The murder of Charlie Kirk

well a gun is a weapon you can use whatever word you want but that's what it is so someone carrying a weapon could be called a warrior. I understand I would be very freaked out if I saw a person walking around a gun here where its illegal. I have never seen one in public before

but the fact is this is a place where people do legally carry around weapons. While I would hope this would make a lot of people in Wisconsin used to it I would imagine there are still many people like you and me. I assume and hope that the open carry permit courses would teach a person of any age gun safety tho.

Also what is really wrong with protecting your property? Obviously it was not his property but he was essentially contracted to protect it. People say lives have no monetary value but that is bullshit. Every life has a monetary value while its toxic to guess what that is I'm certain the first piece of **** who died was not worth the multimillion dollar business they were tasked with protecting.
(who escalated the situation which lead to more deaths)

I think my controversial point here is that he was protecting an area with a weapon not roaming the streets with a weapon. I would also hire gunmen in this situation to protect mine if the law allowed it

There are 17 year olds I would trust 100% to hold a gun and there are 55 year olds that should never touch a gun, and this guy had no clue how old this kid was so it’s completely irrelevant to the issue at hand.

I've lived in 7 US states and visited many more. I have never seen anyone carrying an assault rifle apart from law enforcement and national guard officers. Even seeing those armed officers made me nervous. I'm pretty sure that is not at all common in any part of the US.

Did you see the photo I posted? If anything, he looked younger than 17.

And obviously he was not personally known to the victims.

Hilarious, if one remembers the fact that earlier today you claimed you were not defending the murderous Maga hick....

Oh I see, and the random guy starting fights with people who said the n word and was seen lighting stuff on fire that night is the guy you trust to take the gun from this kid, and you justify this by saying oh well he looked younger than 17. And clearly if the violent and unstable person judges you to look younger than 17 he can chase you down while a guy is yelling that he wants to kill you and firing a bullet in the air, and try to take your gun. This is based off of his subjective judgment.

This is also despite the fact that Rittenhouse had the gun the whole day and Rosenbaum had seen him and not said anything to that effect to him nor had he questioned him about his age prior to that nor did anyone testify to knowing what his age was and I did not see any testimony saying he looked particularly out of place for being young looking.

I don’t really get it, but if that’s what it takes for you to feel consistent in your stance on vigilantism (this despite the fact that Rosenbaum would have been the vigilante in this case since Rittenhouse had done absolutely nothing up to this point except make the situation more positive).

Rittenhouse probably acted legally under applicable law. That said, it was idiotic and cowboy-ish for a seventeen-year old to bring a rifle into that situation, whether it was legal or not.

I don't see any heroes in this particular incident.

And I said as such. I never claimed KR should have been there with an AR-15 style rifle. My claim throughout this has been very simple and becomes just so crystal clear when you look at the evidence. Rosenbaum and Zeminski, two people that plausibly were actually trying to mess with the car lot that people want to say Rittenhouse was just trying to use as a pretext to kill protestors, accosted Rittenhouse while he was using a fire extinguisher to literally put out a car that was on fire.

From there they chased him as he tried to run away from them, and Zeminski literally fired a bullet which caused him to turn around to look and see Rosenbaum running up on him. This was only a few moments after he just heard Zeminski yell about killing him and firing his gun (for all he knew, since he wasn’t looking, Zeminski had aimed at him and simply missed). This guy, who had threatened to kill him earlier that day, was trying to take the rifle out of his hands.

Those two people were absolutely violent and unstable, seemingly out for blood, and doing the exact riot tourism that Rittenhouse was accused of. Then as he’s running away to turn himself in to the cops, who refused to even arrest him despite him jumping in front of their car to put his hands up. He then immediately turns himself in. This was after a full day of just doing what he said he was there to do, giving aid and trying to put out fires at the car lot.

Does that mean he should have been there and it was responsible? Absolutely not, he’s 17 years old. But that doesn’t mean he was “not from the community” or that Rosenbaum was some hero character that tried to stop what he thought was a mass shooter.

