Quote:
Originally Posted by OrangeBlossomBaby
Well - you can ask MOST people in this country. Since every single person in this country had the same options:
a) Show up in a town you don't know anything about, in a state you don't even live in, at while you are still a minor who isn't even eligible to join the armed forces, armed with a semi-automatic weapon that had previously been classified as an actual assault weapon, to an event where you know you will be expecting violence, which is why you are bringing your firearm, to "protect" or "defend" people who never asked you to show up at all.
Or
b) Stay home, or go to work, or go to school if it was on a school day, or go outside and toss a football with your pals, or go shopping, or "anything OTHER than the above paragraph."
Most people chose option b.
In fact, even most people who chose to attend the event weren't armed at all, let alone with a semi-automatic weapon. MOST people chose not to be armed with a firearm at all.
MOST people were not shot at, and MOST people were not killed. And MOST people - including the people who WERE armed - chose not to shoot anyone.
|
Oh boy, facts be dammed yet again.
Rittenhouse's father lives in the town. His friend lives there and he is frequently there.
There is no definition of an "assault weapon" because it doesn't actually exist, but is a term coined by the anti-gun lobby
Actually there is evidence presented at trial that he was there cleaning up graffiti, helped put out a fire and provided some first aid. Yes he admitted to lying about being an EMT, but he is also not charged with practicing medicine without a license or crossing the line in the type of first aid he provided.
I know this won't happen (yet again), where is your PROOF that no one asked him to come?
You mean the people who broke concrete blocks to toss rocks at the police? You mean like the people who shot fireworks and incendiary devices at the police? You mean like the prosecutor's witness who admitted he illegally carried a
semi-automatic handgun and POINTED it at Rittenhouse BEFORE he was shot? You mean like the "adult" who used a skateboard as a weapon to attack Rittenhouse before he was shot?
About the ONLY thing I can find true was the very last statement: "MOST people were not shot at, and MOST people were not killed. And MOST people - including the people who WERE armed - chose not to shoot anyone". You do realize that a reporter with video tape showed that Rittenhouse passed by several groups of people and neither he or they interacted with each other? Could it be that they were not in the process of attacking him, so he saw no need to defend himself? Could it be that they were not threatened by him because he did not raise his weapon at them, merely walked past them?
No, we can't consider there facts because they don't fit the clearly inaccurate narrative that some insist on continuing.