Lurker > InfinityMonster

Lmao, what?

CARRRNE_ASADA posted...

Immigrants are the backbone that sustain NYC. All those restaurant and hotels all throughout the city, who do you think does the dirty work at MIN WAGE OR LESS?

Why do you people continue this irrelevant and ignorant talking point like it's supposed to mean anything?

C_Pain posted...

Support what? I see most of the top comments saying it's an issue at the very least in the short term.

I think he was saying the people discussing it confirm that there are several major issues involved here.

They just announced a few hours ago that they will cutting all NYC agencies by 5% to pay for this and we're only in year 1 of the crisis.

CobraGT posted...

1 uh hunh

2 In your mind only. The implication that their being exploited is a justification for deporting new arrivals is in your mind only.

They are and will be exploited. I would expect this to generate some sympathy instead of enmity.

Lmao, this made no sense. Why are you constantly saying the dumbest shit?

CobraGT posted...

3 Have fun twisting my words. And not being able to see new arrivals as allies gives you a growth benchmark. I hope you achieve it.

I don't have to twist anything. You're clearly said you're fine with lower wages and exploiting people to save money.

I'm a Hispanic guy born and raised in Queens and the BX, surrounded by millions of immigrants. People just coming in with flimsy cases trying to game the system is not a benefit to any of us, and unless you live here with us, you should probably stop making a fool of yourself.

CobraGT posted...

@InfinityMonster

I would not have guessed NYC is a sanctuary city but it is a relief to know.

I agree we need to go forward.

If you didn't know such a well known thing, it kind of shows you're unqualified to speak on this issue basically.

CobraGT posted...

Has anyone of the protesters even considered how the new arrivals could be allies?

As in think out of the box.

Allies how? You just said in the other post that you think it's a benefit that migrants will be exploited and their wages will go down.

Thinking outside the box for you seems like thinking of better ways to exploit them.

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/7/1/7/AAebl6AAE0hl.jpg

JebronLames posted...

do you use the subway mostly or drive? most of my relatives don't drive, some do

It honestly depends on the area I'm going to and if there's gonna be parking or the toll is cost prohibitive like going to the BX ($7 each way). I drive, use buses and the subway.

Lots of people here never even learned to drive, even out in Queens.

JebronLames posted...

why though? it ain't really that great if you aren't wealthy

If you want to live in Manhattan, sure. The skyrocketing prices are a very recent thing, brought on by the pandemic.

Though I'm not gonna argue that in probably a decade, it will become a place for only the rich. Lots of poor people have been leaving and moving to the South.

Still, I live in Queens, which is one of the most diverse areas on Earth, so I can't really see myself moving to any homogeneous area probably ever. I get withdrawals when I'm away from NYC too long.

I do live in it and love it.

Definitely Primer. Like, a lot of the stuff isn't even really apparent till you read up on it.

Mulholland Drive eventually does make sense.

Inland Empire made sense eventually as well but it was nauseating as fuck.

1000

DnDer posted...

No.

I'll refer you to my comment above where I explained that Murdoch and others helped program the idea that looters, rioters, and protesters were all the same group of people "burning cities down" into the heads of people like Rittenhouse.

It was all the justification they needed to feel like they had a right to inflict violence and terror on people in the streets.

Aka more unsubstantiated conspiracy theories.

"Sir, even though we've found no evidence of this, we believe Rittenhouse was brainwashed by right wing media. Even though it's me who is conflating two armed robbers, a crazy guy attacking him for putting out a fire, and BLM protestors altogether, and the situations were nothing alike, just trust me, he's guilty"

Judge: So why did two witnesses just testify that he helped an injured BLM protestor with first aid?

"Because they were brainwashed by the right wing Murdoch Machine. Don't you get it?

Judge: "What?"

haloiscoolisbak posted...

Non American here, have never touched a gun and never will

Once Rittenhouse brought a gun to this protest, was him using it at any point gonna be damning for him? Completely unacceptable?

Surely not right, surely genuine self defence is still gonna be begrudgingly accepted as usage that isn't life imprisonment worthy for him even by the critics who hate him

Is the main crux of the issue whether or not he was in enough fear of his life to fire shots? It seems it all comes down to that initial dude chasing him, whether or not that was really justified using lethal force over

Nah, that's the thing. They did want him in prison for at least 25+. Which is extra disturbing because the whole thing boils down to "well, he should have stayed home"

Even though there's zero evidence Rosenbaum went after him for the gun, while there's plenty of evidence it was because of extinguishing a fire. In fact, they spent several days over this in the trial desperately trying to find evidence either Rosenbaum was trying to be a hero, or that Rittenhouse was threatening anybody. They found nothing, and people that had seen Rosenbaum around even testified that he was going around threatening to kill tons of people and bizzarly calling people the n-word.

So a crazy man is walking around setting things on fire, sees Rittenhouse put one out, who at this point had been there for hours, and decides to start chasing him. Rittenhouse does everything to not only de-escalate by screaming that he's a friendly, but keeps running till he's completely cornered.

And the takeaway from them is that Rittenhouse somehow planned all this and should have been locked up for the next 25+ years. Some people also believe the trial was a farce and that they let him go. Which is again a unsubstantiated conspiracy theory since anybody watching the trial knows that they could have done this case 10x over and Rittenhouse would still walk because it was that open and shut.

mercurydude posted...

This isn't true. Trump and his cult oppose all immigration, unless it's something like Russian birth tourism. Their opposition is racist in nature and they're quite proud of this. It's why Trump did his best to hinder all immigration, except for the cases where it benefited him personally.

Yeah dude, no shit. I was talking about this topic.

flussence posted...

Consensus manufacturing in realtime

If there was a "crisis" i'm sure the police force that gets $3B of funding per year would be all over it

Both Hochul and Adams have said there's definitely a crisis they're unable to handle. Also, the NYPD isn't allowed to do anything about it.

thronedfire2 posted...

what's new york doing with migrants? in MA they're putting them in hotels and motels which most areas have an abundance of because people only visit two areas in MA.

The shelters and hotels are all full. They're building tent shelters in parks and renting out unsafe abandoned buildings now

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

It's supposed to exclusively house 500 men and it's across the street from an all girls school and two other elementary schools to the sides.

CobraGT posted...

These New Yorkers are asking for fascism because of the inherent contradictions.

First off we got migrants. Any big city has migrants. Second (economists tell me) migrant labor is an established part of our economy. Prices go up - profits go up migrant income goes down.

Already my country is flaunting international law in the name of keeping the migrants out. By the way this flaunting of international law has not kept the migrants out.

Lol, how is exploiting them so that their wages go down just so we can save money supposed to be a good thing? Especially since it also hurts existing low wage workers?

CobraGT posted...

What is next? Oh, right. Let NYPD collect anyone suspected of being a migrant. Let NYPD go anywhere it needs to go to grab suspected migrants.

/ / /

Dumb Butt Protesters. You should be demanding decent quality of life from the powers that be instead of helping the powers that be suppress the down-trodden.

When in history has taking something away from a group of people meant it goes to you?

One example please.

The NYPD can't do anything. NYC is a sanctuary city.

Taxes are paying for this and also come at the cost of cuts and stressing housing, infrastructure and social safety nets, so I'm not sure what you're even saying. Only 20-40% are eventually approved, so about $6 million a day is going to waste on people taking advantage, which just hurts legitimate ones since the backlog has swelled to 5+ years now for approval.

Regardless, there is no slowing down on the amount coming. 1.3k more have arrived since this topic was created. Everything is subject to negative returns eventually.

Not really.

Torgo posted...

I wonder what InfinityMonster thinks of the George Zimmerman/ Trayvon Martin outcome?

Zimmerman was an idiot looking to start shit. Exactly like Rosenbaum.

ooger posted...

LOL, Kyle crossed state lines with a gun while looking for a fight. He's guilty.

A swing and a miss for another low info poster.

Torgo posted...

That was the subject of the first topic this topic is the continuation of.

I know these right wingers feel entitled to make and change rules at their whim, but come on.

Lol, known liar talking about "rules". It's a fucking discussion my dude.

BunkerBoy posted...

That was literally the basis of the original topic

Ok and? The discussion right now has nothing to do with the civil suit.

BunkerBoy posted...

The multiple civil lawsuits leveled against him argue that it's not just made up lies and conspiracy

You understand there's a large difference between criminal and civil proceedings, right? He may have acted in self defense at that specific moment because he knowingly injected himself into a dangerous situation with a deadly weapon, but he still may be liable for the wrongful death and injury he caused

BunkerBoy posted...

