Do you live near Minneapolis? Because this would be kinda funny if you’re in LA or NYC.
Yes, I live in Minneapolis.
We have locations throughout the country, but our local office is in the heart of downtown
I've been working remote from home though
WI 6/27/98 WI 10/8/00 MO 10/11/00 IL 4/23/03 MN 6/26/06 MN 6/27/06 WI 6/30/06 IL 8/5/07 IL 8/21/08 (EV) IL 8/22/08 (EV) IL 8/23/09 IL 8/24/09 IN 5/7/10 IL 6/28/11 (EV) IL 6/29/11 (EV) WI 9/3/11 WI 9/4/11 IL 7/19/13 NE 10/09/14 IL 10/17/14 MN 10/19/14 FL 4/11/16 IL 8/20/16 IL 8/22/16 IL 08/18/18 IL 08/20/18 IT 07/05/2020AT 07/07/2020
You think there will be rioting? White guy shot two other white guys. White people don't usually get up in arms about such things. It's not a sporting event.
I know the riots in Kenosha were in response to a different police department murdering a different black man
but believe it or not, people are still pretty salty about George Floyd around here
This happened during those riots but I just don't see people rioting over this.
Look forward to seeing more of this, you know, polling places, school board meetings, town council meetings, candidate meet and greets, election days. Let the gun nuts and insurrectionists celebrate. What a shithole country. Welcome to DC Kyle and the office of Matt Getts Off.
Getting off and playing with guns…DC sounds like a perfect fit.
let's not stay down too long over this verdict. the house passed the BBB bill today, and they are giving assurances that it is going to pass in the senate. so some good can come from this day.
press on.
There is nothing noble in being superior to your fellow man; true nobility is being superior to your former self.- Hemingway
I was going to grab one of my previous posts and edit it but there were too many with awful remarks (made by me) like fry him, fake crying, etc. to edit but I need to practice what I preach. Being honest, truthful.
I still think he was wrong but again they were all wrong. However, as a mother (of children, not that the other doesn’t apply sometimes) my heart broke for him today. His reaction was genuine. I would have hugged him if I were there. And based on the evidence he was acting in self defense. I hope he never does anything like this again but based on my experience with brainless 18 year old boys something is likely to happen again. In fact, 1 in 3 will be arrested by age 23. Both of mine are part of those 1’s. Another story, another day.
What we should be doing is changing gun laws and I only mean the kind, carrying, stuff like that. I want to keep my gun in case someone enters my home uninvited but if I carried I’d have been in jail along time ago (I am forbidden by my husband to carry). Again today another school shooting, no big deal though, we’re just happy no one died, right? The 2nd Am needs fixed but it’s not going to happen, never. So my apologies to everyone I was nasty to. Hope it’s all of us just being emotional.
It's hard to know how to react to the verdict, on the one hand it's exactly what I expected, and based on the evidence, a fairly simple case of self defence. However, it's hard to feel any joy or satisfaction at the verdict, because many of the factors that lead to the incident feel so wrong and in need of change. I wonder how Rittenhouse or any other would be 'hero' is going to going to get the message that it's not a safe nor sensible thing to be wandering about during a riot with a gun? Perhaps if the prosecution had aimed for some lesser charges in terms of reckless endangerment, some kind of meaningful message might have been sent?
I hadn't watched that much news coverage until now, but some of the left wing coverage was pretty outrageous, so factually incorrect and clearly biased, I'm not for a minute doubting that the right wing coverage was wholly accurate either, but I was quite shocked. I also think that Rittenhouse's reaction to the verdict showed his emotional meltdown when testifying was genuine.
0
Options
mickeyrat
up my ass, like Chadwick was up his Posts: 35,802
think the prosecutors need to release that suppressed video/audio if its not already out.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Someone said it best. If your upset with the verdict. Change your news source.
I would place a good amount of blame on the worthless governor Evers. His TDS was so bad he refused help or advice to squash the quickly growing riots. And he still throws gas on the fire after the verdict. Weak and pathetic governor. Sit in a bar in Door and ask residents what they think. You will get an overwhelming response of, he's an idiot. On par with Walz. Not as bad as Lightfoot ot Whitmer. Or, blame Blake for going for a knife. Or super shitty prosecutors. What a mess. But absolutely the right verdict.
He is a stupid kid that put himself in a stupid situation. And then he encountered even more stupid people.
The whole incident is just a microcosm of where we are as a country. And watching the two fringes of political society react the way they are reacting just makes me sad.
And any normal person who came so close to a lifetime of incarceration would probably re- think some choices. But the way he is being lionozed on the right makes me doubt that will happen.
