Not ture, again goes to back to proving your original point that they have some laws that are bonkers to us but does rather ruin your analogy. https://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/explainer-judge-drop-rittenhouse-gun-charge-81285031
Or he got off because the judge controlled the admissible evidence. Different judge, different trial. we’ll never know, we weren’t there, we don’t have access to all the evidence. But from what we do know; my morality says if you leave home with a semi automatic weapon and travel that distance and kill someone, your ‘self defence’ would have been to stay home, have dinner with your family and play Call of Duty for your kicks.
It's certainly the decision most sensible people would make. I would guess the majority of the people on the streets that night didn't have good moral justification for being there. Gaige Grosskreutz who was shot but survived had travelled over twice the distance Rittenhouse had. I suppose while his motivation for being there has some bearing, legally he was entitled to be there and to have the weapon. After that it doesn't take a lot in US law to get to the point of claiming self defence. The whole incident is a sad indictment of US gun laws and general attitudes towards gun ownership.
There's one or two on this board who, if there was a law allowing you to shoot black people, snowflakes and lefties with impunity, would be fully on board with it.
You’re comparing someone touching your parked tank to being chased, cornered, hit with a skateboard, and having a gun put to your head? Aye, alright.
I think you’re trying to make a point about inviting or inciting violence based on bringing something as destructive as a tank. Challenge in this case is that as much as we all find the gun laws nuts, carrying the weapon was legal, the gun was pointed down, and none of us can say or claim that anything bad would have happened without the aggression shown towards him. The media have had an absolute shocker on this. Tried to make the whole case something it wasn’t, not reported on the actual facts, and as a result many parts of the case have only come to light during the trial. Public opinion here in the US very different to two weeks ago. Sad state of affairs all round is my take.
That decision totally sucks!!! How the hell he got a not guilty beggars belief!! His old fella must have friends in very high places fgs!
Which of the charges do you think he should have been found guilty of and based on which evidence? Remember of course that it is legal to carry a gun in America
If it had been a black man, he would never have got to trial, he would have been shot dead by the police.
Boy drives 20 miles with a semi, someone was always going to get ******. Let's flipped this around, some folk are marching in Doncaster for human rights. Should I drive there to protect people in case it gets nasty? Maybe if I take a machete, and wear it like a necklace. Maybe folk won't mind that, feel less intimidated???
Are machetes legal? Also didn't one of those who attacked him and got shot travel double the distance to get there too?
No you're right, may next time they can all get it right and bring grenades and maybe a few thermal nukes that should keep folk happy. Because there were good people on both sides
You are mistaking the law for your personal opinion on what should be the law. Which I agree with you on by the way. Simple fact is that it's legal to carry guns in America which is why both the arsehole who killed people and one of those he shot had guns
Wasn’t this an area where those marching for human rights were also destroying businesses? Schools and businesses in the area were boarded up weren’t there? We simply can’t compare like for like to here. We might speak a different language but we’re culturally worlds apart and just behave differently. Only instance of looting and smashing things up that I know was the ‘yoof’ about five years ago in London and a couple of other major cities. He did nothing illegal and nobody knows if he’d have used his gun had he not come under attack himself. The gun laws are wrong, some of the behaviour questionable, but the verdict is correct. The media corruption on this has been a disaster.