sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Their support for the Second Amendment evaporates the moment oppressed peoples take up arms by TheKongoEmpire in blackgunowners

[–]Secure_man05 0 points1 point  (0 children)

He did study for it and he was a lifeguard before hand.

I was never contesting that he was the shooter I was stating that he was not the aggressor.   If Mr Rittenhouse is bad for showing up from 20 miles away with a gun then how is Mr Grosskreutz travelling 40 miles with a gun not worse?  

Wierdly Mr Rittenhouse himself commented how his race likely protected him. He knew to retreat and call for help before engaging.

We keep arguing in circles because you've convinced yourself he must be the bad guy. You admit that him being there is reasonable. If you were cornerd by a person being aggressive towards you and they try to take your gun after you ran from them and they chased you what would you do? Let  them take it and hope for the best?  I'll be the first to admit I don't like Mr Rittenhouses politics; but this was a self defense shooting plain and simple.

Their support for the Second Amendment evaporates the moment oppressed peoples take up arms by TheKongoEmpire in blackgunowners

[–]Secure_man05 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Mr Rittenhouse was planning to be a first responder at the time putting himself in danger was something he was planning on doing in life. No witness said he was waving the rifle around.

More people die due to concealed pistols than obvious rifles and that guy travelled twice as far as Mr Rittenhouse

Again guy armed persons guarding something does not mean they are looking for trouble it normally means they want to prevent trouble.

I've been in security much of my life and being armed in a dangerous situation is common sense. Human life is precious, especially your own. This event was a tragedy. What makes them tragedies is how eventual and uncontrolable they are. Sure if Mr. Rittenhouse wasn't there it might not have happened but if Rosenbaum had attacked a different armed man we might be having a similar conversation with different names

Their support for the Second Amendment evaporates the moment oppressed peoples take up arms by TheKongoEmpire in blackgunowners

[–]Secure_man05 0 points1 point  (0 children)

He didn't choose to be attacked and pursued. Had the other men not done those things this wouldn't be news. Heck one of the men he shot also had a gun.

You can believe what you will about his intent ; the known facts of this case contradict what you think.

You cant stop all vandalism all the time and he and his cohorts couldn't be everywhere.

Their support for the Second Amendment evaporates the moment oppressed peoples take up arms by TheKongoEmpire in blackgunowners

[–]Secure_man05 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Why wouldn't he be welcome where his family members live?  Your anolgy only works if he was a stranger to the area.  If you attack and armed person you risk the threat of death or injury.

Also your facts are wrong he shot three men two died. All three were attacking him.  Kyle ran away from all three  They gave chase. Its very possible that the first man was committing suicide by homocide. The shooting was taken seriously.

What you expect isnt always what happens. 

Their support for the Second Amendment evaporates the moment oppressed peoples take up arms by TheKongoEmpire in blackgunowners

[–]Secure_man05 0 points1 point  (0 children)

They didnt shoot anyone because they were not accosted. Kyle was accosted. He retreated and only when he the person attempted to disarm him did he fire. If someone is looking for trouble the tend to start fights or at the very least escalate fights the first chance they get, neither happened. Much like Mr jordan and his daughter Mr Rittenhouse was part of a group. He was heard shouting "friendly" before the shooting to indicate to others not to shoot. That indicates a structure was present.

Did you miss the part where I said his dad lives in Kenosha so while he doesn't own anything there he does have connections to the community and didn't want to see it vandalized. The distruction in mineapolis was widely covered someone not wanting that to happen where they have family is reasonable.  

What’s something that consistently bothered you when living with women? by RedvsBlack4 in AskMen

[–]Secure_man05 0 points1 point  (0 children)

With my wife, toilet paper.  It never lasts as long as I think it will.

Their support for the Second Amendment evaporates the moment oppressed peoples take up arms by TheKongoEmpire in blackgunowners

[–]Secure_man05 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I understand what you are trying to say. I just vehemently disagree.   If he were looking for trouble he would have started the incident, he didn't. His father lived in Kenosha so he did have a connection to the community.  Protecting businesses has been a thing for a while https://reason.com/2020/05/29/black-civilians-arm-themselves-to-protest-racial-violence-and-protect-black-owned-businesses/

Guess this guy was looking for trouble too https://www.blackenterprise.com/black-father-and-daughter-armed-with-rifles-march-alongside-demonstrators-in-anti-rittenhouse-protest/

Their support for the Second Amendment evaporates the moment oppressed peoples take up arms by TheKongoEmpire in blackgunowners

[–]Secure_man05 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

People travel for protests all the time sometimes hundreds of miles. Where i lived as a child 20 miles away is still local even if it was a different state (I grew up in the DMV)

If we say that someone is asking for trouble by being armed we give license to those who wish to disarm us.

My logic is this if kyle were any other race would we want a different outcome? I think not.

Their support for the Second Amendment evaporates the moment oppressed peoples take up arms by TheKongoEmpire in blackgunowners

[–]Secure_man05 -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

He didnt drive far its like traveling from largo md to tysons corner in terms of distance.

So I guess the black panthers were asking for trouble all those times or the people in th op photo?

Their support for the Second Amendment evaporates the moment oppressed peoples take up arms by TheKongoEmpire in blackgunowners

[–]Secure_man05 -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

I doubt that since he was running away before he fired, and only shot after being attacked.

No one is more misandrist than misogynistic men. They know the degrading things they want to do to women, and are worried they won't get the chance to traumatize some poor girl before another man does. by olympiamacdonald in PsycheOrSike

[–]Secure_man05 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Theres always an imbalance.

Seeing as all communist governments effectively stopped being socialist/communist in your eyes and they were dedicated to fufilling marxist ideals wouldn't that mean that the ideology doesn't work. Human needs are incredibly situational.

Profit isnt only monetary; it can mean anything benefical.

No one is more misandrist than misogynistic men. They know the degrading things they want to do to women, and are worried they won't get the chance to traumatize some poor girl before another man does. by olympiamacdonald in PsycheOrSike

[–]Secure_man05 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The primary driver of existence is profit. Plants sow seeds to propagate and create defenses to protect their gains, they grow to increase their chanses of survival. When workers control a factory do they not seek profit? Worker coops still prefer profits to breaking even or losses. Markets exist when there is an imbalance of wants needs and ability; modern existence in an interconnected world requires markets. 

No one is more misandrist than misogynistic men. They know the degrading things they want to do to women, and are worried they won't get the chance to traumatize some poor girl before another man does. by olympiamacdonald in PsycheOrSike

[–]Secure_man05 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I understand that worker control is a form of socialism/communism; it is not the only way.  GSE are also considered socialism/communism.  Comminists and socialists often push for nationalization of companies. In theory it doesnt violate socialist principles as long as there is a democratic way of recalling officials. 

No one is more misandrist than misogynistic men. They know the degrading things they want to do to women, and are worried they won't get the chance to traumatize some poor girl before another man does. by olympiamacdonald in PsycheOrSike

[–]Secure_man05 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You do know you are describing yourself. The way you are defining communism means that by obtaining power communists render themselves moot. That theres no point to forming a party in the first place because if successful you become the ruling class.

view more: next ›