The multiple civil lawsuits leveled against him argue that it's not just made up lies and conspiracy

You understand there's a large difference between criminal and civil proceedings, right? He may have acted in self defense at that specific moment because he knowingly injected himself into a dangerous situation with a deadly weapon, but he still may be liable for the wrongful death and injury he caused

First off.

"A person may employ deadly force against another, if the person reasonably believes that force is necessary to protect a third-person or one's self from imminent death or great bodily harm, without incurring civil liability for injury to the other. Clark v. Ziedonis, 513 F.2d 79 (1975)."

Civil suits have a much lower threshold and mean nothing because you can pursue a civil suit even when the person was 100% innocent or the person they're suing for was 100% guilty.

It's not a beyond a reasonable doubt thing. It's basically a "was there a chance this is possible".

Third, we're not discussing the civil suit here no matter what opinion you have towards it.

Torgo posted...

Can't wait for infinity and the Rittenhouse defenders to show up in topics where cops shoot unarmed black people to ardently defend the victims and counter the misinformation...

Surely!

Guy proven to be lying multiple times about the events now insists he knows the future.

Of course he wouldn't want people fact checking them.

BunkerBoy posted...

Cause well adjusted people type up paragraphs of their opinions to defend someone they think is a piece of shit on a routine basis.

I don't care how much I have to write to counteract lies and misinformation. It takes like a minute.

Well adjusted people like you think you are, don't just make up lies and conspiracies.

BunkerBoy posted...

You aren't doing that though. You're trying to shove your opinion down our throats.

Everything I've posted is fact and backed up tons of lawyers.

You guys are literally using ad hominem to counter it. Nothing you've posted reflects actual reality.

HairyQueen posted...

I assumed they meant you donated money to him. Did you really?

No. I agree he's an idiot and a piece of shit. Like Pogo said earlier, this is about being consistent with facts about the law being equal and not making up lies. You can't be always pissed at election deniers when you yourself have weird conspiracy theories about this (not you specifically).

BunkerBoy posted...

He's extremely invested in this for some reason. Gonna be hilarious watching this scumbag go penniless from all the civil suits that will be hitting him.

Yeah, I'm invested in countering misinformation and lies. OMG.

paerarru posted...

smh unbelievable. "arguing" this stuff is insulting

Explaining things to low info people must be insulting for them. I agree.

HairyQueen posted...

Is this true?

Yeah I gave him my entire allowance.

BunkerBoy posted...

https://twitter.com/Evanryt/status/1428472437092593665

Wished he had his AR "ld start shooting rounds at them"

InfinityMonster: this is totally normal behavior and not a sign he wants to shoot people

Just admit you didn't read all the posts in this topic.

Here, I'll quote one of them. Also watch the fucking video from the lawyer explaining this.

InfinityMonster posted...

Because you have no idea what you're talking about and don't understand how the law or intent works. You want some "what feels right" nonsense like the bigots and racists used to.

Like dude, it was a video of two teens at night watching an armed robbery occur from like 200 ft away where you couldn't even really see anything except one of them with a gun.

He said to his friend "wish I had my gun, I would have shot them" after pointing out that they had guns.

It's the same type of shit as "well we saw him hanging with the Crips, so he is capable of having done this crime"

Propensity evidence is inadmissable in court.

You also conflating armed robbers with protesters or rioters is a YOU problem. When I think of armed robbery, I don't fucking think of BLM protestors or rioters or even looters.

Also, the word "victim" creates a prejudice because it was a self-defense case. You can't call them victims when they were fucking assailants. By calling them victims, it would be inferring Rittenhouse's guilt. Imagine some guy was sitting in the park and someone attacked him and the guy had to shoot and kill the attacker. Calling the attacker a victim would be stupid.

Here is an actual well known lawyer explaining all of this.

https://youtu.be/NxoYNpBMaCg?si=C2_U_YcmLGiK6efc

BunkerBoy posted...

No it didn't. You're naive as hell if you believe his crap about going to defend businesses.

No one randomly goes out of state to active riot zones to play policeman.

The kid was talking about wishing he had his AR to shoot shoplifters. That's clearly looking for a fight

I have already explained all this in full depth. Read my posts again. His fucking dad and friend lived there and his mother's house was literally on the border and he was there since the morning. This dude would have to "cross state lines" to go to fucking Walmart.

Reread all my posts and then come back to me with this clearly uninformed nonsense you're trying to spread.

BunkerBoy posted...

