Rittenhouse. What an American Hero. Will Biden apologise?

[Quagmire]

Why do you think people should act as vigilantes?
Not such a great idea if we want a functional society, is it?

I think a better question would be: why would people think they need to?
Kenosha Mayor: 'Did Not Have Enough' Law Enforcement to Put Down Riots - Headline USA

Minneapolis Mayor Defends Stand-Down Order As Rioters Burn Police Precinct | NewsRadio 740 KTRH | Michael Berry (iheart.com)

Violent Protests Given Free Rein; Mayor Orders CPD to Stand Down - Ohio Statehouse News

Cops Told to Stand Down as Madison Burned (townhall.com)

As Chicago is riddled w/lootings, shootings, homicides & police stand-downs, Watch SA Candidate O’Brien take on SA Foxx, Cable & Web | Public Affairs with Jeff Berkowitz (chicagonow.com)

 

[SkepticThinker]

I think a better question would be: why would people think they need to?
Kenosha Mayor: 'Did Not Have Enough' Law Enforcement to Put Down Riots - Headline USA

Minneapolis Mayor Defends Stand-Down Order As Rioters Burn Police Precinct | NewsRadio 740 KTRH | Michael Berry (iheart.com)

Violent Protests Given Free Rein; Mayor Orders CPD to Stand Down - Ohio Statehouse News

Cops Told to Stand Down as Madison Burned (townhall.com)

As Chicago is riddled w/lootings, shootings, homicides & police stand-downs, Watch SA Candidate O’Brien take on SA Foxx, Cable & Web | Public Affairs with Jeff Berkowitz (chicagonow.com)

I don't care if people think they "need to."
That's not how modern societies function, thankfully.
Can you imagine if everyone did this? We'd be living in that movie "The Purge." No thanks.

 

[Quagmire]

We're talking about killing people and what makes someone a killer. Not jay walking.

I was trying to make a point and I think you're trying to evade it. OK then, I'll spell it out:

In common usage, applying the tag of "criminal" to someone is intended to speak more to their nature than to their history. "Criminal" is usually used to describe someone with a propensity towards crime, not necessarily anyone who's ever committed a crime.

Same thing with the word "killer". Technically, anyone who's ever killed is a "killer", but the term isn't usually used in reference to anyone without consideration of the circumstances. Otherwise, every surgeon who's ever performed an unsuccessful operation is a "killer" . Every food service person who's ever inadvertently served contaminated food to a customer is a "killer".

Every asymptomatic covid carrier who passed it on to someone who wound up dying from it, etc.

The terms "criminal" or "killer" as used in modern terminology are meant to serve as a warning label, a predictor of future activity. None of that is necessary if we're just describing someone involved in an isolated event.

Unless you want to lower the bar in which case the term(s) becomes meaningless.

Hence my question asking if you killed someone.
So, sorry but I don't understand your question.

That must have taken quite a bit of effort.

 

[SkepticThinker]

I was trying to make a point and I think you're trying to evade it. OK then, I'll spell it out:

In common usage, applying the tag of "criminal" to someone is intended to speak more to their nature than to their history. "Criminal" is usually used to describe someone with a propensity towards crime, not necessarily anyone who's ever committed a crime.

Same thing with the word "killer". Technically, anyone who's ever killed is a "killer", but the term isn't usually used in reference to anyone without consideration of the circumstances. Otherwise, every surgeon who's ever performed an unsuccessful operation is a "killer" . Every food service person who's ever inadvertently served contaminated food to a customer is a "killer".

Every asymptomatic covid carrier who passed it on to someone who wound up dying from it, etc.

The terms "criminal" or "killer" as used in modern terminology are meant to serve as a warning label, a predictor of future activity. None of that is necessary if we're just describing someone involved in an isolated event.

Unless you want to lower the bar in which case the term(s) becomes meaningless.



That must have taken quite a bit of effort.

I didn't use the word "criminal." I used the word "killer."

I am talking about a person who killed someone as a killer. Because they have killed.
That's it.
Maybe it's an isolated event for this guy, maybe not. It doesn't really matter.

 

[Quagmire]

I didn't use the word "criminal." I used the word "killer."

I am talking about a person who killed someone as a killer. Because they have killed.
That's it.
Maybe it's an isolated event for this guy, maybe not. It doesn't really matter.

Yes, it does.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Yes, it does.

To you.
Not to me.

