skateboard.

10 - Shots were fired, striking the second victim in the stomach.

11 - The third victim, holding a handgun, was struck in the bicep.

12 - The shooter got up and continued to run.

None of the shots were fired prior to him either being assaulted and/or as a last resort while in fear for his life. Had he not fired his weapon in any of those instances, he would have been either the 1st, 2nd or 3rd victim.

I would probably have never put myself in that situation in the first place, but thats irrelevant. If I had, and I suddenly found myself in his shoes at that moment, I can't say that I would have done or would have even wanted to have done anything differently.

13 - He was threatened and felt that his life was in danger and he reacted accordingly.


So, no I do not consider him a hero. He did what he had to do.

No, this video does nothing to change my opinion on the shooting. Nor should it yours.
edit on 8/31/2020 by Firewater because:



posted on Aug, 31 2020 @ 11:34 AM
link   

originally posted by: frogs453

Yet now here, the man being chased had every right to defend himself. I'm not stating whether he did or didn't. I think that kind of falls to whether the first killing was self defense or murder. My point is the double standard on the right course of action which appears to be because of who the the person being chased is.

I am not the only one who sees this hypocrisy, right?


Well it is only hypocrisy IF the person claiming as you suggest that Arbery was killed in self defense also is here in this OP suggesting the opposite in Rittenhouse case. Is that true? The number of people who felt that Arbery was killed in self defense was a very small few... The vast majority saw it differently, so if the vast majority here feel that Rittenhouse killed in self defense wouldn't that show a consistency?


edit on 31-8-2020 by Xtrozero because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 31 2020 @ 11:34 AM
link   

originally posted by: frogs453
I think what is just so amazing to me is that although it seems to be typical here, is we have the thread on Ahmed Arbery. He was not committing a crime, if at best trespassing. He was chased by men with guns and vehicles that may have even have struck him.

The overwhelming posts were that he should never have defended himself. He should have kept running. Since it was shown he was blocked in, there were actual posts saying he should have run in a ditch or trespassed to other properties. When it was found out he basically did run in a ditch, it was actually said he could have found a spot to swim away. The posts stated the man doing the chasing was using self defense by killing Arbery.

Yet now here, the man being chased had every right to defend himself. I'm not stating whether he did or didn't. I think that kind of falls to whether the first killing was self defense or murder. My point is the double standard on the right course of action which appears to be because of who the the person being chased is.

I am not the only one who sees this hypocrisy, right?


No, you're right. The hypocrisy is blatant and overt. One other thing, if Rittenhouse was there to protect some property, what was he doing patrolling the streets brandishing his gun when all he needed to do was show up at the property to do whatever job he was assigned to do. This doesn't look good for him, irrespective of what pushed him into the altercation and subsequent shootings.



posted on Aug, 31 2020 @ 11:38 AM
link   
a reply to: Jaellma

I read that the cops had told him to leave the property he was supposed to be defending. They moved everyone from that area. So yes, he was not asked by anyone to defend the area he was in, he also by law should have left at 1030pm the curfew for under 18 in WI



posted on Aug, 31 2020 @ 11:43 AM
link   

originally posted by: Jaellma

No, you're right. The hypocrisy is blatant and overt. One other thing, if Rittenhouse was there to protect some property, what was he doing patrolling the streets brandishing his gun when all he needed to do was show up at the property to do whatever job he was assigned to do. This doesn't look good for him, irrespective of what pushed him into the altercation and subsequent shootings.


I don't think many people were suggesting Arbery was killed in self defense... Maybe a few...And here we have the same situation that most here are saying Rittenhouse shot in self defense just as Arbery in self defense at the last minute struggled with the son.

The difference is the Dad and Son in Arbery case will go to jail and Rittenhouse will not.... No hypocisy here...

BTW what do you mean by "brandishing a gun"? Was he waving it around pointing it at people or did he have it strapped across his body?


edit on 31-8-2020 by Xtrozero because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 31 2020 @ 11:47 AM
link   
a reply to: Xtrozero
A quick look shows some of the same names. That thread had the same battle in opposite form. Majority blamed Arbery for causing his own death or it was justified because he wandered thru a construction site that had video of 10 other people doing the same thing but were not chased with guns.

Big difference was the shooter was not arrested for almost 3 months until the video finally surfaced. At least in this case there was no delay and will be up to the courts




top topics



 
19
<< 15  16  17    19  20  21 >>

log in

join