[DAVES]

Originally Posted by Ptmckiou

You would be assuming that only one side had AR-15’s. That wouldn’t be reality. Both sides always have access to guns, and thus the reason things can go sideways fast in argumentative situations. Vigilantism rarely harbors peace, but usually antagonizes the situation because uneducated (in law enforcement) hotheads seem to fuel/escalate situations, instead of de escalate situations (which usually takes training).

RE: Training
Am I the only one to wonder where were the police? Apparently close by as after the shooting he was WALKING to the police station.

[JMintzer]

Originally Posted by DAVES

I support the right to own a gun. However the reality is you being able to fight an enemy on our own soil is not REALITY. Average age in the villages is 70. My knees, my back are both shot. You cannot LEGALLY own typical automatic combat weapons. You cannot for example own a 50 cal machine gun. Heck if you did own one the bullets are like $1.50 each. A tank, a canon, jets etc.

Should we ever be invaded by a FOREIGN ENEMY, they would likely not care about a bunch or 70 year olds in the Villages. A DOMESTIC ENEMY is far more likely.

Just picking nits, but yes, you most certainly CAN own a typical automatic combat weapon...

And the number of deer hunters in PA alone would be larger than all but a few country's standing armies... Now add Wisconsin, Michigan, etc, etc, etc and you have one of, if not the largest number of armed people in the world...

All it takes is the proper Tax Stamp and paperwork (plus loads of $$$). Feeding them, otoh, is quite expensive...

[thevillages2013]

Originally Posted by Ptmckiou

You would be assuming that only one side had AR-15’s. That wouldn’t be reality. Both sides always have access to guns, and thus the reason things can go sideways fast in argumentative situations. Vigilantism rarely harbors peace, but usually antagonizes the situation because uneducated (in law enforcement) hotheads seem to fuel/escalate situations, instead of de escalate situations (which usually takes training).

Not assuming anything. Kyle was a good shot

[JMintzer]

Originally Posted by tklloop

Let’s ask them why they were there?? Oh wait we can’t,, the were murdered!!!

Not according to the jury...

[thevillages2013]

Originally Posted by DAVES

RE: Training
Am I the only one to wonder where were the police? Apparently close by as after the shooting he was WALKING to the police station.

The police station he went to first was boarded up in prep for the riots

[JMintzer]

Originally Posted by tklloop

I have one question. If a 16 year old boy had not crossed state lines with an ASSAULT RIFLE and placed himself in a dangerous and volatile situation,,, would any of this happened???? NO! Kiel Rottenhouse was guilty as hell!!

Good thing that didn't happen... But you would have known that if you had actually watched the trial...

[noslices1]

Originally Posted by tklloop

Sounds like they nailed it! You have proven documented facts to dispute these??

You should have watched the trial, then maybe you would not post the trash that you did. Kyle was 17 years old, not 16. Your other statements came right from MSNBC. They are still saying he is guilty, even though a jury, after 25 hours of deliberation, has rendered a NOT GUILTY verdict.

Arguing with a fool will make me a fool also, so I’m done.

[JMintzer]

Originally Posted by tklloop

Sounds like they nailed it! You have proven documented facts to dispute these??

Yes, actually watching the trial (which it is glaringly obvious you did not...)

[Holpat39]

Originally Posted by tklloop

You may want to turn off Fox fake news and join the real world!

FACT: he was 16 when this happened!
FACT: he traveled from Illinois to Wisconsin!
FACT: he carried and AR-15 assault rifle.
FACT: he murdered two innocent people who thought he was an “active shooter”!

Know the facts before you respond and make yourself look,,,,, trumpy?

Your so called facts are wrong. You don't know the demographics of Antioch IL and Kenosha Wis. They border each other. Kyle's father lives in Kenosha. Kyle had every right to be in Kenosha as unfortunately the rioters also had the right to be in Kenosha since this is a free country and we all have the right to travel where we want without interference. The two killed were not innocent people. They were there to commit mayhem and destruction not to protect businesses or protest peacefully. Maybe you should have watched the trial from beginning to end before stating your untrue facts.

[DAVES]

Originally Posted by Johnsocat

I would argue that they are not our "leaders", they are our "representatives" and our "public servants".

Some will argue about anything anything. THEY is a very large group. For the point what does it matter?

[DAVES]

Originally Posted by sparky4840

I'm sure Fox was unbiased, correct?

Fortunately we have choices. With it being so easy to do, record say CNN and watch FOX
on the same story.

[JMintzer]

Some interesting FACTS many people seem to want to ignore...

1: Kyle Rittenhouse had a ballistic vest (they called it "body armor" in the trial, but it's really just the same soft vest the police use)...

He was given the vest by the police when he did his police cadet program...

He gave said body armor to a friend, saying he didn't need it because he was leaving the car dealership to give medical aid. Now, why would someone give up their protection if they thought they were going out "looking for trouble"?

2: Yes, Kyle Rittenhouse did travel about 17 mile from Antioch to Kenosha. It's a trip he made almost daily, for his job as a lifeguard and to visit his father and several other relatives. It is less than the distance from TV to Ocala...

3: He did not bring a rifle of any kind with him. It was already in Kenosha, where it was bought, and stored at his friend's house...

It was legal for him, per state law, to carry said rifle. The prosecution never bothered to measure the rifle before charging him with a crime...

4: Gaige Grosskreutz traveled over 50 miles to attend the "mostly peaceful protest"... He DID bring his illegally carried handgun with him. Odd for someone just looking to be an EMT, no?

5: Rittenhouse did not "illegally drink" in a bar. Per state law, he was allowed to have said drink as long as he was with a parent or guardian (which he was)...

6: Zero, I repeat ZERO evidence was produced proving he was involved in ANY "white supremacy" groups. He voluntarily handed over his unlocked phone to the police, as well as access to his social media accounts...

Anyone who watched the trial would know these things. Anyone who depended on certain "news" outlets would not and would continue to parrot the lies they are still being told...

[DAVES]

Originally Posted by MDLNB

Ah, but we all know that he would not lie in court, especially if that lie was instrumental in getting a plea deal on his charge of carrying a pistol with an expired license.

Lie in court, Reality people are told, trained by legal representatives how to SPIN their testimony. They are rarely prosecuted for lying You swear to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth. You can bet they will not allow you the time necessary to tell the whole truth.

You swear on the bible. Perhaps that had more meaning in the past. What you are stating is that if you lie you will be damned.

[DAVES]

Originally Posted by ThirdOfFive

I disagree. The winners here are those who believe in law and order. I can guarantee you that those rioters are going to think twice the next time, if they think they have carte blanche to burn, loot and destroy.

Hopeful but doubtful. Historically at a hanging or a guillotining, pickpockets were very active.

[kenoc7]

Originally Posted by John41

I agree with not guilty on all counts. Prosecutor needs to be sanctioned for violating defendants rights and pointing a gun at the jury. Watched a lot of the testimony rather than getting media bias. Great day for 2a.

The person that needed to be sanctioned was the biased and bigoted judge who allowed vigilantism to win.