 

[Revoltingest]

Jaywalking is a crime. I've jay walked. Am I a criminal?

I'm a killer....all sorts of pests.
Although only small ones.
I lack the big game license required to hunt lawyers.

 

[Quagmire]

To you.
Not to me.

I guess it depends on whether you're trying to understand the situation, or just looking to pass judgement on the people involved.

 

[Revoltingest]

I guess it depends on whether you're trying to understand the situation, or just looking to pass judgement on the people involved.

I can understand their side...I think....
Rittenhouse killed them wrongfully because he put himself
in the position of having to defend himself, ie, by exercising
constitutional rights as he did, he provoked the responses
leading to the deaths. Setting aside the law, he's a murderer.

I can't argue against that view.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

The terms "criminal" or "killer" as used in modern terminology are meant to serve as a warning label, a predictor of future activity. None of that is necessary if we're just describing someone involved in an isolated event.

Why would we assume that this will be an isolated event?

What message do you think Rittenhouse will take from this experience? Not only has he learned that he can kill without legal consequence, but he's also seen that killing can get him attention and praise from the peer group he's chosen to associate with.

That's a heck of a thing to drop on an impressionable kid. I'd say it's better than even odds that he'll kill again.

I hope I'm wrong, but I don't think I am.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Jaywalking is a crime. I've jay walked. Am I a criminal?

Where is jaywalking a crime?

 

[Quagmire]

I can understand their side...I think....
Rittenhouse killed them wrongfully because he put himself
in the position of having to defend himself, ie, by exercising
constitutional rights as he did, he provoked the responses
leading to the deaths.

I think provocation is up for grabs here too:

This is the most comprehensive video of that night that I've found so far:

Time stamps to help get some idea about the relative motives/disposition of the participants:

13:25

14:33

15:20

Here's how the confrontation between Rittenhouse and Rosenbaum played out:

16:04

Setting aside the law, he's a murderer.

I can't argue against that view.

To me, "murder" suggests some sort of premeditated intent. I've yet to see anything to suggest to me that Rittenhouse went to Kenosha with the intention of hurting anyone.

 

[Quagmire]

Why would we assume that this will be an isolated event?

Make you a deal: if he does it again and someone calls him a killer, I won't argue about it.

What message do you think Rittenhouse will take from this experience? Not only has he learned that he can kill without legal consequence, but he's also seen that killing can get him attention and praise from the peer group he's chosen to associate with.

That's a heck of a thing to drop on an impressionable kid. I'd say it's better than even odds that he'll kill again.

I hope I'm wrong, but I don't think I am.

Until he does, this is still an isolated incident.

 

[Quagmire]

Where is jaywalking a crime?

Most places:
Jaywalking - Wikipedia
Legal view by jurisdiction

 

[Debater Slayer]

The determining factor by me for identifying a large group's racial bias is if the group has mostly fair skinned people in contrast to having mostly beautiful colorfully skinned people. Hence, a group like the Proud Boys seems to me to be very racially biased towards white privilege.

"Beautiful colorfully skinned people"? That sounds quite racist to me, and I'm not white myself.

Putting non-white people on a pedestal is racist too, as is automatically associating being white with racism or privilege.

 

[ecco]

So a group that might have some white supremacists in it is a white supremacist group?

YES!

 

[ecco]

In common usage, applying the tag of "criminal" to someone is intended to speak more to their nature than to their history. "Criminal" is usually used to describe someone with a propensity towards crime, not necessarily anyone who's ever committed a crime.

Same thing with the word "killer". Technically, anyone who's ever killed is a "killer", but the term isn't usually used in reference to anyone without consideration of the circumstances.

Don't ya just love it when people try to make up their own definitions!

crim·i·nal
/ˈkrim(ə)n(ə)l/


noun

1. a person who has committed a crime.
   "these men are dangerous criminals"

kill·er
/ˈkilər/


noun

1. 1.
   a person or thing that kills.
   "police are still searching for the killer"
   

 

[Wildswanderer]

People full stop, why have you got to make **** up about what i mean?

View attachment 57967

I'm just going by what you said.

 

[Wildswanderer]

YES!

What is this picture supposed to prove?

 

[Wildswanderer]

Why do you think people should act as vigilantes?
Not such a great idea if we want a functional society, is it?

It is when leadership refuses to protect those they are supposed to protect. If the National guard had been called in it would not have been necessary for citizens to do thier job.