Holy shit - this is exactly why I don't post here and illustrates how much you just want to argue side vs. side. Did you not see how many times that I've said he is not guilty?
You did, but you were saying alot of the 'this can be a bad precident' talking points. I wanted to post something to remind you of who those are on the 'other side' of this issue.
Those nuts on twitter calling for Kyle's head.
Honestly, I'm surprised they deliberated that long as it was an easy decision.
A few Karens were on the jury.
He's innocent and not guilty, but honestly pretty fucking stupid to be in that situation and lucky it didn't go bad. If you are a parent, I can't imagine you'd support your undersized 17 year old carrying an AR to a riot as a vigilante. And before you start talking about the attackers, as mentioned many times, total dumbass decisions all around. But guess what? I'd expect a bunch of fucking idiots at a riot and would likely steer clear if possible.
No one's saying Kyle's decisions were the smartest, if his main priority was self-preservation.
The dumbest decision of the night? Those who decided to attack, repeatedly, someone holding an AR-15.
1. You, along with many others, love this side vs. side bullshit of an antiquated political system.
As opposed to the 'Why can't we get along?' people?
2. Ironically, side vs side is probably one of the worst things for our nation and our foreign enemies love it. Aren't you military or former military? Do you not acknowledge this?
Are you aware the 'sides' have always existed since the founding of America?
Some wanted George Washington to be crowded king.
3. You actually think more armed citizens at a riot is a good idea, or on the flip side, you think this is actually a deterrent for riots. Either way, I don't think you could be more wrong. Again, I thought you were military (I could be wrong), but I'd guess most in law enforcement or military will agree that the bulk of citizens, even if typically responsible gun owners, have no business being in a high pressure situation like a riot armed to the gills.
Ever heard of term 'Show of force?'
Basically, a person that looks like they'd be able to defend themselves in a fight won't ever have to.
Rioters are cowards and only riot in large numbers because the numbers can overwhelm a police force. If there's armed citizens, even a militia, to stand by at locations most likely to be vandalized and destroyed (defense) the cops can be be the offensive force.
And yes, I am former military, and have dealt with riots.
As for the 'most gun owners have no business being in high pressure situations' that's something for the rioters to consider before they riot. Some may have itchy trigger fingers.
By saying that, its a 'show of force.' A veiled threat. But keep in mind that a person's feeling their life is being threatened in a 'high pressure situation' is very subject to interpretation.
4. You bringing up the facts of the case shows you aren't even hearing what I'm saying. It shows the mindset that most are doing with the case. He's critiquing Rittenhouse, he must be on the "other side"! Yes, I know all of those facts, and that's why I said Not Guilty was correct.
You were saying irrelevant details unrelated to the attack itself.
5. Apathy on the situation? Honestly, I view it as the exact opposite. Instead of being so narrow minded and sheepish that I'd need to include myself on "one side" of the situation, I can look at both sides and see faults and correct points.
You're not a critic reviewing a movie, Siskel & Ebert, this is real life and you're acting like you're just observing and giving 'Thumbs Up' & 'Thumbs Down' to both sides.
You don't sound enlightened, you sound like a coward.
I don't normally engage in all of this because it is all noise. Here's what I know for a fact: I've set up my life to excel under any leadership. The quality of my life is not going to be contingent upon a political party being in office or in power. I'm not immune to the effects of the government, but I'm going to adapt and still improve. Just like with when Trump was elected and just like with when Biden was elected, winners will continue to win and losers will continue to lose. Most throwing stones from one side to the other are guilty of doing the same shit.
That's awesome.
Now what are you going to do when political & economic forces beyond your control and you're not able to excell under the current leadership?
My final point is the irony about the media critique. This trial changes very little. Will Rittenhouse get payouts? Probably, but the media companies will still profit. Why? Because those of you who seem to hate the media so much will continue to feed them heavily through clicks and views. Your die hard and never ending debates on your side vs. the other is feeding exactly what you are bitching about.
They get paid from me posting their twitter links?
I don't surf their websites.
I don't watch their YouTube videos.
I don't watch their TV channels.
So exactly how am I promoting them?