- Messages
- 17,696
Ahh, do you think that 17 year old is oppressing you?
If I was unarmed, and he was, in the midst of a riot, fuck yeah. Most 17 year olds don’t think. Just like Kyle.
Watch the video because Kyle was extremely refrained with excellent trigger control and muzzle control. A very disaplined young man. He only shot people who physically attacked him, did not shoot at people who put their hands up and backed away, but did shoot the three people who were direct threats to his life and well being.
In combat I saw fellow soldiers who displayed less disapline and situational awareness. He was definitely trained by someone and he remembered his training well.
What part of superseding intervening causation are you confused by? Is it the entire philosophy or just the chronology?
That is definitely the case the prosecutor wants to make. He wants to claim that because Kyle may have (but probably not) committed a misdemeanor punishable by a small fine that some how Kyle is responsible for three people attacking him and that he has no right to defend his life. I just don't see a jury of 12 buying that argument.
In any event, he was legally carrying a legal long gun that night so the whole question is mute.
it’s going to be easy since he illegally obtained a weapon
Again. That is completely untrue. Please tell us what you imagine about the rifle and how it was obtained then I will give you the actual facts.