1. #15401
    Quote Originally Posted by Krastyn View Post
    I'm being accused of being dishonest because my interpretation of events differs from theirs. I've said repeatedly the facts don't back up what has been said. So before you mount your high horse trying to say I'm maligning anyone who disagrees, I'm being maligned to begin with, for my opinion. It's quite telling that you're directing this at me though. not the person who initially misframed, who happens to agree with your interpretation of events.



    Then you apparently can't read very well:


    I have repeatedly said that based on the evidence released so far he will be found innocent. I've also said he's an idiot, and shouldn't have put himself there in the first place with a gun.



    Under the law, whether or not Rittenhouse's possession of the rifle is legal or not has no bearing on weather or not he is entitled to self defense. This is not an opinion, this is fact. Much like how a convicted felon barred from posession guns can use a gun in self defense, and be found not guilty, but will still be found guilty on the posession.



    If it isn't illegal, then why do you need to specifically state "crossing state lines"? Why does it matter that Rittenhouse crossed a state line to get somewhere, when other people traveled farther to reach the same place, but didn't cross a state line? It's not even one of the charges he is facing.



    Which still requires the actual conviction of a crime. Rittenhouse was in Kenosha working that day. Unless that Shift was booked that morning or the night before, it's going to be hard to convince anyone that his intent when he crossed the border that morning it was to shoot 3 people, instead of go to work.



    Why is it only intent for Rittenhouse, and for no one else?

    So if Rittenhouse wearing gloves is intent for him to commit a crime, Rosenbaum putting on a mask before engaging Rittenhouse would show the same.




    The fuck it doesn't. The application of self defense doesn't matter if you were armed or not prior to the encounter. You're effectively arguing that any person in an open carry or concealed carry state who walks through any unsafe part of town is guilty of murder if the are attacked.

    I don't deny that he intended to bring protection if the situation arose. Having a gun does not make him guilty. How it was used is what does.



    Do you have a statistical representation of that? The majority of protesters and counter-protesters on any topic don't often engage in violence. It's the extremes on both sides.

    If the protesters were so non-violent, why did Rosenbaum chase down Rittenhouse? To give him a hug? Why did the "paramedic" say his biggest regret was not pulling his gun sooner and emptying his clip into Kyle? It doesn't matter what proportion of which group is violent. What matters are the people involved in this case.



    He's entitled to his opinion. But if he's going to go on a paragraph long rant about how I'm being intellectually dishonest, and his only backup is his opinion, it's fucking hilarious.



    One of the pillars of a successful self defense is that you tried to get out of the situation. That you were left with no other choice. Rosenbaum actively pursued Rittenhouse, threw an object at him, and then upon reaching him, tried to take his gun (all part of the criminal complaint). Rosenbaum at no point has a claim to self defense. Well, he could claim it, but has no grounds for it. The only thing that will matter (as we've discussed before) is whether Rittenhouse's response was proportional.



    And if you want to play this card, then a conviction of murder proves nothing either. So if court rulings mean nothing, everyone is entitled to their own opinion.
    I'm literally begging you to be Kyle's lawyer. Please, please, please, please.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Krastyn View Post
    If only the law worked that way. Guilty before even going to trial. He's guilty in your opinion. Full stop. It has the same weight as me saying he's innocent.

    Which as said before doesn't negate the right to self-defense.



    It's hard to take what you're saying seriously.
    Look man, you have have too many hills you're willing to die on. You can only die once so trying to tell me he didn't break the law by having the gun when the law is not ambiguous about it at all, is fucking stupid.
    When I despair, I remember that all through history, there have been tyrants and murderers, and for a time, they seem invincible.
    But in the end, they always fall. Always.- Mahatma Gandhi


  2. #15402
    I'm still amused that the LA Sherriff's office straight up lied about the NPR-affiliated journalist, knowing full well that there's likely dozens of videos of her arrest to disprove their bullshit.

    Like, the fuck we supposed to believe the cops when they're gonna tell the public such baldface, transparent lies with such regularity?

  3. #15403
    Quote Originally Posted by Felya View Post
    Why? Are you a tax lawyer or something? Why exactly is your assessment required?
    You brought it up that it was the same. In order to compare if they are the same, I need an example.

