The Rittenhouse Trial

drummerboy said:

We barely qualify as a civilized country these days.

We never have. Racist country is more accurate.

Some thoughts:    What kind of a state is it that allows people to walk around with assault rifles and it is not a crime?  Too many states now allow this and it results in the kind of violence seen in this Rittenhouse case.   If NJ lawmakers ever start to consider this allowing to carry assault rifles, then we are in bigger trouble with gun violence than we are now.   I think I read or heard on the news that some gun groups may be suing NJ and NY for overly restrictive gun laws that they say are unconstitutional.    I think I read that there are now more guns than people in the US.   Who is making money off the gun manufacture and sales?....follow the money.  

RobertRoe said:

Some thoughts:    What kind of a state is it that allows people to walk around with assault rifles and it is not a crime?  Too many states now allow this and it results in the kind of violence seen in this Rittenhouse case.   If NJ lawmakers ever start to consider this allowing to carry assault rifles, then we are in bigger trouble with gun violence than we are now.   I think I read or heard on the news that some gun groups may be suing NJ and NY for overly restrictive gun laws that they say are unconstitutional.    I think I read that there are now more guns than people in the US.   Who is making money off the gun manufacture and sales?....follow the money.  

Another reason why it's good that Jack Ciattarelli lost.  He was open to messing with NJ's gun laws.

I guess if you are going to allow people to walk around with guns you have to expect them to use  the guns and, apparently, you can't punish them from doing so. 

What prevent anyone from stalking this guy Kyle with a gun and then shooting him in self-defense when he points a gun back or tries to grab the other guy's gun.

I am not sure if I were much younger if I would continue to live in this country.

nohero said:

Another reason why it's good that Jack Ciattarelli lost.  He was open to messing with NJ's gun laws.

SCOTUS is getting set to make that close to moot, aren't they?

RobertRoe said:

Some thoughts:    What kind of a state is it that allows people to walk around with assault rifles and it is not a crime?  Too many states now allow this and it results in the kind of violence seen in this Rittenhouse case.   If NJ lawmakers ever start to consider this allowing to carry assault rifles, then we are in bigger trouble with gun violence than we are now.   I think I read or heard on the news that some gun groups may be suing NJ and NY for overly restrictive gun laws that they say are unconstitutional.    I think I read that there are now more guns than people in the US.   Who is making money off the gun manufacture and sales?....follow the money.  

unfortunately SCOTUS will be ruling on a NY case that will likely make it unconstitutional (or at least very difficult) to ban open-carry.

https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=scotus+open-carry+new+york

The great thing about "self-defense" and "stand your ground" is that you get to decide who gets to have those rights and who doesn't after the fact.

dave said:

The great thing about "self-defense" and "stand your ground" is that you get to decide who gets to have those rights and who doesn't after the fact.

I think we all know that that decision is already made beforehand, based on the color of your skin. Imagine an african american kid showed up at a protest with an AK 47? I can't, because he would not even make it to the protest.

basil said:

I think we all know that that decision is already made beforehand, based on the color of your skin. Imagine an african american kid showed up at a protest with an AK 47? I can't, because he would not even make it to the protest.

And yet, given the verdict, does it not make sense for African Americans and their supporters to show up armed?

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/black-panthers-california-1967_n_568accfce4b014efe0db2f40

STANV said:

basil said:

I think we all know that that decision is already made beforehand, based on the color of your skin. Imagine an african american kid showed up at a protest with an AK 47? I can't, because he would not even make it to the protest.

And yet, given the verdict, does it not make sense for African Americans and their supporters to show up armed?

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/black-panthers-california-1967_n_568accfce4b014efe0db2f40

Sadly, they should. For one thing, it's the fastest way to get Republicans to support gun control.

basil said:

Sadly, they should. For one thing, it's the fastest way to get Republicans to support gun control.

Open carry was legal in California until the Black Panthers started openly carrying.  Governor Reagan put an end to that post haste.

Have just read that Fox have arranged for that creep to be interviewed by Carlson next week. Two questions:

a) why??? (Hasn’t the murderous twerp had enough publicity?)

b) does it have to be during Thanksgiving week?! 

- Despairing, on the Gold Coast.

joanne said:

Have just read that Fox have arranged for that creep to be interviewed by Carlson next week. Two questions:

a) why??? (Hasn’t the murderous twerp had enough publicity?)

b) does it have to be during Thanksgiving week?! 

- Despairing, on the Gold Coast.

Someone else more familiar with these things, please correct me -- but I think the families can still sue Rittenhouse in civil court. Perhaps if he gets talking at the interview, he'll say something that ends up costing him more in the end...

I wonder if that's why is attorney is pushing back against that interview and other offers/publicity right now.

Turns out Fox was embedded with Rittenhouse throughout the entire trial.  There's likely an agreement as to exclusivity with Fox.

Sigh, to both ways of thinking. 
The last few years, we’ve started to starve such folk of their ‘PR’ - don’t publish their names, barely mention details of the crimes or court cases, try not to mention the localities or victims’ names… very sparse reporting indeed. 

Trumpenstein said rittenhouse called and asked if he could meet up at marelago…I think it’s the other way around.