Poll of the Day > Kyle Rittenhouse

(+) Yeah! (+)

Metalsonic66 posted...

Certainly my good man.

https://archive.is/efjIU
Ignore it's Reddit, that's not the source. The source are the many dozens of scientific articles and studies done by experts in their field. 10 problems with the vaccines with said sources backing up each problem.

https://brownstone.org/articles/79-research-studies-affirm-naturally-acquired-immunity-to-covid-19-documented-linked-and-quoted/
128 studies now, as of this posting (the number is constantly rising) about how natural immunity to covid is indeed a thing. Why does this matter? Because if natural immunity is just as good as the vaccines, then the vaccine mandates even if you have natural immunity are anti-science. In fact natural immunity is better because it provides protection against several of covid's proteins in addition to the spike protein, as opposed to the vaccines which only supposedly provide protection to the single spike protein.
https://www.cell.com/cell-reports-medicine/fulltext/S2666-3791(21)00203-2
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8209951/pdf/RMV-9999-e2260.pdf
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.08.24.21262415v1

Furthermore, while there is a ton of evidence of vaccinated people still getting covid and transmitting it to others, including fellow vaccinated, the CDC strangely has no record of an unvaccinated person catching covid, recovering (thus acquiring natural immunity and therefore being on par with what the vaccines should be doing), catching it again, and then spreading it. To sum up, the vaccinated can still catch and spread covid, but those with natural immunity have no record from the CDC of spreading covid. Not proof of anything but it does make one think that if the unvaccinated are really plague rats, why is there no evidence for that?
https://twitter.com/MichaelPSenger/status/1458953737397948418

Any other questions I'll be happy to answer them :).

---

solaris32 posted...

128 studies now, as of this posting (the number is constantly rising) about how natural immunity to covid is indeed a thing. Why does this matter? Because if natural immunity is just as good as the vaccines, then the vaccine mandates even if you have natural immunity are anti-science. In fact natural immunity is better because it provides protection against several of covid's proteins in addition to the spike protein, as opposed to the vaccines which only supposedly provide protection to the single spike protein.

this was never in doubt.

the thing is, to obtain natural immunity, you need to get covid. which, as we know, is very deadly.

you know what makes it less deadly? the vaccine. like every single vaccine in existence. natural immunity isn't herd immunity. natural requires you to get the thing and recover from it, which is getting increasingly rarer given the current state of hospitals around the nation and morons taking horse juice.

also, if you want to get into the "science proving" part of vaccines, you straight up have a slew of vaccines to look at that straight eradicated diseases. polio did not exist anymore until idiots starting going "no, i want my kid to get polio".

---

helIy posted...

this was never in doubt.

the thing is, to obtain natural immunity, you need to get covid. which, as we know, is very deadly.

you know what makes it less deadly? the vaccine. like every single vaccine in existence. natural immunity isn't herd immunity. natural requires you to get the thing and recover from it, which is getting increasingly rarer given the current state of hospitals around the nation and morons taking horse juice.

also, if you want to get into the "science proving" part of vaccines, you straight up have a slew of vaccines to look at that straight eradicated diseases. polio did not exist anymore until idiots starting going "no, i want my kid to get polio".

Even if the vaccine does make it less deadly (official statistics cast doubt on that claim too, see page 20)
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1018547/Technical_Briefing_23_21_09_16.pdf
Is it worth the very real and also deadly side effects of the vaccine? In my opinion it's not worth risking the vaccine. So let those of us who want to risk death get covid naturally (just as we risk death getting the flu naturally). Which makes mandating the vaccines even for the naturally immune anti-science, because we are no longer a threat to others, just like the vaccine is supposed to do.

