I like how you completely skipped over my response to you with video of KR saying how much he'd like to shoot shoplifters. What was that again about posting in good faith?

That one, it seems.

Whatever he intended to do it shouldn't be allowed. Your f laws made it possible so he could do it. Your laws suck.

1. It seems like your opinion is that all shootings are the same, and they all deserve the same reaction, regardless of the circumstances surrounding. Smart...


2. Every single one of your posts basically boils down to "America bad, DURRR!" Nobody cares.

I skipped your post because I didn't think it merited response.

DJ: Anyone who is saying KR was "hunting" is posting in bad faith.
d2: Here is a video of KR saying he wants to shoot shoplifters. Call it hunting, vigilantism, cleaning up the streets, whatever you want.
DJ: That doesn't merit a response.

Does that **** work in court, bro? Doesn't seem to be working great for Binger.

Speak for yourself? As an American, I actually care that our gun policies are an insane aberration from 1st-world norms and that it's somehow legal for a 17-year old kid to patrol my neighborhood with a ****ing assault rifle. I'm not even a person of color and that **** creeps me out. Sorry if hearing mild criticism of America's gun laws triggers you or whatever.

Donk is playing us. He wants to make a drama by intentionally misunderstanding every aspect. Look at his avator and his Nick. Lol

18* year old, yo. You know, the one who is 3 years away from being responsible enough to have a beer.

My understanding was that he is 18 now but was 17 at the time he shot those dudes; someone correct me if I'm wrong about this.

That is correct. One of his charges is underage possession of that weapon. You need to be 18.

Why don't we try to use some common sense here?

1. If the intent was to "hunt" people, then he would have come on the scene and started to shoot people immediately, instead of waiting until he was being attacked. We see mass shooters in America constantly that are out to hunt people; they take their opportunity to kill people. KR's actions do not seem analogous to me, but you can go with it if it makes you feel better.

2. KR said "I wish I would shoot those people [people stealing out of a store]." It seems to me that your position is that anything that this kid does in the future now has to be looked at through the lens of this comment. Normal people look at a comment like this and think to themselves "hmm, what is the context of this comment? Does he mean it literally? Is it the kind of thing that people regularly say in everyday conversation, perhaps to connote frustration and anger? Does this have to mean that he is a bloodthirsty killer in waiting?" Not D2! Nope, he feels like every single thing that anybody says, regardless of context, is to be construed literally and is 100% a window into their future intent.

3. If this kid blew away a robber or thief, there may be some relevance to the comment he made. This is not the same situation at all.

Sure, Trolly and I were being somewhat hyperbolic in our use of the term "hunt" (only to poke fun at another poster who tried to draw some sort of equivalence, btw). But, given KR's comments, it's nowhere near as unreasonable as you made it out to be.

Right. It's the sort of thing you don't really take seriously. You know, right up until the point that the guy who said it does exactly what he said he would like to do, after putting himself in a situation where it was likely he would end up doing exactly what he said he would like to do. I'd say that's about the point I start lending the comment a little more gravitas.

If my wife overhears me talking to my buddies about how I'd love to bang the marketing girl at work, and then I end up banging the marketing girl at work, I can't really use the "honey, it was all just locker room talk, and then I slipped and my dick fell into her" defence.

Right. Just "looters."

That law is much more complex and ambiguous than this summary makes it out to be.

I think my general point about the ridiculousness of allowing 18 year olds to own firearms but not to drink stands.

That's fine, and I agree -- although to be fully precise about it, people under 18 are permitted to drink with a parent or guardian. They can't purchase booze or possess it on their own.

At the same time, I generally think proportionality arguments like this are not very strong.

At what age would you want to legalize owning guns and drinking alcohol?

Alcohol - 16
Guns - 120

On one hand, I take a dim view of hunting and hunters. It's straight up sociopathy that we recognize killing animals for fun as a form of legitimate recreation. I have a lot of friends who hunt, it's still creepy as **** what they do for pleasure and I'll never understand it.

OTOH, you have to at least respect the skill and artistry that goes into hunting. I'm enough of a Midwesterner to know that venturing off into the woods with a rifle and coming back with a deer requires quite a bit of know-how and skill. Rittenhouse was parading around a riot looking for the flimsiest possible pretext to blast some people, it's insulting to call that "hunting." Shooting human beings in a city is "hunting" in the same sense that walking into a pet store and shooting puppies in a cage is "hunting." You're not a hunter, you're just an ******* killing things.



OK, but what if he wanted to kill people and get away with it? You're supposedly a lawyer, right? You grok that maybe he might have waited a bit until he found a situation where he could claim he was acting in self defense?

It's crazy how that works, right? You hear what people say and you incorporate that into your understanding of them. Absolutely wild **** if you really sit down and think about it.

If I'm in the prosecution this kid is not getting off.

Wtf is he doing, playing hide and seek in the parking lots? And wtf is he protecting? He can't even protect himself with a semi automatic gun strapped to him.
So he should have stayed home. This whole thing is a joke and all on him.

"These kids were chasing me and I had my AT 15 strapped to me!"

"Were they armed?"

"No, but they would have taken my gun and shot me, so I shot them!" WTF?!??

The bolded is some absolutely wild ****. The implication is that he might actually claim he was out hunting in order to duck a gun possession charge. What an amazing country we live in.

Sure.


Not sure if blocking roads illegally is part of the 1st Amendment's right to peaceable assembly, but OK.

Is illegally blocking roads a lawful protest? I don't know, so tell me if it is or isn't. But yes, extreme lawlessness should be stopped by arrest.

Sure.


Well, the 1st Amendment allows for the peaceful assembly for the redress of grievances. The 2nd Amendment allows for a well-regulated militia being necessary for the security of a free state to bear arms.

Are they actual vigilantes, or are they a well-regulated militia formed out of necessity to secure a free state when police refused to secure the free state? Are the protestors peacefully assembling when a minority creates a big problem with burning down businesses, police stations, homes, etc?

Really?

Yes.

Catholics and Anglican's use wine in Communion that can be received by anyone 12+

Yes. I sourced the point on Wikipedia rather than getting on Westlaw and parsing the statute, but wiki was clear on this point.