players meeting to discuss ways to affect change

[TigerTale 357]

27 minutes ago, AUDynasty said:

Follow orders?

Philando Castile, a Black person shot to the death by police (exact excerpt): "The police dashcam video shows that 40 seconds elapsed between when Yanez first started talking to Castile through the car window and when Yanez began shooting at him. According to the dashcam, after Yanez asked for Castile's driver's license and proof of insurance, Castile gave him his proof of insurance card, which Yanez appeared to glance at and tuck in his outer pocket. Castile then calmly informed Yanez: 'Sir, I have to tell you that I do have a firearm on me.'"

Mr. Castile followed the letter to the law to the T, and his life was still taken. He followed orders and he still got shot.

Why do you think Rittenhouse was being chased by a mob? Oh, yeah--he had shown that he was willing to shoot and kill somebody, and he succeeded in taking two lives.

I agree with you on the Castile case. That was egregious. We were talking about the Roof case though and he was taken peacefully because he surrendered.

Did the first person killed inteact with Rittenhosue in any way  or was he murdered in cold blood?

[TigerTale 357]

10 minutes ago, AUDynasty said:

Then the mob acted in self-defense by running after him after seeing that this guy is actually a threat to people's lives after shooting at people.

If a guy is running from you then chasing him down is not self defense.

[DAG 34,016]

7 minutes ago, TigerTale said:

If a guy is running from you then chasing him down is not self defense.

Why did he bring the gun in the first place if it was illegal to be in his possession ? 

[TigerTale 357]

2 minutes ago, DAG said:

Why did he bring the gun in the first place if it was illegal to be in his possession ? 

Good question. I don't believe that kid should have been anywhere near that situation with or without a gun.

[SocialCircle 570]

23 minutes ago, AUDynasty said:

Then the mob acted in self-defense by running after him after seeing that this guy is actually a threat to people's lives after shooting at people.

I made no comment about any of the mob except the ones who attacked him before he fired. He acted in self defense. That doesn’t make him right. 

[SocialCircle 570]

28 minutes ago, DAG said:

I am telling you if Blake had a freaking AR, walking around and people said he short someone , he would not have had the opportunity . He would have guns pointed at him and shot if he had the least bit of resistance . He wouldn’t have any type of time to walk up with his hands towards the police. The first command would’ve been drop the weapon and get your ass on the ground. Does that answer your question ? He would be in custody that night or in a body bag.

Also, whether the kid acted in self defense or not, he crossed state lines with a gun that was illegally not suppose to be in his possession. Why the hell is he leaving Antioch and coming to Kenosha , a town he does not live in, to protect businesses who did not hire him to do so? All of that could’ve easily been avoided, if he had done so. You guys throw me off. You want to say Blake shouldn’t have resisted arrest (which I agree with) but then refuse to acknowledge blatant disregard to the law when the shoe is on the under foot.

I have absolutely consistently said this teen was wrong. Can you not read? The evidence I’ve seen up to this point indicates Blake was wrong, the police were wrong, the mob was wrong for attacking the teen, and the teen broke laws too, but still acted in self defense.

[DAG 34,016]

4 minutes ago, SocialCircle said:

I have absolutely consistently said this teen was wrong. Can you not read? The evidence I’ve seen up to this point indicates Blake was wrong, the police were wrong, the mob was wrong for attacking the teen, and the teen broke laws too, but still acted in self defense.

 And I answered your question Twice now! can you not read?! Sorry I hurt your feelings with my response. 

[McLoofus 35,182]

1 minute ago, DAG said:

 And I answered your question Twice now! can you not read?! Sorry I hurt your feelings with my response. 

Not sure if you're familiar with that one, but that's a dead end street. Dude will literally just keep posting the exact same words over and over again.

[AUEngineer2016 407]

11 minutes ago, SocialCircle said:

He acted in self defense murdered 2 people and injured a 3rd with an illegal firearm after driving across state lines to incite violence at a peaceful protest. That doesn’t make him right makes him a murderer.

Boom, fixed your post

[wdefromtx 3,159]

58 minutes ago, DAG said:

I think what he is saying is if a black man was holding a freaking gun and multiple people were saying he shot someone, the response would’ve been different. The fact that he was able to leave the state after shooting and killing someone on tape and with witnesses mind you, yet still had the ability to turn himself in at his leisure (I am not sure if this was the case) is mind boggling. Yet you are talking about resisting arrest. He should’ve at the very least been apprehended at the site and questioned. Heck, he wasn’t even suppose to have that type of gun and he even crossed state lines with it. 

