USA Mid Term elections in November

Remove this Banner Ad

It would make an interesting philosophical debate.
Trump is essentially amoral. The only thing he cares about is trying to satisfy the demands of a diseased ego no matter the consequences. I think he would do or say or allow anything to happen to anyone to have the big chair back & everyone kissing his ass. I think he would make himself President for life & destroy America as we know it if he could.

But there isn’t any moral basis to it & once he was President for life I don’t think he would care about doing anything. I think he’d just as happily make hookers & blow free for everyone or hold public executions if it meant keeping the job. He doesn’t actually believe in anything.

It remains to be seen if RDS is actually a true believer who wants to turn the US into Gilead or he’s just doing anti woke performance art because he wants power.

If he’s a true believer then is that more dangerous than someone who believes in nothing but would do anything in service of his ego?
Brilliant synopsis of Trump :D
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Well he shot dead a paedophile, an attempted murderer and wounded an armed vigilante.

Yet they want Michael Byrd done for murder for also killing a domestic terrorist, who was attempting to also physically harm people
 
So it's now okay for a random member of the public to be judge, jury and executioner, after deliberately putting themselves into a highly volatile situation?
I don't know what to tell you if you haven't figured out the mask is well and truly off these days.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Not sure how this is relevant, unless you are suggesting he knew this beforehand and formed part of his motive.
Rittenhouse fans never, ever touch this one.

giphy.gif
 
Rittenhouse fans never, ever touch this one.

giphy.gif
well the solution they could argue would be if Rittenhouse was one of his victims, thereby giving a more "wholesome" way of knowing (rather than the inferred was part of the same ring..)
 
I dont know if the law is wrong but the interpretation of self defence in this case went far beyond my understanding
Someone took a gun to a volatile event they had no business being at, and three people died as a direct result, three people who would otherwise still be alive. He got off scot free. Any legal system that allows that is deeply flawed.
 
Someone took a gun to a volatile event they had no business being at, and three people died as a direct result, three people who would otherwise still be alive. He got off scot free. Any legal system that allows that is deeply flawed.
I agree. But it is a legal system and a judge and jury. Any other system is even more flawed

This is the one I am most confused about -


COUNT 6: POSSESSION OF A DANGEROUS WEAPON BY A PERSON UNDER 18

The judge dismissed this charge on Monday.

Rittenhouse was armed with an AR-style semi-automatic rifle. He was 17 years old on the night of the shootings. Wisconsin law prohibits minors from possessing firearms except for hunting or when supervised by an adult in target practice or instruction in the proper use of a dangerous weapon. Rittenhouse’s attorneys argued that another subsection of the law, regarding short-barreled rifles, provided grounds for dismissing the charge.

Prosecutors argued the defense was misreading the statute, and Schroeder had earlier twice declined to dismiss the charge. But the judge also had said the statute was confusing. After prosecutors conceded that the rifle was not short-barreled, Schroeder
dismissed the charge.

He had a good lawyer - the flaw in the system is when money drives the law more than guilt or innocence

Kyle Bogan Rittenhouse is in jail for 60 years

Kyle Sponsored By Republicans Rittenhouse is now on the grift
 
I agree. But it is a legal system and a judge and jury. Any other system is even more flawed

This is the one I am most confused about -


COUNT 6: POSSESSION OF A DANGEROUS WEAPON BY A PERSON UNDER 18

The judge dismissed this charge on Monday.

Rittenhouse was armed with an AR-style semi-automatic rifle. He was 17 years old on the night of the shootings. Wisconsin law prohibits minors from possessing firearms except for hunting or when supervised by an adult in target practice or instruction in the proper use of a dangerous weapon. Rittenhouse’s attorneys argued that another subsection of the law, regarding short-barreled rifles, provided grounds for dismissing the charge.

Prosecutors argued the defense was misreading the statute, and Schroeder had earlier twice declined to dismiss the charge. But the judge also had said the statute was confusing. After prosecutors conceded that the rifle was not short-barreled, Schroeder
dismissed the charge.

He had a good lawyer - the flaw in the system is when money drives the law more than guilt or innocence

Kyle Bogan Rittenhouse is in jail for 60 years

Kyle Sponsored By Republicans Rittenhouse is now on the grift
I more meant that the law should be written where self defence shouldn't be able to work in a situation where you've recklessly, willingly and needlessly invited the threat upon yourself.

But the legal system as it exists in America also means that you would expect a very different outcome if everything remained the same except the colour of the perpetrator's skin.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top