Canadian Money Forum banner
301 - 320 of 345 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,424 Posts
My point is, and remains that he was not found guilty in the civil trial. There was never any spin, or flip flopping.

I understand your lack of knowledge created a misunderstanding on your part, that you clearly describe above.

But that's on you, not me.
... so what's with the assumption in your post#289 on the possibility that I was doing it with malice? Not on you, then who?

... I'm not calling you a flip flopper, I'm calling you a person who makes unfounded claims.
I'm not sure if it is out of malice, or a lack of understanding. ...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,424 Posts
The only difference is the jury decided the defendants provoked the incident, which negated their self defence claim.

In the Rittenhouse trial, the judge wouldn't let any evidence into the trial that revealed why Rittenhouse was in Kenosha.
... exactly. The kid was up to no good. Perhaps finding an opportunity to do some target-shootings with his assault rifle in the name of self-defense subsequently. Or his "heroic act" claim for the "need to defend properties and lives there" as if there's no police dep't there.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
82 Posts
The only difference is the jury decided the defendants provoked the incident, which negated their self defence claim.

In the Rittenhouse trial, the judge wouldn't let any evidence into the trial that revealed why Rittenhouse was in Kenosha.
Yes, the circumstances were similar to the Rittenhouse trial. The difference is that the attackers were charged in one trial and the person who defended himself was charged in the other trial.

Do you have a point? The verdict in both cases seems fairly clear and just.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17,139 Posts
Discussion Starter · #305 ·
Heroes don't go to a different city to defend an empty building by shooting at 4 people and killing 2 of them.

Nobody else shot anyone there. No protestors or other people "protecting businesses" they didn't own.

It is called vigilante law and hopefully the Arbery verdict puts an end to the hero worship of it.

Now he admits he met with Proud Boys members but blames his lawyer. He says he flashed the OK sign but says he didn't know what it means.

This kid will have a hard time staying out of trouble.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Beaver101

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,424 Posts
^ Next career for the kid once he's off (or maybe simultaneously with the suing circus) is a reality tv show.

I don't get it, since he's so much into this "vigilante law" sh1t, why don't he join the US Army first and display his patriotism there whilst getting some real practice.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,298 Posts
... so what's with the assumption in your post#289 on the possibility that I was doing it with malice? Not on you, then who?
I took being called a flip flopper as an insult, as you were attacking my credibility.

I consider unfounded personal attacks malicious.

I left open the fact that you were actually not acting maliciously, if you recall I actually said.
" I'm not sure if it is out of malice, or a lack of understanding. "


If you're making false accusations and personal attacks that you know are false, I consider that malicious.
If you're making false accusations and personal attacks, but you honestly think they are true, I don't consider that malicious, because the intent is different.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,298 Posts
... exactly. The kid was up to no good. Perhaps finding an opportunity to do some target-shootings with his assault rifle in the name of self-defense subsequently. Or his "heroic act" claim for the "need to defend properties and lives there" as if there's no police dep't there.
There literally was no police department there, they were ordered to stand back from the rioters.

I'm okay if people "target shoot" in legitimate self defense those who are actively trying to seriously injure or kill them.

So what, a few stupid criminals got hurt attacking a 17 yr old kid, I don't really care.
Their actions showed that they were still a threat to society, and the law was unable to stop them, so one of their victims did.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,424 Posts
There literally was no police department there, they were ordered to stand back from the rioters.

I'm okay if people "target shoot" in legitimate self defense those who are actively trying to seriously injure or kill them.

So what, a few stupid criminals got hurt attacking a 17 yr old kid, I don't really care.
Their actions showed that they were still a threat to society, and the law was unable to stop them, so one of their victims did.
... you really don't get it. Did he needed to be there? To play victim?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,424 Posts
I took being called a flip flopper as an insult, as you were attacking my credibility.

I consider unfounded personal attacks malicious.

I left open the fact that you were actually not acting maliciously, if you recall I actually said.
" I'm not sure if it is out of malice, or a lack of understanding. "


If you're making false accusations and personal attacks that you know are false, I consider that malicious.
If you're making false accusations and personal attacks, but you honestly think they are true, I don't consider that malicious, because the intent is different.
... so which is it? I have been accused and called everything on this forum ... a racist, a hypocrite, a d1ck ... so many I lost count or recall exactly.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,522 Posts
... you really don't get it. Did he needed to be there? To play victim?
Him being there doesn't mean he should be assaulted.
Same as woman wearing a short skirt doesn't excuse rape.

Like was said before.
In one case the victim was on trial.
In other case the victim was murdered and attackers were on trial.

Victim got exonerated
Attackers got guilty verdict.

Both cases simply show that despite politicians, defamations, threat from protesters, and malice from mass media, the jury system in United States still works.
Not sure for how long, but it is good to know that as of today it is still functioning.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17,139 Posts
Discussion Starter · #315 ·
Being found liable in a civil trial is the same outcome as being found guilty in a criminal trial.

The difference is you pay money instead of going to prison.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Beaver101

·
Registered
Joined
·
17,139 Posts
Discussion Starter · #316 ·
  • Like
Reactions: Beaver101

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,502 Posts
I wonder if anyone will have this thought…….

”I hate my neighbour! I’m going over to her place….and I’m provoking her until she takes a swing at me….then I’m unloading on her with AR15.” - self defence and all that.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17,139 Posts
Discussion Starter · #318 · (Edited)
These guys already tried that and might have got away with it, as the prosecutor didn't lay charges for awhile due to lack of evidence.

It wasn't until the third suspect's video turned up and there were public protests that these guys were arrested.

The dummies recorded themselves doing the crime, but didn't think it would matter.

If there was no tape.....they would have killed the guy and gotten away with it.

I watched the judge reading the jury's verdicts and the son looked shocked, and the dad took a long hard look at the 3rd guy.

You could tell what he was thinking.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
82 Posts
I wonder if anyone will have this thought…….

”I hate my neighbour! I’m going over to her place….and I’m provoking her until she takes a swing at me….then I’m unloading on her with AR15.” - self defence and all that.
But that's not what happened. Well, unless you consider running from an armed thug to be provocation. 🤣

Why don't you talk about what actually happened instead of making stuff up? That's what this whole thing is really about. The angry left just found out that people might fight back and it terrifies them.
 
301 - 320 of 345 Posts
Top