Kyle Rittenhouse to go free!!!

[The Prowler]

But traditional hunting rifles.

Like this one Joe?

 

[The Prowler]

Nothing sways him

Bullshit.

I have had to ease up on Joe a number of times.

For his safety.

 

[The Prowler]

No, actually that determination of the MR 15 as a long rifle was not set in stone prior to the trial.

This the one, Joe?

 

[The Prowler]

Now gowan

This one, Joe?

 

[The Prowler]

I know in our country, New Zealand and Norway they banned or heavily restricted access to the MR15 and other assault weapons

Like this one, Joe?

 

[The Prowler]

A legal scholar from Harvard pointed out that carrying a plastic bag and a skateboard do not constitute “looting” which the victims are referred to as “looters” in lieu of “victim” for purpose of this trial… despite the proof presented that they actually brought those items with them.

Woah!!!

Key point there!!!!

Hahahahahahaha!!!!!

 

[Dove]

A legal scholar from Harvard pointed out that carrying a plastic bag and a skateboard do not constitute “looting” which the victims are referred to as “looters” in lieu of “victim” for purpose of this trial… despite the proof presented that they actually brought those items with them.

Woah!!!

Key point there!!!!

Hahahahahahaha!!!!!

They keep missing the part where the skateboard was used as a weapon.

And the rioters cannot be called "victims" because the trial was for the jury to decide if they were victims or perps. That was the entire point of the trial. Calling them "victims" before the jury gives that verdict is bias manipulation of the jury.

The judge and MANY other attorneys who spoke on this explained it clearly. These people do not get it and dont care to get it. They decided Kyle is guilty and anything that doesnt agree is "bias". They wouldnt know objective if it was a skateboard bashing across their empty noggin.

 

[The Prowler]

Looting had nothing to do with anything as it was a straight up self defense case.

Dude, at this point you just have to laugh at them.

They experience deep emotional trauma when they are forced to think about the facts. They are pretty stupid people, but not so stupid that they cannot understand the simple facts of this case.

So...

Their subconscious is literally forcing them to think about irrelevant information so they become confused. It is a to protect them from the bad emotions they feel when they are not confused - because that would force them to deal with The Truth.

 

[Dove]

I really cant fucking believe rioting mobs are being validated by anyone as some legit "side".

And that people are defending them and demanding that innocent shouldnt have any rights to self defense if these shit bags go after them.

I really struggle with that. We have actual homegrown domestic terrorists and these leftards are validating them even as they plow down children. Destroy communities. Beat. Murder. Rape innocent people.

Unreal.

We need a civil war or national divorce.

 

[Biggie Smiles]

Looting had nothing to do with anything as it was a straight up self defense case.

Dude, at this point you just have to laugh at them.

They experience deep emotional trauma when they are forced to think about the facts. They are pretty stupid people, but not so stupid that they cannot understand the simple facts of this case.

So...

Their subconscious is literally forcing them to think about irrelevant information so they become confused. It is a to protect them from the bad emotions they feel when they are not confused - because that would force them to deal with The Truth.

I've ceased attempting reason with any of these dumb fuckwits as some of the things I've seen them write has me convinced they have the brain power of a fucking earth worm

 

[Joe]

Looting had nothing to do with anything as it was a straight up self defense case.

Dude, at this point you just have to laugh at them.

They experience deep emotional trauma when they are forced to think about the facts. They are pretty stupid people, but not so stupid that they cannot understand the simple facts of this case.

So...

Their subconscious is literally forcing them to think about irrelevant information so they become confused. It is a to protect them from the bad emotions they feel when they are not confused - because that would force them to deal with The Truth.

I meant the AR 15 rifle. so htat was error on my part.

However I did prove my point, that definition of a long range rifle prior
rittenhouse trial was not clearly defined under Wisconsin law.

It was not set in stone nor was the AR 15 properly classified under Wisconsin law before the trial. That classificaiton was determined by Judge Schroeder at the time of the trial and not by the Wisconsin state legislature prior to that.

so herin lies the argument that the judge demonstrated judicial bias and sided with the defense.

