Posted by strikeout26 on 11/23/2021 12:47:00 PM (view original):
Wait, are you claiming that January 6th was more violent than the riots last summer? I really hope not. Please let me keep believing that you’re smarter than that.

January 6 by every barometer was more violent and serious.

And January 6 was only a riot with mass murder in mind.
not a protest with some outliers and neighborhood
yutes.
If you are going to bring up smart I suggest not to.

Re: Rittenhouse - it is very funny to see the entire right wing flip the **** out over Rittenhouse saying he supports BLM in an interview with Tucker Carlson and making arguments from a critical theory lens

Posted by Jetson21 on 11/23/2021 12:51:00 PM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 11/23/2021 12:47:00 PM (view original):
Wait, are you claiming that January 6th was more violent than the riots last summer? I really hope not. Please let me keep believing that you’re smarter than that.

January 6 by every barometer was more violent and serious.

This is absolutely absurd. You are claiming that a few hundred idiots rioting for a couple of hours before it was squashed and life went back to normal is more violent than riots that led to over $8B in property damage, over 30 people dead, and over 1000 injured. Yeah, I think I’ll bring up smarts. I know you’re smarter than this. Quit believing the propaganda.

Posted by strikeout26 on 11/22/2021 6:17:00 PM (view original):

Posted by dahsdebater on 11/22/2021 3:47:00 PM (view original):
One could argue that illegally carrying an assault weapon to a protest is, in and of itself, contributing to an environment that is dangerous to human life.

EDIT: you removed the post to which this was a reply. I'll leave it here for now in case you're just making changes before reposting it.

He didn’t illegally carry an assault weapon. The charge was dropped because he was legally allowed to possess the weapon. He couldn’t purchase the weapon, but he could legally carry it.

P.S. Assault weapon is a loaded term and inaccurate here. An assault weapon is a gun that can be converted to a fully automatic weapon. The gun that Rittenhouse had did not have that capacity.

This is just blatantly untrue.

"Assault weapon" does not have a single uniform definition and varies between jurisdictions. Almost everywhere it includes any semi-automatic that can be fitted with a large magazine. One way to be categorized as an assault weapon under the old, expired Federal ban was to be fitted for a bayonet.

You are correct. It’s still a loaded term.

Posted by strikeout26 on 11/23/2021 1:14:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Jetson21 on 11/23/2021 12:51:00 PM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 11/23/2021 12:47:00 PM (view original):
Wait, are you claiming that January 6th was more violent than the riots last summer? I really hope not. Please let me keep believing that you’re smarter than that.

January 6 by every barometer was more violent and serious.

This is absolutely absurd. You are claiming that a few hundred idiots rioting for a couple of hours before it was squashed and life went back to normal is more violent than riots that led to over $8B in property damage, over 30 people dead, and over 1000 injured. Yeah, I think I’ll bring up smarts. I know you’re smarter than this. Quit believing the propaganda.

You first.
I have a different set of priorities then you and btw it was way more then a few hundred and they were trying to kill political leaders and caused the death of 5 police officers and the maiming of many.
and those were armed police officers. And this is not many combined situations.
Did not stop until massive units of national guard and The Ringleader said to go home.

Really no point arguing over something rather axiomatic while it still can be.

Posted by strikeout26 on 11/23/2021 1:14:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Jetson21 on 11/23/2021 12:51:00 PM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 11/23/2021 12:47:00 PM (view original):
Wait, are you claiming that January 6th was more violent than the riots last summer? I really hope not. Please let me keep believing that you’re smarter than that.

January 6 by every barometer was more violent and serious.

This is absolutely absurd. You are claiming that a few hundred idiots rioting for a couple of hours before it was squashed and life went back to normal is more violent than riots that led to over $8B in property damage, over 30 people dead, and over 1000 injured. Yeah, I think I’ll bring up smarts. I know you’re smarter than this. Quit believing the propaganda.

And you're smarter than this - no ****, a movement that lasted for months and had millions of people was going to accumulate more property damage than one singular riot. Jan 6 was still more dangerous and more serious.

