The lunatic left

[rederob]

Look what he was using before shoving sleight of hands down peoples throats.
He was not using an ak ffs. Or a modified weapon.

I should count the number of times you have avoided my question about the dystopian laws that allow teenagers to roam the streets with loaded assault rifles.

Pakistan you can pick up grenade launches. Israel has heavy weapons but tight conditions. Swiss use military rifles for target shooting. Africa, Middle East, NZ had

More fails on your part.
I won't hold my breath and won't reply on this matter again as you seem unable to work this out.

 

[rederob]

How is that relevant to the facts of the matter at hand? ie the Rittenhouse acqittal and the ludicrous reaction from the left... well I guess you are helping to illustrate my point.

If you kept up then you would know it had nothing to do with the acquittal.

 

[moXJO]

I should count the number of times you have avoided my question about the dystopian laws that allow teenagers to roam the streets with loaded assault rifles.

More fails on your part.
I won't hold my breath and won't reply on this matter again as you seem unable to work this out.

It's not an assault rifle either, buzzword of the day I suppose.

I answered your question multiple times. But keep scratching at that crack.

 

[wayneL]

It's not an assault rifle either, buzzword of the day I suppose.

I answered your question multiple times. But keep scratching at that crack.

Correct, again.

In fact, if @rederob indulged in the most basic fact checking, the "A" in AR15 stands for ”Armalite” and NOT "Assault".

This has been clarified hundreds of times in the real media, in spite of the leftist fake media continueing to blazenly lie about this fact.

Once again, our ideological imperatives here in Oz are completely irrelevant to to law (constitutional law at that) as it stands in the jurisdiction concerned.

As such, it is a straw man argument.

(Cue rederob avoiding the issue by casting aspersions)

 

[SirRumpole]

Law enforcement should be left to those trained for the task imo.

Rittenhouse went looking for trouble, he was lucky with the verdict imo, pity it's going to be used as a precedent for every gun happy vigilante who follows his lead.

 

[IFocus]

It's not an assault rifle either, buzzword of the day I suppose.

I answered your question multiple times. But keep scratching at that crack.

The Smith & Wesson M&P 15 he used is sold as " the ideal modern sporting rifle" which is total BS the design is based on assault rife configuration.

Still doesn't matter one round in the chest and you are dead.

Note he couldn't legally carry a hand gun but was allowed to carry the rife due to barrel length go figure.

Comes back to a untrained 17 year old on the streets with a weapon acting as a vigilante in a situation that was a policing one what could possibly go wrong... just two dead that's all.

As much as I disliked Howard I do give him and John Anderson kudos for acting against the wishers of their constituents for the befit of all Australians regarding our gun laws.

They can put hand on heart and say they saved Australian lives.

Unlike the US conservative politicians practicing fundamentalist BS.

​

​

 

[rederob]

Correct, again.

In fact, if @rederob indulged in the most basic fact checking, the "A" in AR15 stands for ”Armalite” and NOT "Assault".

This has been clarified hundreds of times in the real media, in spite of the leftist fake media continueing to blazenly lie about this fact.

Once again, our ideological imperatives here in Oz are completely irrelevant to to law (constitutional law at that) as it stands in the jurisdiction concerned.

As such, it is a straw man argument.

(Cue rederob avoiding the issue by casting aspersions)

At no point did I ever need to specify what Rittenhouse actually used seeing it's been all over the news, so whatever you want to claim has nothing to do what I have posted.
I separately posted a photo of a civilian openly carrying an automatic weapon in the streets, and this is allowed in some US States. I personally think that's dystopian, aka madness.
Despite numerous requests for @moXJO to indicate what other developed nations lawfully allow this to happen he comes back empty handed and instead confuses his responses with gun ownership or army use, or some other obfuscation.
The semantics of assault rifle, automatic or semi automatic weapon, or brand name, are incidental to the fact that some US States allow them to be open carried.

 

[moXJO]

The Smith & Wesson M&P 15 he used is sold as " the ideal modern sporting rifle" which is total BS the design is based on assault rife configuration.

Still doesn't matter one round in the chest and you are dead.

Note he couldn't legally carry a hand gun but was allowed to carry the rife due to barrel length go figure.

Comes back to a untrained 17 year old on the streets with a weapon acting as a vigilante in a situation that was a policing one what could possibly go wrong... just two dead that's all.

​

​

Your terminology means jack it was legal under the law of the state.
I'd say he was well trained as he showed restraint and remained within the law.

Did you not express you wanted to run over protesters the other day in your car?

Joke or not welcome to being part of the problem.

 

[wayneL]

Law enforcement should be left to those trained for the task imo.

Rittenhouse went looking for trouble, he was lucky with the verdict imo, pity it's going to be used as a precedent for every gun happy vigilante who follows his lead.

It is worth mentioning that law enforcement was stood down and we're not functioning as law enforcement at all.

I do not believe that Rittenhouse was looking for trouble in fact it is documented that he actually offered and provided first aid services to injured protesters.

He did not antagonize protesters at all it was nearly there to help defend, as-is allowed by the law of the particular jurisdiction.

It is only when his own life was threatened dead he acted in self-defense.

it is contingent upon us to actually find out the facts of the matter before making comments... And also to find out from the local contacts rather than judging from an Australian context.

 

[SirRumpole]

It is worth mentioning that law enforcement was stood down and we're not functioning as law enforcement at all.

I do not believe that Rittenhouse was looking for trouble in fact it is documented that he actually offered and provided first aid services to injured protesters.