I also want to point out that ivermectin is scientifically shown to be highly effective in combatting covid with many studies by experts in their field. Also, ivermectin has been orally approved for humans by the FDA for decades now, with research being done on it for longer than that. So to refer to it simply as "horse juice" is doing it and the research and countless human lives it has saved, a disservice.
https://c19ivermectin.com/
https://covid19up.org/fda-ivermectin/
Interestingly ivermectin is also showing promising results in combatting cancer:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5835698/

Your final paragraph is a strawman. I made no claims about other vaccines, nor any kind of general antivax stance. I am only talking about the mrna covid vaccines, mrna vaccines being a technology never used before in humans which do not contain any part of the pathogen it is supposed to protect against. This is different from virtually all other vaccines, including polio, which do have a part of the pathogen along with some immune system stimulants like aluminum. Therefore you cannot compare the two by implying that because the polio vaccine is a vaccine that actually works, so must we assume the covid vaccine similarly works. No, they are vastly different technologies where the mrna vaccines have never before been tested in humans. In fact there are not yet any completed long term studies. Worse, what studies they do have some to all have been invalidated because they allowed the control group, who was supposed to stay unvaccinated, to get the vaccine. Confirmed by the FDA regarding the Pfizer EUA vaccines, at the bottom of the page:
https://archive.md/Z8hGI
"After FDA granted the emergency use authorization of the Pfizer BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine were clinical trial participants unblinded so that the placebo recipients could be offered the vaccine?
Yes. After issuance of the EUA, clinical trial participants were unblinded in a phased manner over a period of months to offer the authorized Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine to placebo participants. These participants were followed for safety outcomes. Overall, in blinded and unblinded follow-up, approximately 12,000 Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine recipients have been followed for at least 6 months."

---

solaris32 posted...

Is it worth the very real and also deadly side effects of the vaccine? In my opinion it's not worth risking the vaccine. So let those of us who want to risk death get covid naturally (just as we risk death getting the flu naturally).

this is literally the only thing you had to say to get every single person here to ignore you

you think the vaccine is deadly or more deadly than covid itself (it's not), then you did the good ole parrotpoint of comparing it to the flu

nah, not going to engage a dude who has bunkered down in misinformation

---

helIy posted...

this is literally the only thing you had to say to get every single person here to ignore you

you think the vaccine is deadly or more deadly than covid itself (it's not), then you did the good ole parrotpoint of comparing it to the flu

nah, not going to engage a dude who has bunkered down in misinformation

Another strawman. I gave no magnitude to the dangerousness of the covid vaccines; merely said they presented a danger and asked if it was worth it. I've also literally given you numerous official studies and papers on various topics, and you're going to harp on a single thing and ignore the rest? Here's a source about vaccine adverse effects.
https://vaersanalysis.info/2021/11/12/vaers-summary-for-covid-19-vaccines-through-11-05-2021/
People don't like VAERS anymore because the data is highly damning for the covid vaccines. They don't like seeing that there are more reports in the last few years for covid vaccines alone than in the last 30 years for ALL vaccines combined. I would say this is extraordinarily alarming, even if only a fraction of these reported numbers are true. (Historically VAERS reports have always been underreported).

Comparing covid to the flu is only natural because it's a virus too and shares many of the same symptoms as covid. People also forget, while they proclaim covid as deadly, that the flu is also deadly with tens of thousands of people dying to the flu every year in the USA alone.

You want to say I'm spreading misinformation even though I provide official information, but you yourself have not provided a single source of any kind. Which one of us is peddling misinformation again?

---

yeah, after two years i'm just so tired of dealing with dumbasses who have been deluded by misinformation from racist shit like oan

you do you man, but when you inevitably get covid and are in the hospital regretting not getting the vaccine, and i somehow find out?

i'm gonna fucking laugh.

---

helIy posted...

yeah, after two years i'm just so tired of dealing with dumbasses who have been deluded by misinformation from racist shit like oan

you do you man, but when you inevitably get covid and are in the hospital regretting not getting the vaccine, and i somehow find out?

i'm gonna fucking laugh.

I never gave OAN as a source. I primarily gave reputable sites as a source like ncbi, official sites (like the fda, cdc, vaers, etc.), and other sources of scientific articles. Are you calling those misinformation? You must be because those are the only sources of my knowledge and information and you are saying I'm dealing out misinformation.

So if ncbi and such are misinformation, what do you consider not misinformation? Give me a depository of unbiased scientific information that you consider to be a reputable source.