Please please please stop citing the "30 dead" number. It's flat wrong and most of the deaths that did occur were BLM protesters being killed by right-wingers or police.

Posted by strikeout26 on 11/23/2021 1:20:00 PM (view original):
You are correct. It’s still a loaded term.

Maybe, but appropriate.

Most US jurisdictions with assault weapons bans either implicitly or explicitly ban the AR-style rifle in question. There are numerous US states and cities where nobody could legally carry that weapon.

Posted by strikeout26 on 11/23/2021 8:08:00 AM (view original):

Posted by Uofa2 on 11/23/2021 4:48:00 AM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 11/22/2021 8:01:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Uofa2 on 11/22/2021 6:27:00 PM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 11/22/2021 6:17:00 PM (view original):

Posted by dahsdebater on 11/22/2021 3:47:00 PM (view original):
One could argue that illegally carrying an assault weapon to a protest is, in and of itself, contributing to an environment that is dangerous to human life.

EDIT: you removed the post to which this was a reply. I'll leave it here for now in case you're just making changes before reposting it.

He didn’t illegally carry an assault weapon. The charge was dropped because he was legally allowed to possess the weapon. He couldn’t purchase the weapon, but he could legally carry it.

P.S. Assault weapon is a loaded term and inaccurate here. An assault weapon is a gun that can be converted to a fully automatic weapon. The gun that Rittenhouse had did not have that capacity.

And his friend is being charged with an illegal straw man sale of the gun to Kyle, correct?

I have a hard time seeing this actually go to trial considering that it has already been proven in court that it wasn’t illegal for Kyle to have the gun.

Kyle having or not having the gun has nothing to do with an illegal straw man sale of the gun.

super cool seeing people bend over backwards for people to have guns.

I’ll always bend over backwards for people’s rights to have guns. It’s a constitutional right. Barring convicted violent offenders, I will defend anyone’s right to a gun. I’m also not afraid of people with guns.

I have no problem with people owning guns for protection and hunting, but there is no reason for a civilian to own a semi automatic weapon and no one has yet to give me a good reason. ( am not saying Rittenhouse had a semi automatic weapon..I don't know exactly what kind of weapon he had) I do think that for anyone to travel with any kind of a gun to a place where they know rioting is going on, is asking for trouble.

Posted by wylie715 on 11/23/2021 1:33:00 PM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 11/23/2021 8:08:00 AM (view original):

Posted by Uofa2 on 11/23/2021 4:48:00 AM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 11/22/2021 8:01:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Uofa2 on 11/22/2021 6:27:00 PM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 11/22/2021 6:17:00 PM (view original):

Posted by dahsdebater on 11/22/2021 3:47:00 PM (view original):
One could argue that illegally carrying an assault weapon to a protest is, in and of itself, contributing to an environment that is dangerous to human life.

EDIT: you removed the post to which this was a reply. I'll leave it here for now in case you're just making changes before reposting it.

He didn’t illegally carry an assault weapon. The charge was dropped because he was legally allowed to possess the weapon. He couldn’t purchase the weapon, but he could legally carry it.

P.S. Assault weapon is a loaded term and inaccurate here. An assault weapon is a gun that can be converted to a fully automatic weapon. The gun that Rittenhouse had did not have that capacity.

And his friend is being charged with an illegal straw man sale of the gun to Kyle, correct?

I have a hard time seeing this actually go to trial considering that it has already been proven in court that it wasn’t illegal for Kyle to have the gun.

Kyle having or not having the gun has nothing to do with an illegal straw man sale of the gun.

super cool seeing people bend over backwards for people to have guns.

I’ll always bend over backwards for people’s rights to have guns. It’s a constitutional right. Barring convicted violent offenders, I will defend anyone’s right to a gun. I’m also not afraid of people with guns.

I have no problem with people owning guns for protection and hunting, but there is no reason for a civilian to own a semi automatic weapon and no one has yet to give me a good reason. ( am not saying Rittenhouse had a semi automatic weapon..I don't know exactly what kind of weapon he had) I do think that for anyone to travel with any kind of a gun to a place where they know rioting is going on, is asking for trouble.

