Rittenhouse trial

[rick_iles]

Darwin’s theory at its best . Who in their right mind would chase anyone armed with a rifle????

[js4fn]

Darwin’s theory at its best . Who in their right mind would chase anyone armed with a rifle????

Prize won bingo

[smitty55]

I've said it it here before, but I don't know why you guys keep responding to those trolls, it's a total waste of time that accomplishes nothing other than feed their frail egos. No matter how much you post the truth it will make no difference to them as their only purpose is to disrupt these threads, regardless of the topic. Just ignore them, they'll slither away once they don't get reactions anymore.

[Gilroy]

I've said it it here before, but I don't know why you guys keep responding to those trolls, it's a total waste of time that accomplishes nothing other than feed their frail egos. No matter how much you post the truth it will make no difference to them as their only purpose is to disrupt these threads, regardless of the topic. Just ignore them, they'll slither away once they don't get reactions anymore.

Here we go again with the only guy on the forum who constantly calls other's trolls and cannot look in the mirror at himself and what he is. LOL

You did it again another useless post.

[Cameracutter]

I've said it it here before, but I don't know why you guys keep responding to those trolls, it's a total waste of time that accomplishes nothing other than feed their frail egos. No matter how much you post the truth it will make no difference to them as their only purpose is to disrupt these threads, regardless of the topic. Just ignore them, they'll slither away once they don't get reactions anymore.

Perhaps one of your eloquent memes might be of use here? You know the one with the R word.

[Cameracutter]

Darwin’s theory at its best . Who in their right mind would chase anyone armed with a rifle????

Who in there right mind would travel to a different state, walk around with a rifle and go looking for a confrontation? Good thing he had that self defence thing to fall back on.

[Gilroy]

[QUOTE=gbk;1180213]With all the strong opinions in this thread ,there is one thing NOT answered yet:
WHY many here ,who vehemently oppose the Rittenhouse verdict, think that those 3 unlucky people, who got shot -HAD the right to attack the kid? With intention to do serious damage to the fleeing man-up to and including killing him?

What makes their attack OK and not questionable?


Please help me understand this .

Well I for one made no mention of vehemently opposing the Rittenhouse verdict. This kid placed himself in harm's way because he was armed and felt emboldened to act as a Cop. He could have well got himself shot and the shooter used the same defense?

The most guilty parties here are as Joe indicates Police officers not carrying out their functions they are being paid to do now they have more vigilantes weekend warriors running around as if they didn't have enough already down there.

[Gilroy]

Who in there right mind would travel to a different state, walk around with a rifle and go looking for a confrontation? Good thing he had that self defence thing to fall back on.

Yeh they have set the bar real low for the taking of another's life down in the old USA expect the same defense to be used by many in the future, what is good for the goose and all that.

[Gilroy]

Darwin’s theory at its best . Who in their right mind would chase anyone armed with a rifle????

A guy armed with a handgun. Do I win a prize.

[smitty55]

LMAO, if those last 6 posts are related to my last one then I guess you still haven't figured out that you're all on my ignore list so I don't see or look at any of your posts. You're not worth wasting my time on, that's for sure.