    Quote Originally Posted by Felya View Post
    What? How is the law written in the first place? You are literally making shit up now...
    A law can be challenged after it has been passed, and be found to be wrong. It's not going to be challenged though until either a) someone preemptively challenges it, or b) gets charged under the law, and then challenges it. We're in case b). So unless you have a bunch of case law precedence where a 17 year old in Wisconsin who has passed the certification has been charged and convicted without appeal, then the avenue is there. Still may not work. Whether it does or does not, the law is still poorly written.

    Quote Originally Posted by Felya View Post
    Why? Did his lawyer state his claim or not?
    Because I'm not doing your research for you.

    Quote Originally Posted by Felya View Post
    Who knows? It looks like we know... That doesn’t sound like he is using your defense... you should call him...
    I'll believe what the lawyer's defense will be at the time of trial. Anything said pre-trial I'll take as a possibility. You do you though. It's your right.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Bodakane View Post
    I'm literally begging you to be Kyle's lawyer. Please, please, please, please.
    Only if you can be the DA.


    Quote Originally Posted by Bodakane View Post
    Look man, you have have too many hills you're willing to die on. You can only die once so trying to tell me he didn't break the law by having the gun when the law is not ambiguous about it at all, is fucking stupid.
    The fact that you think the legality of the weapon is a hill I'm willing to die on shows you're complete inability to comprehend what I'm typing, or your blatant dishonesty about it. I'm not willing to die on any of these hills. You're just of the opinion he's 100% guilty of everything and I'm not. And apparently believing otherwise makes me a Trump-supporting, white nationalist loving, gun right supporting nutjob. You're welcome to think all that. You're entitled to your opinion, no matter how wrong it may be.

    Whether or not the gun is illegal is by and large irrelevant. Every charge except the gun charge are going to hinge on the Rosenbaum interaction. Rittenhouse could have illegally purchased the gun, posted a Facebook video stating he's going shoot someone tonight, driven across the state line only to go to the protests, and still get off on self-defense. It would make it a lot harder on his defense team, but it doesn't invalidate his rights of self-defense.

    I've repeatedly said, it's going to come down to whether or not a jury thinks Rittenhouse might have suffered serious bodily injury if he had not shot Rosenbaum.

  4. #15404
    https://www.cnn.com/2020/09/14/us/or...rnd/index.html

    Oh hey look, vigilante's in Oregon are either refusing to evacuate their homes and placing signs up warning "looters" that they'll be shot, or are straight up illegally stopping people at gunpoint thinking they are looters.

    What's spawning this insanity, that even sheriff's in Oregon are asking people not to do because it's illegal and dangerous?

    Fucking unhinged nutters who believe that the fires are all the fault of "antifa" despite there being no evidence to suggest anything of the sort. Helped by a random sheriff's sergeant who reported "antifa looting" with members armed with chainsaws to cut down power lines...something which was not supported by anything beyond the sergeant hearing about that from a random person and not bothering to confirm it.

  5. #15405
    Quote Originally Posted by Edge- View Post
    https://www.cnn.com/2020/09/14/us/or...rnd/index.html

    Oh hey look, vigilante's in Oregon are either refusing to evacuate their homes and placing signs up warning "looters" that they'll be shot, or are straight up illegally stopping people at gunpoint thinking they are looters.

    What's spawning this insanity, that even sheriff's in Oregon are asking people not to do because it's illegal and dangerous?

    Fucking unhinged nutters who believe that the fires are all the fault of "antifa" despite there being no evidence to suggest anything of the sort. Helped by a random sheriff's sergeant who reported "antifa looting" with members armed with chainsaws to cut down power lines...something which was not supported by anything beyond the sergeant hearing about that from a random person and not bothering to confirm it.
    It's Bunkerville all over again.

    I have family in rural areas near the fires, and the militias have gone haywire. It may be even worse than during the late 1980's, early 1990's.
    Quote Originally Posted by Knadra View Post
    Multiculturalism hurts and kills. This happened before Trump and it would be happening without him. Racism arises from a multicultural society. If we were monocultural, people would not see issues through the lens of race.
    This is a poster saying that people are at fault for being the victims of terrorism, because they are not white.

