NHL NHL will resume play on Saturday

[jgatie]

Just a guess, but I'd say he's contesting the motivations of Mr. Rittenhouse. It's fine to say he went there with a med kit and to help protect, but given how it played out, I think it's fair to second guess his intentions behind going.

But I didn't say anything about his motivation, only what the time frame the decision was made in.

 

[LSCII]

I think I heard that the family of the teenager who was killed in CHOP has brought a $3 BILLION wrongful death suit against the City of Seattle. If people are honest, I would bet that many here supported that takeover. It tragically points out that anarchy, burning, looting, destruction leads to nothing positive. When I moved to DC nearly 30 years ago, there were MANY burned out blocks from the 1968 civil rights riots which were still there 25 years later. And they stayed that way for another 15 additional years. Violence and destruction solve nothing, no matter the underlying reasons.

Can't disagree with any of this. It's insane all sides. Way too many fringe groups muddying the waters too, and depending on what news outlet you follow, it's blamed on whomever they don't like. If you only see one side of that story, you come away convinced it's all one group doing all the stupid shit. But like most things in life, the truth lies in the middle.

 

[Jdavidev]

On this we agree. I myself posted a real life scenario about a "good man" cop who was killed because he hesitated to shoot a persona of color who was holding a rock. I asked if that cop would still be a "good man" if he had instead shot the person of color holding a rock and went home to his wife and kids, yet had his face plastered over every headline in the nation because "Cop shoots person of color holding a rock!"

I asked this to make the point that rushing to judgement doesn't help anyone, and the typical private citizen's idea of what is and isn't a deadly scenario doesn't mesh too well with real life.

Nobody dared answer the question.

It was a heinous murder. And I believe you said this was close to personal for you, but you seem to be injecting that he hesitated because the perp was a person of color, which no one knows if that was true or not. The guy was running from a hit and run accident, seemed to be trying to break into a home to hide out. The officer had no way of knowing his life was in imminent danger beforehand. It was horrible, awful, tragic. And the guy will spend the rest of his life in prison for it. But no, I don't want officers just to shoot people who might pose a threat. Their duty is to protect and serve, to arrest individuals so that they can't be held accountable for their actions. It can be a scary, f***ed up job. And as a society, we have a duty to help them by addressing poverty, drugs and guns on the streets. And while the police have a role in that, so do we. Community outreach, more drug and mental health institutions, and demanding more of our politicians to address racial and economic disparities.

This whole thing isn't a bad cop / good cop thing. It's not even as simple as systemic racism. Police reform alone won't stop this. This is a failure of society to just send our police out there to clean up all of our mess. Of course our last line of defense is going to get hardened and scared. Us against them. None of this is new. This war has been going on all my life. The same issues, again and again. The only difference now is that we have cameras in everyone's pockets. But the root problem of inequity continues.

We shouldn't allow our police to have the power to be judge, jury and executioner, but we also shouldn't give our police the burden of being judge, jury and executioner.

 

[LSCII]

I stated in my post it is still illegal. However, I like to clarify things, especially when the facts are a clarification of an oft cited statement that can be misconstrued.

On the other hand, the kid is a wannabe, and should be in jail for a long time.

Sure. And he will be, no doubt. Like I said earlier, what kind of parent allows their teenager to go to a protest strapped like that? I wouldn't let my kids anywhere near that shit show, let alone drive them there with weapons.

 

[jgatie]

I’m contesting the fact that you said it might not have been premeditated because he didn’t travel hundreds of miles to get there.

No I didn't. Whether he did it spur of the moment, or thought about it for days, he got in the car and drove there, which shows premeditation.

 

[LSCII]

But I didn't say anything about his motivation, only what the time frame the decision was made in.

Yeah, I didn't say you did. I said my guess was that's what @Mainehockey33 was getting at. And he clarified, and that is what he was saying.

 

[Save By Thomas]

I stated in my post it is still illegal. However, I like to clarify things, especially when the facts are a clarification of an oft cited statement that can be misconstrued.

On the other hand, the kid is a wannabe, and should be in jail for a long time.

I don't think that kid is a 'wannabe' at all, he most definitely is an 'is'.

 

[jgatie]

It was a heinous murder. And I believe you said this was close to personal for you, but you seem to be injecting that he hesitated because the perp was a person of color, which no one knows if that was true or not. The guy was running from a hit and run accident, seemed to be trying to break into a home to hide out. The officer had no way of knowing his life was in imminent danger beforehand. It was horrible, awful, tragic. And the guy will spend the rest of his life in prison for it. But no, I don't want officers just to shoot people who might pose a threat. Their duty is to protect and serve, to arrest individuals so that they can't be held accountable for their actions. It can be a scary, f***ed up job. And as a society, we have a duty to help them by addressing poverty, drugs and guns on the streets. And while the police have a role in that, so do we. Community outreach, more drug and mental health institutions, and demanding more of our politicians to address racial and economic disparities.

