I'm no lawyer, I can only attest to what I saw on video. The first killing, unfortunately, is not terribly clear. Not as clear as what follows: Kyle running away from attackers that even when struck in the head with a fist, Kyle did not use his weapon. He uses his weapon a second time AFTER falling to the ground and a kick to the head coming right for him. If I recall correctly, Kyle even had chance to shoot another person prior to the kick but he did not open fire then presumably because the person backed away from Kyle.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BQ6b-7_9K4w (14:38)

I think we can deduce intent from this: his intention wasn't to go on a mass shooting spree, very much unlike a school shooter who enters school premises armed with a gun/s. Kyle's weapon was there for defense. Even after those attacks, Kyle gets up and shoots no one else presumably because people had wisely run away. I'd expect a mass shooter to go on shooting anyone else nearby for the hell of it.

I think a jury will conclude self-defense but we shall see... Don't worry though, if things don't turn out the way I want them to, I won't be targeting buildings and setting them on fire so relax...

"I'm not a lawyer either, but I don't think killing someone for hitting you with a skateboard is a measured response.
If someone kicked me, I have a right to hit them back to defend myself. That's a measured response. I don't have a right to shoot and kill them.
And the fact that these attacks were coming from people trying to subdue a shooter would be another mitigating factor on top of that."

>Several factors to consider: Kyle's head was targeted. As both you and I know, the head is a vital part of the human body. He was also outnumbered... But we'll see. I'm going to let the lawyers sort this mess out. At least they're getting paid for their time.

"As for the 'buildings on fire' remark, I haven't defended anyone doing that."

>I thank you for that.

"You're defending a killer though who shot someone in the back."

>Only in so far as clear video footage will allow. The first killing, the killing of Rosenbaum, isn't so clear so not sure self defense will apply here.

We'll see...

At least this thread is giving me plenty of examples of what sources NOT to cite, what youtubers NOT to subscribe to.

It's kinda funny because some people like to turn this into an issue of 'oh, you just don't like it when people disagree with you' or 'You're so closeminded!'

No, it's not that at all. It's easy to think that when you only consider the surface details of the argument (And if you are an idiot who doesn't care to consider nuance in any discussion). But the reality is, a lot of these issues concern actual health and welfare, it concerns basic rights and equality. Preferring coffee over tea or Marvel over DC is a simple disagreement. Xbox vs Playstation is a pretty unimportant disagreement. Cats vs dogs. All these are great to disagree, and if someone was to argue that you're terrible for liking cats or DC just becuase they like dogs or Marvel, then that's pretty silly and closeminded. 

However, what we have here is something far more important. Basic human rights are not a matter of opinion. Black people, mexican people, muslim people, middle-eastern people, and anyone else who isn't a white male in the US needs to be treated with more respect. A lot of the arguments in this thread basically boil down to some variation on justifying or ignoring the fact that minorities are grossly disrespected in the US (And around the world, but this is a US thread). Honestly, if you're the kind of person who is twisting things around to make the Kenosha dude with the AR-15 a hero, you're on the wrong side. If you're trying to argue there is no systemic racism in the US because the official laws on the books don't discriminate, then you need perspective. If you actually think things like 'Build that Wall' and Trumps comments on muslim countries or africa being a shithole are okay, you need to learn some empathy or compassion. 

We live in a world where modern republicans are outright villains. At their core, right-wing politics are SUPPOSED to stand for the rights of the individual, for personal responsibility, and for a freedom from government intervention. That is what the core of the Republican stance is SUPPOSED to be, and it's three things I highly agree with. I feel we need a balance between freedom and responsibility. we need balance between the rights of the individual and the needs of the many. We need balance between right-wing and left-wing policies, and in the end a lot of the surface level arguments boil down to people disagreeing WHERE on that spectrum we should be. 

However, the reality of the world is that the modern republican party stands for oppression of minorities, religious persecution, unsafe gun rights, regression in science, a disregard for women's rights, and a whole lot of xenophobia.

It's not democrats clamouring to build a wall to keep the rapists and criminals of mexico out. 

It's not democrats who are resisting trans rights and gay rights and pushing for 'traditional' family values.

