Rittenhouse self defense analysis

I have a hard time figuring out how this verdict is about racism. But perennial race-baiter Leonard Pitts, Jr, commentator for the Miami Herald, straightened me out. He preempted my thinking with this jewel:

"There will be those who don’t understand why race is invoked here. Rittenhouse, after all, was a white boy who shot three white men.

"But those men lost whiteness the moment they joined that protest. No, that doesn’t mean they became dark of skin or curly of hair. What it does mean is that to be a white person who stands up for African-American lives is to place yourself in opposition to the great body of whiteness and privilege by which this country is driven."

So beware. You lose your white privilege the moment you take the side of any non-white person, no matter the circumstances.
 
Tucci454 said:
View attachment 400257

Exchange with a more left thinking friend on the book. Comes out with "shot two people in the back". Actually, no.
Click to expand...
Can’t let facts get in the way of their emotions.

Had these people actually watched the trial, they’d learn a few things… like I did.

I was 100% in support of Kyle’s right to self defense but didn’t think he was very smart about things he did that night nor about how he got the gun. However, watching the trial, I learned a few things that changed my view of him and I’m even more supportive. I learned that the WI minor in possession law was written very poorly as it basically excludes 16 & 17 year olds unless they have an SBR/SBS.
 
Tucci454 said:
...Exchange with a more left thinking friend on the book. Comes out with "shot two people in the back". Actually, no.
Click to expand...

Your friend gets hits his or her news from outlets that constantly manufacture (or regurgitate) lies that are specifically crafted to stoke racial division. A communist agenda advanced by class division has not worked in the USA because of the still considerable economic mobility and autonomy in our free market system, so the Globalist-types and their minions are using race to divide here and now. It's working for now.
 
Tucci454 said:
View attachment 400257

Exchange with a more left thinking friend on the book. Comes out with "shot two people in the back". Actually, no.
Click to expand...

How quick Jason want to end the conversation when he’s shown he’s wrong..
Now is the time for no quarter on that SOB...
He should be laid into until he commits comment suicide.
 
dmarbell said:
I have a hard time figuring out how this verdict is about racism. But perennial race-baiter Leonard Pitts, Jr, commentator for the Miami Herald, straightened me out. He preempted my thinking with this jewel:

"There will be those who don’t understand why race is invoked here. Rittenhouse, after all, was a white boy who shot three white men.

"But those men lost whiteness the moment they joined that protest. No, that doesn’t mean they became dark of skin or curly of hair. What it does mean is that to be a white person who stands up for African-American lives is to place yourself in opposition to the great body of whiteness and privilege by which this country is driven."

So beware. You lose your white privilege the moment you take the side of any non-white person, no matter the circumstances.
Click to expand...
this commentator is well versed in word salad
 
Mirac said:
How quick Jason want to end the conversation when he’s shown he’s wrong..
Now is the time for no quarter on that SOB...
He should be laid into until he commits comment suicide.
Click to expand...
That's what I was thinking. Clams right up when confronted with actual facts. They all do it.
 
Aardvark said:
I contend Rittencide is how Anthony Huber (skateboard guy) died.

Grab the barrel of a gun you're forcefully trying to take from someone and odds are very high you will shoot yourself.
Click to expand...
The sling prevented Kyle from being disarmed.
 
dmarbell said:
I have a hard time figuring out how this verdict is about racism. But perennial race-baiter Leonard Pitts, Jr, commentator for the Miami Herald, straightened me out. He preempted my thinking with this jewel:

"There will be those who don’t understand why race is invoked here. Rittenhouse, after all, was a white boy who shot three white men.

"But those men lost whiteness the moment they joined that protest. No, that doesn’t mean they became dark of skin or curly of hair. What it does mean is that to be a white person who stands up for African-American lives is to place yourself in opposition to the great body of whiteness and privilege by which this country is driven."

So beware. You lose your white privilege the moment you take the side of any non-white person, no matter the circumstances.
Click to expand...
Keep in mind that Whiteness is not a genetic characteristic that has anything to do with skin color or ancestry according to the Smithsonian but is all about behavior. As soon as the rioters assumed the behavior that is considered by the government to be nonWhite, their Whiteness can be said to be gone. We are, therefore, not a country divided by race but rather a country divided by different patterns of behavior. Our laws and Constitution have been set up with to work with one set of behaviors. They work just fine as long as everybody of all colors and ancestries behaves in ways that allow the laws and constitution to work.
 
BlackGun said:
GoFundMe took down an account to raise money for Rittenhouse's defense but yet two local to me murderers accounts stayed up. I gotta tell you I was wanting to send $100 and it pissed me off. They’re a coward organization.
Click to expand...

I absolutely refuse to use them, that includes sending funds for family and friends
 
dmarbell said:
I have a hard time figuring out how this verdict is about racism. But perennial race-baiter Leonard Pitts, Jr, commentator for the Miami Herald, straightened me out. He preempted my thinking with this jewel:

"There will be those who don’t understand why race is invoked here. Rittenhouse, after all, was a white boy who shot three white men.

"But those men lost whiteness the moment they joined that protest. No, that doesn’t mean they became dark of skin or curly of hair. What it does mean is that to be a white person who stands up for African-American lives is to place yourself in opposition to the great body of whiteness and privilege by which this country is driven."

So beware. You lose your white privilege the moment you take the side of any non-white person, no matter the circumstances.
Click to expand...

So there is a black privilege? And you get it attending riots. And that privilege is extended to participants of all races as long as they have the right ideology. And it conveys on the attendant the ability to do anything they wish and not be bound by any laws of the land.

I mean, I knew that but I've never heard it put so succinctly. We should thank him for that.
 
georgel said:
What I mean is, they actually have real criminal history. Specifically, note the histories of the Rittenhouse shootings.

I said long ago that trouble makers are taking advantage of the situation, not because the believe in a cause, but because they can hide behind it.
Click to expand...

Gotcha. I misunderstood the first time.
 
The biggest issues I see with him not laying low for a while are:

A)effectively giving people more reason to riot, stoking the fire, and

B)the ever-lingering threat of federal charges from salty, butt-hurt, leftist activist AG Garland. What charges? I have no clue, but leave it to his office to figure out something.
 
Last edited:
Jerzsubbie said:
The biggest issues I see with him not laying low for a while are:

A)effectively giving people more reason to riot, stoking the fire, and

B)the ever-lingering threat of federal charges from salty, butt-hurt, leftist activist AG Garland. What charges? I have no clue, but leave it to his office to figure out something.
Click to expand...
agreed- buuuuut I am enjoying being on the offensive and rubbing in the braindead commie automatons face for a change. they would be doing a non stop victory lap had verdict gone the other way.
 
Stogies said:
Why? At this point he is already infamous anyway, I don't see how it would make things worse.
Click to expand...

Maybe he's going to use his newfound "infamy" as a platform to attempt to make a positive impact by standing up and rallying others to fight the Liberty-crushing influences that own 90% of the formerly-great institutions that have now turned on the people as they suck-dry what's left of the American experiment. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom