17 year old charged with homicide during riots in America

Watch
Jebedee
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#61
Report 4 weeks ago
#61
For once I actually agree with OP.

No one can look at the video and honestly say it wasn't self-defence. It's just another media tool so they can claim a "white supremacist fires randomly into crowds of innocent protesters".

Get that kid a medal.
0
reply
Napp
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#62
Report Thread starter 4 weeks ago
#62
(Original post by DiddyDec)
As someone who is left leaning and pro gun it puts me in a strange position.

I think you mean FPSRussia, he got locked up for a while due to his dodgy licences. I don't bother with vlogs or vetting, not really my interest.
Forgotten Weapons is a world class educational channel. I don't mind InRange because I actually get to see interesting guns shoot.

The other channel worth looking at is the Kalashnikov Group, that is the actual PR wing of the manufacturers. They have an interesting arsenal of weapons.
Aye i agree.
Yes thats the one, cant believe i forgot the name aha - yeah plus his drug use, not good for gun owners lol
Oh yes, ive seen a couple (mainly them trying to destroy various Kalashnikov guns for some reason) but interesting nevertheless. Do you watch any of the darkdoc or Drachinifel out of interest?
0
reply
Siciliano
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#63
Report 4 weeks ago
#63
Kid did nothing wrong besides illegally possessing a weapon. Hard to feel remorse for a pedophile who also used the N word multiple times (despite them being the ‘anti-racists’ lmao). Other dudes weren’t innocent either. Anyone calling him a white supremacist obviously has a strong dislike and bias against whites. I just hope China doesn’t try to invade America once they inevitably engage in civil war
1
reply
Gundabad(good)
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#64
Report 4 weeks ago
#64
(Original post by Napp)
An interesting move charging him with murder, given from the videos he appeared to be defending himself from a mob? Should be an interesting case to follow to see what other facts emerge though.


https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/world...-protests.html
The problem with him is that he shot three people, knowing full well that a crowd of demonstrators would show up.
0
reply
Meathook
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#65
Report 4 weeks ago
#65
Not suprising look what they did to the Mcloskeys they are abusing their power to side with the protest movement and not the law.


Protesters despite all those buildings they burnt down, all those they've killed (30+ have died due to protests?) all those they've hospitalised and terrorised yet they are the good guys to Democrats and their media establishment.

I've seen videos of elderly store owners defending their buildings, who get beat unconcious. Those with guns defending them are branded "terrorists" and "extremists"

Some Democrats think they're being smart, defying Trumps offering to bring in the national guard but they're not. But what about the people who live there who find the place they grew up in is burnt to a ground? Who will they vote for?

Btw don't forget the riots that happened under Obama. They had no problem bringing in the national guard then.
Last edited by Meathook; 4 weeks ago
1
reply
TheStupidMoon
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#66
Report 4 weeks ago
#66
If only bayonets weren't banned then this tragedy could have been avoided.
0
reply
Iñigo de Loyola
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#67
Report 4 weeks ago
#67
(Original post by Ascend)
Also, is there any evidence that this little gun nut is actually a white supremacist?
He's a Latino. Given that Ocasio-Cortez has said that Latinos are black, I think that by the Left's own logic we can assume he's not a white supremacist.
(Original post by Ascend)
^ Asking after seeing this tweet from one of the new left populists in Congress:

Image
Expecting common sense from Comrade Slaphead or any of the Squad is generally a pointless endeavour.
(Original post by Napp)
This. These people thinking a child (which he is) should be murdered is disgusting.
He may well have been in the wrong having a gun illegally in that state (ironic given they say borders dont matter) and for going into a dangerous situation but him defending himself from armed perverts seems completely proper to me.
Two things can be true at the same time. He can illegally have a gun and still use that gun in self-defence.
In my opinion leftists who bring up the fact Kyle Rittenhouse wasn't legally allowed to bring that AR-15 to the protest and rightists who being up the fact George Floyd was a petty criminal are two cheeks of the same arse. They both serve to muddy the waters nd distort the facts of the case.
0
reply
Iñigo de Loyola
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#68
Report 4 weeks ago
#68
(Original post by Meathook)
But what about the people who live there who find the place they grew up in is burnt to a ground? Who will they vote for?
Exactamente. If you're an immigrant who worked hard to set up a business, are you going to vote for the party whose Congresswomen believe that people looting your business are ”just trying to get bread” or are you going to vote for the party which wants to stop the looters?
1
reply
anarchism101
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#69
Report 4 weeks ago
#69
(Original post by DiddyDec)
I am very torn about the whole situation. The kids should never have been there in the first place but he should still have the right to defend himself from violence.
The thing about the "defending himself" claim is that it's very focused on the immediate moment rather than the wider context around it.
0
reply
anarchism101
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#70
Report 4 weeks ago
#70
(Original post by LiberOfLondon)
Exactamente. If you're an immigrant who worked hard to set up a business, are you going to vote for the party whose Congresswomen believe that people looting your business are ”just trying to get bread” or are you going to vote for the party which wants to stop the looters?
I think it's slightly misleading to simply claim the GOP "want to stop the looters", but even ignoring that, would you rather vote for the party that wants to stop them more or the party which is more likely to bring them to stop if in power?
0
reply
Iñigo de Loyola
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#71
Report 4 weeks ago
#71
(Original post by anarchism101)
I think it's slightly misleading to simply claim the GOP "want to stop the looters", but even ignoring that, would you rather vote for the party that wants to stop them more or the party which is more likely to bring them to stop if in power?
The actions (or lack thereof) of Democrat mayors show that, for whatever reason, they don't want to stop the riots. Case in point, Portland.
0
reply
anarchism101
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#72
Report 4 weeks ago
#72
(Original post by Iñigo de Loyola)
The actions (or lack thereof) of Democrat mayors show that, for whatever reason, they don't want to stop the riots. Case in point, Portland.
The Mayor of Portland is almost certain to be re-elected in November - he came within 0.7% of winning a first round majority and not even requiring a runoff. And even if he somehow loses, his runoff opponent is a DSA candidate! There is no gubernatorial election in Oregon until 2022, and even when we get to that, it's very very likely that the new elected governor will be another Democrat, it's a pretty blue state, there hasn't been a GOP governor there since the 1980s, and no Republican has won a statewide election there since 2002.

In other words, nothing on the local government level in Portland is going to change for at least the first half of the next presidential term, and likely the whole of it. If Trump can't stop protests and riots there now, he won't be able to stop them, end of story.
0
reply
Iñigo de Loyola
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#73
Report 4 weeks ago
#73
(Original post by anarchism101)
The Mayor of Portland is almost certain to be re-elected in November - he came within 0.7% of winning a first round majority and not even requiring a runoff. And even if he somehow loses, his runoff opponent is a DSA candidate! There is no gubernatorial election in Oregon until 2022, and even when we get to that, it's very very likely that the new elected governor will be another Democrat, it's a pretty blue state, there hasn't been a GOP governor there since the 1980s, and no Republican has won a statewide election there since 2002.

In other words, nothing on the local government level in Portland is going to change for at least the first half of the next presidential term, and likely the whole of it. If Trump can't stop protests and riots there now, he won't be able to stop them, end of story.
Yeah, I wouldn't be surprised if the few registered Republicans don't vote in the Portland mayoral election because the two options are equally ****.
0
reply
anarchism101
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#74
Report 4 weeks ago
#74
(Original post by Iñigo de Loyola)
Yeah, I wouldn't be surprised if the few registered Republicans don't vote in the Portland mayoral election because the two options are equally ****.
Personally, I don't see the unrest in the US ending without a "clean" win for one party or other - i.e. that one party wins both the popular and electoral votes in the presidential election, and takes both houses of Congress, without any real irregularities or legal machinations clouding the result.

It's very unlikely indeed, near enough impossible that the GOP can manage this. At present I'd say it's probably more likely the Democrats manage it than not, but certainly a good chance that they don't. Possibly the worst-case scenario for stability is Trump losing the popular vote by a good margin but managing to narrowly eke out an Electoral College win, combined with the GOP very narrowly holding onto the Senate 51-49 or even 50-50 with Pence as tiebreaker. Unfortunately, this is a very plausible outcome.
0
reply
Just my opinion
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#75
Report 4 weeks ago
#75
If Trump wins, even by a decent margin, the violence will continue if not get worse.
The only way the violence will stop is if the polls show the Democrats are suffering because of it and people are turning away from Biden.
At this point these violent protesters are the attack dogs of the Democrat Party
Imagine if when Obama was power in his first term and in the last few weeks before the election there had been 80 straight days of violence , protests and riots by right wingers in various cities across the country with Republicans barely condemning it.
0
reply
Just my opinion
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#76
Report 4 weeks ago
#76
(Original post by Gundabad(good))
The problem with him is that he shot three people, knowing full well that a crowd of demonstrators would show up.
It's almost like you haven't seen any of the videos.🤔
0
reply
Napp
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#77
Report Thread starter 4 weeks ago
#77
(Original post by Gundabad(good))
The problem with him is that he shot three people, knowing full well that a crowd of demonstrators would show up.
I dont see the problem in him shooting three attackers - especially as the rioters showed up and were then shot, not the other way around.
Either way, given they were all repeat criminals (and quite egregious ones at that) my sympathy is lacking. Paedophiles, wife beaters etc.
0
reply
Captain Haddock
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#78
Report 4 weeks ago
#78
(Original post by Napp)
I dont see the problem in him shooting three attackers - especially as the rioters showed up and were then shot, not the other way around.
Either way, given they were all repeat criminals (and quite egregious ones at that) my sympathy is lacking. Paedophiles, wife beaters etc.
What about the video that surfaced today showing Kyle beating a girl in the head and kidneys from behind? Clearly he's no angel himself.
0
reply
Napp
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#79
Report Thread starter 4 weeks ago
#79
(Original post by Captain Haddock)
What about the video that surfaced today showing Kyle beating a girl in the head and kidneys from behind? Clearly he's no angel himself.
I havent seen said video so cant comment.
Still not sure how that, if its true, removes his right to defend himself from a lynch mob of criminals though?
0
reply
Captain Haddock
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#80
Report 4 weeks ago
#80
(Original post by Napp)
I havent seen said video so cant comment.
Still not sure how that, if its true, removes his right to defend himself from a lynch mob of criminals though?
It doesn't. But equally what does anyone's background have to do with anything?

You said that 'either way' you wouldn't have much sympathy. I took that to mean even if it wasn't self defence, you wouldn't feel too bad about it. So now it turns out Kyle is a woman beater, surely you don't feel too bad about him being attacked by a mob, either?
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Are you confident you could find support for your mental health if you needed it in COVID-19?

Yes (79)
21.76%
No (284)
78.24%

Watched Threads

View All