It's not democrats trying to push creationism in schools and shutting down any studies that go against the bible. 

It's not democrats putting children in cages

It's not democrats crying 'all lives matter' in the wake of the BLM protests.

It's not democrats doing most of the resticting access to planned parenthood and other forms of contraceptivs

It's not democrats ignoring the reality of climate change.

It's not democrats looking to villainize the lower class and make the rich richer by giving tax cuts to corporations.

It's not democrats taking money away from social services.

It's not democrats who are looking to militarize the police and demonizing those trying to protest peacefully.

IT's democrats pushing for equality, liberty, justice, and freedom. It's democrats pushing for positive change. It's democrats who want to make a world that is safer for minorities and women and people of colour. It's democrats pushing an agenda that includes an important inclusion of science and research that supports actual change. It's democrats who are fighting republicans for the heart of the US, and all the republicans are doing is making it more difficult, resisting change (Even positive change), and blocking everything the democrats do. In this story, and in the tide of history, republicans are literally going to go down as the villains, much like the clergy during the dark ages. America could be so much better if money-hungry republicans got the fuck out of the way and let the democrats actually make the nation great again. America has so many resources, so many people who want to help, so much access to some of the best higher education and government budgets. America has the most money and the most capability to make a positive difference in the world as the nation has the most power.

But any time someone tries to do something like protest inequality or educate on matters of science or push for inclusion for gay or trans rights or women's rights, they get called an SJW Libtard cuck white knight and laughed at by the right, as if wanting to push for positive change is a bad thing. SJW has turned into an insult used by the right to demean anyone who thinks things need to change, and that's not okay. America needs to do better, and as long as this ignorant, venomous, regressive variation on republican values are in power, that'll never happen. The Right side of politics has some good ideas, and both sides need to work together. In the US, you have Republicans on the right and Democrats in the center. The problem is that when you're so far to the right, center looks like the left; Republicans have no perspective. 

Republicans are the bad guys here. They're standing in the way, and have convinced half the country that it's better this way because change is scary and America used to be great so change is inherently bad. By its very core, the political right stand for regression and their policies are based in ignorance and propagate through those unwilling to learn. 

The fact that I know exactly who's going to respond to this with some snide, smug retort and call me an SJW myself shows that it's not about who's right or what's best, it's about defeating the enemy. And when you're the villains in this story, it means those you combat are the good guys. 

I won't apologize. I know plenty of conservative folks who are good people and don't stand for a lot of what US republicans stand for. There's nothing wrong with being conservative - as I stated, we need a balance between left-wing and right-wing policies - but there is a problem with using conservatism to deny reality, oppress minorities, and turn everything into some huge tribalistic conflict. When something like 'hey, are we contributing to global warming?' is a political issue, it's not about what's right or wrong, it's about us vs them. 

Modern republicans are definitely the bad guys in this story. 

That was a heartwarming post just a tad too long. Almost nodded off there.

Now for lack of empathy I'll just point out multiple boats sank at Trump boat parade near where I live in lake Travis. Karma is a a bitch.

"there is a problem with using conservatism to ... turn everything into some huge tribalistic conflict"

Ironic to read coming from a post laced with tribalistic, us vs them rhetoric.

I Was agreeing with you. I think? 

They started it by actively pushing for so many of the above-mentioned policies and actions. Democrats push for science and reason and inclusion. Republicans actively try to shut that down and counter it with many of the policies currently in place that result in a lack of equality. 

You don't get to campaign for inbalanced human rights and then complain when people call you out on being bigoted. You don't get to devalue or disregard people's very real struggles then play the victim when your discompassionate take is rightly criticized. 

Perhaps they view your proposals as resulting in greater inequality, not less?

I don't really care what they think, that's not where the research, historical precedent, and science lead. Both sides of this discussion are not equal, one side is correct and the other is incorrect. Feelings aside, I go where the science leads, I go where the studies tell me to go. I believe that which has the most supporting evidence. I go with the views that do the most good for the most amount of people, and I use actual logic and reason to come to those conclusions, not my reactionary fears and concerns about change.