---

ReturnOfFa posted...

Tell me how it never happened. As far as I can parse:

On August 25, Kyle Rittenhouse, a 17-year-old from Antioch, Illinois, shot three people with an AR-15 style rifle. Kenosha resident Joseph Rosenbaum, 36, and nearby Silver Lake resident Anthony Huber, 26, were killed; while Gaige Grosskreutz, 26, a resident of nearby West Allis, Wisconsin, was injured.

Because the gun never left Wisconsin.

ReturnOfFa posted...

But unlike what many Rittenhouse supporters claimed, we could find no court evidence that Huber had sexually assaulted anyone.

I have literally never seen anybody make that claim.

ReturnOfFa posted...

In the interview with CNN, Grosskreutz said he has paid his debt for his past crimes and that he had every right to carry a gun at the Aug. 25 protest. Im not a felon, he said. I had a legal right to possess [a firearm] and to possess it concealed.

He said on the stand that the concealed weapons permit was expired. He lied about having a legal right.

HornedLion posted...

White kid, Kyle Rittenhouse, illegally has a gun shoots 3 people gets to go home to mommy.

Black man, Philandro Castile, legally is a licensed gun owner shoots no one gets shot down and dies in front of his family.

If you cant even understand why the black community has the right to feel the way they do, and protest then youre a part of the problem.

Every single person Rittenhouse shot is white.
---

solaris32 posted...

I never gave OAN as a source. I primarily gave reputable sites as a source like ncbi, official sites (like the fda, cdc, vaers, etc.), and other sources of scientific articles. Are you calling those misinformation? You must be because those are the only sources of my knowledge and information and you are saying I'm dealing out misinformation.

So if ncbi and such are misinformation, what do you consider not misinformation? Give me a depository of unbiased scientific information that you consider to be a reputable source.

Which of the 30 or 40 links you dumped in this topic and called "official" show that covid vaccines are dangerous? That's your only claim I'm concerned with. Let's get to the bottom of that one first.

solaris32 posted...

election fraud evidence

Very hard to take you serious after that little nugget.

---

kind9 posted...

Which of the 30 or 40 links you dumped in this topic and called "official" show that covid vaccines are dangerous? That's your only claim I'm concerned with. Let's get to the bottom of that one first.

Very hard to take you serious after that little nugget.

The first one, the archived link to the reddit post with the 10 problems of the covid vaccines. It should raise serious doubt as to the safety of the vaccines, if you actually take the time to read the many scientific articles and studies. Combined with the astonishingly high VAERS reports, compounded with the fact that natural immunity is superior, I choose natural immunity over vaccination. Why take the risk of the covid vaccine with no long term studies and where the manufacturers are not liable for any injuries or death that may arise from their product?

How it works is they, including the CDC and various governments of the world including the USA, are making the positive claim that the vaccines are "safe and effective". I am raising reasonable doubt against this claim, while proving natural immunity is superior. Saying the vaccines are dangerous is my opinion based on the preponderance of evidence and data. I would argue them calling it "safe and effective" is also an opinion, especially since they lack compelling evidence in the form of long term studies and unbiased comparisons between the unvaccinated and the covid vaccinated. Therefore when we both have opposite opinions, I'm going to defer to the undeniable scientific evidence overwhelmingly in favor of natural immunity, and cut out the extra and unneeded risk of the covid vaccines.

---

just fyi about vaers, it's user reported. as in, i can submit to vaers that the vaccine made me become dr. manhatten and then that would be a thing vaers would tell people.

everyone who brings up vaers doesn't seem to know this lmao

---

solaris32 posted...

The first one, the archived link to the reddit post with the 10 problems of the covid vaccines.

This is where your post ends. The rest is irrelevant, conspiratorial shit I didn't ask for. I'll peruse it and get back to you. In the meantime please post your credentials as a scientist who studies infectious diseases and/or vaccines, just so I know you can read and understand peer reviewed research on the subject and aren't just putting things forward because they agree with your confirmation bias.

