Why? Were they also shooting people?
No, they were just there rioting and burning a city they didnt live in.
Its a pretty good move to want to go defend property that isnât yours.
Its a pretty jerk move to go burn and destroy a city you donât live in.
5 Likes
Thanks for clarifying.
Still wrong.
I did. Even posted many. None of it applies to a 17 year carrying loaded weapon on a street
No they have not.
Apparently so, though itâs not clear who the victims are.
My mistake.
Still doesnât really change the point.
Protecting home, family, or property is different then crossing state borders to put your self in the middle of civil unrest to say you are protecting property that you have no ties to.
WowâŚwe agree on somethingâŚlol
People are getting fed up with the rioting and burning.
I think you are going to see more and more people defending their properties and cities against these thugs.
Inevitable unless the Mayors grow a backbone and put a stop to the violence themselves.
2 Likes
What does that have to do with the quote I was responding to?
We know themâŚ
1st guy shot. Registered sex offender for acts involving a minor.
Second guy shot. The one that hit him with a skateboard. Has been charged with battery and multiple counts of domestic abuse. Also lives 45 miles from the riots since evidently that matters to the left.
Third guy shot in the arm. Felon, canât possess a firearms.
1 Like
Thatâs your post right?
The scenario you discribed is 100% different then what happened.
You discribed a scenario where someone protesting their family and themselves was force to break the law for self defense.
Vs
A kid who broke the law and as a result of him breaking the law, lead to him shooting people
Actually. The result of grown criminal adults breaking the law is what led to him shooting the rioters.
If he wasnât there with a gun do they get killed?
Did he have to be there? Was he asked to be there?
Was he even legally allowed to be there with a gun?
For self defense he has to PROOF that his life was in danger independent of him breaking the law.
If he wasnât breaking the law would be have shot 2 people??
You will ask the same questions from the victims, but their answer doesnât matter. They are not going to be on trial
One of us has a reading comprehension problem. Reading is fundamental.I was responding to whether or not a case could be made for self defense. Doc said it couldnt with this post.
I showed a scenario where it could. No where did I make the claim where what happened here is the same as in my scenario.
Further, are you as naive to believe that a person carrying a unregistered loaded weapon on their person, gets robbed and beat up by three attackers, will be charged for murder if he kills any of the perpetrators? If he has a spotless record, he will never be convicted. It will all boil down to who is the aggressor. In this case, the video shows who the aggressor is. He will get a jury trial and be found not guilty for any of the shootings, and maybe a conviction on a misdemeanor for carry a weapon under age.
Defund the police if you want to. I can promise you it will lead to more antifa getting shot.
The rioter with the handgun may get arrested. There are petitions going around calling for his arrest.
Prediction: the kid gets cleared of all charges. From the pictures and reports, the first guy was shot in the head while throwing a brick in a plastic bag at the kid⌠making his shooting legal self defense.
That in turn means the second two had no legal reason to apprehend the kid, and it was two guys assaulting him with deadly weapons⌠also legal self defense.
And since the DA there is an idiot and wants to charge him as an adult, it means they cant charge him as a minor in possession of a weapon.
1 Like
I didnt think of that, but have been wondering if it will come out that he has been previously emancipated. Otherwise, why would his mother drive him to the event? There has to be more to it. I cant see a mother driving her 17yo to a riot like that.
Thereâs already been a trial? Damn it, I really wanted to hear the arguments.
That was a big one.
