Weird thing... you can criticize violent protestors (wanting law enforcement to respond) AND at the same time criticize vigilantism and not want untrained teenagers patrolling riot areas carrying illegal weapons and shooting and killing people.
No heroes (especially the rioters) but somehow you choose to act like this factors into any legal or constitutional sense. Floyd had a knee to his neck and was not resisting arrest. His past is irrelevant. let me guess, you were cheering when emmet till was tied to cotton gin because supposedly whistled at a white woman which was de facto a crime as well. The left is cringe with their virtue signaling but so are you with your I get my sauces frok tweets and open hating on black ppl / anything covid related
Are you calling kyles attempts to put out the fires vigilantism or the self defense? Or both? Either way you are wrong and dumb
Weird thing... that's not what I responded to. I responded to him calling it a 'protest'. Clearly it was more dangerous and violent than a 'protest'.
My friend felt the need to tell me what my views as a Democrat are the other day. It was crazy! I wasn’t even aware of what I apparently believe in.
There is no rational person in this world who doesn’t not think Rittenhouse was not acting as an enforcement agent who would claim to be deputized by the 2nd amendment which gives the right to “A well regulated militia.” Under that right is how it is justified for citizens to bear arms and in this case act as a law enforcement deputy in absence of actual law enforcement. Yes it is very much the definition of vigilantism…. Which is exactly what the right wing Supreme Court has interpreted the constitution to allow since the 2008 Heller decision. Before that decision in 2008 by an activist court what Rittenhouse did would probably have resulted in a much different decision. In that decision the court decided to just forget that the word “regulated” exists in the 2nd amendment and that established ruling after ruling that now allows for the wild Wild West where you can pretty much carry any weapon anywhere and shoot anyone if you yourself can sell that you are defending yourself against anything. I for the life of me cannot understand why you’d even want to entertain the idea that he was not acting as a vigilantee. Your perception of the 2nd amendment glorifies that so it’s weird you’d then want to distance yourself from glorifying it.
no person who doesn't not think was not acting that sentence needs parsing, I'm not sure what it says
You can't call rioters protestors. Once you start grouping them all together, you are justifying violence against peaceful protestors which is what these guys want. The national guard and police should be left to deal with rioters. Not 17 year old kids from another state. This idea of getting people rounded up with guns and a posse to go to protests to keep the peace shouldn't be conflated with defending cities from riots. They aren't the same thing.
You’re missing out on the same “I went to the bar and ordered a Rittenhouse drink” joke being posted 700 times.
Read what you posted that I replied to. No where did you mention anything about riots or criminal behavior.
Got it so your basic argument is to say that all these black people were criminals anyway and deserve to have some white power guys kill them? You gonna flash that OK symbol at us now?