PLUS, Judge Schroeder did admit or state that he was confused by the ambiguity of the statute.

"I think it ought to have been mighty clear that I had big problems with this statute," Schroeder said. "I made no bones about that from the beginning. And there always was access to the court of appeals all along here. Well, I guess that's not fair for me to say because I was sitting on it. So shame on me."​

Therefore...judge Schroeder undertook a form of judicial acitivism of his own kind, which conservatives often accuse liberals and liberal justics of doing.

And the definition of an AR15 was determine at the time of the trial, not before that.

He injected his own bias into the trial.

That's hardly an impartial judge.

He was partial to the defense

 

[Dove]

Looting had nothing to do with anything as it was a straight up self defense case.

Dude, at this point you just have to laugh at them.

They experience deep emotional trauma when they are forced to think about the facts. They are pretty stupid people, but not so stupid that they cannot understand the simple facts of this case.

So...

Their subconscious is literally forcing them to think about irrelevant information so they become confused. It is a to protect them from the bad emotions they feel when they are not confused - because that would force them to deal with The Truth.

I've ceased attempting reason with any of these dumb fuckwits as some of the things I've seen them write has me convinced they have the brain power of a fucking earth worm

It drives me fucking nuts.

I don't want to accept it

How the fuck does this happen to people?

 

[Admin.]

He looked at me with askance, I felt threatened so I shot him!

 

[Joe]

Looting had nothing to do with anything as it was a straight up self defense case.

Dude, at this point you just have to laugh at them.

They experience deep emotional trauma when they are forced to think about the facts. They are pretty stupid people, but not so stupid that they cannot understand the simple facts of this case.

So...

Their subconscious is literally forcing them to think about irrelevant information so they become confused. It is a to protect them from the bad emotions they feel when they are not confused - because that would force them to deal with The Truth.

I've ceased attempting reason with any of these dumb fuckwits as some of the things I've seen them write has me convinced they have the brain power of a fucking earth worm

It drives me fucking nuts.

I don't want to accept it

How the fuck does this happen to people?

I think what drives you nuts is when people don't wholly agree with you or validate your narrative.

It's your way or the highway and nothing else.

 

[Dove]

Looting had nothing to do with anything as it was a straight up self defense case.

Dude, at this point you just have to laugh at them.

They experience deep emotional trauma when they are forced to think about the facts. They are pretty stupid people, but not so stupid that they cannot understand the simple facts of this case.

So...

Their subconscious is literally forcing them to think about irrelevant information so they become confused. It is a to protect them from the bad emotions they feel when they are not confused - because that would force them to deal with The Truth.

I meant the AR 15 rifle. so htat was error on my part.

However I did prove my point, that definition of a long range rifle prior
rittenhouse trial was not clearly defined under Wisconsin law.

It was not set in stone nor was the AR 15 properly classified under Wisconsin law before the trial. That classificaiton was determined by Judge Schroeder at the time of the trial and not by the Wisconsin state legislature prior to that.

so herin lies the argument that the judge demonstrated judicial bias and sided with the defense.

PLUS, Judge Schroeder did admit or state that he was confused by the ambiguity of the statute.

"I think it ought to have been mighty clear that I had big problems with this statute," Schroeder said. "I made no bones about that from the beginning. And there always was access to the court of appeals all along here. Well, I guess that's not fair for me to say because I was sitting on it. So shame on me."​

Therefore...judge Schroeder undertook a form of judicial acitivism of his own kind, which conservatives often accuse liberals and liberal justics of doing.

He injected his own bias into the trial.

That's hardly an impartial judge.

He was partial to the defense

Joe Raven showed you a link twice that went into how the weapon charge was tossed because the AR was a long gun under WI law.

I dont know why you are ignoring this. It's not suiting your argument here. And you are deciding you think the JUDGE was bias when really Kyle was perfectly legal according to WI law on this.

And MANY people have been saying he was in legal possession under the law and citing the law.

