Kyle Rittenhouse Trial

[*Nately120*]

(11-18-2021, 02:08 PM)jj22 Wrote: Honestly guys. None of us should want 17 year old's being vigilantes with AR 17. I don't know why that is even supported by some or seen as OK. The fact that it is highlights a real problem with American society. Or maybe politics. But I'm not sure how anyone in their right mind taking politics out would think this is ok. Like will people really have no problem with their 17 year old kid leaving the house to go be a vigilante in the middle of something like this?

I'd rather go to jail then to come home and face my parents after leaving out and getting into the mess Kyle got himself into.

Ida know...there is a romanticized idea about "shooting someone who deserves it" that floats around.  The holidays are really the only time I'm around my wife's family and they are evangelical rural folk who always seem to get around to two topics of conversation that they talk about in very glowing and positive terms:

#1 - This country is too soft on criminals and people should be executed via gunshot
#2 - How they'd all definitely shoot someone who broke into their house

I think you underestimate how, at least in bs-talk, people view the prospect of getting to shoot someone "who deserves it."  I know one person who shot someone in self defense and the view that he is almost lucky to have gotten the chance to do so is pretty interesting. 

So yeah, I think the ideation of self defense via justified shooting is right up there with winning the lottery and being famous as far as stuff people dream about.  For what it is worth I think for a lot of people Kyle Rittenhouse represents one of the new American dreams.

[jj22]

Judge bans MSNBC from court based off or right wing conspiracy.

https://twitter.com/FoxNews/status/1461389505143975938

To summarize. Some random guy ran a red light or some sort of traffic violation which was in distance of the jury bus claims he was from MSNBC and was following jury bus (unverified as admitted by judge - would be easy to verify their employee), and the judge bans the whole network from courtroom.

[Truck_1_0_1_]

(11-18-2021, 02:28 PM)Nately120 Wrote: Ida know...there is a romanticized idea about "shooting someone who deserves it" that floats around.  The holidays are really the only time I'm around my wife's family and they are evangelical rural folk who always seem to get around to two topics of conversation that they talk about in very glowing and positive terms:

#1 - This country is too soft on criminals and people should be executed via gunshot
#2 - How they'd all definitely shoot someone who broke into their house

I think you underestimate how, at least in bs-talk, people view the prospect of getting to shoot someone "who deserves it."  I know one person who shot someone in self defense and the view that he is almost lucky to have gotten the chance to do so is pretty interesting. 

So yeah, I think the ideation of self defense via justified shooting is right up there with winning the lottery and being famous as far as stuff people dream about.  For what it is worth I think for a lot of people Kyle Rittenhouse represents one of the new American dreams.

Then there's Scott Hall's story; got into a fight with a guy who was jealous that he was with his a girl, struggled and Scott shot him in self defense, when he was able to wrest the guy's gun away.

He has stated numerous times that it's an incident he can't ever forget and still bothers him to this day.

Some people are just desensitized/selfish and don't care about things like this, even though it is incredibly serious,

[Sled21]

(11-18-2021, 02:08 PM)jj22 Wrote: Honestly guys. None of us should want 17 year old's being vigilantes with AR 17. I don't know why that is even supported by some or seen as OK. The fact that it is highlights a real problem with American society. Or maybe politics. But I'm not sure how anyone in their right mind taking politics out would think this is ok. Like will people really have no problem with their 17 year old kid leaving the house to go be a vigilante in the middle of something like this?

I'd rather go to jail then to come home and face my parents after leaving out and getting into the mess Kyle got himself into.

I really don't think anyone thinks it was a good idea for a 17 year old kid to be in that situation, with an AR-15 or AR-17 either one. That said, nothing Rittenhouse did by being there was illegal and he had just as much right to be on that street as those who attacked him. And when they attacked him, he had the right to defend himself. It's just as simple as that.