What misinformation did I spread? All the videos and messages in evidence show that this scumbag went looking for a fight. The act may have been self defense, but he put himself in that situation and deserves any civil penalties that come from the wrongful death and injury he caused

No they don't. None of the videos or "messages" show this. You stated earlier it's well documented he went there looking for a fight.

The trial established the complete opposite of that. Yes, you've been spreading misinformation.

Lmao, that Saikyo blocked me after being bitched out for literally lying and spreading misinformation.

What a clown.

SaikyoStyle posted...

Why would I need help? Im not the one who got scammed out of my allowance by a neo-Nazi.

Because you've been spreading lies and misinformation without being able to refute anything and making up some lie about allowances or some dumb shit.

Acting like a conspiracy theorist election denier.

SaikyoStyle posted...

Just think. When the pudgy, walleyed, murdering neo-Nazi is taken to the cleaners by the families of his shooting spree victims, some of that money will have been InfinityMonsters.

Get help my dude.

BunkerBoy posted...

InfinityMonster gave his allowance to Kyle.

Counteracting liars and people spreading misinformation and explaining how the law works is not giving anybody allowances.

Especially since you were spreading misinformation yourself earlier.

SaikyoStyle posted...

InfinityMonster gave his allowance to Kyle.

Says the guy literally living in an alternate reality saying shit like this.

SaikyoStyle posted...

Bringing a semi-automatic rifle to a protest and shooting it into a crowd of people because you dont like their politics no longer counts as malicious.

We really do treat guns in the stupidest way possible in this culture, as well as the people who misuse them (as long as they meet certain criteria).

Like is this just straight up lying or are you so low info that you actually believe this nonsense? Counteracting liars and people spreading misinformation and explaining how the law works is not giving anybody allowances.

DnDer posted...

No one wants to punish Rittenhouse because we don't like him. We want to punish him because stated, on tape, a desire to shoot people, and then went and shot people.

If you had a guy who said, "I want to shoot me some Nazis," and then two weeks later, he magically ends up shooting some Nazis... You're not going to wonder about coincidences. He needs to be punished for taking other human life. (Even if that life is subhuman Nazi scum. The law is there, and we want it respected the same way.)

He's literally on tape saying it. And somehow, he's not allowed to have that used against him in court, when it absolutely goes to intent? And, as mentioned before, the ridiculous ruling about the word "victims?"

The law needs protecting. But not from people on the left.

Because you have no idea what you're talking about and don't understand how the law or intent works. You want some "what feels right" nonsense like the bigots and racists used to.

Like dude, it was a video of two teens at night watching an armed robbery occur from like 200 ft away where you couldn't even really see anything except one of them with a gun.

He said to his friend "wish I had my gun, I would have shot them" after pointing out that they had guns.

It's the same type of shit as "well we saw him hanging with the Crips, so he is capable of having done this crime"

Propensity evidence is inadmissable in court.

You also conflating armed robbers with protesters or rioters is a YOU problem. When I think of armed robbery, I don't fucking think of BLM protestors or rioters or even looters.

Also, the word "victim" creates a prejudice because it was a self-defense case. You can't call them victims when they were fucking assailants. By calling them victims, it would be inferring Rittenhouse's guilt. Imagine some guy was sitting in the park and someone attacked him and the guy had to shoot and kill the attacker. Calling the attacker a victim would be stupid.

Here is an actual well known lawyer explaining all of this.

https://youtu.be/NxoYNpBMaCg?si=C2_U_YcmLGiK6efc

Rexdragon125 posted...

Gonna ignore this post then?

Rittenhouse can be heard saying I wish I had my (expletive) AR
Prosecutors want permission to use this video as evidence that Kyle Rittenhouse had vigilante intentions.
https://www.jsonline.com/videos/news/crime/2021/08/19/rittenhouse-can-heard-saying-wish-had-my-expletive-ar/8188781002/

I addressed the thing in your post already in my long post above.

Torgo posted...

No no no, that was the most fairest judge in all the land, judges are only unfair when they aren't completely biased in favor of white supremacy!

You've already proven you're arguing in bad faith by straight up lying, but you should still listen to LegalEagle all this since low information people should be educated on how the justice system actually works when they're making a fool of themselves.

https://youtu.be/NxoYNpBMaCg?si=C2_U_YcmLGiK6efc

Toonstrack posted...

Torgo doesn't care about witness testimony. He doesn't like Rittenhouse, so he HAS to he guilty, every other bit of reality can he molded snd rearranged to reach the necessary conclusion of guilty

Seems like it, since he's now literally making shit up.