If only I’d had a gun when the FJB folks in my town started harassing a 10-year-old at the elementary school they like to shout in front of. I could have “defended” him.
If only I’d had a gun when the FJB folks in my town started harassing a 10-year-old at the elementary school they like to shout in front of. I could have “defended” him.
Just finished reading this article when I saw your comment…
Blame and hold “responsible” everyone and everything but Kyle Rittenhouse. What a fucking country.
You're talking about two different things here. A jury acquitted under the standard of 'beyond a reasonable doubt'. Rittenhouse is responsible for putting himself in a stupid situation. The two 'victims' also acted like morons. The third man that was shot admitted he pointed his gun at Rittenhouse first. All of these people are stupid.
0
Options
mickeyrat
up my ass, like Chadwick was up his Posts: 35,802
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Blame and hold “responsible” everyone and everything but Kyle Rittenhouse. What a fucking country.
You're talking about two different things here. A jury acquitted under the standard of 'beyond a reasonable doubt'. Rittenhouse is responsible for putting himself in a stupid situation. The two 'victims' also acted like morons. The third man that was shot admitted he pointed his gun at Rittenhouse first. All of these people are stupid.
And if Rittenhouse had just stayed home or not gone to Kenosha with an AR15 strapped across his chest, it wouldn’t even be discussed. He’s the only dipshit of all the armed folks that night that pulled the trigger when “threatened.” It’s a stupid country we’re living in. FreeDUMB.
Blame and hold “responsible” everyone and everything but Kyle Rittenhouse. What a fucking country.
You're talking about two different things here. A jury acquitted under the standard of 'beyond a reasonable doubt'. Rittenhouse is responsible for putting himself in a stupid situation. The two 'victims' also acted like morons. The third man that was shot admitted he pointed his gun at Rittenhouse first. All of these people are stupid.
And if Rittenhouse had just stayed home or not gone to Kenosha with an AR15 strapped across his chest, it wouldn’t even be discussed. He’s the only dipshit of all the armed folks that night that pulled the trigger when “threatened.” It’s a stupid country we’re living in. FreeDUMB.
Agree 100% all four of these people fall into that category.
Blame and hold “responsible” everyone and everything but Kyle Rittenhouse. What a fucking country.
You're talking about two different things here. A jury acquitted under the standard of 'beyond a reasonable doubt'. Rittenhouse is responsible for putting himself in a stupid situation. The two 'victims' also acted like morons. The third man that was shot admitted he pointed his gun at Rittenhouse first. All of these people are stupid.
And if Rittenhouse had just stayed home or not gone to Kenosha with an AR15 strapped across his chest, it wouldn’t even be discussed. He’s the only dipshit of all the armed folks that night that pulled the trigger when “threatened.” It’s a stupid country we’re living in. FreeDUMB.
Agree 100% all four of these people fall into that category.
Blame and hold “responsible” everyone and everything but Kyle Rittenhouse. What a fucking country.
You're talking about two different things here. A jury acquitted under the standard of 'beyond a reasonable doubt'. Rittenhouse is responsible for putting himself in a stupid situation. The two 'victims' also acted like morons. The third man that was shot admitted he pointed his gun at Rittenhouse first. All of these people are stupid.
And if Rittenhouse had just stayed home or not gone to Kenosha with an AR15 strapped across his chest, it wouldn’t even be discussed. He’s the only dipshit of all the armed folks that night that pulled the trigger when “threatened.” It’s a stupid country we’re living in. FreeDUMB.
You're totally right in that he should have stayed at home, but I don't understand why you would put the word threatened in quote marks, he was clearly threatened, and could have been seriously injured or killed, hence the outcome.
There really are two different issues here, the moral conversation around a child vigilante inserting himself in a very volatile situation, and the right to defend oneself. I'd imagine it would be a lot more constructive to focus on the laws and circumstances that allowed him to be in that environment in the first place, rather than putting all the blame on a stupid child who didn't know any better. Through pushing the moral argument in spite of the very clear legal argument of self defence, all that is happening is that the opposing side are doubling down on their own narrow beliefs. Nobody is giving Kyle Rittenhouse or would be Kyle Rittenhouse's the message that he may have been entitled to defend himself, but he shouldn't have been taking the law into his own hands.