[Sled21]

(11-18-2021, 02:28 PM)Nately120 Wrote: Ida know...there is a romanticized idea about "shooting someone who deserves it" that floats around.  The holidays are really the only time I'm around my wife's family and they are evangelical rural folk who always seem to get around to two topics of conversation that they talk about in very glowing and positive terms:

#1 - This country is too soft on criminals and people should be executed via gunshot
#2 - How they'd all definitely shoot someone who broke into their house

I think you underestimate how, at least in bs-talk, people view the prospect of getting to shoot someone "who deserves it."  I know one person who shot someone in self defense and the view that he is almost lucky to have gotten the chance to do so is pretty interesting. 

So yeah, I think the ideation of self defense via justified shooting is right up there with winning the lottery and being famous as far as stuff people dream about.  For what it is worth I think for a lot of people Kyle Rittenhouse represents one of the new American dreams.

Remember the father in Texas who waited in the airport lobby, then shot the man who kidnapped and killed his son as Deputies walked him past there? Did it right on National TV, and was not convicted.

[Dill]

(11-18-2021, 04:31 PM)jj22 Wrote: Judge bans MSNBC from court based off or right wing conspiracy.

https://twitter.com/FoxNews/status/1461389505143975938

To summarize. Some random guy ran a red light or some sort of traffic violation which was in distance of the jury bus claims he was from MSNBC and was following jury bus (unverified as admitted by judge - would be easy to verify their employee), and the judge bans the whole network from courtroom.

Heard the Hannity version of this on my way home from Walmart a few minutes ago.

He didn't need to "verify" anything. 

There should be laws against jury intimidation. Mistrial with Prejudice!!  

[Sled21]

(11-18-2021, 04:31 PM)jj22 Wrote: Judge bans MSNBC from court based off or right wing conspiracy.

https://twitter.com/FoxNews/status/1461389505143975938

To summarize. Some random guy ran a red light or some sort of traffic violation which was in distance of the jury bus claims he was from MSNBC and was following jury bus (unverified as admitted by judge - would be easy to verify their employee), and the judge bans the whole network from courtroom.

NBC has confirmed the guy was working for them. He was a freelance, following the van at the behest of the NBC producer. 

[Sled21]

(11-18-2021, 01:33 PM)Dill Wrote: Yah! I heard he even talked about "Negro leagues" while praising Satchel Paige, referring to segregated baseball. One of his most "disturbing and troubling moments," according to Hannity.  

I don't believe Biden ever described integrated schools as "racial jungles" though. Are you referring to his 1977 claim that without ORDERLY integration, which he supported, schools could become racial jungles? He was supporting school integration back when Trump was successfully sued for housing discrimination. 

That's why I prefer Biden's record on civil rights. Apparently most black voters do as well. 

Do "both sides" really do it, or is this a manufactured double standard. What do you think? 


"Black men and kids" were shooting "their own"? 

You are referring to an accidental discharge, right? Things like that happen when people gather with guns to protest.

I think black kids are allowed to cross state lines with guns, and form their own armed militias and come to mass protests of police shootings of black individuals. But I don't celebrate this expansion of militia ideology, nor tolerance of their presence at peaceful protests. 

I'm not sure a black kid with a long gun could have run around the Kenosha riot without some police interest, and I don't mean handing him a bottle of water. 

Even if this hypothetical kid wanted to "run to danger" on the side of the police, its not so clear they would recognize him as a "good (black) guy with a gun," is it?   

You realize Biden authored the 1991 Crime Bill, right?

And as to your second paragraph, that was my point. When over 1000 African-American Protestors came to Louisville with guns, nobody bothered them until 3 of them were shot, and at that point they were given medical treatment and yes, water was handed out to them. (Wearing all black clothing in Louisville on a 95 degree day with full sun and high humidity wasn't the smartest thing their leader ever ordered) 

[jj22]

(11-18-2021, 06:00 PM)Sled21 Wrote: NBC has confirmed the guy was working for them. He was a freelance, following the van at the behest of the NBC producer. 

Well then I have no problem with it then. The ban that is.

[BengalYankee]

(11-18-2021, 06:09 PM)Sled21 Wrote: You realize Biden authored the 1991 Crime Bill, right?

The 1991 Crime Bill affected every race right? 

[Sled21]

(11-18-2021, 06:14 PM)BengalYankee Wrote: The 1991 Crime Bill affected every race right? 

Disproportionally affected African Americans..