  6. #15406
    Quote Originally Posted by Krastyn View Post
    The fact that you think the legality of the weapon is a hill I'm willing to die on shows you're complete inability to comprehend what I'm typing, or your blatant dishonesty about it. I'm not willing to die on any of these hills. You're just of the opinion he's 100% guilty of everything and I'm not. And apparently believing otherwise makes me a Trump-supporting, white nationalist loving, gun right supporting nutjob. You're welcome to think all that. You're entitled to your opinion, no matter how wrong it may be.

    Whether or not the gun is illegal is by and large irrelevant. Every charge except the gun charge are going to hinge on the Rosenbaum interaction. Rittenhouse could have illegally purchased the gun, posted a Facebook video stating he's going shoot someone tonight, driven across the state line only to go to the protests, and still get off on self-defense. It would make it a lot harder on his defense team, but it doesn't invalidate his rights of self-defense.

    I've repeatedly said, it's going to come down to whether or not a jury thinks Rittenhouse might have suffered serious bodily injury if he had not shot Rosenbaum.
    Me: Look that guy is driving 120mph in a 25mph zone, he's speeding.
    You: NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO you can't say that until he goes to court!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! What's wrong with youuuuuuuuuuuuu!!!!!!!!!!!!!ARRRRRGGGGHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Its also not irrelevant. As you've clearly shown, you lack the ability to understand intent.
    When I despair, I remember that all through history, there have been tyrants and murderers, and for a time, they seem invincible.
    But in the end, they always fall. Always.- Mahatma Gandhi


  7. #15407
    I Don't Work Here Endus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    64,365
    Quote Originally Posted by Krastyn View Post
    Under the law, whether or not Rittenhouse's possession of the rifle is legal or not has no bearing on weather or not he is entitled to self defense. This is not an opinion, this is fact. Much like how a convicted felon barred from posession guns can use a gun in self defense, and be found not guilty, but will still be found guilty on the posession.
    You're pushing what I have to assume is a deliberate misframing of self defense law, here. Since I'm pretty sure I've corrected you, specifically, about this point before in this thread.

    Yes, Rittenhouse had the right to defend himself against an unlawful assault. No one is disputing that. It is not being contested, by anyone, anywhere. Attacking this is attacking a straw man.

    The issue is that Rittenhouse used lethal force to defend himself. That is something that has a fairly strict legal standard to justify its use. Which nothing about the circumstances seems to support, given that Rosenbaum was an unarmed person who never laid a finger on Rittenhouse.

    Trying to make this about "self defense" in general, rather than about "use of lethal force in self defense" specifically, is a dishonest attempt to misframe the facts.

    Why is it only intent for Rittenhouse, and for no one else?

    So if Rittenhouse wearing gloves is intent for him to commit a crime, Rosenbaum putting on a mask before engaging Rittenhouse would show the same.
    Who else is being charged with crimes, here? Why are you trying to distract from dealing with Rittenhouse and his actions?

    The fuck it doesn't. The application of self defense doesn't matter if you were armed or not prior to the encounter. You're effectively arguing that any person in an open carry or concealed carry state who walks through any unsafe part of town is guilty of murder if the are attacked.
    If they use lethal force in their self defense, when the circumstances don't reasonably suggest they're at imminent risk of death or great bodily harm?

    That would be murder, not self defense. This is crystal clear under Wisconsin law. Literally why there's a line in there that limits the use of lethal force to those circumstances; in any situation where the threat does not rise to that level, use of lethal force cannot be justified and thus its use would be murder, because it legally cannot qualify as "self defense".

    I don't deny that he intended to bring protection if the situation arose. Having a gun does not make him guilty. How it was used is what does.
    Nobody's suggesting Rittenhouse be charged just for being armed.

    It's because of the murders.

    Do you have a statistical representation of that? The majority of protesters and counter-protesters on any topic don't often engage in violence. It's the extremes on both sides.
    https://www.cnn.com/2020/09/04/us/bl...rnd/index.html

    If the protesters were so non-violent, why did Rosenbaum chase down Rittenhouse? To give him a hug? Why did the "paramedic" say his biggest regret was not pulling his gun sooner and emptying his clip into Kyle? It doesn't matter what proportion of which group is violent. What matters are the people involved in this case.
    What you're doing here is basically just sealioning. However;
    Witnesses state Rittenhouse was mishandling his weapon and putting people at risk, and the only hostile acts Rosenbaum engaged in were trying to secure that weapon.
    Had Grosskreutz shot Rittenhouse, then he'd have saved both himself and and another protestor from being shot. Though I think he made the right choice in the moment.
    And yes; it matters that Rittenhouse shot someone 4 times when that person hadn't ever touched him. And then shot two more people who tried to stop him fleeing the scene of the first murder. And I wasn't the one who brought up group affiliation. You're the one who made that false equivalence, not I.