0
Options
mickeyrat
up my ass, like Chadwick was up his Posts: 35,802
what is occuring is wannabes are creating situations that result in a claim of self-defense. in court this is successful as it focuses on that instant or moments prior which overlooks the fact the defendent created the situation in the first place. it can be argued the dead or injured felt threatened and sought to defend themselves from an aggressor. given the results , generally, thats the truer scenario.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
what is occuring is wannabes are creating situations that result in a claim of self-defense. in court this is successful as it focuses on that instant or moments prior which overlooks the fact the defendent created the situation in the first place. it can be argued the dead or injured felt threatened and sought to defend themselves from an aggressor. given the results , generally, thats the truer scenario.
Are there other cases this is happening? And if that is the tactic, it’s a very poor one that I don’t see being very successful. You have to agitate a crowd enough to make them want to seriously harm you, but then hope they don’t long enough to give you time to retreat and reestablish yourself as a non-threat and then hope they don’t stop and fight back after they continue to be a threat to you. Because if you just fight back while you’re the agitator, then that wouldn’t be self defense. Ive seen mixed statements, but assuming Kyle was the original agitator, he still clearly retreated and reestablished himself as a non-threat. Just doesn’t seem like a plausible plot to use as an excuse to go out and shoot people.
Blame and hold “responsible” everyone and everything but Kyle Rittenhouse. What a fucking country.
You're talking about two different things here. A jury acquitted under the standard of 'beyond a reasonable doubt'. Rittenhouse is responsible for putting himself in a stupid situation. The two 'victims' also acted like morons. The third man that was shot admitted he pointed his gun at Rittenhouse first. All of these people are stupid.
And if Rittenhouse had just stayed home or not gone to Kenosha with an AR15 strapped across his chest, it wouldn’t even be discussed. He’s the only dipshit of all the armed folks that night that pulled the trigger when “threatened.” It’s a stupid country we’re living in. FreeDUMB.
You're totally right in that he should have stayed at home, but I don't understand why you would put the word threatened in quote marks, he was clearly threatened, and could have been seriously injured or killed, hence the outcome.
There really are two different issues here, the moral conversation around a child vigilante inserting himself in a very volatile situation, and the right to defend oneself. I'd imagine it would be a lot more constructive to focus on the laws and circumstances that allowed him to be in that environment in the first place, rather than putting all the blame on a stupid child who didn't know any better. Through pushing the moral argument in spite of the very clear legal argument of self defence, all that is happening is that the opposing side are doubling down on their own narrow beliefs. Nobody is giving Kyle Rittenhouse or would be Kyle Rittenhouse's the message that he may have been entitled to defend himself, but he shouldn't have been taking the law into his own hands.
He pointed his gun at people and was a threat by doing so. His having to run and then protect himself as a result is why I put “threatened” in quotation marks. Maybe if he hadn’t pointed his gun at people, two other folks would be alive and a third wouldn’t be missing a bicep?
Blame and hold “responsible” everyone and everything but Kyle Rittenhouse. What a fucking country.
You're talking about two different things here. A jury acquitted under the standard of 'beyond a reasonable doubt'. Rittenhouse is responsible for putting himself in a stupid situation. The two 'victims' also acted like morons. The third man that was shot admitted he pointed his gun at Rittenhouse first. All of these people are stupid.
And if Rittenhouse had just stayed home or not gone to Kenosha with an AR15 strapped across his chest, it wouldn’t even be discussed. He’s the only dipshit of all the armed folks that night that pulled the trigger when “threatened.” It’s a stupid country we’re living in. FreeDUMB.
You're totally right in that he should have stayed at home, but I don't understand why you would put the word threatened in quote marks, he was clearly threatened, and could have been seriously injured or killed, hence the outcome.
There really are two different issues here, the moral conversation around a child vigilante inserting himself in a very volatile situation, and the right to defend oneself. I'd imagine it would be a lot more constructive to focus on the laws and circumstances that allowed him to be in that environment in the first place, rather than putting all the blame on a stupid child who didn't know any better. Through pushing the moral argument in spite of the very clear legal argument of self defence, all that is happening is that the opposing side are doubling down on their own narrow beliefs. Nobody is giving Kyle Rittenhouse or would be Kyle Rittenhouse's the message that he may have been entitled to defend himself, but he shouldn't have been taking the law into his own hands.
He pointed his gun at people and was a threat by doing so. His having to run and then protect himself as a result is why I put “threatened” in quotation marks. Maybe if he hadn’t pointed his gun at people, two other folks would be alive and a third wouldn’t be missing a bicep?
Who pointed first for the two dead? The man who was shot in the arm admitted he did first in his situation.
0
Options
mickeyrat
up my ass, like Chadwick was up his Posts: 35,802
Blame and hold “responsible” everyone and everything but Kyle Rittenhouse. What a fucking country.