From the reports I have seen, there were many people with guns there. And once things went down it was chaotic and at the time they didn't know exactly who did what. I don't think it was fully known who shot someone until after he walked past the police. The first shots fired weren't even from Rittenhouse. It was someone else and that triggered the whole thing. If anything they should have questioned anyone with a rifle until they figured out who did what. But hindsight is 20/20. I imagine it was chaotic.

[DAG 34,016]

2 minutes ago, wdefromtx said:

From the reports I have seen, there were many people with guns there. And once things went down it was chaotic and at the time they didn't know exactly who did what. I don't think it was fully known who shot someone until after he walked past the police. The first shots fired weren't even from Rittenhouse. It was someone else and that triggered the whole thing. If anything they should have questioned anyone with a rifle until they figured out who did what. But hindsight is 20/20. I imagine it was chaotic.

Exactly they were and many of those individuals had no business out there with guns unless they were hired as private security. The fact that the police nonchalantly let it happen without doing some sort of questions is beyond me. Now what if protesters decided to walk around with guns, saying it was for their own personal protection? What do you think the response would’ve been? I doubt they would’ve been handed water by the police. 

[wdefromtx 3,159]

3 minutes ago, DAG said:

Exactly they were and many of those individuals had no business out there with guns unless they were hired as private security. The fact that the police nonchalantly let it happen without doing some sort of questions is beyond me. Now what if protesters decided to walk around with guns, saying it was for their own personal protection? What do you think the response would’ve been? I doubt they would’ve been handed water by the police. 

I agree, many had no business being there with guns. It is one thing is a person is there protecting their own property, but this call to arms is just inviting violence. 

 

To be honest, it probably depends on the skin color if protestors with guns got the same treatment. 

[DAG 34,016]

1 minute ago, wdefromtx said:

I agree, many had no business being there with guns. It is one thing is a person is there protecting their own property, but this call to arms is just inviting violence. 

 

To be honest, it probably depends on the skin color if protestors with guns got the same treatment. 

Exactly . Guns in citizens hands during highly emotional situations are an issue to me, but even I would have more empathy if it were business owners there protecting their business. I live legit 20 minutes from Kenosha. My home church is there. There was a Facebook group shared which promoted the fact that people were coming to protect the Kenosha businesses . The citizens and the police was well aware of this potential threat , yet all of it was reactive o nature. 

[AUEngineer2016 407]

2 minutes ago, DAG said:

Exactly they were and many of those individuals had no business out there with guns unless they were hired as private security. The fact that the police nonchalantly let it happen without doing some sort of questions is beyond me. Now what if protesters decided to walk around with guns, saying it was for their own personal protection? What do you think the response would’ve been? I doubt they would’ve been handed water by the police. 

White privilege is being able to walk around in full tactical gear with a military-style assault rifle and have the police ask you if you need any water. PoC's do the same and they're branded "thugs".

also: If cops fear for their lives because they see this:

And not when they see this:

Then we should probably re-evaluate our police officers.

[SocialCircle 570]

32 minutes ago, DAG said:

 And I answered your question Twice now! can you not read?! Sorry I hurt your feelings with my response. 

My feelings aren’t hurt. 

[SocialCircle 570]

27 minutes ago, AUEngineer2016 said:

Boom, fixed your post

The teen clearly acted in self defense. Those people absolutely would have not gotten shot by him had they not first attacked him. Yes, he was wrong being there and was carrying a gun illegally as well. He was wrong, but still acted in self defense. 

[DAG 34,016]

7 minutes ago, AUEngineer2016 said:

White privilege is being able to walk around in full tactical gear with a military-style assault rifle and have the police ask you if you need any water. PoC's do the same and they're branded "thugs".

also: If cops fear for their lives because they see this:

And not when they see this:

Then we should probably re-evaluate our police officers.

I am telling you right now, if black men assembled like that, wearing black panther attire and walking around with rifles , people would lose it.

[DAG 34,016]

Just now, SocialCircle said:

The teen clearly acted in self defense. Those people absolutely would have not gotten shot by him had they not first attacked him. Yes, he was wrong being there and was carrying a gun illegally as well. He was wrong, but still acted in self defense. 

Would not have had to worry about that , if he had never been out there with a gun in the first place. Kind of loses the self defense tag when you openly bring an illegal gun across the state and recorded saying you are using non-lethal, if you have to. He has no authority to even be policing. 

[AUEngineer2016 407]

6 minutes ago, SocialCircle said:

The teen clearly acted in self defense. Those people absolutely would have not gotten shot by him had they not first attacked him. Yes, he was wrong being there and was carrying a gun illegally as well. He was wrong, but still acted in self defense. 

