Race and Guns: Liberals are screwing up their own message.

Forums:
Email this Topic • Print this Page

Kyle Rittenhouse was a stupid 17 year old teen. He grabbed a gun and went to a violent protest. Three people got shot. Everyone involved in this story was White. Why the hell is the main story here about race?

The Kyle Rittenhouse story has nothing to do with race. The question we should be asking is "Why the hell is it so easy for a 17 year old to get a gun?"

The liberals are so rabid about race, that they are screwing up the message. Now we will have weeks of screaming about race that will make those who already are true believers more outraged and convince exactly no one.

The real discussion here is about gun control, and there is a real point to be made that the best way to keep this tragedy from happening is to keep guns out of the hands of kids.

Can we talk about that? This is a case of liberal extremism hurting liberal causes, when all they do is scream about race they lose the opportunity to make progress on real progressive values.

Topic Stats
Top Replies
Link to this Topic

Type: Question • Score: 2 • Views: 958 • Replies: 51

@maxdancona,

maxdancona wrote:

....The real discussion here is about gun control....

Another question might be why the police allowed a violent protest to persist. The violent portions of the protest should have been stopped at once.Violent protests tend to result in violence. People doing violence should have been stopped with water cannons, pepper spray, and possibly rubber bullets. Had the violent protest been stopped, and had the protesters remembered from the past that violent protests are always stopped, only a peaceful protest would have been left and the Rittenhouse affair would likely not have happened.

1 Reply

maxdancona wrote:

The question we should be asking is "Why the hell is it so easy for a 17 year old to get a gun?"

The answer is easy. Because we are a free country and 17 year old kids have rights.

maxdancona wrote:

The real discussion here is about gun control, and there is a real point to be made that the best way to keep this tragedy from happening is to keep guns out of the hands of kids.

There was no tragedy. The tragedy was averted by self defense.

Had progressives succeeded in preventing this poor kid from defending himself, then there would have been a tragedy.

1 Reply

@Brandon9000,

I am talking specifically about political strategy here. Your response is about policy. These are two distinct things. I do agree with you about policy though, although police are in an awfully difficult spot as it is.

0 Replies

@oralloy,

1. I would support a law that said that children under the age of 18 could not have a gun of any kind unless they are practicing or hunting under the supervision of a responsible adult.

2. I consider it a tragedy when people are shot, even if they are of the opposing political party. Lives were lost, and Kyle Rittenhouse is going to suffer from this; people who kill in combat, even as soldiers doing their job, suffer psychologically. Whatever you believe about whether these killings were justified or not, they were still a tragedy.

1 Reply

@maxdancona,

maxdancona wrote:

Kyle Rittenhouse was a stupid 17 year old teen. He grabbed a gun and went to a violent protest. Three people got shot. Everyone involved in this story was White. Why the hell is the main story here about race?

The Kyle Rittenhouse story has nothing to do with race. The question we should be asking is "Why the hell is it so easy for a 17 year old to get a gun?"

The liberals are so rabid about race, that they are screwing up the message. Now we will have weeks of screaming about race that will make those who already are true believers more outraged and convince exactly no one.

The real discussion here is about gun control, and there is a real point to be made that the best way to keep this tragedy from happening is to keep guns out of the hands of kids.

Can we talk about that? This is a case of liberal extremism hurting liberal causes, when all they do is scream about race they lose the opportunity to make progress on real progressive values.

You went too far here, Max.

If you want to say that race is not a primary element of the issue...fine. If you want to suggest it should not be the main story...fine. My agreement would not be solid, but I can understand the logic of those two arguments.

But to say that the issue has "has nothing to do with race" is absurd.

One of the reasons Kyle Rittenhouse was indicted and stood trial...is almost entirely due to race. If he had been black...he almost certainly would not have been indicted nor tried.

He would have been dead.

Kyle Rittenhouse was beckoned back behind police lines while walking towards them with an assault style weapon held in the ready position. He was, in effect, welcomed back by the police...AFTER he had shot three people with that weapon, killing two of them.

Anyone who thinks a black young man would have fared as well...is too naïve for this kind of discussion. I think you are NOT too naïve for it, Max.

2 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

what frank said

0 Replies

@maxdancona,

maxdancona wrote:

I would support a law that said that children under the age of 18 could not have a gun of any kind unless they are practicing or hunting under the supervision of a responsible adult.