This is were bias happened because left wingers turning this into some fight against "the right"(when its not) were completely convinced that a 17 year old having the gun was illegal. None of them checked the law. They just FEEL like it's illegal or should be. But it's not. Kyle was within the law.

Bias would have been convicting him anyway, regardless that he legally had it.

 

[Joe]

But traditional hunting rifles.

Like this one Joe?

At least in Canada and in other nations, the AR15 semiautomatic is defined as such and is prohibited because it shoots out more than 1 bullet with 1 trigger pull.

I saw that on the RCMP website.

Now or course in the USA, the AR15 is considered a 'long rifle' in many US states but in Canada and in other nations/jursidictions it is not for the reasons I've citied. It is clearly defined as 'an assault weapon'.

Whether or not one agrees with allowing the AR15 as a legal firearm in their nation, it is beyond a reasonable doubt, that the AR15 has been responsible for hundreds of killins of innocent civilians around the globe.

That's why it is listed as a prohibited firearm in many nations.

The RCMP in Canada, a highly regarded police force internaitonally, does classify the AR15 as an assault weapon/rifle.

 

[Dove]

He looked at me with askance, I felt threatened so I shot him!

Yet the future you guys are building looks more like a 3rd world totalitarian state where no one has their human or constitutional rights to defend themselves. Where riots destroy communities and deaths are shrugged off and girls are raped in schools and nothing happens. Women forced to share cells with men and tolerate rape and assault.

Where mob justice is demanded and terrorist attacks happen.

At some point you need to take an HONEST look at exactly what kind of society you are creating. You guys refuse to do that.

You guys are brainwashed with partisan hatred fighting for regular people to have no rights while mobs attack innocent people.

You dont even care about human beings.... so your idea of a future is a joke.

Go look at pictures of Kenosha. THATS the future you are pushing. Violence. Rape. Destroyed schools where children are taught to be hateful activists.

The country really needs to just split.

How many genocides have happened I the name of some utopia future? Yeah that's where team blue is leading us. People building a future dont lie and spread hate.

 

[Joe]

Looting had nothing to do with anything as it was a straight up self defense case.

Dude, at this point you just have to laugh at them.

They experience deep emotional trauma when they are forced to think about the facts. They are pretty stupid people, but not so stupid that they cannot understand the simple facts of this case.

So...

Their subconscious is literally forcing them to think about irrelevant information so they become confused. It is a to protect them from the bad emotions they feel when they are not confused - because that would force them to deal with The Truth.

I meant the AR 15 rifle. so htat was error on my part.

so on a technicality, that does seem heavily biased.

However I did prove my point, that definition of a long range rifle prior
rittenhouse trial was not clearly defined under Wisconsin law.

It was not set in stone nor was the AR 15 properly classified under Wisconsin law before the trial. That classificaiton was determined by Judge Schroeder at the time of the trial and not by the Wisconsin state legislature prior to that.

so herin lies the argument that the judge demonstrated judicial bias and sided with the defense.

PLUS, Judge Schroeder did admit or state that he was confused by the ambiguity of the statute.

"I think it ought to have been mighty clear that I had big problems with this statute," Schroeder said. "I made no bones about that from the beginning. And there always was access to the court of appeals all along here. Well, I guess that's not fair for me to say because I was sitting on it. So shame on me."​

Therefore...judge Schroeder undertook a form of judicial acitivism of his own kind, which conservatives often accuse liberals and liberal justics of doing.

He injected his own bias into the trial.

That's hardly an impartial judge.

He was partial to the defense

Joe Raven showed you a link twice that went into how the weapon charge was tossed because the AR was a long gun under WI law.

I dont know why you are ignoring this. It's not suiting your argument here. And you are deciding you think the JUDGE was bias when really Kyle was perfectly legal according to WI law on this.

And MANY people have been saying he was in legal possession under the law and citing the law.

This is were bias happened because left wingers turning this into some fight against "the right"(when its not) were completely convinced that a 17 year old having the gun was illegal. None of them checked the law. They just FEEL like it's illegal or should be. But it's not. Kyle was within the law.

Bias would have been convicting him anyway, regardless that he legally had it.