No, he didn't. There is one reason and one reason only that he drove from 2 states away to go to Kenosha - he went to incite violence. There is no other reason to brandish an assault weapon (an illegally obtained assault rifle at that) like that other than a) to incite violence or b) to manufacture fear, and given that he was literally part of the Cadet program for the local police department in Illinois, he sure as hell knew that.

This issue right here is representative of one of the biggest eye openers for me at the state of this country- If you look at what happened, everyone should be in agreement that this POS murderer drove from 2 states away with ill intentions and ended up killing people. Full stop, end of sentence. And yet, what's happening is people are saying "well yeah he killed 2 people and yeah he was walking around with his finger on the trigger of an assault rifle and pointing it at innocent, unarmed people, but it was self defense" or "well he just went there to protect people's property". He (and others) traveled from 2 states away and brought an assault rifle to attempt to intimidate and disrupt a protest. He loses the "self defense" argument immediately a) because he chose to bring deadly assault weaponry with him, b) he chose to open carry that deadly assault weaponry, and c) he intentionally put himself in the situation (IMO so that he would get the chance to shoot, but he hasn't explicitly said that). 

Absolute, 100% BS. This kid is a terrorist, by literal definition of the word:

Quote

ter·ror·ist

/ˈterərəst/

noun

 

1. a person who uses unlawful violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims.

Unlawful? Check, he had an illegal firearm

Intimidation? Check again, open-carrying his illegal military-style firearm for no other reason than to intimidate and cause fear.

Civilians? Check

Pursuit of political aims? People LOOOOOOVE to call BLM a political movement, so that's a big ol' checkaroo here.

 

 

[SuperAUsome09 738]

23 minutes ago, SocialCircle said:

The teen clearly acted what he's played in Call of Duty. Those people absolutely would have not gotten shot by him had he stayed home. Yes, he was wrong being there and was carrying a gun illegally as well. He was wrong, but still acted in self defense. 

If they kick in your front door, you drop them. <- That's self defense.

[TigerTale 357]

21 minutes ago, DAG said:

Would not have had to worry about that , if he had never been out there with a gun in the first place. Kind of loses the self defense tag when you openly bring an illegal gun across the state and recorded saying you are using non-lethal, if you have to. He has no authority to even be policing. 

I say the kid was out of line being there. However, once he was there, I say he was justified in defending himself, if that's what he was doing. The investigation should determine that.

[DAG 34,016]

1 minute ago, TigerTale said:

I say the kid was out of line being there. However, once he was there, I say he was justified in defending himself, if that's what he was doing. The investigation should determine that.

You are correct with that. We shall see. 

[Tivo48 31]

1 hour ago, SocialCircle said:

I am not saying this teen did no wrong.  You avoided answering my question.  Had Blake turned himself in voluntarily like this teenager; would the outcome have been very different?  The answer is yes.  I agree this teenager was in the wrong.  However, the police actually had seen this young man helping clean up glass and cleaning off graffiti in their town earlier. I have no doubt this teen did wrong, but he also acted in self defense after he was violently attacked.  

Would it have been different? Sure. Did his actions justify being shot 7 times in the back while cops had him outnumbered and had multiple other options to contain someone who was walking to his car? That's the question here. Anyone saying Jacob Blake acted perfectly isn't being honest either, but the continued outrage is over the response being way too much for the situation at hand. These cops have a hard job and have to make split second decisions, but we hold lots of other professions (medical, legal, etc) accountable for inappropriate decision making even when those are made in the heat of the moment.

Also, when it comes to the Black Lives Matter vs All Lives Matter crowd, especially from the Christian/religious crowd. There's a video going around where the preacher brings up the Sermon on the Mount and Jesus saying "blessed are the poor." For anyone in the All Lives Matter camp, would you immediately have jumped up screaming "No Jesus, blessed are all people!!!" And if not, why is that so different from this distinction? Nobody (and if so, they're missing the point) is using BLM to say that all lives don't matter. The point is, like the poor in Jesus' teachings, that we have a group of people who are being treated as sub-human by other groups and whose lives aren't as valuable in the eyes of some as others. 

[SocialCircle 570]

46 minutes ago, DAG said:

Would not have had to worry about that , if he had never been out there with a gun in the first place. Kind of loses the self defense tag when you openly bring an illegal gun across the state and recorded saying you are using non-lethal, if you have to. He has no authority to even be policing. 

I agree he was wrong and in no way should have been there.  I have no idea how this impacts this legally.  However, it is still very clear he acted in self defense. 

[ShocksMyBrain 9,368]

This thread has remained mostly civil. It will be interesting to see what happens over the next few hours when happy hour concludes.