Another "I can't breath" death: Police Reform & Protests in the USA

[Astalnar]

protesting is a constitutional right.

Is burning other people's property also a constitutional right?

Is beating up and mugging unarmed transwomen also a constitutional right?

Is vandalising the city a constitutional right?

Did you look at the date of conviction????????? because he was 18... and like Cubby pointed out earlier... an 18 year old can be picked up for sexual misconduct with a 17 year old and made a lifelong sex offender.

Which was a major major issue back in the early 00s where 14 year olds were being charged with child porn but taking pictures of themselves and being charged for assault... of themselves... who the fuck this was supposed to protect... idk.

It is weird you want to use this to say they're a pedophile. Especially when they were 18... and this happened during a time period where 18 and 17 year olds indeed could find themselves being lifelong sex offenders.

Do you have more from the case than just this... because right now it isn't looking good for your claims.

Do you have any proof his victim was 17, or are you just looking for excuses how to normalise pedophilia?



He was convicted of a sexual conduct with minor. On two different counts he got 12.5 years for that shit. In my book, that is pedophilia. In the eyes of society, that is pedophilia. It's only you who feels rather strong about defending a convicted pedophile by sayin in essence, that it is all just one big misunderstanding. Why are you defending pedophilia?

Oh no, an 18 year old got together with a 17 year old, and that warrants the death sentence.

Talk about letting your emotions get out of hand. You are ridiculous.

Another one who feels strongly about defending stupid dead pedophiles. Do you have any proof for your hyperbole, or are you like your colegue, just batting for pedos?

Don't know where you're from, but in the US it is against the law to just murder people in street regardless of their criminal record.

You're acting like, the radicalized 17 year old, was doing background checks on people before he shot them with a gun he wasn't legally allowed to posses.

According to the videos the 17-year old did not just "murder people in street". It's actually clear, that any shooting he did, was done in selfdefence and with great restraint. He only opened fire on his attackers. The dead in this case, were scum. Does that mean people can just go and kill them for no reason? No, it doesn't. That said, society does not weep for convicted pedophiles and domestic abusers, especially if they get themselves killed while trying to gang up on a minor defending the town from crime.

People are for some reason forgetting, that if Rittenhouse decided not to defend himself, the mob would actually kill him. To each his own, but I prefer a 17-year old kid surviving than the three crooks. Because in this "summer of love" as a mayor of Seattle described it, we actually have it filmed, how peaceful protestors apply a kick in the head, and the let the man die in the hospital.

[Easo]

People were literally begging the police to stop him. They let him walk by, the police have made it well clear that they have no interest in doing their jobs.

Is police supposed to act under the directions of a bunch of clearly agitated people (read, potentially a mob) just because they are screaming something? Did they see him do anything? If yes, investigate them for ignoring shootings. If not, then there is nothing else to add.

Yes, they made a mistake, should have held him to get the information regardless and should have held him, if they actually did see him shooting. Mistakes where made, should be checked. Anything else is guessing and fantasies.

[Edge-]

Do you have any proof his victim was 17, or are you just looking for excuses how to normalise pedophilia?

Will y'all ever actually link to sources for this shit so the information can be verified? Maybe so we can do the digging to find out the age of the minor involved? Or are y'all just gonna keep posting selective screencaps and then making further claims without additional evidence?

And, again, as repeatedly pointed out, what does his prior criminal history have to do with his murder? What relevance does his background have? If he was a saint who volunteered at a retirement home and attended church every Sunday, would that suddenly make his killing not OK?

[DarkTZeratul]

Is police supposed to act under the directions of a bunch of clearly agitated people (read, potentially a mob) just because they are screaming something?

If a bunch of people are screaming "he shot somebody," then FUCKING YES.

[Edge-]

Is police supposed to act under the directions of a bunch of clearly agitated people (read, potentially a mob) just because they are screaming something?

Generally, when people start screaming about an active shooter it's an officers job to respond to verify if there is indeed a public threat or not. Not sit at the end of a block shrugging their shoulders.

Did they see him do anything?

Very likely, yes. His first victim was shot under the lights, and even if they didn't see it they absolutely heard multiple gunshots and appear to have taken no immediate action until well after the second set of gunshots.

Yes, they made a mistake, should have held him to get the information regardless and should have held him, if they actually did see him shooting. Mistakes where made, should be checked. Anything else is guessing and fantasies.