Right off the bat that article claims the vaccines are experimental, which goes against every official source. Looks like it's gonna be more biased fucking garbage. And yeah, this is not an official source. It's a rando conspiracy theorist on reddit who threw a bunch of links into the footnotes of his opinionated post to make it look like official sources agree with him.

---

Bulbasaur posted...

just fyi about vaers, it's user reported. as in, i can submit to vaers that the vaccine made me become dr. manhatten and then that would be a thing vaers would tell people.

everyone who brings up vaers doesn't seem to know this lmao

I'm aware of that. Something most people aren't actually aware of is that it's a crime to knowingly file a false report:
https://vaers.hhs.gov/reportevent.html
So while you could make such a report you would quite possibly be fined for misusing it. Therefore vaers is a slightly more trustworthy source of statistics than say an internet forum or survey. However the statistics themselves aren't proof of anything specific, nor have I claimed otherwise. Instead it is supposed to be used as an early warning if something might be wrong and therefore further investigation is required. Sadly our government seems to be ignoring this and doing little to no additional investigation. Instead they continue to assure everyone the vaccines are "safe and effective".

kind9 posted...

This is where your post ends. The rest is irrelevant, conspiratorial shit I didn't ask for. I'll peruse it and get back to you. In the meantime please post your credentials as a scientist who studies infectious diseases and/or vaccines, just so I know you can read and understand peer reviewed research on the subject and aren't just putting things forward because they agree with your confirmation bias.

Right off the bat that article claims the vaccines are experimental, which goes against every official source. Looks like it's gonna be more biased fucking garbage. And yeah, this is not an official source. It's a rando conspiracy theorist on reddit who threw a bunch of links into the footnotes of his opinionated post to make it look like official sources agree with him.

For the first conspiracy claim:
https://www.factcheck.org/2021/07/scicheck-covid-19-vaccine-generated-spike-protein-is-safe-contrary-to-viral-claims/

I hear you like big dumps of links, and you'll find plenty at the end of that article. Honestly if everything you say hinges on a conspiracy that actual official sources are lying to everyone then you have to actually establish that that's the case.

What "rest"? Every single point I've made has been accompanied by legit sources or compilations of legit sources. Also I don't care what you "asked for" because my words are meant for everyone who seeks the truth and the science to go with it.

My credentials are irrelevant because I'm not citing any anecdotes, personal experiences, or studies I've personally conducted. If you want credentials look at the authors of the studies I've exposed you to. If you don't like the easily readable conclusions, take it up with the authors, because you don't need a masters to be able to read and understand them.

The covid vaccines are experimental, because never before has this mrna vaccine technology been used in humans. That means they are being experimented on with humans.

I know reddit isn't an official source, I made that quite clear. His links are official sources though, whether you like them or not. Science doesn't care about your feelings or biases. If you want that join a religion.

I haven't actually claimed they are lying. I said I've brought up reasonable doubt, which means we should be doing further testing and investigation instead of declaring them "safe and effective" and giving them to everyone including children. We also shouldn't be mandating them and forsaking natural immunity. This is my entire argument. I did say "proving" in post #198 to which I apologize for using inaccurate language. You don't actually "prove" anything in science, except for math, because science is always changing and has to be able to change. In simplest terms a hypothesis is formed, you test it, and if enough evidence exists supporting that hypothesis it can become a scientific theory. Right now we have two hypothesis about the safety and efficacy of the covid vaccines where both sides seem to have a large amount of scientific evidence supporting them. Neither side has earned the ability to claim their hypothesis is stronger or more valid. I say without a clear victor, err on the side of caution and not expose yourself to an unknown (the covid vax). Problem is there are mandates and rules hindering my life unless I side with a particular side that has yet to prove itself the correct one. And that's anti-science and immoral.

---

the problem with your "doubts" and natural immunity is that viruses evolve every time they infect a host. Each time that happens they spread a new strain, or variant. Therefore, nothing matters if a virus continues to evolve to become more resistant to the human body and vaccines. If people keep spreading it, it keeps science from winning. And science has won in the past when humans accept it.

but we've been here before. people denied the polio vaccine in the past and tried to use religion to block the needle, or to "cure" it. In the end, science won and those unfortunate souls to survive it's infection spent the rest of their lives living in an iron lung.

