Kyle Rittenhouse Legal Proceedings - Come for the trial, stay for….

What do you think will happen?

  • Guilty on all charges

    Votes: 282 8.8%
  • Full Acquittal

    Votes: 1,077 33.7%
  • Mistral

    Votes: 264 8.3%
  • Mixture of verdicts

    Votes: 479 15.0%
  • Minecraft

    Votes: 213 6.7%
  • Roblox

    Votes: 132 4.1%
  • Runescape

    Votes: 203 6.3%
  • Somehow Guilty Of Two Mutually Exclusive Actions

    Votes: 514 16.1%
  • KYLE WILL SUBMIT TO BBC

    Votes: 35 1.1%

  • Total voters
    3,199
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
The first amendment states a right to free speech, not a right to intimidate. This is a cut and dry issue and anyone who disagrees with me is a flaming homosexual who probably likes anime.
screaming about anti kyle, anti-kenosha, pro-self defense isn't intimidation. as far as i know, they haven't threatened the jurors.
 
  • Dislike
Reactions: Youtube Celery
Also remember that this by design not accident.
The point is to have riots forever whenever they need them so having an impossible goal to demand is a sure way to have riots from here to the end of time
BLM riots are, arguably, more political terrorism than they are protests. The proof of this is in how people in all walks of life, including the government and justice system, become frozen in fear of them. Protests are meant to be a deterrent to poor behavior, yes, but the riots arguably inspire terror as their main goal, and manipulate people via fear.
The founding fathers were themselves corrupt bureaucrats who cracked down violently on any kind of dissent or insurrection after their rise to power. The whole Constitution's a mess of a trickery and bullshittery to placate the people they manipulated into bringing them control in the first place. Our rights end when the government decides they do, and it's always been that way.
That's because it's a complex thing to leave the door open to 'well you can violently rise up and fix the government if something goes wrong'. There's plenty of discussion via letters and diary entries from the founding fathers about this very matter because of it. The end conclusion was basically 'if you succeed in rising up and overthrowing the government to reinstitute the constitution as it was written, you were right to, if you fail to do so, you were wrong to try'. It's nonsensical, but so is the fact that the founding fathers staunchly believed in inalienable rights for the people that essentially extended to 'the government can't tell you to do anything' but then still had prisons and police that inherently violate those rights. For a functioning society to exist, certain compromises in their idealism must exist.
If a revolution is needed, the Constitution isn’t being followed anyway, so this could not be what ‘assembly’ refers to, not logically anyway. The Bill of Rights is obviously referring to rights during a compliant government.

There's steps between 'violent revolution' and 'picketing with paper signs'. My point is that a violent protest is within the rights intended by the founding fathers, provided it is actually a protest and not a looting riot where the people attending it actively don't care about the alleged reasons for the riot (see: early on in 2020 when the Floyd family asked for the riots to stop, and the protestors wearing George Floyd shirts said 'this ain't about him').
 
Screen Shot 2021-11-17 at 3.15.02 PM.png
 
I hope the Judge does the absolute best of his conscience and follows what he knows to be right. He has a lot of power in this situation. I have faith that he will let the truth and morality guide his actions. I've been doom pilling a bit today. I actually think there are a lot of good people in the justice system. I believe the right thing will be done. No need to worry so much.
 
I hope the Judge does the absolute best of his conscience and follows what he knows to be right. He has a lot of power in this situation. I have faith that he will let the truth and morality guide his actions. I've been doom pilling a bit today. I actually think there are a lot of good people in the justice system. I believe the right thing will be done. No need to worry so much.
I hope you're right, but I seriously doubt that.
 
screaming about anti kyle, anti-kenosha, pro-self defense isn't intimidation. as far as i know, they haven't threatened the jurors.
Screaming is intimidation in itself. If you can’t express your speech in a calm, non-spergy manner, it doesn’t deserve to be heard, and you deserve to be beaten with a whip for acting like a five-year-old.
 
You're gonna have to link it because I don't see him in any part of those quotes nor do I see you replying to him.
“Chauvin and Kyle's convictions will set down four precedents: that police officers can't restrain criminals, and that if you are attacked in public you can't defend yourself if the attackers support state-sponsored terrorism like BLM. Third, the media decides your guilt and may influence the outcome however they'd like. Fourth, intimidation of juries and even judges is permissable and even politicians can incite riots and violence if the verdict isn't what they want it to be.

It fucked up badly enough with Chauvin, and if it fucks up with Kyle then the Justice System in our country will what little legitimacy it had left.”

It’s right there lol.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Haram Exercise
I hope the Judge does the absolute best of his conscience and follows what he knows to be right. He has a lot of power in this situation. I have faith that he will let the truth and morality guide his actions. I've been doom pilling a bit today. I actually think there are a lot of good people in the justice system. I believe the right thing will be done. No need to worry so much.
what he knows is right is to let the process play out. it is what it is.
 
Jury is almost certainly hang up on a political matter. Acquitting Kyle would mean you can indeed shoot a motherfucker, even as a 17 y/o white boy (at least in Wisconsin).
And that's a problem. It's obvious that self-defense is justified in all of the charges and he is not guilty. It's not just potential riot and whatnot, the implication is far bigger than that and they know it. No lefty ideologue would want to hand the right this W, even if it means dooming an innocent young man to rot in prison.
The Left™ is really just a window that is perpetually in motion. It travels further and further from whoever is locked within its frame at any given moment. Anyone with any sense of forethought should realize it's just a matter of time until The Left™ decides you are no longer a member of The Left™. Then when you consider the ways The Left™ treats anyone they see as an enemy of The Left™, why wouldn't you want robust rights to self-defense?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back