Cannot think of a name wrote:Galloism wrote:You know, I’ve never looked at a person getting literally attacked in the street and thought “you know what would make this situation better? If the victim they were apparently attempting to murder was unarmed and unable to defend themselves”.
It’s a really twisted and hateful form of thinking. Can’t wrap my head around it at all.
Yeah, I know. You're outraged. Blah blah blah. I could give a shit about your state of mind. Thing is, I'm not a blithering fucking idiot who has to pretend that having the gun there wasn't an intentional act of escalation. I haven't shoved my head so far up my ass as to pretend it's an innocent act that didn't create the situation. You can hem and haw about what a dangerous unhinged wreckless person one of the three people he shot was, but funny, somehow the only person he managed to be a deadly threat to was the guy who brought a fucking rifle to a protest. You can wrap your little outrage in as much language as you want, and I know that you'll chase this thing all over the forum in your rampant pursuit of the golden mean, the 'rational centrist' as you bend over backwards to make excuses for this little shithead who brought a gun to a protest and shock and horror oh my god he eventually found a use for it but no no, he's just an innocent victim in it. I have not taken leave of my senses, I don't give a shit if the law allows people to create their situations where they have to defend themselves with deadly force. He's not off the hook. But keep at it, it's a super cool look to make the teenager who took a rifle to a protest as an innocent poo wittle victim who had no choice but to use the tool of agitation he was carrying around totally innocently. The fuck outta here with that.
Cannot think of a name wrote:Arlenton wrote:Your not buying that it's legal in Wisconsin for a 17 year old to carry a non-SBR rifle but not a handgun? I am pretty sure that is what the law says there.
Who the fuck said anything about 'legal'. Just because you can doesn't mean you should and if you do and you get the result you wanted in the first place just because it was 'perfectly legal' you're still a fucking piece of shit.
Cannot think of a name wrote:Arlenton wrote:He had a right to both be there and carry the rifle, regardless of how reckless it was. Protestors, and rioters, looters, and crazy people both who may or may not have any connection to the protests, have no right to rule the street and attack someone who is doing nothing illegal.
You have a right to do a lot of shitty things, still would make you a piece of shit.
Cannot think of a name wrote:Galloism wrote:You could read all of it, as I also referenced video which shows the same.
Stop blaming victims for getting attacked.
Oh look, co-opting language for an actual issue to make it seem legit. I think that fills out my bingo card.
You can blather yourself blue in the fucking face. A teenager brought a rifle to a protest and found a reason to use it and he's a fuckwad for doing so. I don't care if he had a right to do it, I'm not a judge. I'm someone who knows what bringing a gun to a protest says, the tension it creates, and that this is what the people who brought guns to a protest wanted. Good for them they have people that will bend over backwards excusing those actions by repeating 'it was legal' or 'this guy was scary so shooting three people was totally cool' for them. But nope. He's a fuckwad. You're tirelessly defending a fuckwad.
So. Whatya wanna do? Say the same fucking shit back and forth at each other for another fifteen pages? Pretend I give a shit about how you feel about me or care even a little about your respect while you cluck your tongue at me a couple more times? Tell ya what. Repeat yourself one more fucking time because I know you will, but let me just pre-load my response.
Don't buy it.
Now the thread can return to its topic.
This person should cool down a bit. We don't need another heated thread in NSG.