The second shooting was in the middle of the street. Cops saw that. Period. They then drove by him as he walked towards them, a move police often say is aggressive, with his hands in the air and repeatedly reaching down to adjust his rifle, another move which police often say is aggressive and a threat to their safety.

As far as mistakes go, letting an active shooter flee the scene and state is pretty fucking serious and should absolutely be fireable.

[Templar 331]

but I prefer a 17-year old kid surviving than the three crooks.

Do you prefer 17 year old kids arming themselves illegally and heading into a riot to kill people?

[Collegeguy]

Peacefully prostesting the protest, by shooting .223 (or 7.62 i'm not sure) rounds into people? Yea right.

How do you know he is a terrorist? Did you receive a suicide note from him or something?

[Themius]

Is burning other people's property also a constitutional right?

Is beating up and mugging unarmed transwomen also a constitutional right?

Is vandalising the city a constitutional right?



Do you have any proof his victim was 17, or are you just looking for excuses how to normalise pedophilia?

[IMG]https://www.ar15.com/media/mediafiles/55344/rosenbaum_png-1564467.JPG[/MG]

He was convicted of a sexual conduct with minor. On two different counts he got 12.5 years for that shit. In my book, that is pedophilia. In the eyes of society, that is pedophilia. It's only you who feels rather strong about defending a convicted pedophile by sayin in essence, that it is all just one big misunderstanding. Why are you defending pedophilia?



Another one who feels strongly about defending stupid dead pedophiles. Do you have any proof for your hyperbole, or are you like your colegue, just batting for pedos?

Not on "two different accounts" literally both charges note the offence is on one day that's not "two different accounts" that's "two counts related to one instance of criminal activity"

He was convicted of a sexual conduct with minor. On two different counts he got 12.5 years for that shit. In my book, that is pedophilia. In the eyes of society, that is pedophilia. It's only you who feels rather strong about defending a convicted pedophile by sayin in essence, that it is all just one big misunderstanding. Why are you defending pedophilia?

Who cares what you think?

An 18 year old having sex with an underaged person of say 16... is not a pedophile... It isn't only me at least 4 other people noted this.


Seriously who the fuck calls an 18 year old who has sex with a teenager a pedophile????

Do you think 15 year olds who take pictures of themselves should be charged with producing illegal porn and charged with sexually abusing themselves and therefore a danger to minors for "sexual abuse of a minor"??? this was literally what was often happening back in the early 2000s until finally states began passing laws to stop that stupidity.

Also was the terrorist a Technopath?? did he have some power to have the internet in his brain and instantly scan faces and know names and records???

[cubby]

But under what scenario would the electors be appointed but not vote? Remember, the election is to choose which electors are appointed, who have already declared how they will vote. But if the election isn't certified, then no electors would be appointed. And if they are appointed, then there's no reason for them not to cast their votes on December 14th.

Like I said, we disagree on that point. I'm still not finding the article. Can you find anything saying one way or another?

[EyeSeeYou]

NYTimes account of Kyle Riitenhouse:

About two hours before the first shooting, the producer of a video livestream interviews Mr. Rittenhouse at a Kenosha vehicle dealership.

Mr. Rittenhouse is there at the same time as several other armed men. Some of them are positioned on the building’s roof overlooking the parking lot where vehicles were burned the day before.

Mr. Rittenhouse says that he’s there to protect the business. He calls it his job, although there is no indication that he was asked to guard the site.

Later, he claims to another videographer that he was pepper sprayed by someone in a nearby crowd while protecting property.

In most of the footage The Times has reviewed from before the shootings, Mr. Rittenhouse is around this area. He also offers medical assistance to protesters.

About 15 minutes before the first shooting, police officers drive past Mr. Rittenhouse, and the other armed civilians who claim to be protecting the dealership, and offer water out of appreciation.

Mr. Rittenhouse walks up to a police vehicle carrying his rifle and talks with the officers.

He eventually leaves the dealership and is barred by the police from returning. Six minutes later footage shows Mr. Rittenhouse being chased by an unknown group of people into the parking lot of another dealership several blocks away.

While Mr. Rittenhouse is being pursued by the group, an unknown gunman fires into the air, though it’s unclear why. The weapon’s muzzle flash appears in footage filmed at the scene.

Mr. Rittenhouse turns toward the sound of gunfire as another pursuer lunges toward him from the same direction. Mr. Rittenhouse then fires four times, and appears to shoot the man in the head.

Mr. Rittenhouse seems to make a phone call {he called 911 about the shooting}and then flees the scene. Several people chase him, some shouting, “That’s the shooter!”