This whole thing isn't a bad cop / good cop thing. It's not even as simple as systemic racism. Police reform alone won't stop this. This is a failure of society to just send our police out there to clean up all of our mess. Of course our last line of defense is going to get hardened and scared. Us against them. None of this is new. This war has been going on all my life. The same issues, again and again. The only difference now is that we have cameras in everyone's pockets. But the root problem of inequity continues.

We shouldn't allow our police to have the power to be judge, jury and executioner, but we also shouldn't give our police the burden of being judge, jury and executioner.

You are correct, we don't know if he hesitated. So, regardless if he hesitated or not, would he have been in the right for shooting a person of color holding a rock?

 

[Bocephus86]

Uh, yeah, I'm serious. I've been 'presented a world view you (I) hadn't considered before' (except I had considered that view) and have absolutely, with zero reservations, rejected it. I'm pushing 50 years old, my 'world view' wasn't formed overnight.

Learning & personal growth should never stop. I guess some people are fundamentally different.

 

[jgatie]

Really? Rioters and looters are terrible and they've done some bad things, but killing them? Really? Seriously? Over some insured goods and some damage to some statues and a handful of buildings? I don't advocate for that at all. I'd advocate to have the people who did it to be arrested and prosecuted, but murdering them? Nah.

Not by self-styled cop helpers, but I fully support what the Korean grocers did during the Rodney King riots to protect their stores and livelihoods. Those guys were badass (and I don't believe they killed anyone).

 

[Gee Wally]

Apparently they have now added charges to the kid:


Kyle Rittenhouse Faces New Charges in Kenosha Shooting

The new charges against Mr. Rittenhouse include first-degree reckless homicide, first-degree recklessly endangering safety, first-degree intentional homicide and possession of a dangerous weapon.

When he was first arrested Wednesday in his hometown of Antioch, Ill., the teenager was charged with first-degree homicide.

Mr. Rittenhouse was due to appear in court early Friday for a hearing that would have determined whether he can be extradited to Wisconsin, where he could be charged as an adult. But a public defender appearing on his behalf requested a delay while his family seeks the help of a private attorney. The teen’s extradition hearing is now scheduled for Sept. 25.

If tried as an adult and convicted, Mr. Rittenhouse could face life in prison.

 

[CDJ]

bad things happen to murderers, Hope he enjoys his ruined life

 

[CDJ]

Also imagine handcuffing somebody that you just paralyzed to a bed so he can’t escape


Stupid and callous. Gotta love it.

 

[The National]

Crazy Crazy world we live in. At least we have a little bit of hockey left to get away from it all.

Stuff like this reminds us of how silly getting worked up over our hockey team is. But we’ll still do it .

Hopefully we can get a little bit closer to figuring this thing out in my lifetime.

 

[LouJersey]

Very interesting that people have no issue with a person using basic human nature instinct to protect oneself when feeling in danger and shooting first is acceptable but for some reason it isn’t when you wear a badge.

Obviously not referring to what happened in Wisconsin, just the general mentality of people. Interesting way to look at things

 

[CDJ]

I personally hold police officers to a higher standard than I do drug dealers who think they are gonna get shot and robbed because people broke into their house in the middle of the night

 

[Beesfan]

Apparently they have now added charges to the kid:


Kyle Rittenhouse Faces New Charges in Kenosha Shooting

The new charges against Mr. Rittenhouse include first-degree reckless homicide, first-degree recklessly endangering safety, first-degree intentional homicide and possession of a dangerous weapon.

When he was first arrested Wednesday in his hometown of Antioch, Ill., the teenager was charged with first-degree homicide.

Mr. Rittenhouse was due to appear in court early Friday for a hearing that would have determined whether he can be extradited to Wisconsin, where he could be charged as an adult. But a public defender appearing on his behalf requested a delay while his family seeks the help of a private attorney. The teen’s extradition hearing is now scheduled for Sept. 25.

If tried as an adult and convicted, Mr. Rittenhouse could face life in prison.

I'm a lawyer, and from what I have seen I highly doubt Rittenhouse will be convicted of any homicide charges. The fact that he shouldn't have been there, the fact that he was inciting trouble by his mere presence and even the fact that he was illegally in possession of the gun will not be factors because they don't have bearing on self-defense. Self defense is all about the moment, and whether the defendant had a reasonable fear that he would be killed or suffer great bodily harm. In both shooting instances, Rittenhouse is running away and being pursued by a large group. In the first, a gun goes off behind him just seconds before he discharges his weapon at a man (who I believe was armed) and had gotten close enough to him to grab the barrel of his gun. In the second shooting, moments later, Rittenhouse is clearly being chased an attacked by a large group and I think in reasonable fear of great bodily harm.