It was an AR style - I think 15.

Posted by wylie715 on 11/23/2021 1:33:00 PM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 11/23/2021 8:08:00 AM (view original):

Posted by Uofa2 on 11/23/2021 4:48:00 AM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 11/22/2021 8:01:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Uofa2 on 11/22/2021 6:27:00 PM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 11/22/2021 6:17:00 PM (view original):

Posted by dahsdebater on 11/22/2021 3:47:00 PM (view original):
One could argue that illegally carrying an assault weapon to a protest is, in and of itself, contributing to an environment that is dangerous to human life.

EDIT: you removed the post to which this was a reply. I'll leave it here for now in case you're just making changes before reposting it.

He didn’t illegally carry an assault weapon. The charge was dropped because he was legally allowed to possess the weapon. He couldn’t purchase the weapon, but he could legally carry it.

P.S. Assault weapon is a loaded term and inaccurate here. An assault weapon is a gun that can be converted to a fully automatic weapon. The gun that Rittenhouse had did not have that capacity.

And his friend is being charged with an illegal straw man sale of the gun to Kyle, correct?

I have a hard time seeing this actually go to trial considering that it has already been proven in court that it wasn’t illegal for Kyle to have the gun.

Kyle having or not having the gun has nothing to do with an illegal straw man sale of the gun.

super cool seeing people bend over backwards for people to have guns.

I’ll always bend over backwards for people’s rights to have guns. It’s a constitutional right. Barring convicted violent offenders, I will defend anyone’s right to a gun. I’m also not afraid of people with guns.

I have no problem with people owning guns for protection and hunting, but there is no reason for a civilian to own a semi automatic weapon and no one has yet to give me a good reason. ( am not saying Rittenhouse had a semi automatic weapon..I don't know exactly what kind of weapon he had) I do think that for anyone to travel with any kind of a gun to a place where they know rioting is going on, is asking for trouble.

The vast majority of guns are semiautomatic. Essentially, you want to ban almost every gun in circulation.

It also doesn’t make sense to say that you’re for owning guns for protection, but then say you don’t believe people should take guns to protect themselves in areas that might be dangerous.

Posted by Jetson21 on 11/23/2021 1:27:00 PM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 11/23/2021 1:14:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Jetson21 on 11/23/2021 12:51:00 PM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 11/23/2021 12:47:00 PM (view original):
Wait, are you claiming that January 6th was more violent than the riots last summer? I really hope not. Please let me keep believing that you’re smarter than that.

January 6 by every barometer was more violent and serious.

This is absolutely absurd. You are claiming that a few hundred idiots rioting for a couple of hours before it was squashed and life went back to normal is more violent than riots that led to over $8B in property damage, over 30 people dead, and over 1000 injured. Yeah, I think I’ll bring up smarts. I know you’re smarter than this. Quit believing the propaganda.

You first.
I have a different set of priorities then you and btw it was way more then a few hundred and they were trying to kill political leaders and caused the death of 5 police officers and the maiming of many.
and those were armed police officers. And this is not many combined situations.
Did not stop until massive units of national guard and The Ringleader said to go home.

Really no point arguing over something rather axiomatic while it still can be.

Me first?

What propaganda am I believing? You’re not making any sense.

To all best estimates, about 800 people stormed the capital. It did NOT lead to the death of 5 police officers. It led to the death of 5 people total. Ashley Babbit, some person that over-dosed, a police officer that sustained injuries that day and 2 officers that committed suicide.

What they did was terrible. they deserve to be in jail and are heading that way. But it’s quite the stretch to claim it was more violent than the summer 2020 riots.

Something that defies fact is not axiomatic.

Violent or threatening?

I'd say the 1/6 coup attempt was far far more threatening to our right to type our blabber our very freedom than anything the 2020 riots amounted to.

Besides that we've had other "summers" of riots and burning cities. Far worse than 2020.

too bad them hotheads didn't get down into the basement

string up pelosi and pence



we would have got us a true reckoning by now