[Sled21]

I see where they identified "Jump Kick Man," and once again, the prosecution knew who it was and did not say. Oh yeah, he's a career criminal as well.

[jj22]

Is "Jump Kick Man" on trial?

[jj22]

Kyle was an active shooter. The only active shooter. Anyone who tried to stop him even dude with the skate board is considered a hero for trying to stop an active shooter when you have nothing but a skateboard.

Typically this bravery is applauded. Before politics demanded folks continue to let Kyle kill because they didn't like the unarmed people he was killing.

[GMDino]

This whole thing with the producer from MSNBC is weird because the judge used his name and then banned an entire network over it.

Same judge who (rightfully) wouldn't allow the men killed to be called victims until they had a trial.

[jj22]

It was an extreme move. But MSNBC should have known the judge they were dealing with and not risked anything. Reporters do follow the jury bus though (that is how they get a heads up when the deliberations are over). It happens more than we know and the jury aren't intimidated because they don't know what cars behind them on a bus are reporters from regular people. But reporters are everywhere we are learning but in their face in the hotel room lobby etc. They are "hidden" mostly and know not to approach them.

And it had nothing to do with reporting on what is going on inside the courtroom. But we've established the judges "issues" and it's pretty well known at this point.

It wasn't scandalous enough for the judge to react like he did. It wasn't like the reporter got caught talking to them or interviewing them. It wasn't like he got caught harassing the bus or forcing it to change direction or something.

It was a traffic violation and that is the only reason why we heard of it. If it was thought to be scandalous he wouldn't have said he was a reporter. He did because it was common practice to keep an eye on the jury bus to see when they are headed back to the trial during deliberations. Everyone wants to be the first to report that the jury has reached a verdict. Fox news reporters and all other media outlet reporters probably drove past him and chuckled as they continued on the pursuit of the bus.

[Dill]

(11-19-2021, 10:38 AM)jj22 Wrote: Is "Jump Kick Man" on trial?

No one knows who he is.

[jj22]

(11-19-2021, 01:25 PM)Dill Wrote: No one knows who he is.

I thought I was the only one who didn't know but was trying to fake the funk like I did..... 

[Dill]

(11-18-2021, 06:09 PM)Sled21 Wrote: You realize Biden authored the 1991 Crime Bill, right?

I appreciate your response, Sled.  But did you mean the 1994 crime bill? 

If so, I'm not clear how this relates to what we were discussing.  Would you be arguing that it rolled back civil rights gains? Possibly, but Biden was "leading from behind" on that bill, with 58% support among Black voters. What was Trump's view on crime and the death penalty during this period? We get some indication of that as he continued advocating the death penalty for the Central Park five, even AFTER their coerced convictions were vacated. Traditionally, few black voters have trusted white courts to sort out the death penalty fairly, so none that I know of backed Trump on this. He didn't care. 

You were comparing Biden and Trump in terms of "racist" behaviors. Trump will always lose that fight. 

(11-18-2021, 06:09 PM)Sled21 Wrote: And as to your second paragraph, that was my point. When over 1000 African-American Protestors came to Louisville with guns, nobody bothered them until 3 of them were shot, and at that point they were given medical treatment and yes, water was handed out to them. (Wearing all black clothing in Louisville on a 95 degree day with full sun and high humidity wasn't the smartest thing their leader ever ordered) 

Were the police showing their "appreciation" for support when they handed out that water? 

I get you point, I think. In the Louisville case black men were allowed to carry guns, and weren't arrested. I wonder if there are some differences in circumstances, though. 

I'm not sure that THOUSANDS of armed men, peacefully marching in broad daylight, tells us how police in Kenosha would have reacted to an open carrying black man from another community, operating singly, at night after curfew, during a riot involving arson, assaults, and shooting.

[Dill]

(11-19-2021, 12:15 PM)GMDino Wrote: This whole thing with the producer from MSNBC is weird because the judge used his name and then banned an entire network over it.
Same judge who (rightfully) wouldn't allow the men killed to be called victims until they had a trial.

Lesson to the press.

Maybe some of those channels will think twice now before running segments on the judge's behavior. 

Press should not be allowed in court if they are going to show us how judges really behave.