Doesn't matter. That's not my argument.

First of all, I will say that this statement of mine has nothing to do with legality of this incident. So just in case someone wants to twist my words again. This post is just talking about the reality of nature.

First rule of nature, you respect whoever has the advantage. You don't go crying when you try to fight someone with fists and up losing because he had a gun or is more experienced than you. Huber was a fucking idiot. He wanted to play "hero" because he was convinced he was. He chased Kyle, tried smack him, got shot and died. I mean who knew someone's self preservation will kick in when you try to smack someone in the head with the skateboard during a really incident where a mob is involved. It's a pure failure of common sense on his behalf.

Alright then, I'm only arguing with the person that thinks more deaths from non-guns means bats are as deadly as AR-15's. If your quote wasn't you agreeing with that portion of his argument than my mistake. 

Yea, I can see you didn't watch the trial. Kyle did have it on his back for most of the day. It wasn't until shit started going down that he took it off his back. He also never did point his gun til threatened. 

And go to the cops? You mean the ones who weren't doing shit and letting the community burn. Probably told to stand down or do the minimal. Of course, if the cops shot a bunch of violent rioters, you'd be bitching, too.

Hilarious that you're on a video game board pushing that supposed Right-wing puritan belief that video games cause people to be violent. If anything, Kyle was incredibly disciplined with that gun. 100% of the people who didn't attack Kyle are still alive. Hell, a lot of the people who got in some cheap shots are alive, too.

Again, sorry, not sorry, it didn't go your way and we actually have the right to defend ourselves, our property, and our community.

Yes, and society can also judge the actions of those trying to destroy that property.  And sane people do not have much sympathy for people destroying property of people that have nothing to do with whatever BS thing you are rioting over and will instead sympathize with those who are trying to defend that property.  It's also pretty elitist to just assume everyone can afford and has insurance on their houses and businesses, just so you can justify that destruction in your head.  It's not just things to them, it's the destruction of their way of life.  Of course, people who like to say its just things have no empathy for those people, pr people in general, but sure as HELL wouldn't be saying the same when the riots come to their house.  That's why those bastard mayors and governors who tell the cops and National Guard to stand down have a quick change of heart once the rioters get a little too close to their families' homes.

Sadly too many people are guided by the biased media and don't look at the actual facts of the cases, or the number of cases, involved to realize that rioting, or even protesting, has no basis in reality.  There was no coverage of the black school shooter in Texas who was out on a bail of $75K less than 24 hrs of him shooting inside a school.  Shouldn't he have been shot on sight if the narrative was true.  A case in Georgia that may actually have to do with racists killing a black man hasn't gotten nearly the same coverage as the Rittenhouse case, which involved no one of color.  Why?  Because stripping law abiding citizens of the right to defend themselves is more important to them than actual racism.  They also know that if the facts of the case definitely point to them being racists, the vast majority of people will agree and come together on it.  Can't have that.  Not good for ratings.

And you guys keep that White Nationalists/Supremacists narrative alive.  It's just going to make it easier for Rittenhouse to sue the ass off of these media companies, just like Nick Sandman.  The kid you guys were saying was a racist White Nationalist/Supremacist who harassed a Native American.

And if you can't see that the media is biased, then that is most likely because you yourself are biased. Too many people think that black people were shot.  That Kyle had the gun illegally.  That he crossed state lines with it, not that I think that is even illegal.  That he was marching up and down the streets all day pointing the gun at people.  That his mom drove him, which I have no idea what that has to do with anything.  Hell, people actually think Jacob Blake, the piece of garbage that the riots were even started over, is dead.  Even after the trial, some people, including people who should know better like politicians and celebrities who supposedly were following the case, were saying these things.  Why?  Because many media outlets were reporting them as pretty much fact.  They only slowly started walking it back when it was proven wrong in court and they know they have a chance of being sued over it.  These are ALL things that could have been debunked with just the smallest amount of research.  But, that wouldn't fit their agenda, so they just ran with whatever they wanted to be true, just like the Nick Sandman incident.  Again, if you can't see how biased that is, that's all you.

I mean it's futile to even bring such a thing up. Why would I even bother arguing against something like that? You're not a computer or superhuman to be able to calculate what your actual fucking odds are. It doesn't work like that. All you got are your instincts which a lot of people do not have at all. When you get into a physical conflict, whatever happens, you signed up for it. Now what comes out legally, is an entirely different situation.

When something happens that wasn't intended, there's no "Oh it was an accident" or "I didn't mean to do that". Kyle shot back as a means of self preservation. That's about it. He was running away from the Child Molester who tried to grab his gun while another stupid idiot behind the Child Molester though it was a good idea to shoot in the air. He was running away from the crowd till something knocks him down on the ground Huber did something stupid. He shot Huber while his back was on the ground. So I don't know what the hell are you trying to twist this situation into but it is hilarious!

I'm just trying to bring us back to reality here. If my child rushes me with a fork I shouldn't shoot him in response even if some people die from accidental fork stabbings. Kyle can be reasonable in his actions at the time without equating every single weapon even vaguely capable of killing someone. We aren't supercomputers but we should be able to differentiate use of force in different scenarios. 

Your mind reading skills need work. 

You can try to bring up apples and oranges but it's not gonna work. You're just looking silly.

If you're trying to say that what happened in the Kyle Rittenhouse incident is not a reality, then I question what reality you have.

My conversation was specific to cops as Thismeintiel tried to get another user on a "bet you'd be bitching if the cops shot a bunch of violent rioters" whilst lacking all sorts of context so I wanted clarification on this attempted gotcha but now I'm just shaking my head in disbelief, it wasn't about Kyle or regular civilians.

Though now I'm curious on all sorts of scenarios, if all things share the same threat levels, can a cop shoot someone who uses a pencil as a weapon since it could kill someone if stabbed in the right spot too? If there's two people doing fisticuffs in the streets, can the cop then shoot one of them as they perceive them to be a threat, without knowing who the instigator even is?

Giving cops free reign to shoot at any perceived threat is an absolutely awful idea I can't even begin to imagine how terrible that would go, American police are already trigger happy as it is, I don't see why you want to make that even worse, and that's without getting into the fact that the cop doesn't know who instigated it if we're talking about civilians fighting each other.

Cops absolutely should be able to asses situations if the threat is directed towards them too and use the appropriate response, they have more at their disposal than just a pistol, Lol.

But I think I've said all I have to say on this, I know how I want cops to behave, I sure as shit am glad they don't behave like a deer in headlights, Lol.

Stop trying to read between the lines before you read the actual lines themselves. I am arguing against someone that said "Your bullet and punch example falls flat when it is a fact that more people die from being hit physically than from being shot every year"

Now do you agree with the quote (in which case there's a debate to be had about how math and stats work and how they should be interpreted) or not (in which case I have no real debate with you on that topic)