Black Lives Matter

[wufan]

Fred, as intelligent as always, knows which side his bread is buttered on although I am not exactly sure what his statement is intended to convey. Is he implying that there was something racist bout the Rittenhouse case. As far as I can tell the Rittenhouse case had nothing to do with race. It was about the right of self-defense. So are the NBA and Fred taking a position that people should not have the right to defend themselves?

Fred was able to make a left leaning statement without saying anything. He is a great speaker that knows his audience.

[ShockerPrez]

Progress: Every Sesame Street Character Will Now Wear A Label On Their Forehead Indicating Their Race

https://babylonbee.com/news/progress-every-sesame-street-character-will-now-wear-a-label-on-their-forehead-indicating-their-race

"We hope this will help kids to see that race is the most important thing about a person," said Sesame Street writer Wallace Lemon. "We don't want kids to see Big Bird, Oscar, and Elmo; but rather, Jamaican, White guy, and Jew. Our goal is to rewire their brains so the first thing they think of when they meet a new friend in their neighborhood or at school is 'What race is that kid?'"

"This is the only way toward a brighter, more harmonious future, where the only thing we ever worry about is race. Well, and gender and pronouns and all that, of course."

Some parents have protested the move, saying that it's better when kids see this diverse group of characters just getting along despite their differences. These parents are currently being investigated as domestic terrorists by the FBI.

When your content of character sucks...

[WstateU]

So are the NBA and Fred taking a position that people should not have the right to defend themselves?

Kinda looks that way…

[ShockingButTrue]

This whole fiasco has been the equivalent of Idiocracy, but without the one-liners, unless one is watching CNN.

Bizzaro...

[WstateU]

[ShockerPrez]

Kinda looks that way…

Just more pablum from people dependent on toeing the line as to keep on the good side of the woke. That's the dangerous path.

People who don't give a **** about your product, Steve, are of no fear to you and you know it.

[SubGod22]

These are the same NBA guys who turn a blind eye to all of thr human rights abuses in China. Nothing they say means a damned thing

[WuDrWu]

Met Steve Kerr and Matt Mulebach at WCC when they were here for ALS fund raiser. Sat down and visited like we were old friends. As normal and friendly and polite and humble and regular a guy as you every would want to know. No idea when he suffered his brain injury after that.

[ShockerPrez]

If you asked Steve Kerr which he would prefer outside his house. A mob of Kyle Rittenhouses, or a mob of BLM protesters, or a mob of the asshats Kyle shot, do you think he would answer honestly?

Mob of Antifa or a hundred Kyle's.

Of course everyone knows the answer.

That"s why this is all lies and show. And about virtue signalling $$$.

You know what? Maybe Kaepernick is right, the league's are slave owners. But not how he thinks they are. They hold free thought captive and in bondage.

[1972Shocker]

Democrats Suggesting Businesses Give Black Employees a Mental Health Day After the Rittenhouse Verdict

https://redstate.com/brandon_morse/2021/11/23/democrats-suggesting-businesses-give-black-employees-a-mental-health-day-after-the-rittenhouse-verdict-n480486

The Vice-Chair of the Oregon black Caucus Gregory McKelvey posted a tweet saying that the verdict is going to make it hard for Black people to work and so they should be able to take off for a day or two to recoup.

“Employers, consider giving your Black employees a day or two off after the Rittenhouse verdict. Regardless of the outcome, it’s going to be hard for Black people to work and it isn’t fair to expect them to,” tweeted McKelvey.

---

Gee, what would they black employees need if the Rittenhouse case had actually had anything to do with race or the oppression of black people.

Sounds like a message to employers to avoid hiring blacks because they are too delicate to handle any stress, real or imagined. Now that is a racist message.

[C0|dB|00ded]

I know almost zero about this Rittenhouse deal. The one question I'd like to have answered is this: what could a young white dude at a BLM rally, carrying an AR-15, be looking for besides trouble?

I'm assuming he's conservative, had been listening to Hannity all afternoon long and finally said to himself, "**** this! I'm not gonna let a bunch of no-good ni***rs burn down my town". Then he picked up his rifle and (hoped) he would find some trouble.

Am I way off here?

It was made very clear to me at my CCL class that if you are going to be involved in a self-defense/lethal force situation, there better not be ANY way for the prosecution to link your prior behavior to the criminal actions of the perp. For example: no prior arguments, unfriendly interactions, taunts, threats, etc.

Without knowing anything about anything except what I stated above, it seems Rittenhouse should have been found guilty of a Class B felony. You DON'T go down to a BLM rally with a ****ing rifle unless it's to defend your own business (from the inside).

[SubGod22]

I know almost zero about this Rittenhouse deal. The one question I'd like to have answered is this: what could a young white dude at a BLM rally, carrying an AR-15, be looking for besides trouble?

I'm assuming he's conservative, had been listening to Hannity all afternoon long and finally said to himself, "**** this! I'm not gonna let a bunch of no-good ni***rs burn down my town". Then he picked up his rifle and (hoped) he would find some trouble.

Am I way off here?

It was made very clear to me at my CCL class that if you are going to be involved in a self-defense/lethal force situation, there better not be ANY way for the prosecution to link your prior behavior to the criminal actions of the perp. For example: no prior arguments, unfriendly interactions, taunts, threats, etc.