---

Cloud75x posted...

viruses evolve

Excuse me, evolution is a theory.

---

solaris32 posted...

What "rest"? Every single point I've made has been accompanied by legit sources or compilations of legit sources. Also I don't care what you "asked for" because my words are meant for everyone who seeks the truth and the science to go with it.

Uh, the rest of your reply to me, obviously. I asked one simple question that required one simple answer. Because people like you always have to gish-gallop. You can't actually win an argument so you have to bore the fuck out of people with too many words and too many points at once so they won't even bother with you. It's just a tactic for people who are more concerned about winning arguments than being right.

solaris32 posted...

I know reddit isn't an official source, I made that quite clear.

No, the conspiracy theorist who wrote that opinion piece is not an official source. Just because he threw in a bunch of links doesn't mean any of them agree precisely with his opinions. If his very first point can be countered by actual official sources through a 5 second google search then why should I even care about the rest of it?

solaris32 posted...

Right now we have two hypothesis about the safety and efficacy of the covid vaccines

It seems more like reality vs. conspiracy to me.

solaris32 posted...

Problem is there are mandates and rules hindering my life

Here is your real, honest position and the source of your bias. Freedumb & liberty. Why don't you just argue that instead of pretending science is on your side?

---

Cloud75x posted...

the problem with your "doubts" and natural immunity is that viruses evolve every time they infect a host. Each time that happens they spread a new strain, or variant. Therefore, nothing matters if a virus continues to evolve to become more resistant to the human body and vaccines. If people keep spreading it, it keeps science from winning. And science has won in the past when humans accept it.

but we've been here before. people denied the polio vaccine in the past and tried to use religion to block the needle, or to "cure" it. In the end, science won and those unfortunate souls to survive it's infection spent the rest of their lives living in an iron lung.

That's why I pointed out natural immunity protects against several of a virus' proteins as opposed to the vaccine's single spike protein protection. Therefore natural immunity is actually less likely to create variants. Furthermore the virus cannot become vaccine immune except by interacting with vaccinated people, which means if vaccine resistant variants keep popping up you can't blame the unvaccinated. As you said though, it's always going to evolve and we will just have to learn to live with it, like the flu. So are we really accomplishing anything with these mandates and forsaking natural immunity?

kind9 posted...

Uh, the rest of your reply to me, obviously. I asked one simple question that required one simple answer. Because people like you always have to gish-gallop. You can't actually win an argument so you have to bore the fuck out of people with too many words and too many points at once so they won't even bother with you. It's just a tactic for people who are more concerned about winning arguments than being right.

No, the conspiracy theorist who wrote that opinion piece is not an official source. Just because he threw in a bunch of links doesn't mean any of them agree precisely with his opinions. If his very first point can be countered by actual official sources through a 5 second google search then why should I even care about the rest of it?

It seems more like reality vs. conspiracy to me.

Here is your real, honest position and the source of your bias. Freedumb & liberty. Why don't you just argue that instead of pretending science is on your side?

You've made it clear you operate on bias and feelings, and disregard science that goes against that. I operate solely on what the science says regardless of whatever beliefs I may have (my beliefs are formed around science anyway).

I do feel the need to point out that you are complaining that I "bore the fuck out of people with too many words and too many points at once", even though my words and points are needed to properly and accurately convey meaning so that it can be understood without misinterpretation or obfuscation. Yet previously you questioned my ability to read and comprehend studies. How can you question my ability to read studies, which are far more lengthy, technical, and "boring", when you yourself have difficulty with my relatively simple responses and explanations?

It is clear you do not value science or accurately and intelligently having a discussion.

---

solaris32 posted...

You've made it clear you operate on bias and feelings, and disregard science that goes against that. I operate solely on what the science says regardless of whatever beliefs I may have (my beliefs are formed around science anyway).