    One of the pillars of a successful self defense is that you tried to get out of the situation. That you were left with no other choice. Rosenbaum actively pursued Rittenhouse, threw an object at him, and then upon reaching him, tried to take his gun (all part of the criminal complaint). Rosenbaum at no point has a claim to self defense. Well, he could claim it, but has no grounds for it. The only thing that will matter (as we've discussed before) is whether Rittenhouse's response was proportional.
    And? This doesn't even speak to anything I said, or explain why you thought a self defense argument means those attacking you weren't justified in doing so, automatically.

    And if you want to play this card, then a conviction of murder proves nothing either. So if court rulings mean nothing, everyone is entitled to their own opinion.
    That's not what was said, and you're not even bothering to respond to it.

  8. #15408
    Quote Originally Posted by Krastyn View Post


    I have repeatedly said that based on the evidence released so far he will be found innocent. I've also said he's an idiot, and shouldn't have put himself there in the first place with a gun.



    Under the law, whether or not Rittenhouse's possession of the rifle is legal or not has no bearing on weather or not he is entitled to self defense. This is not an opinion, this is fact. Much like how a convicted felon barred from posession guns can use a gun in self defense, and be found not guilty, but will still be found guilty on the posession.
    This is what I have said as well, I feel legally he will be found innocent from murder, he might get in trouble for possessing the weapon but not for using it. There is 2 different videos floating around showing Kyle was Chased by Robert and there is video that Robert made verbal altercations at Kyle, daring Kyle to shoot him.

  9. #15409
    I Don't Work Here Endus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    64,365
    Quote Originally Posted by BlackDruid96 View Post
    This is what I have said as well, I feel legally he will be found innocent from murder, he might get in trouble for possessing the weapon but not for using it. There is 2 different videos floating around showing Kyle was Chased by Robert and there is video that Robert made verbal altercations at Kyle, daring Kyle to shoot him.
    And in doing so, both of you willfully and deliberately ignore the proportionality requirement for the use of lethal force in self defense. Nothing about the events in Kenosha would reasonably have led Rittenhouse to think he was at imminent risk of death or great bodily harm.

  10. #15410
    Quote Originally Posted by Thelxi View Post
    I disagree. I think it is important to highlight reasoning like yours to make sure people know exactly what kind of waters they are wading into. This kind of shit festers and propagates on the internet like the fucking plague when left unchecked, particularly now with Trump at helm giving a license to everyone to contort reality however it might suit their immediate interests best.
    Dude. You called me “dark and creepy” for citing the ADL. Get off your high horse.
    MMO-Champion Off-Topic's voice of reason.
    If you're mad at me, rest assured it's only because I'm smarter than you.
    Quote Originally Posted by Brexitexit View Post
    I am the total opposite of a cuck.

  11. #15411
    I am Murloc! Noxx79's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Location
    Kansas. Yes, THAT Kansas.
    Posts
    5,177
    Quote Originally Posted by Krastyn View Post
    If only the law worked that way. Guilty before even going to trial. He's guilty in your opinion. Full stop. It has the same weight as me saying he's innocent.

    Which as said before doesn't negate the right to self-defense.



    It's hard to take what you're saying seriously.
    But the people he was “defending” himself against were innocent of all wrongdoing - no court has declared the victims guilty of anything, so how can you claim defense when his attackers are innocent? Or does guilty until proven innocent only count for people with guns?

  12. #15412
    Quote Originally Posted by Themius View Post
    Someone shot cops part of a department with history of past and current gangs murdering black and brown people to earn ink

    Why in the ever loving fuck should I give two shits? Do you care when someone from ISIS dies you know after they've been installed the police the neighbourhood to make sure everyone is following the rules? If not... well... goodbye.
    You are insane, you people have fucking lost it. You just compared police to ISIS and excused shooting of those two cops about which, I assume, you don't have any kind of proof of them being guilty at something. But guilty by association, duuuhhhh.
    You are insane. This goes for the other geniuses too, including the ones talking about "police starting a war". What's next, USA cops are doing genocide? Worse than Hitler?
    [Infraction]
    Last edited by Rozz; 2020-09-15 at 04:47 AM. Reason: Minor Trolling
    Quote Originally Posted by Shadoowpunk View Post
    Take that haters.
    IF IM STUPID, so is Donald Trump.