Torgo posted...

a nakedly biased judge.

There was nothing biased about him and several lawyers have spoken about this is in length. You clearly don't know how anything works.

Torgo posted...

Yeah, that's for the people he confronted and antagonized while brandishing a deadly weapon... after declaring on social media that he wanted to kill the sort of people he might find there.

This is a straight up lie.

Torgo posted...

Helping the protesters? You mean lying about being an EMT and trying to get in good with the cops before he went off with his rifle at the ready in order to harass and threaten the protesters he openly said he wanted to kill?

Yes, multiple witnesses testified he was helping protestors and is even on video doing it and giving an interview.

The trial established that he never harassed anybody or threatened any of them. It's like you didn't read any of my post and just repeating yourself.

Sure, I'll explain for those that actually care about what the trial established. Not a single witness came forward to state he was threatening anybody nor did anybody claim that they felt threatened since tons of people had guns there and it's an open carry state. Most of the witnesses that were called, by the prosecution no less, testified that he was either walking around or providing aid to protestors.

Rittenhouse was attacked while off on his own bothering no one after hours of being there. His crime was putting out a trash can fire that Rosenblum had started near a gas station. Pretty normal thing to put out. Rosenbaum was a white guy just like him, who lived even further than Rittenhouse, had no connections to the area and was instructed by the doctor to go home immediately. Instead he decided to go downtown and start fires, trash things and threaten to kill people, all after a suicide attempt. It's clear he came looking to start shit and successfully did.

Even when Rosenbaum started chasing Rittenhouse, all Rittenhouse kept screaming was "friendly". He ran every time, when he could have shot Rosenbaum immediately instead of risking it by running and getting cornered. Even after, he only shot people attacking or trying to attack him. He could have just started shooting everybody coming at him if his intent was to just kill people.

It was pretty clear from the trial that this was an idiot trying to play first responder and not some fucking 17 year old master manipulator that was going around trying to help protestors, hoping someone would eventually chase and corner him, so he could play out some "murder fantasy". He could have easily played out his fantasy in much easier and way less riskier ways.

Linking a high school fight where he jumped in for his sister and him seeing shoplifters with guns and going "I'd shoot them" to his friend are way too long of reaches that would open up so much abuse and is the exact type of shit historically used to lock up minorities. Propensity evidence like that is always inadmissable in court, so it's not some conspiracy theory that it was inadmissable here too.

If he just showed up, immediately started shit and shot someone, it would be a different story. But he spent all day in Kenosha and hours in that protest area helping the protestors everybody claims he wanted to kill. The whole thing started because some crazy guy who wasn't even a protestor literally got mad his fire was put out.

Is Rittenhouse a piece of shit now, especially because of his social media presence and his affiliations to the right? Sure. One can see that and also look at the events of that night objectively.

Torgo posted...

He was a terrorist in that he is a known White Supremacist with ties to 1/6 terror groups who declared his desire to harm people at the BLM protests, and then made special arrangements to get a high capacity semi automatic rifle, lied about being an EMT, lied about being asked by the store owner to provide security, and took the deadly weapons to the protest where he harassed and threatened people.

...and ultimately two people ended up dead.

Ideologically motivated.
Stated his intent to harm those he disagreed with.
Made steps to acquire a weapon.
Took the weapon to where he would likely find those people.
Two people end up dead.

Sounds like a terrorist to me.

Most of this post is just straight up misinformation.

DnDer posted...

The trial did no such thing. It only twisted in on itself to give the white supremacists the verdict they needed to take an unwarranted victory lap.

Just start with not being able to say "victims" and begin working your way up from there. Judge threw the case for Rittenhouse and anyone with two eyes saw it.

Lmao, here come the conspiracy theories from people who have no idea how the justice system works.

andel posted...

i guess that's why you dropped the line about the murder fantasy eh? stop making things up and stop posting right wing propaganda and maybe you won't get called out for it tbh. it's really not hard to spot a trumper, you all regurgitate the same buzzwords you were indoctrinated to repeat

I'm gonna start marking you for harassment if you keep lying about me being some kind of Trump supporter just because you were wrong.

There was no murder fantasy. You're too hyperpartisan to think rationally and logically. Get the dissonance checked.

andel posted...

it's absolutely a semantic argument, especially from someone who defends a neo nazi killer and won't comment on him expressing the desire to murder people in cold blood 15 days before he showed up with an illegally obtained gun and gunned down multiple people

As I said, get help. I voted for Hillary and Biden.

