- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
0
Posted on 11/11/21 at 2:15 pm to Korkstand
quote:
while Grosskreutz thought he was helping/saving people (much like Rittenhouse).
Rittenhouse was retreating at all times.
Grosskreutz was the aggressor at all times.
So are you or are you not asserting that the aggressor has a right to self defense?
Posted on 11/11/21 at 2:15 pm to Scruffy
quote:
And Rittenhouse wasn’t actively shooting, making the active shooter claim a fallacy.
He was in fact running away towards the cops.
Posted on 11/11/21 at 2:16 pm to Korkstand
quote:
I'm claiming that a strong case for self-defense can be put forth for someone pointing a weapon at an active shooter.
He was in the mob pursuing Kyle. He was 100% aware of what happened.
You have no point here.
Lefty drew on Kyle and rightfully paid the price.
Posted on 11/11/21 at 2:16 pm to Centinel
Let us also not forget that Rittenhouse wasn’t even the first one who fired.
It was a rioter who slipped away into the crowd (can’t recall his name).
It was a rioter who slipped away into the crowd (can’t recall his name).
Posted on 11/11/21 at 2:17 pm to Korkstand
quote:
I'm claiming that a strong case for self-defense can be put forth for someone pointing a weapon at an active shooter.
Not when the "active shooter" is not actively threatening you and is in fact in retreat.
You can't be an "active shooter" when you are in fact not actively shooting and are in retreat at all times.
So no, Kyle can not be considered an "active shooter" in any way, shape or form.
So if you're claiming Grosskreutz has a right to self defense by being the aggressor, you're either being a disingenuous troll, or you're a fricking idiot.
I'll let you decide which one you are.
This post was edited on 11/11/21 at 2:18 pm
Posted on 11/11/21 at 2:17 pm to Korkstand
quote:
Didn't it also state that he believed Rittenhouse to be an active shooter? Which, depending on your political views, he may or may not have been?
He also testified that he had no clue what was going on and didn't see anything go down before he moved in on KR. He also said that he was afraid for his life then ran towards KR. He also said he was trying to surrender to KR. He also said that he pointed the gun at KR. He also said he never drew his weapon, which the prosecutor had to correct him on. This guy's testimony was a dumpster fire because he kept contradicting himself at every turn. Again, the guy admitted that he was the aggressor and was only shot after he ran towards KR and pointed a gun at him. This is pretty basic stuff that you, for some odd reason, are refusing to acknowledge because it doesn't fit the story you want to hear.
Posted on 11/11/21 at 2:17 pm to Korkstand
quote:
I'm claiming that a strong case for self-defense
Posted on 11/11/21 at 2:18 pm to upgrayedd
quote:
He also testified that he had no clue what was going on and didn't see anything go down before he moved in on KR. He also said that he was afraid for his life then ran towards KR. He also said he was trying to surrender to KR. He also said that he pointed the gun at KR. He also said he never drew his weapon, which the prosecutor had to correct him on.
Posted on 11/11/21 at 2:18 pm to Centinel
quote:I'm questioning whether you can determine if he was the aggressor without putting yourself in his shoes. Most here are putting themselves in Kyle's shoes and ignoring all of his bad decisions. Least you could do is do the same for those who were shot by him.
So are you or are you not asserting that the aggressor has a right to self defense?
Posted on 11/11/21 at 2:19 pm to Korkstand
quote:
You don't see a difference here? An armed robber has obvious intentions to commit a crime, while Grosskreutz thought he was helping/saving people (much like Rittenhouse).
He never even said he was trying to save people. He said that he closed the distance between him and Rittenhouse because he thought he was going to die (then he said he ran towards him to surrender). He didn't even make a "for the greater good" argument.
Posted on 11/11/21 at 2:19 pm to Korkstand
quote:
I'm questioning whether you can determine if he was the aggressor without putting yourself in his shoes.
Are you saying Grosskreutz was not the aggressor in the situation? Even when he admitted under oath that he in fact was?
This post was edited on 11/11/21 at 2:21 pm
Posted on 11/11/21 at 2:19 pm to Korkstand
quote:
I'm claiming that a strong case for self-defense can be put forth for someone pointing a weapon at an active shooter.
That would require there being an active shooter though wouldn't it?
Posted on 11/11/21 at 2:19 pm to upgrayedd
quote:
He also testified that he had no clue what was going on and didn't see anything go down before he moved in on KR. He also said that he was afraid for his life then ran towards KR. He also said he was trying to surrender to KR. He also said that he pointed the gun at KR. He also said he never drew his weapon, which the prosecutor had to correct him on. This guy's testimony was a dumpster fire because he kept contradicting himself at every turn. Again, the guy admitted that he was the aggressor and was only shot after he ran towards KR and pointed a gun at him. This is pretty basic stuff that you, for some odd reason, are refusing to acknowledge because it doesn't fit the story you want to hear.
He also said he was going tell the skateboard guy to stop.
Posted on 11/11/21 at 2:20 pm to Korkstand
quote:
I'm questioning whether you can determine if he was the aggressor without putting yourself in his shoes. Most here are putting themselves in Kyle's shoes and ignoring all of his bad decisions. Least you could do is do the same for those who were shot by him.
He said on the stand that he was the aggressor.
Posted on 11/11/21 at 2:20 pm to Korkstand
quote:
Didn't it also state that he believed Rittenhouse to be an active shooter?
Sack of shite for attempting that line after the fact. He certainly wasn't thinking that before coached by the ADA.
quote:
Which, depending on your political views, he may or may not have been?
Political views have no bearing on the fact that Kyle didn't shoot until confronted by credible threats to his life. In fact, it was pointed out the Kyle demonstrated considerable restraint at the time.
This post was edited on 11/11/21 at 2:21 pm
Posted on 11/11/21 at 2:20 pm to member12
Get my money, gtfo of kenosa, let birds fly to any and every left wing media outlet that wants to video ne or take my picture and move to a conservative city or suburb area. Maybe even another country....
Or shiate, maybe even witness protection
Or shiate, maybe even witness protection
This post was edited on 11/11/21 at 2:24 pm
Posted on 11/11/21 at 2:22 pm to member12
Both. Sue everyone and get money from it. Then change appearance and disappear for years.
This kid sucks. He is an entitled little shite who thought he could just start shooting people that had nothing to do with him and get away with it. Maybe he will. He deserves zero attention though when the Epstein trial is under way.
This kid sucks. He is an entitled little shite who thought he could just start shooting people that had nothing to do with him and get away with it. Maybe he will. He deserves zero attention though when the Epstein trial is under way.
Posted on 11/11/21 at 2:22 pm to Centinel
quote:
I'll let you decide which one you are.
Why cant he be both?
Posted on 11/11/21 at 2:23 pm to Clark W Griswold
You serious clark?
Page 11 of 25
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News