By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Dulfite said:
Ryuu96 said:

What are you, a cop?

Jimbo1337 said:

I don't need to understand the context to understand that it is never acceptable to "want to shoot someone". People should not go around looking for a fight so that they can start shooting and killing people. Again, I stand by what I said. Your statement is and will always be radical. Your violent rhetoric has no place here. 

Almost certain that this is a simple misunderstanding, Machia is being sarcastic and using an extreme example to call out the ridiculousness of the current situation(s) but he is not seriously saying he is about to go outside and start shooting people up.

His extreme example makes it seem like anyone going to an opposing rally to speak their mind and armed to defend themselves is automatically guilty if they end up using said arm to defend themselves. 

As much as you probably want to do that after this verdict, you probably should hold off from that temptation. There's much better hobbies.



Around the Network
Moren said:
Dulfite said:

His extreme example makes it seem like anyone going to an opposing rally to speak their mind and armed to defend themselves is automatically guilty if they end up using said arm to defend themselves. 

As much as you probably want to do that after this verdict, you probably should hold off from that temptation. There's much better hobbies.

Oh I wouldn't ever do that. I much prefer spending time with my wife and kids than going to argue with people.



I think there is a fundamental misunderstanding about why this was such a high profile cultural flashpoint. This was a perfect storm of gun rights meets political intimidation.

That's it.

To many Americans, Kyle's act of bringing an assault rifle to that kind of situation instantly painted him as a force of intimidation meant to silence speech. Consequently, when he got himself into a situation that was way over his head, he was able to use the fact that he had an assault rifle as a part of his defense that he was afraid for his life. To many, this was basically a situation of having your cake and eating it too.

Should the first individual who went after Kyle have had more restraint? Probably. But they weren't the one holding a weapon manufactured to kill people. Kyle was. In fact, many people had guns that night. But the only person who killed anyone was Kyle. A kid who had too little respect for life and way too large of an ego.

Now people are worried of copy-cat vigilantes. I'm not implying that Kyle's intention was to kill in Kenosha. I think that was a legitimately unfortunate chain of events. But other people will see this and come to extreme conclusions about what is or is not acceptable. And just because the law deemed what Kyle did to be acceptable, it will be of little comfort to future victims of stand your ground type claims of authority over who lives and dies.

No one would have died that night had Kyle not had a gun. People need to stop bringing guns to public spaces. We are too paranoid and trigger happy to be trusted with that kind of power, and there never seems to be a good guy with a gun when you need them. Likely because the legitimately good people are rarely the type who could stomach pulling the trigger.



It's funny. I think people who disagree with me should be allowed to live and view the needless deaths of two people as a bad thing, not something to masturbate to, fucking psychos! Yeeeeeeeesh!

EDIT: SO...anyone still think I'm this forum's worst bigot? That I am "pretty much where the Republican party is right now"? Or perhaps I'm not so bad after all?

Last edited by Jaicee - on 20 November 2021

IvorEvilen said:

I think there is a fundamental misunderstanding about why this was such a high profile cultural flashpoint. This was a perfect storm of gun rights meets political intimidation.

That's it.

To many Americans, Kyle's act of bringing an assault rifle to that kind of situation instantly painted him as a force of intimidation meant to silence speech. Consequently, when he got himself into a situation that was way over his head, he was able to use the fact that he had an assault rifle as a part of his defense that he was afraid for his life. To many, this was basically a situation of having your cake and eating it too.

Should the first individual who went after Kyle have had more restraint? Probably. But they weren't the one holding a weapon manufactured to kill people. Kyle was. In fact, many people had guns that night. But the only person who killed anyone was Kyle. A kid who had too little respect for life and way too large of an ego.

Now people are worried of copy-cat vigilantes. I'm not implying that Kyle's intention was to kill in Kenosha. I think that was a legitimately unfortunate chain of events. But other people will see this and come to extreme conclusions about what is or is not acceptable. And just because the law deemed what Kyle did to be acceptable, it will be of little comfort to future victims of stand your ground type claims of authority over who lives and dies.

No one would have died that night had Kyle not had a gun. People need to stop bringing guns to public spaces. We are too paranoid and trigger happy to be trusted with that kind of power, and there never seems to be a good guy with a gun when you need them. Likely because the legitimately good people are rarely the type who could stomach pulling the trigger.

This. ^^^

That is all.



Around the Network
IvorEvilen said:


Should the first individual who went after Kyle have had more restraint? Probably. But they weren't the one holding a weapon manufactured to kill people. Kyle was. 

The fuck you are talking about, the individual who ran after Kyle had a gun, hell, he shot aiming to kill Kyle. He missed, he died. 



LurkerJ said:
IvorEvilen said:


Should the first individual who went after Kyle have had more restraint? Probably. But they weren't the one holding a weapon manufactured to kill people. Kyle was. 

The fuck you are talking about, the individual who ran after Kyle had a gun, hell, he shot aiming to kill Kyle. He missed, he died. 

No. The first two who went after Kyle did not have guns. The first one had a plastic bag. He died. The second had a skateboard. He died. The third had a gun. He did not shoot. He got his bicep blown off. He survived.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F1gWECYYOSo

Please Watch/Share this video so it gets shown in Hollywood.

Signalstar said:
LurkerJ said:

The fuck you are talking about, the individual who ran after Kyle had a gun, hell, he shot aiming to kill Kyle. He missed, he died. 

No. The first two who went after Kyle did not have guns. The first one had a plastic bag. He died. The second had a skateboard. He died. The third had a gun. He did not shoot. He got his bicep blown off. He survived.

One of us is misinformed. I remember watching a video detailing the accident, the first guy who fired a gun wasn't Kyle. I am open to corrections. 



LurkerJ said:
Signalstar said:

No. The first two who went after Kyle did not have guns. The first one had a plastic bag. He died. The second had a skateboard. He died. The third had a gun. He did not shoot. He got his bicep blown off. He survived.

One of us is misinformed. I remember watching a video detailing the accident, the first guy who fired a gun wasn't Kyle. I am open to corrections. 

My understanding is the first person to shoot was someone behind Rosenbaum and they fired into the air. I have never heard anywhere that someone shot at Kyle. 



...

LurkerJ said:
Signalstar said:

No. The first two who went after Kyle did not have guns. The first one had a plastic bag. He died. The second had a skateboard. He died. The third had a gun. He did not shoot. He got his bicep blown off. He survived.

One of us is misinformed. I remember watching a video detailing the accident, the first guy who fired a gun wasn't Kyle. I am open to corrections. 

Website flubbed and posted twice. 



...