I do feel the need to point out that you are complaining that I "bore the fuck out of people with too many words and too many points at once", even though my words and points are needed to properly and accurately convey meaning so that it can be understood without misinterpretation or obfuscation. Yet previously you questioned my ability to read and comprehend studies. How can you question my ability to read studies, which are far more lengthy, technical, and "boring", when you yourself have difficulty with my relatively simple responses and explanations?

It is clear you do not value science or accurately and intelligently having a discussion.

Look up what gish galloping is. Stop projecting your own faults onto others. I haven't argued against science at all in this topic. I'm arguing against conspiracies.

---

kind9 posted...

Look up what gish galloping is. Stop projecting your own faults onto others. I haven't argued against science at all in this topic. I'm arguing against conspiracies.

I do not believe in, nor I have presented, any conspiracies. I've only shown science that casts doubt on the official narrative by linking official and legit sources of science and information. Just because you don't like the results of that information does not make it a conspiracy. That's why I say you do not value science and instead operate on bias and feelings.

---

We already had 200 vaccine threads.
---

How did this turn into a covid thread? Lol

solaris32 posted...

I do not believe in, nor I have presented, any conspiracies. I've only shown science that casts doubt on the official narrative by linking official and legit sources of science and information. Just because you don't like the results of that information does not make it a conspiracy. That's why I say you do not value science and instead operate on bias and feelings.

Did you know that white supremacists also cite legitimate science to back up their belief that brown people are genetically inferior to whites, even though the science doesn't actually agree with them? It's a very common thing that people do when they want to give the appearance of legitimacy to their beliefs. So when your primary source is an opinion piece by somebody who is just regurgitating conspiracies(or disproven claims at the least) then I'm going to call you a conspiracy theorist. You also linked to the brownstone institute, which is a non-profit with a political agenda(anti-vax mandates, personal liberty & choice).

The fact that neither of us really understands the science means this conversation is a dead end, unless you want to just throw studies at each other. I had an aunt and uncle who were anti-vax, and they're dead now. My cousin almost died from it. If natural immunity is better than vaccine immunity, which is part of your argument against vaccines, then you're essentially saying people should just go ahead and get covid. Wow. I'm so glad my parents are vaccinated.

Since I am a scientific layman all I can do is trust the experts and health officials. I.e., the "official narrative". If you claim that the official narrative(I just assume you mean information from the CDC) is a lie then that is a conspiracy. The CDC recommends getting vaccinated on grounds that they are safe, and the FDA has fully approved them. I'm not going to argue any further about this in this thread, so have the last word and make it good.

Edit: Oh, and you believe one of the biggest conspiracies of all: 2020 election fraud. You are a conspiracy theorist.

---

kids thinking they are adults is all this thread is

---

Did the trumpsters really turn this into a vaccine debate?

Mandates do not ignore natural immunity - natural immunity has not been shown to be 'more effective' than vaccinated immunity. In addition, having both is better than simply having natural immunity. In addition, both have the pitfall of only giving you antibodies for a certain period of time. You will need a booster - I'd rather have a booster than risk getting COVID repeatedly.

I don't know how this thread turned into a vaccination argument, but here's a good video addressing some of the 'points' made.
https://youtu.be/5wRDLf54Scs

Also, note to @solaris32 - you are making plenty of refutable claims.

"CDC strangely has no record of an unvaccinated person catching covid, recovering (thus acquiring natural immunity and therefore being on par with what the vaccines should be doing), catching it again"

"Cases of reinfection with COVID-19 have been reported, but remain rare . " -CDC

In addition, we haven't even had enough time elapse to establish that reinfection 'doesn't happen'.

What's your scientific background @solaris32 and what qualifies you to interpret the data?

---

https://youtu.be/y9lL-rwPu58

---

OhhhJa posted...

How did this turn into a covid thread? Lol

That's what I'm wondering but I'm not going to bother reading all this s***

dioxxys posted...

That's what I'm wondering but I'm not going to bother reading all this s***

Probably trolls tried to change topic to covid to get topic nuked.

---

Veedrock- posted...

if your whole case hinges on one word

That's how the court system works. Depending on your state laws a whole self defense situation can ride on a single word.