  13. #15413
    The Insane draynay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    California
    Posts
    16,059
    Quote Originally Posted by Easo View Post
    What's next, USA cops are doing genocide?
    There are over 15,000 posts in this thread, did you just now discover the thread topic?
    /s

  14. #15414
    Quote Originally Posted by draynay View Post
    There are over 15,000 posts in this thread, did you just now discover the thread topic?
    I don't remember the topic ever being genocide, especially since I made the thread.
    Quote Originally Posted by Shadoowpunk View Post
    Take that haters.
    IF IM STUPID, so is Donald Trump.

  15. #15415
    Quote Originally Posted by Themius View Post
    Someone shot cops part of a department with history of past and current gangs murdering black and brown people to earn ink

    Why in the ever loving fuck should I give two shits? Do you care when someone from ISIS dies you know after they've been installed the police the neighbourhood to make sure everyone is following the rules? If not... well... goodbye.

    - - - Updated - - -



    I would challenge you on what is appropriate...

    Just what the fuck do people do?

    The FBI knows about these hates groups the government knows about them, yet we have no actions by the federal government to address these problems All this as they go around killing people over and over and over. And the whistle blower says the 18 year old was shot multiple times in the back, lying down. so the deputy could earn his ink. What the fuck is the "appropriate" response in the face of a government that doesn't care about this because "first amendment rights, cops can be part of hate groups"?

    Appropriate in my mind comes down to the most logical ending given the current situation.
    Comparing the cops to isis shows a complete ignorance of the magnitude of the problem. ISIS killed thousands/tens of thousands per year. No one is accusing the cops of that.

    Gets back my main problem with this. I’ll concede that some cop killings are unjustified. I’ll concede that those skew racially due to systemic bias. But this is a small problem in the grand scheme. Education, healthcare, guns, excessively punitive criminal justice system, worker conditions and wages are so so so so much bigger.

    And while training is necessary and I support body cams, etc., I also recognize that cops are typically lower middle class guys who didn’t go to college, and that when you target that level of person you’re not going to get paragons of virtue all the time.

    Anyone have any large scale stats that show this being a bigger problem than I think it is? Because 5 or so unfortunate shootings in a summer with millions of arrests just doesn’t do it for me.

  16. #15416
    LA hospital treating ambushed deputies inundated by protesters: ‘We hope they die’

    Anti-police protesters descended on a Los Angeles hospital where two deputies were fighting for their lives after being ambushed and shot in the head — chanting, “we hope they die,” according to officials.

    The sick chants came outside as the two rookie officers — one a 31-year-old mother of a six year-old boy — were still fighting for their lives after being “critically injured” as they sat in their patrol car in the caught-on-camera ambush in Compton.

    “To the protesters blocking the entrance & exit of the HOSPITAL EMERGENCY ROOM yelling ‘We hope they die’ referring to 2 LA Sheriff’s ambushed today in #Compton: DO NOT BLOCK EMERGENCY ENTRIES & EXITS TO THE HOSPITAL,” Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department tweeted early Sunday.

    ----

    Well...at least they're honest.

  17. #15417
    The Insane Masark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    17,337
    Quote Originally Posted by Edge- View Post
    https://www.cnn.com/2020/09/14/us/or...rnd/index.html

    Oh hey look, vigilante's in Oregon are either refusing to evacuate their homes and placing signs up warning "looters" that they'll be shot, or are straight up illegally stopping people at gunpoint thinking they are looters.

    What's spawning this insanity, that even sheriff's in Oregon are asking people not to do because it's illegal and dangerous?

    Fucking unhinged nutters who believe that the fires are all the fault of "antifa" despite there being no evidence to suggest anything of the sort. Helped by a random sheriff's sergeant who reported "antifa looting" with members armed with chainsaws to cut down power lines...something which was not supported by anything beyond the sergeant hearing about that from a random person and not bothering to confirm it.
    And the sheriff continues to play pat a cake with the domestic terrorists. "I'd ask them to do is please stop that,"

    If it was black people doing that, they'd be demanding the air force strafe the area with A-10s.

