Kyle Rittenhouse - The Truth in 11 Minutes

How much time must elapse between shootings for it to no longer be classified an active shooting?
15 seconds?
1 minute?
3 minutes?
There may be some confusion among the general public. It would be great if you could set us straight.

Let's start with active shooters aren't generally associated with having a still loaded and functioning weapon trying to get away vs, you know, "actively" shooting people.

Dropping the first guy and start dropping everyone approaching? That'd match the definition much better.
 
So, going back to my point a couple days ago, your problem is that you don't support the 2nd Amendment.
...and taking it a step further, you believe that anyone that legally possesses a firearm in public in accordance with their U.S. Constitutional rights, deserves to die.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rickyvol77
I'll try to break it down to a level you can process.
I was for the kid making better decisions that would have avoided the senseless killings. Once he stupidly put himself in the position he found himself and decided to shoot and kill a person because he "felt" threatened, it would have been good by me had they taken each other out. It would have saved the life of the guy with a skateboard if nothing else.

Are you denying that Rosenbaum was an actual threat? Do you think if he caught the kid, he would’ve just gave him a strong talking to?

Here’s what most insane. You want Rittenhouse to die because you consider him a vigilante despite 0 actions of vigilantism from him. His only actions prior to being attacked were providing medical aid, putting out fires, and removing graffiti.

Yet the guy with the skateboard who had a horrific criminal history (threatened his brother and grandmother at knife point for example) who attacked someone with a skateboard while they were trying to run to the police, you wish he had been the one to live?

Based on what? Just nonsense partisan beliefs?
 
Not too general at all. The whole schtick was designed to be divisive. The silly name calling, the demonizing of the other side, the expressed aversion to compromise.

Oh wait! You mean there has been name calling! Demonizing of the other side! Unwillingness to compromise! And you believe this only occurs on the right? Peoples' exhibit 1:
luthervol said:
Which side of the divide is most steeped in ignorance is obvious


And if we needed more evidence of divisiveness by the right, Peoples' exhibit 2:
It's the foundation of Trumpism and how our society was conditioned to actually nominate and elect such a horrendously despicable human. The people who were pre-conditioned actually laughed at the repulsiveness.
I have to admit, I do not have a clue as to what the second line means, but appears to be intended as an insult. To someone. Maybe.

I listened to Rush Limbaugh over the years as I used to drive a considerable amount. I have to say it appears you listened to him very little, if at all, and got your talking points from others who did not listen to him either. Rush was unfailingly polite and respectful to everyone. He actively encouraged those with opposing points of view to call and they would be moved to the head of line. You might want to look up some recent videos of his producer "Snerdly" that are available. Based on your characterization of the man, you know absolutely nothing about him.

With regards to FOX, they certainly have their share of ideologues. I admit I cannot stand to listen to Sean Hannity, but do give him props for being a pretty good interviewer, when he is not interrupting his guest. I Like Gutfeld, the Five, Outnumbered and Tucker, although Tucker can also kind of go off the rails sometimes. They are certainly no worse than CNN, MSNBC, NBC, CBS, ABC and the rest. Those are just plain laughable. CNN could not make a truthful report if their lives depended on it.
 
So, going back to my point a couple days ago, your problem is that you don't support the 2nd Amendment.
If a person isn't in support of a 4 year old having the legal right to take a machine gun to pre-k, does that make them anti 2a?

Just trying to establish a baseline.
 
...and taking it a step further, you believe that anyone that legally possesses a firearm in public in accordance with their U.S. Constitutional rights, deserves to die.
I guess that was meant for me, but it's to absurd to warrant a reply.
 
You wouldn't say that the more stupid person always dies and the less stupid person always lives, would you?

Probability studies would say that would be the most likely outcome. For instance, is it more stupid to reach for a gun or have the gun? Would it seem more stupid to have the skateboard or the gun in a confrontation?
 
Why are you comparing multiple riots in multiple states to single riots in single cities?
Your game is asinine.
I was comparing events that cause damage. They do have that in common don't you think?
Still waiting to hear why the scenario with your daughter is different from a legal and moral standpoint to your illogical and irrational take
 

VN Store



Back
Top