---

Everyone involved in this case are idiots, and that goes for Trayvon Martin and all other incidents like this.
Only in USA are people willing to risk either getting killed or getting life in prison for killing, all over some stupid hashtag cultural movement nonsense. Smh America

---

Ferarri619 posted...

Everyone involved in this case are idiots, and that goes for Trayvon Martin and all other incidents like this.
Only in USA are people willing to risk either getting killed or getting life in prison for killing, all over some stupid hashtag cultural movement nonsense. Smh America

George Zimmerman got assaulted because of stalking somebody buying tea then shot an unarmed black person.
---

solaris32 posted...

I'm aware of that. Something most people aren't actually aware of is that it's a crime to knowingly file a false report:

it's also a crime to murder two people for absolutely no reason

:)

---

Ferarri619 posted...

that goes for Trayvon Martin

I don't know how the fuck you could think that these cases are even remotely comparable. You stalk someone with a loaded gun and they end up shot dead, it's pretty clear what your fucking intent was.

---

Ferarri619 posted...

Everyone involved in this case are idiots, and that goes for Trayvon Martin and all other incidents like this.
Only in USA are people willing to risk either getting killed or getting life in prison for killing, all over some stupid hashtag cultural movement nonsense. Smh America

Trayvon Martin was literally just a kid walking home from a store. The heck is the matter with you?

---

Wow, I'm pleasantly surprised by the poll here, it's not nearly as lopsided as I expected. I guess Gamefaqs users don't hate their dads as much as folks on Reddit.


---

Bowser102 posted...

Wow, I'm pleasantly surprised by the poll here, it's not nearly as lopsided as I expected. I guess Gamefaqs users don't hate their dads as much as folks on Reddit.

It's a bit of a silly poll, tbh, because most (all?) faces are punchable, but... I dunno, I don't really get the punchable face meme. Must be my autism.
Like... is the actual meaning "Do you want to punch x?" That would make more sense, I guess.

---

Gaawa_chan posted...

It's a bit of a silly poll, tbh, because most (all?) faces are punchable, but... I dunno, I don't really get the punchable face meme. Must be my autism.
Like... is the actual meaning "Do you want to punch x?" That would make more sense, I guess.

Yeah, lol. That's what it means.

By the way, describing autism in any non-clinical manner is usually a bad idea. Make sure you are not using it as an insult in any way.

---

Bowser102 posted...

Yeah, lol. That's what it means.

By the way, describing autism in any non-clinical manner is usually a bad idea. Make sure you are not using it as an insult in any way.

Apparently you think people with autism are not allowed to say they have autism.
---

Revelation34 posted...

Apparently you think people with autism are not allowed to say they have autism.

depending on the context, on gamefaqs they sometimes arent

---

PeterPumpknhead posted...

depending on the context, on gamefaqs they sometimes arent

I don't see how the context would matter there.
---

---

zebatov posted...

Meme

Lmao, love it.


---

Lol

---

Revelation34 posted...

I don't see how the context would matter there.

youll just have to trust me

---

Theres video of Kyle Rittenhouse beating up a girl!? What a bitch ass kid.

https://youtu.be/plpA0yRQ_pU

Oh, and the judge is trash too.

---

I try not to get any news from youtube videos

---

helIy posted...

it's also a crime to murder two people for absolutely no reason

:)

it's a shame that's not what happened in this situation then isn't it?

---

HornedLion posted...

Theres video of Kyle Rittenhouse beating up a girl!? What a bitch ass kid.

https://youtu.be/plpA0yRQ_pU

Oh, and the judge is trash too.

Not positive but I'm pretty sure that video was debunked a long time ago

TIE543 posted...

it's a shame that's not what happened in this situation then isn't it?

oh it didn't?

so Kyle didn't brutally shoot and kill two people and then just get to walk away?

oh, guess all the footage of it happening is just cgi


---

helIy posted...

oh it didn't?

so Kyle didn't brutally shoot and kill two people and then just get to walk away?

oh, guess all the footage of it happening is just cgi

I always knew you were an idiot lmfao

---