    I think we need to inspect the sheriff's closet for red shirts and white robes.

    Warning : Above post may contain snark and/or sarcasm. Try reparsing with the /s argument before replying.
    What the world has learned is that America is never more than one election away from losing its goddamned mind
    Quote Originally Posted by Howard Tayler
    Political conservatism is just atavism with extra syllables and a necktie.
    Me on Elite : Dangerous | My WoW characters

  18. #15418
    I am Murloc!
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Poland
    Posts
    5,208
    Quote Originally Posted by Scrod View Post
    Comparing the cops to isis shows a complete ignorance of the magnitude of the problem. ISIS killed thousands/tens of thousands per year. No one is accusing the cops of that.

    Gets back my main problem with this. I’ll concede that some cop killings are unjustified. I’ll concede that those skew racially due to systemic bias. But this is a small problem in the grand scheme. Education, healthcare, guns, excessively punitive criminal justice system, worker conditions and wages are so so so so much bigger.

    And while training is necessary and I support body cams, etc., I also recognize that cops are typically lower middle class guys who didn’t go to college, and that when you target that level of person you’re not going to get paragons of virtue all the time.

    Anyone have any large scale stats that show this being a bigger problem than I think it is? Because 5 or so unfortunate shootings in a summer with millions of arrests just doesn’t do it for me.
    This very thread had multiple examples of police directly lying about the events, attacking people without provocation, abusing their authority, ignoring active shooter, working together with borderline vigilantes and being far too trigger happy against POC when compared to white people. They even shoot at children when called to help calm them down. What kind of psycho does this? And let's not forget that this whole thread started because police officer choked a (black) person to death, on camera, for eight minutes, while his pals watched - all of them completely indifferent to any pleas from both the victim and other people.

    On top of that, they get access to military level equipment that they have zero need for - something that would never fly in other countries. I can only imagine the amount of money being wasted on this (or, more likely, lining someone's pockets), that could have been spent on far more productive areas. Why would they bother de-escalating potential situations, if they are constantly given new toys they are just itching to use?
    Last edited by KaPe; 2020-09-15 at 08:57 AM.

  19. #15419
    I am Murloc! Noxx79's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Location
    Kansas. Yes, THAT Kansas.
    Posts
    5,177
    Quote Originally Posted by Shadowferal View Post
    LA hospital treating ambushed deputies inundated by protesters: ‘We hope they die’

    Anti-police protesters descended on a Los Angeles hospital where two deputies were fighting for their lives after being ambushed and shot in the head — chanting, “we hope they die,” according to officials.

    The sick chants came outside as the two rookie officers — one a 31-year-old mother of a six year-old boy — were still fighting for their lives after being “critically injured” as they sat in their patrol car in the caught-on-camera ambush in Compton.

    “To the protesters blocking the entrance & exit of the HOSPITAL EMERGENCY ROOM yelling ‘We hope they die’ referring to 2 LA Sheriff’s ambushed today in #Compton: DO NOT BLOCK EMERGENCY ENTRIES & EXITS TO THE HOSPITAL,” Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department tweeted early Sunday.

    ----

    Well...at least they're honest.
    Who? The cops? We’ve already proven they’re liars. The nypost? A sensationalist gossip mag? Or the video of just a few people, who again are gross.

  20. #15420
    Quote Originally Posted by Shadowferal View Post
    LA hospital treating ambushed deputies inundated by protesters: ‘We hope they die’

    Anti-police protesters descended on a Los Angeles hospital where two deputies were fighting for their lives after being ambushed and shot in the head — chanting, “we hope they die,” according to officials.

    The sick chants came outside as the two rookie officers — one a 31-year-old mother of a six year-old boy — were still fighting for their lives after being “critically injured” as they sat in their patrol car in the caught-on-camera ambush in Compton.

    “To the protesters blocking the entrance & exit of the HOSPITAL EMERGENCY ROOM yelling ‘We hope they die’ referring to 2 LA Sheriff’s ambushed today in #Compton: DO NOT BLOCK EMERGENCY ENTRIES & EXITS TO THE HOSPITAL,” Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department tweeted early Sunday.

    ----

    Well...at least they're honest.
    Wasn't this like...4 people total? And then the cops went on to arrest a local journalist and lie about it afterwards?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •