+ Reply to Thread
Page 4 of 102 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4 5 6 14 54 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 80 of 2030
  1. #61

    Sweaty Dick Punching Enthusiast

    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    3,097
    BG Level
    7

    Quote Originally Posted by Gadritan View Post
    I did. Pay attention.

    Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk
    Pay attention? If you've already linked it just do it again, please - I've looked through your posts in this thread and I don't see it; I'm pretty confident I've watched all angles of anything relating to the matter, including a half hour prior to the altercation and can't see any action of kyle's that I could even stretch as brandishing - despite being able to time stamp times when people were agitating the "armed militia" by racking the slide of their gun and throwing poles at them because a member of the "militia" closed the lid to a dumpster fire (definitely a lot of localities would consider that brandishing by virtue of performing a threatening action with a firearm that's directed at someone, unsure if all or most, though) and the particular person, joseph, who chased down kyle initially being belligerent himself, "shoot me, nigga, shoot me, nigga"

    Quote Originally Posted by Tyche View Post
    The cognitive dissonance is mind numbing. Destruction of life is an appropriate response to destruction of property, but destruction of property is not an appropriate response to destruction of life...
    Few things,
    1. Kyle's very being there the way he was, was illegal by virtue of some state line crossing (unsure exactly what this means to the letter of the law, but could be a big deal), him being 17 open carrying, and him breaking curfew for the area(?)
    2. Just him breaking those laws doesn't excuse joe chasing him down

    Kyle's shooting at the 4 people he shot at had nothing to do with anyone "destroying property", I'm unsure how you're coming to that conclusion when the only evidence of the situation we have has joseph and the others being the clear aggressors.

    I suspect you're assuming Kyle must have aggressed prior to that video starting?

    Afaik all we, the public, have of that atm is:
    1. video ~30min prior to the first incident: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LojfGWZwHg0&t=1s - no inflammatory actions from any of the "militia peoples" can be seen, let alone kyle (despite others throwing things at one of them and racking a slide at one @after about 25:45); small note of kyle's volunteering first aid to some injured blm protester at 8:50 and declaring himself an emt (counter to: he proudly was declaring he would kill to defend property)
    2. supposed eyewitness account of a deadspin journalist interviewing kyle moments before the fatal interaction (also supposedly is the 3rd man chasing behind kyle and joseph on video)
    Detective Cepress interviewed McGinnis and indicates the following: Before the shooting,
    McGinnis was interviewing the defendant. The defendant told McGinnis that he was a trained
    medic. McGinnis stated that he (McGinnis) has handled many ARs and that the defendant was not
    handling the weapon very well. McGinnis said that as they were walking south another armed male who appeared to be in his 30s joined them and said he was there to protect the defendant.
    McGinnis stated that before the defendant reached the parking lot and ran across it, the defendant had moved from the middle of Sheridan Road to the sidewalk and that is when McGinnis saw a male (Rosenbaum) initially try to engage the defendant. McGinnis stated that as the defendant was walking Rosenbaum was trying to get closer to the defendant. When Rosenbaum advanced, the defendant did a “juke” move and started running. McGinnis stated that there were other people that were moving very quickly. McGinnis stated that they were moving towards the defendant. McGinnis said that according to what he saw the defendant was trying to evade these individuals. McGinnis described the point where the defendant had reached the car. McGinnis described that the defendant had the gun in a low ready position. Meaning that he had the gun raised but pointed downward. The butt of the gun would have been at an angle downwards from the shoulder. McGinnis stated that the defendant brought the gun up. McGinnis stated that he stepped back andhe thinks the defendant fired 3 rounds in rapid succession. McGinnis said when the first round went off, he thought it hit the pavement. McGinnis felt something on his leg and his first thought was wondering whether he had gotten shot. McGinnis was behind and slightly to the right of Rosenbaum, in the line of fire, when the defendant shot.
    McGinnis stated that the first round went into the ground and when the second shot went off, the
    defendant actually had the gun aimed at Rosenbaum. McGinnis stated he did not hear the two
    exchange any words. McGinnis said that the unarmed guy (Rosenbaum) was trying to get the
    defendant’s gun. McGinnis demonstrated by extending both of his hands in a quick grabbing
    motion and did that as a visual on how Rosenbaum tried to reach for the defendant’s gun.
    Detective Cepress indicates that he asked McGinnis if Rosenbaum had his hands on the gun when
    the defendant shot. McGinnis said that he definitely made a motion that he was trying to grab the
    barrel of the gun. McGinnis stated that the defendant pulled it away and then raised it. McGinnis
    stated that right as they came together, the defendant fired. McGinnis said that when Rosenbaum
    was shot, he had leaned in (towards the defendant).McGinnis stated that after the defendant shot he ran back towards the hospital towards the middle of the road. McGinnis stayed and turned his attention to Rosenbaum. McGinnis stated that he then heard other shots really soon after.

  2. #62

    Quote Originally Posted by Thunder View Post
    Kyle's shooting at the 4 people he shot at had nothing to do with anyone "destroying property", I'm unsure how you're coming to that conclusion when the only evidence of the situation we have has joseph and the others being the clear aggressors.
    Traveling to another town so you can walk around with a gun is being the aggressor. No one here has said the other people are innocent bystanders, but this kid comes looking for a reason to kill someone. He found it.

  3. #63

    Sweaty Dick Punching Enthusiast

    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    3,097
    BG Level
    7

    Quote Originally Posted by Yabby View Post
    Traveling to another town so you can walk around with a gun is being the aggressor.
    I'm going to in good faith add that you mean [during a protest with the intent to "counter" violent/destructive protesters] because surely you don't mean just going an open carrying in another state is inherently aggressing
    but this kid comes looking for a reason to kill someone.
    I don't see how anyone's coming to that conclusion other than pretending they're reading his mind and/or playing psycho analyst because he had blue lives matter on his FB
    the only commentary kyle gives on why he/his group is there afaik is,
    "our job is to protect this business"
    "and part of my job is to also help people - if there's somebody hurt i'm running into harm's way - that's why i have my weapon, to protect myself, obviously - but i also have my medkit"
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LGdGHBlBBMY
    supposedly he has gone through EMT training (idk if that's realistic, google-fu says it's just 140 hours of classes so maybe he isn't exaggerating that claim)

  4. #64

    Quote Originally Posted by Thunder View Post
    "our job is to protect this business"
    It wasn't his job, nor anyone in his little group's job.

    "and part of my job is to also help people - if there's somebody hurt i'm running into harm's way - that's why i have my weapon, to protect myself, obviously - but i also have my medkit"
    He admits right here that he expects there is going to be violence. And when it happens he brought his gun with him.

    The kid should not have been there. It isn't his job, he wasn't trained to deal with large groups or de-escalation. He wanted to go play a big man with a gun because in his head he is a big strong man who protects the weak. He knew what he was doing when he went there with a gun. Truthfully, if he was walking around with just a medkit and trying to help people, I highly doubt anyone would have gotten hurt nor himself get attacked.

    If i went to a trump rally with a shirt say "FUCK TRUMP AND HIS SUPPORTERS", I can expect someone is going to attack me.

    At this point, I'm not really sure what you are defending. Are you saying he should be let go and did nothing wrong? Murder 1 is too much? What outcome are you wanting from this?

  5. #65
    Caesar Salad
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    28,300
    BG Level
    10

    He thinks the kid will walk free after 2 murders cause of self defense

    Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

  6. #66

    Sweaty Dick Punching Enthusiast

    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    3,097
    BG Level
    7

    "It wasn't his job, nor anyone in his little group's job."
    I was quoting that as a matter of fact of what he said; contrast to assuming I knew what was in his mind


    "He admits right here that he expects there is going to be violence. And when it happens he brought his gun with him."
    Taking steps to protect oneself from x doesn't mean one expects x to happen. It means one believes x can happen (me getting homeowner fire insurance doesn't mean i expect my house to burn down)

    "He wanted to go play a big man with a gun because in his head he is a big strong man who protects the weak. He knew what he was doing when he went there with a gun."
    mindreading
    "Truthfully, if he was walking around with just a medkit and trying to help people, I highly doubt anyone would have gotten hurt nor himself get attacked."
    more psychic abilities

    "If i went to a trump rally with a shirt say "FUCK TRUMP AND HIS SUPPORTERS", I can expect someone is going to attack me."
    Yes, perfect; and what did kyle wear that could illicit such a response from joseph?

    "At this point, I'm not really sure what you are defending."
    I'm trying to attack the logic that tries to use negligible facts far removed from the situation to paint "both sides" as equally wrong.
    Was it dumb for him to have been there? yeah, I would never have done that nor would I have wanted anyone close to me doing something like that
    Whole 'nother level of dumb is attacking someone for no good reason (as is currently known, anyway)

    But you're not saying it was kind of dumb to go to a protest to try and deter the bad apples within that protest. You're (and others) are ascribing additional mal intent that runs contrary to what kyle has said and what his group has said. I understand waving away "oh he said he was there to help people, who cares, could be lying" OK, but then don't pretend like assuming that he's thinking "oh im a big strong man with my gun and im gonna shoot some people" is somehow relevant

    " Are you saying he should be let go and did nothing wrong? Murder 1 is too much? What outcome are you wanting from this?"
    I think everything as it's happening is exactly how it should. Something terrible happened, we don't have all the facts, and it should be hashed out in a court with trained professionals making arguments on either side and then coming to some sort of conclusion by that. And if he does end up getting convicted I'll be interested to see why

  7. #67

    Sweaty Dick Punching Enthusiast

    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    3,097
    BG Level
    7

    Quote Originally Posted by Salodin View Post
    He thinks the kid will walk free after 2 murders cause of self defense

    Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
    yeah, I'd put money on that atm given what we know (of course some other eye witness accounts could come out, some video, or some other evidence that changes my opinion drastically) edit: except for being in possession of a firearm illegally, idk what the punishment for that is though

    If zimmerman can literally walk up to someone and try and impede them leaving that situation... and then shooting them because of that situation... and then walk free... yeah. That was gross af, and that was even his own telling of the story, whereas here we have video at least

  8. #68
    Caesar Salad
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    28,300
    BG Level
    10

    This guy is over here telling us he's going to walk for self defense based on what we know, but also mentions he doesn't know what the punishment is for using an illegally procured firearm.

    The punishment is being charged with murder my guy.

    Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

  9. #69

    Quote Originally Posted by Thunder View Post
    "If i went to a trump rally with a shirt say "FUCK TRUMP AND HIS SUPPORTERS", I can expect someone is going to attack me."
    Yes, perfect; and what did kyle wear that could illicit such a response from joseph?
    A gun. You know, the one thing that, if removed, would have kept all this from happening.

    " Are you saying he should be let go and did nothing wrong? Murder 1 is too much? What outcome are you wanting from this?"
    I think everything as it's happening is exactly how it should. Something terrible happened, we don't have all the facts, and it should be hashed out in a court with trained professionals making arguments on either side and then coming to some sort of conclusion by that. And if he does end up getting convicted I'll be interested to see why
    Not sure why you engaged then. People here are just saying they think he will get hit with murder one. They are not defending him or the people who attacked him. That said, murder 1 is hard to slap on someone, and all it would take is one person, like yourself, on that jury to keep it from sticking.

  10. #70

    Sweaty Dick Punching Enthusiast

    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    3,097
    BG Level
    7

    Quote Originally Posted by Yabby View Post
    Not sure why you engaged then.
    Well look back to what you replied to
    "he waved his gun at people"
    did he? can I see?
    "destruction of property does not warrant destruction of life"
    is that what happened? Maybe tyche had evidence of the story that went around elsewhere that joseph "got shot in the head because he was breaking into a car"

    They are not defending him or the people who attacked him.
    yep, I wonder what you think about people who say garbage like, "im not defending white supremacists, but all lives matter..." or, "im not defending the cops but jacob blake wouldn't be shot if he just listened to police"

    A gun. You know, the one thing that, if removed, would have kept all this from happening.
    so fundamentally carrying a gun will reliably provoke protesters at a protest like wearing a shirt "FUCK TRUMP AND HIS SUPPORTERS" would provoke trump supporters at a trump rally
    I understand your position in its totality, I think

  11. #71

    Sweaty Dick Punching Enthusiast

    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    3,097
    BG Level
    7

    Quote Originally Posted by Salodin View Post
    This guy is over here telling us he's going to walk for self defense based on what we know, but also mentions he doesn't know what the punishment is for using an illegally procured firearm.

    The punishment is being charged with murder my guy.

    Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
    Ok, so I understand your claim to be that even if he defended himself perfectly legally (aside from the illegal possession of the weapon) it's all null and void because the weapon he used to defend himself he was possessing illegally and so then he will, by default, be charged with both murders?
    That's not how I understand the law to work, would be great if you could provide some source for that
    (note: i said i'm not sure what the punishment for [that] is because i was replying to your assertion that he will "walk" and i'm just not sure if illegal possession of a firearm results in any prison time in wisconsin)

  12. #72
    Caesar Salad
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    28,300
    BG Level
    10

    The onus isn't on me to continue to explain to you why illegally murdering someone in america leads to jail time. We have all given you plenty of reasons for why he did multiple bad-to-illegal things throughout the night.

    Also, he was out past curfew so he also broke that mandate/whatever they call an emergency curfew, but lol who cares about curfew (im not being sarcastic)

    Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

  13. #73

    Quote Originally Posted by Thunder View Post
    "destruction of property does not warrant destruction of life"
    is that what happened? Maybe tyche had evidence of the story that went around elsewhere that joseph "got shot in the head because he was breaking into a car"
    I think his point is that taking a life isn't better than a store burning down. He was there to "Protect" a store, and two people died because of it. I'm not sure how you jumped to joseph breaking into a car, that is a huge leap from what was said.

    You are not allowed to kill someone to protect property in most states (Or any? Not sure). Someone stealing a lady's handbag on the street does not give her the ability to shot him in the back.

    yep, I wonder what you think about people who say garbage like, "im not defending white supremacists, but all lives matter..." or, "im not defending the cops but jacob blake wouldn't be shot if he just listened to police"
    Once again, not sure how you jumped to this logic or how they are connected to the discussion.

  14. #74

    Sweaty Dick Punching Enthusiast

    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    3,097
    BG Level
    7

    Quote Originally Posted by Yabby View Post
    I think his point is that taking a life isn't better than a store burning down. He was there to "Protect" a store, and two people died because of it. I'm not sure how you jumped to joseph breaking into a car, that is a huge leap from what was said.
    look closely,
    that went around elsewhere
    Quote Originally Posted by Yabby View Post
    You are not allowed to kill someone to protect property in most states (Or any? Not sure). Someone stealing a lady's handbag on the street does not give her the ability to shot him in the back.
    you are in some, texas for sure
    but that's not at all what happened here, is it? All 4 men that kyle shot at were in arm's reach of kyle and aggressing on him - nothing at all about stolen or damaged property



    Quote Originally Posted by Yabby View Post
    Once again, not sure how you jumped to this logic or how they are connected to the discussion.
    ok

    Had you not trotted out "not allowed to kill someone to protect property" I think it's clear you and I just disagree on the fact that carrying a firearm reliably can provoke people into attacking you like a "FUCK TRUMP SUPPORTERS" shirt would at a trump rally. I can understand that position. I do not understand why you're suggesting kyle shot anyone because they were destroying/stealing property

    The onus isn't on me to continue to explain to you why illegally murdering someone in america leads to jail time.
    you're not understanding and conflating illegally murdering someone with legally killing someone with an illegal-to-possess item
    I think it's more reasonable for you to show me the law where illegal possession of the item you use to defend yourself voids any and all self defense. I would on the other hand have to show you where it doesn't say that. See how that's asking me to provide a null?

  15. #75

    Quote Originally Posted by Thunder View Post
    but that's not at all what happened here, is it? All 4 men that kyle shot at were in arm's reach of kyle and aggressing on him - nothing at all about stolen or damaged property
    He was there to "Protect business". That was what he said in the interview, correct? That is what people are talking about when they say you can't kill someone to protect property.

  16. #76
    Caesar Salad
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    28,300
    BG Level
    10

    My guy every time you respond you keep assuming this was self defense. Even Wisconsin prosecutors don't think its self defense, that's why he's getting murder and homicide thrown at him.

    Also, even in Texas its illegal to shoot someone in the back. Your life isn't in danger if theyre running away, so you don't exactly need self defense, do you? Unless of course you think property is as valuable as life, which you are arguing even if you don't realize it.

    Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

  17. #77

    Sweaty Dick Punching Enthusiast

    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    3,097
    BG Level
    7

    You don't see how it's a stretch to assume "protecting business" meant killing anyone who was stealing/damaging property? While that may be legal in some fucked place like texas (idk wisconsin) i don't care because to me it's morally reprehensible to kill because some property (especially not yours) was being damaged

    But... none of the two murdered were because property was being damaged. They both were shot at point blank because they were after kyle. One eyewitness says joseph reached for kyle's gun. The other deceased we have on video hitting kyle with a skateboard and grabbing his gun

    Tell me you can see my issue with your analogy of
    Someone stealing a lady's handbag on the street does not give her the ability to shot him in the back.
    when none of these men were shot in the back by kyle and none of them were stealing/damaging property (do you mean they were trying to steal the rifle away from kyle maybe?)

  18. #78

    You are aurging something that can't be proven. We don't know what started the attack or why the protestors attacked him. So talking about that is dumb. What we do know he is carried a gun he should not have, across state lines, to a town he doesn't live in, to protect a business he doesn't own,to a protest about police violence, where he walked around with a gun.

    Most are saying those points alone are enough to show he was an agitator, and the defense of protecting himself no longer applies in court. I'm not sure why you keep trying to drag the discussion away from this. Did he not do any of those things? Are you saying doing the above doesn't prove anything, and he was free to kill them? That he did nothing wrong in this situation and shouldn't be charged with murder?

  19. #79
    Caesar Salad
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    28,300
    BG Level
    10

    Who cares about a made up example when theres video of the guy saying he's ready to kill people to protect businesses that aren't even in his state?

    You can not do that, and on top of that looking for trouble and then finding it is not self defense. He was looking for trouble, and he found it cause he clearly could have just stayed home with mom. Its clear you won't understand this so w/e live your best life my guy, look forward to your hot takes over the next few days

    Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

  20. #80

    Sweaty Dick Punching Enthusiast

    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    3,097
    BG Level
    7

    Quote Originally Posted by Salodin View Post
    My guy every time you respond you keep assuming this was self defense. Even Wisconsin prosecutors don't think its self defense, that's why he's getting murder and homicide thrown at him.
    My guy, some prosecutor in wisconsin thinks it isn't self defense. The same one who tried to convict an underage girl of murdering her 3 year trafficker/rapist https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2...in-prosecutor/
    don't care about that appeal to authority

    why don't you and i, the people here, talk about it? I gave my reasons, and I asked for a citation of your claim that by utilizing an illegal item in, otherwise perfectly legal, self defense it voids the ability to use self defense as a legal defense of one's actions.
    I'm still unsure what some people believe
    was it,
    [Kyle shouldn't have been there, but defending himself against aggressors literally within arms reach is OK; darwin awards all around]
    or
    [Kyle was a loose cannon who went there because he wanted to kill people, he's a premeditating murderer of opportunity]
    or
    [Kyle's self defense was legitimate but being that the weapon he used was in illegal possession he cannot utilize the affirmative legal defense of self defense]

    Quote Originally Posted by Salodin View Post
    Also, even in Texas its illegal to shoot someone in the back. Your life isn't in danger if theyre running away, so you don't exactly need self defense, do you? Unless of course you think property is as valuable as life, which you are arguing even if you don't realize it.
    joe horn killed someone fleeing the residence of his neighbor's home after robbing it and wasn't charged

    why even pivot here when all I did was clarify to yabby's question in () that it is legal in at least one state. And then conflate my involvement with what texas law is, as if that's what I believe is morally right

    please salodin, let you and i not respond to each other because it's incredibly fruitless

+ Reply to Thread
Page 4 of 102 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4 5 6 14 54 ... LastLast

Quick Reply Quick Reply

  • Decrease Size
    Increase Size
  • Remove Text Formatting
  • Insert Link Insert Image Insert Video
  • Wrap [QUOTE] tags around selected text
  • Insert NSFW Tag
  • Insert Spoiler Tag

Similar Threads

  1. George Floyd (II): Say His Name
    By 6souls in forum Politics: Advanced Shitposting
    Replies: 3013
    Last Post: 2020-08-27, 18:58
  2. George Floyd Murder by Cop
    By 6souls in forum Politics: Advanced Shitposting
    Replies: 3154
    Last Post: 2020-06-15, 18:28