As Mr. Rittenhouse is running, he trips and falls to the ground. He fires four shots as three people rush toward him. One person appears to be hit in the chest and falls to the ground. Another, who is carrying a handgun, is hit in the arm and runs away.

Mr. Rittenhouse’s gunfire is mixed in with the sound of at least 16 other gunshots that ring out during this time.

As this happens, police vehicles just one block away remain stationary during the gunfire.

Mr. Rittenhouse walks with his hands up toward the police vehicles. Bystanders call out to the officers that he had just shot people.

The police drive by him without stopping, on their way to assist the victims.

I added the part about 911.
These are facts, not conjecture that you guys are throwing around. If they try him for first degree murder, they will not convict.

[EyeSeeYou]

Do you prefer 17 year old kids arming themselves illegally and heading into a riot to kill people?

can you link where he was illegally carrying? If i could link, I would link you where they have proven it wa sno illegal for a 17 year old to carry a rifle under Wisconsin law

[Theodarzna]

[...]

Look, I'm not here to make an Anti-2A point, or even to say you shouldn't defend your stuff with lethal force if a mob is coming to burn your shit down or kill you. Obviously protect yourself.

But, Kyle wasn't protecting HIS property as far as I know. He wasn't some hired security guard, hell idk if he was even really in a militia group or if he just saw a message on social media and turned up. This minor had zero business being out on the streets on a freaking school night, unsupervised with a loaded AR15 in hand, acting as the informal deputized child soldier of that cities police department. He isn't even from that city, what the hell was he doing there?

[EyeSeeYou]

NY Times account of Kyle Rittenhouse: I can't link the article

About two hours before the first shooting, the producer of a video livestream interviews Mr. Rittenhouse at a Kenosha vehicle dealership.

Mr. Rittenhouse is there at the same time as several other armed men. Some of them are positioned on the building’s roof overlooking the parking lot where vehicles were burned the day before.

Mr. Rittenhouse says that he’s there to protect the business. He calls it his job, although there is no indication that he was asked to guard the site.

Later, he claims to another videographer that he was pepper sprayed by someone in a nearby crowd while protecting property.

In most of the footage The Times has reviewed from before the shootings, Mr. Rittenhouse is around this area. He also offers medical assistance to protesters.

About 15 minutes before the first shooting, police officers drive past Mr. Rittenhouse, and the other armed civilians who claim to be protecting the dealership, and offer water out of appreciation.

Mr. Rittenhouse walks up to a police vehicle carrying his rifle and talks with the officers.

He eventually leaves the dealership and is barred by the police from returning. Six minutes later footage shows Mr. Rittenhouse being chased by an unknown group of people into the parking lot of another dealership several blocks away.

While Mr. Rittenhouse is being pursued by the group, an unknown gunman fires into the air, though it’s unclear why. The weapon’s muzzle flash appears in footage filmed at the scene.

Mr. Rittenhouse turns toward the sound of gunfire as another pursuer lunges toward him from the same direction. Mr. Rittenhouse then fires four times, and appears to shoot the man in the head.

Mr. Rittenhouse seems to make a phone call {he called 911 about the shooting}and then flees the scene. Several people chase him, some shouting, “That’s the shooter!”

As Mr. Rittenhouse is running, he trips and falls to the ground. He fires four shots as three people rush toward him. One person appears to be hit in the chest and falls to the ground. Another, who is carrying a handgun, is hit in the arm and runs away.

Mr. Rittenhouse’s gunfire is mixed in with the sound of at least 16 other gunshots that ring out during this time.

As this happens, police vehicles just one block away remain stationary during the gunfire.

Mr. Rittenhouse walks with his hands up toward the police vehicles. Bystanders call out to the officers that he had just shot people.

The police drive by him without stopping, on their way to assist the victims.

The only thing I added was the 911 because it was not mentioned. These are facts, not the conjecture you guys have been spewing. He will not be convicted of first degree murder, and having had a shot happen before he fires his first shot, most likely will not be convicted of anything serious.

And for the people who are uninformed, the police did not arrest him when he held up his hands because they do not know what is going on and are driving to the scene to help victims.

[cubby]

NY Times account of Kyle Rittenhouse: I can't link the article

Super convenient that you can't link the article, that you just cut/pasted from. It's so WEIRD that people that take your perspective on events have so much trouble with the copy/paste functions.

The only thing I added was the 911 because it was not mentioned. These are facts, not the conjecture you guys have been spewing. He will not be convicted of first degree murder, and having had a shot happen before he fires his first shot, most likely will not be convicted of anything serious.