You're talking about two different things here. A jury acquitted under the standard of 'beyond a reasonable doubt'. Rittenhouse is responsible for putting himself in a stupid situation. The two 'victims' also acted like morons. The third man that was shot admitted he pointed his gun at Rittenhouse first. All of these people are stupid.
And if Rittenhouse had just stayed home or not gone to Kenosha with an AR15 strapped across his chest, it wouldn’t even be discussed. He’s the only dipshit of all the armed folks that night that pulled the trigger when “threatened.” It’s a stupid country we’re living in. FreeDUMB.
You're totally right in that he should have stayed at home, but I don't understand why you would put the word threatened in quote marks, he was clearly threatened, and could have been seriously injured or killed, hence the outcome.
There really are two different issues here, the moral conversation around a child vigilante inserting himself in a very volatile situation, and the right to defend oneself. I'd imagine it would be a lot more constructive to focus on the laws and circumstances that allowed him to be in that environment in the first place, rather than putting all the blame on a stupid child who didn't know any better. Through pushing the moral argument in spite of the very clear legal argument of self defence, all that is happening is that the opposing side are doubling down on their own narrow beliefs. Nobody is giving Kyle Rittenhouse or would be Kyle Rittenhouse's the message that he may have been entitled to defend himself, but he shouldn't have been taking the law into his own hands.
He pointed his gun at people and was a threat by doing so. His having to run and then protect himself as a result is why I put “threatened” in quotation marks. Maybe if he hadn’t pointed his gun at people, two other folks would be alive and a third wouldn’t be missing a bicep?
Who pointed first for the two dead? The man who was shot in the arm admitted he did first in his situation.
rosenbaum was first, wasnt he? unarmed, verbal altercation?
I'd argue it was all one action with several parts. rather than seperate acts.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Blame and hold “responsible” everyone and everything but Kyle Rittenhouse. What a fucking country.
You're talking about two different things here. A jury acquitted under the standard of 'beyond a reasonable doubt'. Rittenhouse is responsible for putting himself in a stupid situation. The two 'victims' also acted like morons. The third man that was shot admitted he pointed his gun at Rittenhouse first. All of these people are stupid.
And if Rittenhouse had just stayed home or not gone to Kenosha with an AR15 strapped across his chest, it wouldn’t even be discussed. He’s the only dipshit of all the armed folks that night that pulled the trigger when “threatened.” It’s a stupid country we’re living in. FreeDUMB.
You're totally right in that he should have stayed at home, but I don't understand why you would put the word threatened in quote marks, he was clearly threatened, and could have been seriously injured or killed, hence the outcome.
There really are two different issues here, the moral conversation around a child vigilante inserting himself in a very volatile situation, and the right to defend oneself. I'd imagine it would be a lot more constructive to focus on the laws and circumstances that allowed him to be in that environment in the first place, rather than putting all the blame on a stupid child who didn't know any better. Through pushing the moral argument in spite of the very clear legal argument of self defence, all that is happening is that the opposing side are doubling down on their own narrow beliefs. Nobody is giving Kyle Rittenhouse or would be Kyle Rittenhouse's the message that he may have been entitled to defend himself, but he shouldn't have been taking the law into his own hands.
He pointed his gun at people and was a threat by doing so. His having to run and then protect himself as a result is why I put “threatened” in quotation marks. Maybe if he hadn’t pointed his gun at people, two other folks would be alive and a third wouldn’t be missing a bicep?
Who pointed first for the two dead? The man who was shot in the arm admitted he did first in his situation.
rosenbaum was first, wasnt he? unarmed, verbal altercation?
I'd argue it was all one action with several parts. rather than seperate acts.
There’s definitely different parts. If Kyle pointed his gun at others first (I’ve seen varied sources, so I don’t know if he did or not) then there should be charges for that and those people have a right to defend themselves in that moment. That moment is gone when he turns and runs away and they chase and corner him. It was more than a verbal altercation. Rosenbaum chased him until he was just a few feet away. I’d be afraid of serious injury if some dude was chasing me like that. Kyle was not an imminent threat at that moment and they did not have a right to attack him. Same goes for the second two. He was being chased down the street. He was not an imminent threat at that moment. When a he was struck in the head or having a gun pointed at him that’s self defense. Let’s say he missed the dude hitting him in the head with a skateboard and that guy runs away, he doesn’t have the right to chase him down and attack him.
Blame and hold “responsible” everyone and everything but Kyle Rittenhouse. What a fucking country.
You're talking about two different things here. A jury acquitted under the standard of 'beyond a reasonable doubt'. Rittenhouse is responsible for putting himself in a stupid situation. The two 'victims' also acted like morons. The third man that was shot admitted he pointed his gun at Rittenhouse first. All of these people are stupid.