Who would read the facts of what actually happened and feel the need to only talk about Rittenhouse for being there rather than realize that Rosenbaum and Zeminski were the key instigators that day and caused the series of events that unfolded right after? Many people who condemn Rittenhouse want to hold on to the view that his first killing was him going crazy and unloading on an unarmed protestor 4 times for no reason. That couldn’t be further from the truth.

Yes, Rittenhouse is a piece of shiit, and his mom is garbage, too.

The biggest question was the guy at the gas station, as no clear footage was posted on YouTube, but the evidence brought in court from nearby surveillance showed him running away from his attacker and only shooting once his chubby ass couldn't outrun his assailant. The skateboard and the handgun incidents shouldn't be debatable at all.

However, the prosecution tried to have a recording from two weeks prior where he was in a car with a friend watching looting going on and said, "Bro, I wish I had my fukking AR. I'd start shooting rounds at them."

That would have probably cooked him.

Shittenhouse’s stated objective was to cross state lines to be a provocateur. He was literally an example of right wing indoctrination thinking this country needs a hero

The legality and context of what he ultimately did is irrelevant (it shouldn’t be, but it now is), the fact is he was radicalized by right wing messaging, indoctrinated by right wing messaging, and believed the world needed a good guy with a gun now more than ever

And in a sign of how ****ed up we are as a country, the end result of all of this is that he is a hero

Deeply unserious people being deeply unserious

Same as it ever was

And that cooks him as far as in this discussion - he basically got off on a technicality. So the men who died weren't great guys, and they were behaving badly during a riot (which is pretty much true by definition).

But they weren't armed, and they didn't show up planning to kill someone. KR did. They, in fact didn't kill anyone. KR did.

Where do you guys got this idea that being unarmed makes you immune from being shot at when you are violent toward others?

I don't believe that, just making a comparison. I never claimed these were good guys or that they were heroes (my hero comments were theoretical and deliberately made to provide the frame in which they could by seen that way)

But that doesn't make KR innocent. The dead guys weren't on trial.

and where did he state that? thats what we call an opinion not a statement. I didn't know the hate was so deep for this nucklehead. im curious do you guys also hate the other 4 or so armed guards he was working with that no one ever talks about? because they did the same thing yet theres no hate or love for them

I doubt that Wisconsin is a blue state. I highly doubt they are the most pro gun state in the union

These 4 "armed guards" also killed people? I know nothing about them, but I'm pretty sure I would have heard if there were multiple other shooting deaths at the scene.

Wisconsin was a swing state won by Trump with a very small margin in 2024. It's not even close to being the most pro-gun state.

I don't understand how these relate to my comment you quoted.

It's really good to see how movin.target is definitely not defending Shittenhouse. No Sir, not at all. Imagine if he did.

I actually feel safer when I see a person open carrying in a Walmart. We need more citizens open carrying in public. As someone with a CCW, I don't carry often but when I do I automatically feel more inclined to AVOID conflict of any kind. Guns make a polite society.

WWJC?

What I like most about guns is that they made a charliekirkless society possible.

A Wizard staff? And maybe a backpocket subcompact .40cal for when **** gets real 😀

Yeah the last couple pages highlights my last point exactly

There is no symmetry between the left and right. The left still holds disdain for Rittenhouse who shot violent rioters and a child rapist when they attacked him.

The reaction to saint floyd dying while resisting arrest was foaming at the mouth rage.

The reaction to kirk dying has been to dance on his grave. As I said before, if this happened to someone like AOC there wouldn't be people shifting blame on to her messaging or a tsunami of grave dancing

Kirks murder is like 10/10 outrage on the right. No riots or murders (I'm sure some loon will try to retaliate at some point though).

The left is just totally unhinged with a broken moral compass and a total lack of humanity. They're even attacking vigils and memorials now. It even happened in canada. These people are mental