romad1 Posted November 13, 2021 Share Posted November 13, 2021 I'm enjoying this a lot. I missed the discussion about a grand jury earlier. I guess I just thought the committee had the power to issue the indictment since he was in contempt of Congress. But, i was busy and didn't have time to process. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
romad1 Posted November 13, 2021 Share Posted November 13, 2021 Rittenhouse had an illegal weapon. If it was a death ray or a .22 single shot pistol. He was under aged. His mama drove him into a riot situation so he could play vigilante because: reasons. I own plenty of ARs. I built them myself. I know exactly what they are. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Archie Posted November 13, 2021 Share Posted November 13, 2021 8 hours ago, gehringer_2 said: right. It's what the weapon is engineered to be useful for - and that is pretty obviously high-volume anti-personnel. They are a semi auto rifle. Some uninformed person made up that AR-15 stood for assult rifle. The AR-15 was first built in the 1950s by Armalite and that is where the AR comes from. They have the same capacity and use as many other semi auto rifles. Some uninformed people even call them weapons of war or military weapons. AR-15 are no such thing. If our military used them in combat they would be seriously outgunned by the opposition. They are nothing remotely close to a military rifle other than looks. Last I knew looks don't kill. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Archie Posted November 13, 2021 Share Posted November 13, 2021 8 hours ago, Motown Bombers said: I've done my own research and Rittenhouse had an assault rifle. Remind me never to use you for research since you are wrong. Rittenhouse had a semi auto rifle. It wasn't perfect use for his situation but it saved his life against domestic terrorists. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edman85 Posted November 13, 2021 Share Posted November 13, 2021 22 minutes ago, Archie said: Remind me never to use you for research since you are wrong. Rittenhouse had a semi auto rifle. It wasn't perfect use for his situation but it saved his life against domestic terrorists. Saved his life? He didn't have to be there... And it seems unlikely that if he hadn't been wielding that gun or acting aggressively, there wouldn't have been any life saving necessary. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Archie Posted November 13, 2021 Share Posted November 13, 2021 40 minutes ago, Edman85 said: Saved his life? He didn't have to be there... And it seems unlikely that if he hadn't been wielding that gun or acting aggressively, there wouldn't have been any life saving necessary. I agree with you that he didn't have to be there but neither did the BLM and other rioters. Fact is he was in his legal right to be there. The rioters arent very bright if they attack an armed individual with a skateboard. Its worse than taking a knife to a gun fight. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Archie Posted November 13, 2021 Share Posted November 13, 2021 8 hours ago, romad1 said: Rittenhouse had an illegal weapon. If it was a death ray or a .22 single shot pistol. He was under aged. His mama drove him into a riot situation so he could play vigilante because: reasons. I own plenty of ARs. I built them myself. I know exactly what they are. Then you know they are no different than any other semi auto rifle. If I was in Rittenhouse's position I would have had a handgun. The rifle isn't the best defensive firearm in close quarters. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pfife Posted November 13, 2021 Share Posted November 13, 2021 2 hours ago, Archie said: They are a semi auto rifle. Some uninformed person made up that AR-15 stood for assult rifle. The AR-15 was first built in the 1950s by Armalite and that is where the AR comes from. They have the same capacity and use as many other semi auto rifles. Some uninformed people even call them weapons of war or military weapons. AR-15 are no such thing. If our military used them in combat they would be seriously outgunned by the opposition. They are nothing remotely close to a military rifle other than looks. Last I knew looks don't kill. whew these new arguments that no one has ever heard before still suck just like the last 10 times some dude come here and rerurgitated them I'll stop giving my opinion on guns when their ammunition lack the ability to pierce my skin. Your arbitrary knowledge tests don't matter a bit hoss Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pfife Posted November 13, 2021 Share Posted November 13, 2021 2 hours ago, Archie said: Remind me never to use you for research since you are wrong. Rittenhouse had a semi auto rifle. It wasn't perfect use for his situation but it saved his life against domestic terrorists. remind me to never use you for a sarcasm detector Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gehringer_2 Posted November 13, 2021 Share Posted November 13, 2021 (edited) 2 hours ago, Archie said: They have the same capacity and use as many other semi auto rifles. and there is still no earthly reason for anyone not a sworn LEO to be carrying *any* semi-auto weapon on the street in the US. It's what any parent back in the day would have called 'asking for trouble', which in this case is exactly the correct formulation. Maybe someday this society will wake up, look back and realize that it has been completely insane during this period. But at this point, between the addiction to personal military fantasy, religious superstition, tribalism, pop star politics and ignorance in general, my doubts increase daily this society is going to survive itself long enough to realize much of anything. Bu we shouldn't feel bad, 200 yrs a decent run for the average empire...... Edited November 13, 2021 by gehringer_2 1 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Archie Posted November 13, 2021 Share Posted November 13, 2021 11 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said: and there is still no earthly reason for anyone not a sworn LEO to be carrying *any* semi-auto weapon on the street in the US. It's what any parent back in the day would have called 'asking for trouble', which in this case is exactly the correct formulation. Maybe someday this society will wake up, look back and realize that it has been completely insane during this period. But at this point, between the addiction to personal military fantasy, religious superstition, tribalism, pop star politics and ignorance in general, my doubts increase daily this society is going to survive itself long enough to realize much of anything. Bu we shouldn't feel bad, 200 yrs a decent run for the average empire...... I would agree with you if it was the 1950's but this is a different USA today. Too much violence, too much thug mentality, no respect, not enough police and criminals are coddled and given a free pass too many times. Take Michael Brown for an example. He attacks a police officer and the officer does his job to take down the violent offender to protect himself and save his life. The officer loses his job and is crucified by liberals and the media for doing his job. Obama even sends a state dept delegation to the dead thugs funeral. That's unbelievable! Americans have a lot of rights and they are not required to be a victim. If you don't like firearms, don't want to carry one or prefer to be victim that's your choice but don't condemn others that are doing nothing wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Motown Bombers Posted November 13, 2021 Share Posted November 13, 2021 1 minute ago, Archie said: Americans have a lot of rights and they are not required to be a victim. If you don't like firearms, don't want to carry one or prefer to be victim that's your choice but don't condemn others that are doing nothing wrong. I can find so may other things this applies to that Republicans are trying to take away it's not even funny. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Motown Bombers Posted November 13, 2021 Share Posted November 13, 2021 Isn't something how most of the states with the highest murder rates are red states with loose gun laws? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMRivdogs Posted November 13, 2021 Share Posted November 13, 2021 6 minutes ago, Archie said: I would agree with you if it was the 1950's but this is a different USA today. Too much violence, too much thug mentality, no respect, not enough police and criminals are coddled and given a free pass too many times. Take Michael Brown for an example. He attacks a police officer and the officer does his job to take down the violent offender to protect himself and save his life. The officer loses his job and is crucified by liberals and the media for doing his job. Obama even sends a state dept delegation to the dead thugs funeral. That's unbelievable! Americans have a lot of rights and they are not required to be a victim. If you don't like firearms, don't want to carry one or prefer to be victim that's your choice but don't condemn others that are doing nothing wrong. IDK, it really doesn’t sound that much different than this country a century or so ago. we’ve always been a violent nation Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gehringer_2 Posted November 13, 2021 Share Posted November 13, 2021 (edited) 1 hour ago, CMRivdogs said: IDK, it really doesn’t sound that much different than this country a century or so ago. we’ve always been a violent nation take a look at this source - page 38-39 https://www.jrsa.org/projects/Historical.pdf I'd try to screen cap it but the chart spans two pages. It shows US murder rates over the last 100yr. Been all over the map. Big steady increases from 1905 though to a peak in the 1930's with the organized crime sparked by prohibition. But the bigger trend might just be population surges - or maybe just youth population surges, which were huge both because of the baby boom starting with the 50's and in the huge immigration period at the beginning of the 20th century. Chart ends at 1998. As per this source https://www.disastercenter.com/crime/uscrime.htm, murder since 2000 has pretty much leveled out - a bit of a minimum at 2014 and a trend up since then. Since population has continued to increase that would probably net out to some decrease in the per capita rate over the last two decades - but not all that much if any. Edited November 13, 2021 by gehringer_2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buddha Posted November 13, 2021 Share Posted November 13, 2021 18 hours ago, oblong said: I'm not an expert in legal matters.... but if the jury were to come back with a guilty verdict could this judge throw it out? Or tell them to go back and delibarate more until a not guilty verdict is reached? I am not certain that's out of the question of happening. after the verdict, i think the defense could make a post judgment motion to say the verdict did not comply with the evidence presented, but those are routinely denied. i think so. not sure about criminal law. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Motown Bombers Posted November 13, 2021 Share Posted November 13, 2021 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Cowan Posted November 13, 2021 Share Posted November 13, 2021 4 hours ago, Archie said: Americans have a lot of rights and they are not required to be a victim. If you don't like firearms, don't want to carry one or prefer to be victim that's your choice but don't condemn others that are doing nothing wrong. I can't even begin to describe how bewildering this is to people who live in almost every other country in the world except maybe Somalia. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Motown Bombers Posted November 13, 2021 Share Posted November 13, 2021 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oblong Posted November 13, 2021 Share Posted November 13, 2021 Ted Cruz was publicly more upset about Big Bird urging kids to get vaccinated than he was about Donald Trump calling his wife ugly. That tells you what you need to know. Nothing else is required. He’s a spineless cuck. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gehringer_2 Posted November 13, 2021 Share Posted November 13, 2021 (edited) 19 minutes ago, oblong said: Ted Cruz was publicly more upset about Big Bird urging kids to get vaccinated than he was about Donald Trump calling his wife ugly. That tells you what you need to know. Nothing else is required. He’s a spineless cuck. and why is the wife even still with a guy who doesn't stand up for her? A perfect pair maybe? Edited November 13, 2021 by gehringer_2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiger337 Posted November 14, 2021 Share Posted November 14, 2021 9 hours ago, Motown Bombers said: Isn't something how most of the states with the highest murder rates are red states with loose gun laws? That's why they need more guns! So, the good guys with guns will stop the bad guys with guns. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gehringer_2 Posted November 14, 2021 Share Posted November 14, 2021 8 hours ago, buddha said: after the verdict, i think the defense could make a post judgment motion to say the verdict did not comply with the evidence presented, but those are routinely denied. i think so. not sure about criminal law. In MI a judge can direct the jury to submit an acquittal ( sort of "throwing out" a possible guilty verdict? ) if he makes a showing the prosecution did not present the required elements to make the case. That's probably a high bar in most cases but it's on the books here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiger337 Posted November 14, 2021 Share Posted November 14, 2021 10 hours ago, Archie said: Americans have a lot of rights and they are not required to be a victim. If you don't like firearms, don't want to carry one or prefer to be victim that's your choice but don't condemn others that are doing nothing wrong. I am not at all convinced that gun ownership makes one less likely to be killed or seriously injured in a violent crime. I think it makes it more likely. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buddha Posted November 14, 2021 Share Posted November 14, 2021 2 hours ago, gehringer_2 said: In MI a judge can direct the jury to submit an acquittal ( sort of "throwing out" a possible guilty verdict? ) if he makes a showing the prosecution did not present the required elements to make the case. That's probably a high bar in most cases but it's on the books here. yes, that's what i was referencing. those are very very very rarely granted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.