OT LeBron James said Kyle Rittenhouse should 'knock it off' after the teen cried during murder trial

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
STOMP said:
Australia would be a good one for you to look into. Here's one article to get you started.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-35048251

btw like most Americans, I support responsible gun ownership. To me that means registering your gun, being required to take/pass safety courses & banning assault type automatic weapons. Though it would never happen, if it were up to me I'd ban hand guns as they are obviously the type most often used in crimes, especially murders. My Sis and her family are all hunters and I'm looking forward to our Christmas Elk presents.

STOMP
Click to expand...
And after taking that drastic action Australia still has shootings, still has mass murders (granted, none as bad as their largest ever), and their violent crime and murder rates dropped almost the same as ours did here in the US.

The UK went through a similar change as Australia at about the same time. Similar results.

All while we let the assault weapons ban expire, and more than doubled the number of guns in our country.

If guns were the catalyst our trends over the same timeline wouldn't have been possible.

It's almost like the economic growth and stability all 3 countries experienced over that time frame had far more to do with violent crime and murder rates than the number of and access to guns did...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate_by_decade

https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2015/crime-in-the-u.s.-2015/tables/table-1

http://appsso.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/nui/show.do?dataset=crim_off_cat&lang=en

http://www.ausstats.abs.gov.au/auss...8BCDCF9DCA2578B700119690/$File/45100_2010.pdf
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot_20211117-195331_Sheets.jpg
    Screenshot_20211117-195331_Sheets.jpg
    112.9 KB · Views: 1
Last edited:
Bottom line - compare the US to like-countries, not Central American or the Caribbean, and then tell me the US doesn’t have a problem or stand out. Not talking about totals, but per capita. We get it- some of you like guns. And I’m sure you’re all the ideal gun owners but this isn’t about you. This is about the fact that people in America are obsessed with guns and deathly afraid of broaching the subject and implement some stricter laws.
 
calvin natt said:
Bottom line - compare the US to like-countries, not Central American or the Caribbean, and then tell me the US doesn’t have a problem or stand out. Not talking about totals, but per capita. We get it- some of you like guns. And I’m sure you’re all the ideal gun owners but this isn’t about you. This is about the fact that people in America are obsessed with guns and deathly afraid of broaching the subject and implement some stricter laws.
Click to expand...
Same people who own guns and constantly fear the government taking them away are often the same people who fall into the category of political extremism as well.

IE: People who fear their government and are exceptionally passionate/dispassionate about political beliefs or groups.
 
STOMP said:
Silly point. Individual states having gun control works as well as a smoking section on a plane.

STOMP
Click to expand...
About as well as any gun control would work here in the US. But good point.

So show me all of the countries who've seen drastic improvement after instituting gun control?
 
calvin natt said:
Bottom line - compare the US to like-countries, not Central American or the Caribbean, and then tell me the US doesn’t have a problem or stand out. Not talking about totals, but per capita. We get it- some of you like guns. And I’m sure you’re all the ideal gun owners but this isn’t about you. This is about the fact that people in America are obsessed with guns and deathly afraid of broaching the subject and implement some stricter laws.
Click to expand...
Stricter laws have been tried and they don't work. The states with the lowest crime rates have the most guns.

There is not even correlation, let alone causation.
 
calvin natt said:
So they buy a 200 safe and get a tax break worth more than that, and don’t use the safe? Fuck that. So now we are paying people to do what they should be doing?
Click to expand...
Yeah, gun safes aren't the problem either. Most gun owners have a gun safe.
 
calvin natt said:
So they buy a 200 safe and get a tax break worth more than that, and don’t use the safe? Fuck that. So now we are paying people to do what they should be doing?
Click to expand...
Maybe it should be more structured like
-If taxpayer claims independents
-And Taxpayer owns a gun
-And Taxpayer buys a gun safe
-Then Taxpayer gets Break of x

Basically, if you have children, and you own a gun, and you buy a gun safe - the gun safe company will not give you a% off for having children, but the government will.
 
Idk, maybe anybody who is staunchly in defense of this kid who has killed others with a gun could also think about gun violence and youth in America.

Look at the history, in your lifetime. I don’t need to name specific events, you can remember them yourself and if you can’t then that is evidence of an issue.
 
Flash powder used in photography and cinematography is proof that we ourselves as humanity realized that our use of gunpowder as a means of weaponry in warfare was wrong, and subconsciously sought to find non violent avenues for its use.

Convince me otherwise.
 
PDXFonz said:
Idk, maybe anybody who is staunchly in defense of this kid who has killed others with a gun could also think about gun violence and youth in America.

Look at the history, in your lifetime. I don’t need to name specific events, you can remember them yourself and if you can’t then that is evidence of an issue.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure who's staunchly in defense of this kid. If there is evidence showing he assaulted them he should be in jail. I haven't seen that evidence.

If there is evidence that they assaulted him then he acted in self defense. I've seen that footage, and it appears the prosecution had better footage of that than they showed the court. So... It just seems like the prosecution is kind of crooked.

The judge ruled that the kid didn't break any laws by having the gun, so none of that matters. Why he was there doesn't matter.

Who attacked who is all that matters.
 
Phatguysrule said:
I'm not sure who's staunchly in defense of this kid. If there is evidence showing he assaulted them he should be in jail. I haven't seen that evidence.

If there is evidence that they assaulted him then he acted in self defense. I've seen that footage, and it appears the prosecution had better footage of that than they showed the court. So... It just seems like the prosecution is kind of crooked.

The judge ruled that the kid didn't break any laws by having the gun, so none of that matters. Why he was there doesn't matter.

Who attacked who is all that matters.
Click to expand...
Nah, bullshit

Why did you drive to Portland from Newberg when you knew that the situation was hostile.