He did not antagonize protesters at all it was nearly there to help defend, as-is allowed by the law of the particular jurisdiction.

It is only when his own life was threatened dead he acted in self-defense.

it is contingent upon us to actually find out the facts of the matter before making comments... And also to find out from the local contacts rather than judging from an Australian context.

Were his attackers armed?

Did he give any warning before he fired?

There are places you can shoot people to disable rather than kill.

 

[IFocus]

Your terminology means jack it was legal under the law of the state.
I'd say he was well trained as he showed restraint and remained within the law.

Did you not express you wanted to run over protesters the other day in your car?

Joke or not welcome to being part of the problem.

Well trained, you are kidding?

Part of the problem? I am not advocating that a 17 year old to go armed in public.

 

[wayneL]

Were his attackers armed?

Did he give any warning before he fired?

There are places you can shoot people to disable rather than kill.

Please view the evidence rather than making assumptions.

This is what the court does, has done, and acquitted him.

Plenty of videos from the night, out there on the interwebz, bro.

 

[rederob]

Were his attackers armed?

Joseph Rosenbaum was unarmed while another had a deadly skateboard. Gaige Grosskreutz had a pistol but never fired.

Did he give any warning before he fired?

Lol - in America he would have got off on lunacy if he did that (assuming he survived after firing).

There are places you can shoot people to disable rather than kill.

Doesn't that defeat the purpose of carrying a deadly weapon?

 

[SirRumpole]

Doesn't that defeat the purpose of carrying a deadly weapon?

Only if you have intent to kill.

 

[rederob]

Only if you have intent to kill.

Defeats the purpose of carrying a deadly weapon. That's why most British police (except in N.I.) do not carry weapons.

 

[wayneL]

Ridiculous.

 

[Investoradam]

Law enforcement should be left to those trained for the task imo.

Rittenhouse went looking for trouble, he was lucky with the verdict imo, pity it's going to be used as a precedent for every gun happy vigilante who follows his lead.

he was chased several blocks by 3 BLM/ANTIFA members who were, life long criminals. a pedo, child molester, a wife beater and a felon!
let that sink in
so Rittenhouse killed 2 and injured 3 life long criminals out of a mob of how many who were burning and looting the neighbour hoods!

funny how the media only focus on one bloke and ignoring the real trouble going on! & remember Antifa is apparently only an idea

 

[SirRumpole]

he was chased several blocks by 3 BLM/ANTIFA members who were, life long criminals. a pedo, child molester, a wife beater and a felon!
let that sink in

And he knew that did he ?

Anyway, that's the USA , he was found not guilty by his peers so he went through the process, I just hope that sort of thing doesn't happen here.

Would be interesting to see if some anti vax and/or 'freedom' protestors were shot by similar vigilantes (or the police), that would give some people here a real identity crisis.

 

[Investoradam]

And he knew that did he ?

Anyway, that's the USA , he was found not guilty by his peers so he went through the process, I just hope that sort of thing doesn't happen here.

Would be interesting to see if some anti vax and/or 'freedom' protestors were shot by similar vigilantes (or the police), that would give some people here a real identity crisis.

the USA is 10 years ahead of Australia so its coming. thank Johnny Howards stunt for taking the guns away!

before mocking some one try to understand why!
remember the governments, business and billy gates said one jab and covid will away and we will get our freedoms back
some countries re 4 jabs in and still dont have freedom, Australia are 2 jabs in and we still can't travel
in Queensland Anna wants out our credit card linked to our my gov account along with out check in app so we can be fined for not checking in?

maybe these freedom and choice protestors are questioning something?

in th4 states, why are those BLM loons stopped, why is the media silent on the issue?, why are the people trying to defend the streets mocked for being vigilantes as they see neigh hoods burned, how on earth did Kyle shoot 3 people, that were life long criminals?


learn a little history by starting with lenin and the bolshevik revolution of 1916, vilmer republic germany 1918 to 1933 and the context today will make sense. who Antifa & marxism really is, how Antifa & BLM is nothing but a marxist group (leaders own words) are used and why they exist.

if you aren't concerned about the west after that, maybe hire a tutor to explain it to you

 

[SirRumpole]

the USA is 10 years ahead of Australia so its coming. thank Johnny Howards stunt for taking the guns away!

before mocking some one try to understand why!
remember the governments, business and billy gates said one jab and covid will away and we will get our freedoms back
some countries re 4 jabs in and still dont have freedom, Australia are 2 jabs in and we still can't travel
in Queensland Anna wants out our credit card linked to our my gov account along with out check in app so we can be fined for not checking in?

maybe these freedom and choice protestors are questioning something?

in th4 states, why are those BLM loons stopped, why is the media silent on the issue?, why are the people trying to defend the streets mocked for being vigilantes as they see neigh hoods burned, how on earth did Kyle shoot 3 people, that were life long criminals?


learn a little history by starting with lenin and the bolshevik revolution of 1916, vilmer republic germany 1918 to 1933 and the context today will make sense. who Antifa & marxism really is, how Antifa & BLM is nothing but a marxist group (leaders own words) are used and why they exist.

if you aren't concerned about the west after that, maybe hire a tutor to explain it to you

I think you missed my point.

Say Rittenhouse was a Marxist with a gun who was chased by three "anti vaxers" (the type of people threatening to kill people) who he then shot dead.

You would stand up and defend him yes ?

Or would you say he was a Communist infiltrator repressing freedom of protest ?