But I'm making the point, that the AR15 was not classified as a long rifle prior to that trial, and Judge Schroeder even admitted that.

so he alone made that determination, not lawmakers in the Wisconsin state legislatiuere

so that does seem like a form of judicial bias that it came down down to a single judge as opposed to muliparty vote of several legislators and proper review to make that determination.

It seems like the latter would be more appropriate since it would take months of reserach and legal drafts to make that determination as opposed to a snap decision of a single and possibly quite biased judge.

that's why I'm finding fault with the verdict.

 

[X]

A legal scholar from Harvard pointed out that carrying a plastic bag and a skateboard do not constitute “looting” which the victims are referred to as “looters” in lieu of “victim” for purpose of this trial… despite the proof presented that they actually brought those items with them.

Woah!!!

Key point there!!!!

Hahahahahahaha!!!!!

They keep missing the part where the skateboard was used as a weapon.

And the rioters cannot be called "victims" because the trial was for the jury to decide if they were victims or perps. That was the entire point of the trial. Calling them "victims" before the jury gives that verdict is bias manipulation of the jury.

The judge and MANY other attorneys who spoke on this explained it clearly. These people do not get it and dont care to get it. They decided Kyle is guilty and anything that doesnt agree is "bias". They wouldnt know objective if it was a skateboard bashing across their empty noggin.

Sorry

 

[Blurt]

 

[Joe]

I really cant fucking believe rioting mobs are being validated by anyone as some legit "side".

And that people are defending them and demanding that innocent shouldnt have any rights to self defense if these shit bags go after them.

I really struggle with that. We have actual homegrown domestic terrorists and these leftards are validating them even as they plow down children. Destroy communities. Beat. Murder. Rape innocent people.

Unreal.

We need a civil war or national divorce.

And have you thought 16 year olds carryomg around a semiautomatic AR15 that this will not endanger the public ?

I think these types were validated during the Kenosha trial.

So the American Right appears to have gotten theirs during that trial.

Validation.

 

[X]

a gay person said that, don't you know it's rendered irrelevant

 

[Oerdin]

But traditional hunting rifles.

Like this one Joe?

At least in Canada and in other nations, the AR15 semiautomatic is defined as such and is prohibited because it shoots out more than 1 bullet with 1 trigger pull.

I saw that on the RCMP website.

Now or course in the USA, the AR15 is considered a 'long rifle'. but in Canada and in other nations/jursidictions it is not for the reasons I've citied.

Whether or not one agrees with allowing the AR15 as a legal firearm in their nation, it is beyond a reasonable doubt, that the AR15 has been responsible for hundreds of killins of innocent civilians around the globe.

That's why it is listed as a prohibited firearm in many nations.

The RCMP in Canada, a highly regarded police force internaitonally, does classify the AR15 as an assault weapon/rifle.

Joe, by definition a semiautomatic is by definition one trigger pull equals one round fired. You don't know what you are talking about. Hell, I can find examples of semiautomatic rifles from the 1890's so it is not anything remotely new.

 

[Joe]

But traditional hunting rifles.

Like this one Joe?

At least in Canada and in other nations, the AR15 semiautomatic is defined as such and is prohibited because it shoots out more than 1 bullet with 1 trigger pull.

I saw that on the RCMP website.

Now or course in the USA, the AR15 is considered a 'long rifle'. but in Canada and in other nations/jursidictions it is not for the reasons I've citied.

Whether or not one agrees with allowing the AR15 as a legal firearm in their nation, it is beyond a reasonable doubt, that the AR15 has been responsible for hundreds of killins of innocent civilians around the globe.

That's why it is listed as a prohibited firearm in many nations.

The RCMP in Canada, a highly regarded police force internaitonally, does classify the AR15 as an assault weapon/rifle.

Joe, by definition a semiautomatic is by definition one trigger pull equals one round fired. You don't know what you are talking about. Hell, I can find examples of semiautomatic rifles from the 1890's so it is not anything remotely new.

Oh I'm just going by the definition in my own country.