And if Rittenhouse had just stayed home or not gone to Kenosha with an AR15 strapped across his chest, it wouldn’t even be discussed. He’s the only dipshit of all the armed folks that night that pulled the trigger when “threatened.” It’s a stupid country we’re living in. FreeDUMB.
You're totally right in that he should have stayed at home, but I don't understand why you would put the word threatened in quote marks, he was clearly threatened, and could have been seriously injured or killed, hence the outcome.
There really are two different issues here, the moral conversation around a child vigilante inserting himself in a very volatile situation, and the right to defend oneself. I'd imagine it would be a lot more constructive to focus on the laws and circumstances that allowed him to be in that environment in the first place, rather than putting all the blame on a stupid child who didn't know any better. Through pushing the moral argument in spite of the very clear legal argument of self defence, all that is happening is that the opposing side are doubling down on their own narrow beliefs. Nobody is giving Kyle Rittenhouse or would be Kyle Rittenhouse's the message that he may have been entitled to defend himself, but he shouldn't have been taking the law into his own hands.
He pointed his gun at people and was a threat by doing so. His having to run and then protect himself as a result is why I put “threatened” in quotation marks. Maybe if he hadn’t pointed his gun at people, two other folks would be alive and a third wouldn’t be missing a bicep?
I don't know that it was established whether he was pointing his gun at people? Regardless, he tried to de-escalate the incident that set off the chain of events when he ran away, maybe if Rosenbaum hadn't charged at him they'd also still all be alive? Rosenbaum, who was clearly there just to revel in the chaos and violence - he was clearly no ally to the cause either, caught on camera shouting the 'N' word. Again, I'm not saying Rittenhouse should have been there, with a gun, but legally, it seems he was allowed to be.
Comments
Yes, I live in Minneapolis.
We have locations throughout the country, but our local office is in the heart of downtown
I've been working remote from home though
please stay safe.
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
Hell I could be wrong but I hope I am right.
press on.
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
I hadn't watched that much news coverage until now, but some of the left wing coverage was pretty outrageous, so factually incorrect and clearly biased, I'm not for a minute doubting that the right wing coverage was wholly accurate either, but I was quite shocked. I also think that Rittenhouse's reaction to the verdict showed his emotional meltdown when testifying was genuine.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
I would place a good amount of blame on the worthless governor Evers. His TDS was so bad he refused help or advice to squash the quickly growing riots. And he still throws gas on the fire after the verdict. Weak and pathetic governor. Sit in a bar in Door and ask residents what they think. You will get an overwhelming response of, he's an idiot. On par with Walz. Not as bad as Lightfoot ot Whitmer. Or, blame Blake for going for a knife. Or super shitty prosecutors. What a mess. But absolutely the right verdict.
The whole incident is just a microcosm of where we are as a country. And watching the two fringes of political society react the way they are reacting just makes me sad.
And any normal person who came so close to a lifetime of incarceration would probably re- think some choices. But the way he is being lionozed on the right makes me doubt that will happen.
https://www.salon.com/2021/11/18/the-nra-gave-us-kyle-rittenhouse/
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
There really are two different issues here, the moral conversation around a child vigilante inserting himself in a very volatile situation, and the right to defend oneself. I'd imagine it would be a lot more constructive to focus on the laws and circumstances that allowed him to be in that environment in the first place, rather than putting all the blame on a stupid child who didn't know any better. Through pushing the moral argument in spite of the very clear legal argument of self defence, all that is happening is that the opposing side are doubling down on their own narrow beliefs. Nobody is giving Kyle Rittenhouse or would be Kyle Rittenhouse's the message that he may have been entitled to defend himself, but he shouldn't have been taking the law into his own hands.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
And if that is the tactic, it’s a very poor one that I don’t see being very successful. You have to agitate a crowd enough to make them want to seriously harm you, but then hope they don’t long enough to give you time to retreat and reestablish yourself as a non-threat and then hope they don’t stop and fight back after they continue to be a threat to you. Because if you just fight back while you’re the agitator, then that wouldn’t be self defense.
Ive seen mixed statements, but assuming Kyle was the original agitator, he still clearly retreated and reestablished himself as a non-threat. Just doesn’t seem like a plausible plot to use as an excuse to go out and shoot people.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Same goes for the second two. He was being chased down the street. He was not an imminent threat at that moment. When a he was struck in the head or having a gun pointed at him that’s self defense. Let’s say he missed the dude hitting him in the head with a skateboard and that guy runs away, he doesn’t have the right to chase him down and attack him.