I suppose that could work, since you allowed for kids to hunt if they are under adult supervision.

0 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Frank Apisa wrote:

Kyle Rittenhouse was beckoned back behind police lines while walking towards them with an assault style weapon held in the ready position.

His gun was not an assault style weapon. It was an ordinary self defense gun.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

Specifically, it was an AR-15 assault style weapon.

1 Reply

@InfraBlue,

Wrong. It is not an assault style weapon. It is an ordinary self defense weapon.

It should be returned to him so he can sell it for a lot of money like Mr. Zimmerman did with the gun that he used to defend himself when Trayvon tried to murder him. That should be enough to cover a college education for Mr. Rittenhouse.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

Nuh-uh.

1 Reply

@InfraBlue,

Wrong. Mr. Rittenhouse did not have an assault style weapon. He had an ordinary self defense weapon.

And wrong again. Since Mr. Rittenhouse committed no crime, he has the right to receive his property back, just like Mr. Zimmerman did when he committed no crime.

Kind of like my great uncle back in the olden days when he blew the sheriff's head off with a shotgun. He committed no crime, and the gun remains in my family's possession to this day.

2 Replies

@oralloy,

Quote:

You know, some 90 years ago the county sheriff shot up my great uncle while he was unarmed. He didn't sit around whining about it. He ran inside and grabbed his shotgun, and put a 12 gauge slug in the back of the sheriff's head.

Quote:

To this day the the local paper in that area still runs an occasional article about their poor precious dead sheriff.

So are you finally going to provide some proof for this silly story? And did the slug actually result in decapitation? This is the first time I've seen you make this specific claim.

1 Reply

@hightor,

Of course I'm not going to give you clues as to my real life identity.

What is silly about defending yourself when someone is murdering you? I don't know how I would react to being murdered, but it would be nice if I were aggressive enough to take my murderer with me when I go. I'm pretty proud of my great uncle. He didn't want to be murdered, but he went out like a man and left a better world behind him.

My understanding is that a significant amount of the sheriff's head was no longer there. I don't know exactly how much. I would guess that the lower part of his head was probably still attached to his neck.

It was a 12 gauge slug that struck the sheriff square in the head. Considering the era, the slug was probably a round lead ball. If you are curious, try doing an internet search for pictures of shotgun blasts to people's heads. I'm sure the pictures will be broadly similar to the sheriff's wound.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

Nuh-uh.

1 Reply

@InfraBlue,

You're wrong. It is not an assault style weapon. It is an ordinary self defense weapon.

You're also wrong about people receiving their guns back when they have committed no crime.

Mr. Rittenhouse will be able to pay for a college education if he sells that gun.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

Quote:

Of course I'm not going to give you clues as to my real life identity.

Oh, of course not. And it would be against the rules of this site to reveal such personal information even if I discovered it myself. I just thought it was interesting that no such crime is found in the Michigan Law Enforcement Officers Memorial list of fallen officers between 80 and 100 years ago. I guess it must not have happened in Michigan and the "local paper" you refer to is from another state.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

Quote:

It is not an assault style weapon.

Actually it fits the definition of an "assault-style" weapon:

Quote:

Any of various automatic or semiautomatic firearms with detachable magazines and often other features such as a pistol grip or a collapsible stock, designed for individual use

What makes it particularly dangerous is that, with its pistol grips and relatively short barrel (compared to a high-powered hunting rifle) it can be fired effectively without raising it to your shoulder. You see people brandishing AR15s from the hip, finger on the trigger. An "ordinary" defense weapon would be something like a handgun, taser, pepper spray, or possibly a sporting firearm that was in the house and easily repurposed.

1 Reply

@hightor,

If you emailed it to others, the site rules would not be violated, and no one would ever be able to prove it came from you.

I was intentionally vague about both the location and the date. I've also left out a large amount of details of the incident in order to ensure that no one could zero in on the specific event. Some of those details I'd actually like to be able to vent and rant about.

One time I decided I gave too much away and deleted my post a few minutes after I posted it. I don't know if anyone read it before I deleted it. It's also possible that it wasn't necessary and the post would have been fine. Better safe than sorry though.

1 Reply

Forums
» Race and Guns: Liberals are screwing up their own message.

Read Question
Reply to All

Race and Guns: Liberals are screwing up their own message.

Quick Links

My Account

able2know