So I suppose in yours it's different.

At least according to our national police force.

 

[Joe]

I think what liberals and even traditional conservatives want or don't want is validation of someone's extreme ideologies at ANY cost. such as flooding the streets with AR15s which have proven track record of efficiently massacring hundreds of people around the globe in just a few minutes. That's a war weapon which is more sutiable for war, law enforcement and combat, not civilian use.

Civilian weapons such as sports rifles are traditionally used for hunting outside of city limits in the bush/wildenress, not mowing down people within city limits.

 

[Dove]

I really cant fucking believe rioting mobs are being validated by anyone as some legit "side".

And that people are defending them and demanding that innocent shouldnt have any rights to self defense if these shit bags go after them.

I really struggle with that. We have actual homegrown domestic terrorists and these leftards are validating them even as they plow down children. Destroy communities. Beat. Murder. Rape innocent people.

Unreal.

We need a civil war or national divorce.

And have you thought 16 year olds carryomg around a semiautomatic AR15 that this will not endanger the public ?

I think these types were validated during the Kenosha trial.

So the American Right appears to have gotten theirs during that trial.

Validation.

Joe.....you have seen a video of my daughter shooting a gun.

Joe you are not worried about public safety. That's what IM worried about. I'm VERY concerned about mobs descending on communities, burning, looting, destroying and beating, murdering and raping innocent people.

The riots are a big enough public safety threat where EVERY citizen there should have been armed.

If Kyle didnt have that gun he would be DEAD or severely beaten. Just like MANY other people.

These rioters had guns... many illegally.

How can you possibly see all that, and think it's the kid who demonstrated excellent control of his fire arm, a skilled more responsible handler than Gross....who is a threat to public safety?

Make it make sense.

 

[X]

I think what liberals and even traditional conservatives want or don't want is validation of someone's extreme ideologies at ANY cost. such as flooding the streets with AR15s which have proven track record of efficiently massacring hundreds of people around the globe in just a few minutes. That's a war weapon which is more sutiable for war, law enforcement and combat, not civilian use.

Civilian weapons such as sports rifles are traditionally used for hunting outside of city limits in the bush/wildenress, not mowing down people within city limits.

 

[The Prowler]

Cue Dovid for her non sequitur response.

Show me a Trump rally where a bunch of crazed lunatics where chasing a guy yelling "Kill him!" and hitting him with a skateboard and pointing a gun at him from a few feet away.

 

[Blurt]

What Joe doesn't get, seems to me, is that it scarcely matters how any jurisdiction outside the U.S,, including Joe's beloved Dudley Do-Rights, define an AR-15. It's a purely domestic issue.

 

[Oerdin]

But traditional hunting rifles.

Like this one Joe?

At least in Canada and in other nations, the AR15 semiautomatic is defined as such and is prohibited because it shoots out more than 1 bullet with 1 trigger pull.

I saw that on the RCMP website.

Now or course in the USA, the AR15 is considered a 'long rifle'. but in Canada and in other nations/jursidictions it is not for the reasons I've citied.

Whether or not one agrees with allowing the AR15 as a legal firearm in their nation, it is beyond a reasonable doubt, that the AR15 has been responsible for hundreds of killins of innocent civilians around the globe.

That's why it is listed as a prohibited firearm in many nations.

The RCMP in Canada, a highly regarded police force internaitonally, does classify the AR15 as an assault weapon/rifle.

Joe, by definition a semiautomatic is by definition one trigger pull equals one round fired. You don't know what you are talking about. Hell, I can find examples of semiautomatic rifles from the 1890's so it is not anything remotely new.

Oh I'm just going by the definition in my own country.

So I suppose in yours it's different.

At least according to our national police force.

The very first sentence of your first post I quoted in this chain said semiautomatic one pull equals multiple rounds fired. That is untrue. That is an automatic or three round burst.

I don't care which country you live in the definition of semiautomatic is the same. It is one trigger pull, one round fired. The only difference is the gas powered action has the bolt chamber a new round. On the older bolt action rifles you had to physically use a lever to chamber the next round.