Without knowing anything about anything except what I stated above, it seems Rittenhouse should have been found guilty of a Class B felony. You DON'T go down to a BLM rally with a ****ing rifle unless it's to defend your own business (from the inside).

He spent most of his time in Kenosha that day, and previously, cleaning up and helping others with some basic first aid as well as putting out fires. He, and many others, were armed because they knew there were people in town who had violence in mind. There's video of the first guy killed threatening Rittenhouse and others earlier that day. Nothing happened, because there were a group of them that were armed and they kept their cool even though he was trying to bait them and threatening them at that time.

Kyle was apparently headed to another location at the request of the owner of that business and got separated from others and that's when the first guy tracked him down, threatened him and chased him. There was a gunshot from another "protester" and immediately following that the first guy grabbed at Kyle's weapon and he rightfully defended himself and fired. Apparently fired four rounds in just under three quarters of a second and neutralized that threat.

I'm not sure where any of the above indicates that he was looking for trouble.

After that, the man who fired the first shot and I believe his wife, indicated to everyone around that Kyle had attacked and was going on some killing spree. All he did at that point was try to get to police. He even called 911 to report the shooting and probable death of the first guy. He again only fired upon those who had attacked or were an immediate threat to do so. It's why he was found not guilty on every count.

You can argue all day if it was wise for him to be in Kenosha that night or not. Again, he'd been there previous days with no issues that I'm aware of. But there was absolutely nothing illegal about him being there. Poor judgement in and of itself is not a crime. Him carrying that weapon was not against Wisconsin law. Him putting out fires, cleaning up graffiti was not against the law. Him administering basic first aid to those protesters that had been hurt was not against the law. Being in the wrong place at the wrong time is not against the law. Defending yourself from grave bodily harm or death is not against the law. He had a track record up to and including that night of doing nothing but helping. You don't have to like the kid and may think he should have stayed home, but that's irrelevant to law. The right to self defense is one of the most important rights we have.

[C0|dB|00ded]

He spent most of his time in Kenosha that day, and previously, cleaning up and helping others with some basic first aid as well as putting out fires. He, and many others, were armed because they knew there were people in town who had violence in mind. There's video of the first guy killed threatening Rittenhouse and others earlier that day. Nothing happened, because there were a group of them that were armed and they kept their cool even though he was trying to bait them and threatening them at that time.

Kyle was apparently headed to another location at the request of the owner of that business and got separated from others and that's when the first guy tracked him down, threatened him and chased him. There was a gunshot from another "protester" and immediately following that the first guy grabbed at Kyle's weapon and he rightfully defended himself and fired. Apparently fired four rounds in just under three quarters of a second and neutralized that threat.

I'm not sure where any of the above indicates that he was looking for trouble.

After that, the man who fired the first shot and I believe his wife, indicated to everyone around that Kyle had attacked and was going on some killing spree. All he did at that point was try to get to police. He even called 911 to report the shooting and probable death of the first guy. He again only fired upon those who had attacked or were an immediate threat to do so. It's why he was found not guilty on every count.

You can argue all day if it was wise for him to be in Kenosha that night or not. Again, he'd been there previous days with no issues that I'm aware of. But there was absolutely nothing illegal about him being there. Poor judgement in and of itself is not a crime. Him carrying that weapon was not against Wisconsin law. Him putting out fires, cleaning up graffiti was not against the law. Him administering basic first aid to those protesters that had been hurt was not against the law. Being in the wrong place at the wrong time is not against the law. Defending yourself from grave bodily harm or death is not against the law. He had a track record up to and including that night of doing nothing but helping. You don't have to like th
e kid and may think he should have stayed home, but that's irrelevant to law. The right to self defense is one of the most important rights we have.

If that's exactly how it happened, then yes, he was technically within his rights. Definitely poor judgment carrying a rifle. A concealed pistol would attract much less attention. I frown on those who open carry anything. It's threatening behavior to most average folk.

If there's ANY evidence that he got involved in a heated verbal exchange with anybody prior to the shootings and didn't leave the area immediately, he's going to be found guilty most times. Fear of imminent threat and staying in the area after the threat occurred is a major legal hurdle to overcome.

"cleaning up graffiti was not against the law."

If by "cleaning up graffiti" you mean he was painting over fresh graffiti before the event was even over... that would be extremely unwise, and easily interpreted as aggressive/taunting behavior. It's like shouting over another protester, except you're doing it with a paint brush. The time to "clean up" is AFTER the chaos is over and protestors have dispersed.

I suspect he was passive-aggressively "helping" at the rally and armed to the tits while doing so. A tacit reminder that "he's in charge" and nobody better get in his way. That exact attitude is what the BLM people were/are protesting against. It's a good thing the perps he shot weren't black...

[C0|dB|00ded]

There's video of the first guy killed threatening Rittenhouse and others earlier that day. Nothing happened, because there were a group of them that were armed and they kept their cool even though he was trying to bait them and threatening them at that time.

Just read this again. This complicates matters immensely.

1) Rittenhouse receives a threat from a perp he ends up shooting hours later.

He's DAMN lucky he got off scot-free.

[Kung Wu]

The one question I'd like to have answered is this: what could a young white dude at a BLM rally, carrying an AR-15, be looking for besides trouble?

...

You DON'T go down to a BLM rally with a ****ing rifle unless it's to defend your own business (from the inside).

"BLM rally"