Nothing I've said has been wrong. Everything you've said is wrong or misinformed and it's pretty clear that you're not operating in good faith by accusing anybody that disagrees with you of being a Trump supporter. This is what being terminally online looks like.

andel posted...

a jury will hear the civil case against him and decide. you quoting something you clearly don't understand is irrelevant, the criminal trial has no bearing on the civil trial.

seems like you are ignorant of how character evidence works too. sucker punching a girl unprovoked shows a violent tendency.

i see you didn't respond to the fact that rittenhouse expressed a clear murder fantasy and you were laughably wrong about that. the fact that you didn't even know that basic information means you probably shouldn't comment on the case since you clearly don't understand it. not surprising an election denier and 1/6 insurrection supporter would also support a white nationalist killer though tbf

Lmao, these are straight up delusions at this point. It's like y'all don't even read.

I clearly answered TC's weird gotcha immediately in my OP to AI123 and Torgo where I said people who lie or are straight misinformed about this case are no different than election deniers who also deny reality.

And that somehow turned into me supporting 1/6 and supporting killers?

Get help bro.

andel posted...

amazing that trump cultists that think fat donald won in 2020 are also itt lying about easily verifiable information like the well documented rittenhouse murder fantasy. it's easy to shut those types down every time lol

You haven't shut shit down. You're not even paying attention.

andel posted...

you are ignorant of civil liability. if a jury rules he acted in a way that a reasonable person wouldn't (like showing up after expressing a desire to murder protestors) he will be found liable in a civil case. a judge already threw out his lawyers attempt to dismiss the case.

"A person may employ deadly force against another, if the person reasonably believes that force is necessary to protect a third-person or one's self from imminent death or great bodily harm, without incurring civil liability for injury to the other. Clark v. Ziedonis, 513 F.2d 79 (1975)."

andel posted...

at least learn the facts before talking about the issue. he threatened to murder protestors 15 days before he murdered protestors.

he attacked the girl unprovoked. only a real piece of shit would sucker punch a girl unprovoked

Are you just not paying attention? They weren't protestors and he attacked the girl because his sister was fighting with her. Why the fuck would some high school brawl where there's another family member involved be used in a murder trial?

Dark_Arbron posted...

Who won in 2020?
If you cant bring yourself to answer, just pinch your nose and lie.

(yes, my shitty phone corrected it to punch at first, this has been corrected, I am not encouraging you to do violence to yourself, calm down mods)

I already answered it.

ai123 posted...

Travelling 20 miles isn't travelling? That's a good one.

It doesn't matter if it's 20, 200, or 2,000. He travelled out of his way, for a purpose.

You said traveling around the country. His dad lived there and he was already there since the morning hanging with his friend and cleaning graffiti and shit.

ai123 posted...

Why was he there with a gun?

It was a dangerous situation and tons of people, from these guys, to the protestors to the rioters all had guns.

ai123 posted...

You claim that travelling 20 miles isn't travelling and talk of misinformation?

I didn't say he wasn't traveling. Stop being dishonest.

Tora_Sami posted...

Wouldn't surprise me, murderers get off on technicalities all the time. OJ is the biggest example, Zimmerman is the closest example.

If you watched the trial and paid attention to the actual facts, there were no technicalities. Every witness brought there ended up testifying in favor of him and there were like 2 dozen of them.

andel posted...

right wingers tend to defend the guy because he looks like a typical right wing incel, had a murder fantasy, attacked girls unprovoked, and actually showed up somewhere and killed people. not to mention how he hung out with neo nazi 1/6ers.

More misinformation. He didn't attack someone unprovoked. His sister and the girl got in fight and he jumped in.

And there was zero evidence of any murder fantasy.

Dark_Arbron posted...

I dont use Twitter. I didnt back when it had quality control, and I certainly dont now that its run by the alt-right. I simply go by whats quoted by people I trust. People who have a history of being reputable. Its not perfect, but its served me well so far.

Try going with the facts then.

andel posted...

wrongful death suits absolutely account for a person putting themselves in situations with intent do harm.

he absolutely said he wanted to shoot protestors. what do you think "i wish i had my rifle" means? because any reasonable person knows exactly what that means.

character evidence is often allowed in trials. the alex murdaugh trial is a prime example of this. the fact that shittenhouse was known to start violent confrontations and has a history of stating he wants to murder protestors is pertinent, and will be allowed in the civil case.