And for the people who are uninformed, the police did not arrest him when he held up his hands because they do not know what is going on and are driving to the scene to help victims.

All your bullshit conjecture here is patently false. He's literally be extradited right now to Wisconsin. He will face multiple felony charges, including the illegal firearm over a state line.

You have no idea why the police didn't arrest him.

[Mekh]

[Stuff]

So which one are you? From the bland taste of the sea-lioning, my guess would be @Specialka.

[Bodakane]

According to the videos the 17-year old did not just "murder people in street". It's actually clear, that any shooting he did, was done in selfdefence and with great restraint. He only opened fire on his attackers. The dead in this case, were scum. Does that mean people can just go and kill them for no reason? No, it doesn't. That said, society does not weep for convicted pedophiles and domestic abusers, especially if they get themselves killed while trying to gang up on a minor defending the town from crime.

People are for some reason forgetting, that if Rittenhouse decided not to defend himself, the mob would actually kill him. To each his own, but I prefer a 17-year old kid surviving than the three crooks. Because in this "summer of love" as a mayor of Seattle described it, we actually have it filmed, how peaceful protestors apply a kick in the head, and the let the man die in the hospital.

We are watching two different videos then. Because the one I see shows a 17 year old white nationalist from out of state with gloves and an illegal assault rifle menacing protestors until they were forced to fight back in self defense.

Remember how you thought Jacobs should be shot 8 times in the back because he might of possibly but definitely didn't;t have a gun and now all of a sudden you do a complete 180 degree turn when the person does have a gun by saying that isn't threatening? You either are biased in favor of 17 year olds or white guys, not sure which.

[unfilteredJW]

NY Times account of Kyle Rittenhouse: I can't link the article



The only thing I added was the 911 because it was not mentioned. These are facts, not the conjecture you guys have been spewing. He will not be convicted of first degree murder, and having had a shot happen before he fires his first shot, most likely will not be convicted of anything serious.

And for the people who are uninformed, the police did not arrest him when he held up his hands because they do not know what is going on and are driving to the scene to help victims.

Can cut and paste the article but can't do that with the web site.

HMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM

[EyeSeeYou]

Super convenient that you can't link the article, that you just cut/pasted from. It's so WEIRD that people that take your perspective on events have so much trouble with the copy/paste functions.




All your bullshit conjecture here is patently false. He's literally be extradited right now to Wisconsin. He will face multiple felony charges, including the illegal firearm over a state line.

You have no idea why the police didn't arrest him.

Well the article says why. You can believe the New York Times or not, but they have video evidence of a shot being fired before he fires. It's going to be hard for them to prove he did not act in self defense. You are welcome to your opinion based on what you want reality to be. I am posting facts from a New York Times article which has video and pictures. Feel free to call them fake news.

- - - Updated - - -

Can cut and paste the article but can't do that with the web site.

HMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM

well you and everyone else knwos you have to post 10 times to be able to link something orrrrrrrrrr you could take the initiative and look up the New York Times article titled "Tracking the Suspect in the Fatal Kenosha Shootings"

[cubby]

Well the article says why. You can believe the New York Times or not, but they have video evidence of a shot being fired before he fires. It's going to be hard for them to prove he did not act in self defense. You are welcome to your opinion based on what you want reality to be. I am posting facts from a New York Times article which has video and pictures. Feel free to call them fake news.

What article? The one you conveniently can link?

[EyeSeeYou]

We are watching two different videos then. Because the one I see shows a 17 year old white nationalist from out of state with gloves and an illegal assault rifle menacing protestors until they were forced to fight back in self defense.

Remember how you thought Jacobs should be shot 8 times in the back because he might of possibly but definitely didn't;t have a gun and now all of a sudden you do a complete 180 degree turn when the person does have a gun by saying that isn't threatening? You either are biased in favor of 17 year olds or white guys, not sure which.

Can you link proof he is a white nationalist? I have yet to find proof, just a bad Connecticut govt official's tweets.

- - - Updated - - -

What article? The one you conveniently can link?

Feel free to turn a blind eye to the truth. I understand that you seem to have a problem typing" Tracking the Suspect in the Fatal Kenosha Shootings" or "New York Times" into your browser. Feel free to be misinformed and spout uninformative, biased and obviously reactionary opinions based on no facts. Feel free to link facts about the matter...since you seem to only subscribe to news with links. Link a source saying he is guilty of murder and that the cops have arrested him as such