• GNUTup@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    10 days ago

    I remember when I was a freshman in high school, I worked at a McDonald’s. For whatever reason, I owned a Burger King t shirt. As a 14 year old, I thought it would be funny to wear the Burger King shirt to work. I figured it would annoy my boss and might get a few reactions out of other people. It didn’t work, but there were no real consequences because of it.

    You really can’t see how Rittenhouse did a similar thing? He went to a protest knowing he was diametrically opposite, politically, to people actually protesting and he did it with a big ass gun. Like my Burger King t shirt, this was very clearly sending a message of “I am your enemy.” And the message wasn’t on a harmless shirt, it was on a deadly big ass gun.

    You really truly believe he had no intention of killing? Are you dumb?

    • Tb0n3
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      9 days ago

      Do you remember the part of the story where nobody cared about the shirt? It’s possible people cared but didn’t say anything because they didn’t want to cause a conflict. The same is true of a gun. You’re allowed to carry a gun and people are allowed to disagree but they are not allowed to attack you for it. Not without consequences anyway.

      • GNUTup@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        9 days ago

        If I’m just using my eyes, the difference between a good guy with a gun and a bad guy with a gun is the bad guy is shooting at people. But by that point, it’s too late. You might be allowed to carry a gun, but people may be scared of it, and justifiably so.

        If he took the gun with him, he was anticipating the need to protect himself. By simply taking the gun, he acknowledges that he is putting himself in danger. So why did he go? Aside from bloodlust, what was the purpose of him going?

        Murders with guns happen. This fact has still not led to the seizure of weapons in the US. So, why are so many gun proponents afraid to admit Rittenhouse is a murderer who unfairly got away with his crimes?

      • GNUTup@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        10 days ago

        Rittenhouse was not a cop, he was a douchebag little shit stirrer with a murder fantasy, and he got exactly what he wanted — a fun murder spree killing liberals with no consequences.

        I’m not going to coordinate an effort to lynch the piece of shit, but spreading bullshit about how “he’s not a murderer,” like what you’re doing, is disingenuous at best. Kindly, shut the fuck up

          • GNUTup@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            10 days ago

            Violent bloodthirsty evil thug, then. Is that better for you, Herr Pedant?

              • GNUTup@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                6
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                10 days ago

                Orchestrating a scenario in which the only possible outcome is self-defense by deadly force sounds an awful lot like premeditated murder, to me. I think you should reevaluate what you consider pedantry.

                  • GNUTup@lemm.ee
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    4
                    arrow-down
                    3
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    10 days ago

                    People attacked him because he had a big gigantic deadly gun and was goading a literal angry mob with the gun.

                    It’s now more clear to me than ever that you are intentionally acting in bad faith. What is wrong with you?

          • Roflmasterbigpimp@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            edit-2
            10 days ago

            It was not murder, since murder means killing illegally

            You could have picked from so many different reasons to why this was not murder, but this one takes the cake.

            I have another one!

            Murder is a crime, and Criminals are in Jail.

            Since he is not, it could not have been murder! CHECKMATE LIBERALS /s