I was talking about the criminal trial. And those weren't protestors.

The civil trial will likely not go anywhere because

"A person may employ deadly force against another, if the person reasonably believes that force is necessary to protect a third-person or one's self from imminent death or great bodily harm, without incurring civil liability for injury to the other. Clark v. Ziedonis, 513 F.2d 79 (1975)."

Dark_Arbron posted...

guy says hes going to kill people, shows up with a gun, antagonises those people, death happens.

This is not what happened. Like at all.

Yeah, go watch the trial and brush up on what actually happened and not what you read on Twitter.

andel posted...

shittenhouse is getting sued and may be fucked in the civil case.

"A person may employ deadly force against another, if the person reasonably believes that force is necessary to protect a third-person or one's self from imminent death or great bodily harm, without incurring civil liability for injury to the other. Clark v. Ziedonis, 513 F.2d 79 (1975)."

andel posted...

the judge in the criminal case didn't let in the information that he sucker punches girls

A fight over his sister starting a fight with another chick has nothing to do with this situation. No judge would have allowed that. Neither did he say he wanted to shoot protestors. And why would something happening after he was charged be relevant? People in lock up get friendly with the gangs there like the Bloods. Should prosecutors be able to use that against a case?

Dark_Arbron posted...

We dont have to think in the overly complicated way the legal system does (lots of does this technically qualify).

He went to a protest, full of people he disagreed with and hated, carrying a firearm. How dense, or dishonest, do you have to be not to understand what he was doing there?

There wasn't technicalities. If you paid attention to and watched the trial, the prosecution had nothing.

ai123 posted...

Or that he travelled with a gun?

He didn't. He also didn't go around the country. He lived 20 miles away on the border with his mom. His dad lived in Kenosha, as did his friend.

ai123 posted...

Or that the purpose of the gun was to threaten to shoot protesters if he didn't like what they were doing?

The entire point of the trial was to establish this and the prosecution failed absolutely miserably because their own witnesses testified in Rittenhouse's favor.

Which is pretty much the type of misinformation and made up facts election deniers often fall for.

ai123 posted...

The idea that it's fine for civilians to just travel around the country with guns, threatening to shoot people if they happen to think they deserve it . . .

When did this happen? Why are people still spreading misinformation debunked years ago?

Torgo posted...

I mean... Rittenhouse lied about being called there by the store owner to defend his property after all... but without the property damage crime narrative it looks like Rittenhosue went there expressly to provoke an armed confrontation while carrying a high capacity semi automatic rifle.

None of the evidence or anything in the trial showed this other narrative you're making up. It's like some of you are still stuck in 2020.

SiO4 posted...

It is not an easy fix.
But the richest county in the world could probably figure something out.
~Even though we are in fact a debtor nation.

There are several relatively easy fixes.

SiO4 posted...

Ahh, I think a lot of people are saying that.
But it's mostly Scapegoating and Racism that is fueling it.
American birth rates are on the decline as it is.

Fueling what? That things are completely unsustainable and there's no room or money and it's hurting the entire city? $10 million dollars are day is being spent just for housing. That's just common sense.

Every country will eventually suffer falling replacement rates. That's a thing the whole world needs to figure out. Importing in people does not help and just makes the issue worst in those countries. There are tons of ways to mitigate this without tons of people pouring in.

SiO4 posted...

Well, Eggs did. Which is crazy, and shows a real flaw in the system.
And if you want a bunch of cheap bruised up Tomatoes that travel 3000 miles, have at it.

Go after the people that 'employ' and exploit those workers. That is the first step.

At any rate, I question the intentions of these 'protestors.'

The eggs things pretty well documented and was because of the Avian Flu adding on top of all issues and Cal-Maine not being affected. Eggs are now back to regular prices.

I'm not sure why automation, and higher wages for people working in existing farms are all gonna be from 3000 miles away? What?

Not sure why these protestors specifically matter. There were several huge ones in Queens over Creedmore and they're happening all over the city and every race and people are involved.

Everybody sees this is a massive issue.

https://www.politico.com/news/2023/08/22/new-york-voters-down-on-democrats-over-migrant-crisis-poll-finds-00112158

CableZL posted...

Trump supporters in New York are protesting against migrants, more accurately

Migrants that are being sent to New York by Republican governors.

Only 12k have been sent and it's way more than just Republicans protesting over this.