PS - If I’m your lawyer I’m telling you to claim it was to give medical aid because that’s the only thing which makes any semblance of sense, and it is a clear attempt at eliciting empathetic response from the observers and jury.

Its astonishing to me.

Cause it’s like

“Why no sir, I was in the area 21 miles away from my home to pick up Chinese food. Then all the sudden this magical rabbit excreted an AR-15 Non-Automatic rifle and told me to go save the people in the riots. So I set my MooShoo Pork down and headed a few blocks over when I was attacked and my gun killed the people who attacked me. Why thank goodness for that magical rabbits AR-15 sir because if not for it, I think I may be a goner.”
 
PDXFonz said:
Nah, bullshit

Why did you drive to Portland from Newberg when you knew that the situation was hostile.

PS - If I’m your lawyer I’m telling you to claim it was to give medical aid because that’s the only thing which makes any semblance of sense, and it is a clear attempt at eliciting empathetic response from the observers and jury.

Its astonishing to me.

Cause it’s like

“Why no sir, I was in the area 21 miles away from my home to pick up Chinese food. Then all the sudden this magical rabbit excreted an AR-15 Non-Automatic rifle and told me to go save the people in the riots. So I set my MooShoo Pork down and headed a few blocks over when I was attacked and my gun killed the people who attacked me. Why thank goodness for that magical rabbits AR-15 sir because if not for it, I think I may be a goner.”
Click to expand...
There is no law against driving to the town his father lives in.

I understand that you want him to be guilty, but there just isn't much evidence I've seen to support a conviction.
 
Last edited:
Phatguysrule said:
There is no law against driving to the town his father lives in.

I understand that you want him to be guilty, but there just isn't much evidence I've seen to support it.
Click to expand...
I don’t care if he’s guilty or not.

What I want is for shit like this to not happen.
 
PDXFonz said:
I don’t care if he’s guilty or not.

What I want is for shit like this to not happen.
Click to expand...
Shit like this will happen until we drastically improve our gini coefficient.

There is no gun control that could ever change it.
 
jonnyboy said:
The world must be a really scary place when you watch televised news. Thank god I don’t.
Click to expand...
Ever since Trump it's been a scary place. So, bury your head in the sand and it will all go away.
 
PDXFonz said:
Same people who own guns and constantly fear the government taking them away are often the same people who fall into the category of political extremism as well.

IE: People who fear their government and are exceptionally passionate/dispassionate about political beliefs or groups.
Click to expand...

Not true at all.

Edit. You said some people. This is not the majority of gun owners and gun rights advocates. Some are even democrats.
 
STOMP said:
Kyle's first victim Joseph Rosenbaum, did not have a gun. Kyle claimed he did to the police, but he didn't. Prior to throwing a plastic bag at KR, Rittenhouse had pointed his gun at him and others, which is assault. This has been testified to. Lecturing others about sharing incorrect info is rich.

STOMP
Click to expand...
If 3 people are coming at me and I see 2 with guns and the other is hitting me with a weapon I'm probably not wasting much time searching them for guns.
 
So lets toss an analogy out there.
If i trespass onto private property with an illegal gun in the woods and im pointing it at animals and then a bear attacks me. Am i then not able to be allowed to defend myself because the gun is illegal?

yes im guilty of tresspass. Yes im guilty of possession of illegal firearms. But im guilty of murdering a bear too??? When it attacked me with two other bears???

doesnt seem right to me…..

and my motive for tresspassing is irrelevant. Maybe i was trying to prevent a forest fire or maybe i was hunting deer….irrelevant…
 
Rittenhouse's lawyers have been trying to get the trial thrown out because of an issue with the video because the Jury is taking to long and scaring them.
 
Tyrant of Ants said:
The Arbery's case has a lot more damning evidence against the defendants. The three that ganged up to murder him will fry... hopefully.
Click to expand...

Yeah, one of the McMichaels took the stand and claimed self defense. Using the Rittenhouse, he grabbed my gun defense. Yeah, Arbery grabbed it to stop him from using it on him after they chased him down in their trucks and cornered him. Arbery was defending himself. He was fighting for his life and the McMichaels took it.

An officer testified at most Arbery would have got a ticket for trespassing. Instead he got murdered.
 
Chris Craig said:
Rittenhouse's lawyers have been trying to get the trial thrown out because of an issue with the video because the Jury is taking to long and scaring them.
Click to expand...
No. They gave the jury a much clearer version of a video clip than they gave the defense. That is incredibly shady and could have altered how the defense handled the case.

Some of you all are why nobody should ever be in a position where you are in court. I've been on a jury before. It was disgusting how much people use their feelings instead of looking at the law and trying to put no emotion into deciding if the prosecution did their part providing enough evidence to convict. Or if the defense showed enough doubt in the evidence provided. Or showed why the law supports why their client should not be convicted.

Either someone broke the law or they did not. The evidence has to be there. You have to follow the law and only use the evidence that has been presented.
 
SlyPokerCat said:
No. They gave the jury a much clearer version of a video clip than they gave the defense. That is incredibly shady and could have altered how the defense handled the case.

Some of you all are why nobody should ever be in a position where you are in court. I've been on a jury before. It was disgusting how much people use their feelings instead of looking at the law and trying to put no emotion into deciding if the prosecution did their part providing enough evidence to convict. Or if the defense showed enough doubt in the evidence provided. Or showed why the law supports why their client should not be convicted.

Either someone broke the law or they did not. The evidence has to be there. You have to follow the law and only use the evidence that has been presented.
Click to expand...

It got compacted after being transferred from an iphone to an Android. It wasn't on purpose.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top