The only way he gets convicted is if the State can show that in the first shooting, the people attacking him were themselves acting in self-defense against him. From what I've seen, that is a little far fetched, as he is running away, gun barrel down. It will take more than just showing he had a weapon, there will have to be evidence of him brandishing it and threatening people. That isn't in the evidence that's out there now, but it could emerge. Ironically, whether the second shooting is lawful may depend largely on whether the first shooting was self-defense. If Rittenhouse is fleeing after what has been determined a justified homicide, then the crowd has no right to attack him, and his use of force against them is now lawful. However, if the first homicide was not justified, then one could conclude that the crowd was acting in self-defense (or defense of others) when then chased him down to subdue/disarm him.

All in all, I think there is far too much gray area for a murder conviction. All it takes is one juror to vote against, and I think there will be more than that. He will definitely get convicted of some lesser charges though.

 

[jgatie]

I personally hold police officers to a higher standard than I do drug dealers who think they are gonna get shot and robbed because people broke into their house in the middle of the night

Actually, you don't. You are giving the drug dealers the benefit of the doubt when it comes to evaluating whether their life is in danger and/or when to use deadly force (afterall, you've said nothing about the drug dealer not being justified in shooting first). That same benefit of the doubt you are not giving the cops. That's holding the drug dealers to a higher standard.

 

[LouJersey]

I personally hold police officers to a higher standard than I do drug dealers who think they are gonna get shot and robbed because people broke into their house in the middle of the night

I agree one maybe should be trained more, both however are still human. Consequences should be paid for sure in all cases

 

[CDJ]

Actually, you don't. You are giving the drug dealers the benefit of the doubt when it comes to evaluating whether their life is in danger and/or when to use deadly force (afterall, you've said nothing about the drug dealer not being justified in shooting first). That same benefit of the doubt you are not giving the cops. That's holding the drug dealers to a higher standard.

not at all, I expect the drug dealer to fire in a situation like that because he’s a drug dealer. If anything I’m holding him to a lower standard

I don’t expect a tax dollar paid public servant to play judge, jury, and executioner or Rambo however. They’re supposed to be cool under pressure. If they aren’t they chose the wrong job. And they aren’t a criminal. Or at least they aren’t supposed to be....

 

[jgatie]

not at all, I expect the drug dealer to fire in a situation like that because he’s a drug dealer. If anything I’m holding him to a lower standard

I don’t expect a tax dollar paid public servant to play judge, jury, and executioner or Rambo however. They’re supposed to be cool under pressure. If they aren’t they chose the wrong job. And they aren’t a criminal. Or at least they aren’t supposed to be....

Where do you draw the line? Should they wait until fired upon before evaluating? How many bullets do they have to take before they can "play judge, jury, and executioner or Rambo".

Also. cops have no wish to be judge, jury, and executioner. Shooting someone is horrible. Killing someone is worse. Some cops never recover. If you hold them to a higher standard, at least realize that and stop with the cartoonish language. Ask me about a cop who had to kill a deranged man who chopped his mother into pieces, then attacked him with a machete. He was never the same afterwards. Real life ain't TV.

 

[LouJersey]

not at all, I expect the drug dealer to fire in a situation like that because he’s a drug dealer. If anything I’m holding him to a lower standard

I don’t expect a tax dollar paid public servant to play judge, jury, and executioner or Rambo however. They’re supposed to be cool under pressure. If they aren’t they chose the wrong job. And they aren’t a criminal. Or at least they aren’t supposed to be....

So when someone reacts in self preservation you expect one to be human and one to be a cop.

I totally understand what you are trying to say and in my opinion the police are incredibly patient in those situations because they run into them every day of the week. Obviously some are unfit and should never be in that position but I don’t think you’re being completely fair with the human element, like it or not.

 

[HumBucker]

I'm a lawyer, and from what I have seen I highly doubt Rittenhouse will be convicted of any homicide charges. The fact that he shouldn't have been there, the fact that he was inciting trouble by his mere presence and even the fact that he was illegally in possession of the gun will not be factors because they don't have bearing on self-defense. Self defense is all about the moment, and whether the defendant had a reasonable fear that he would be killed or suffer great bodily harm. In both shooting instances, Rittenhouse is running away and being pursued by a large group. In the first, a gun goes off behind him just seconds before he discharges his weapon at a man (who I believe was armed) and had gotten close enough to him to grab the barrel of his gun. In the second shooting, moments later, Rittenhouse is clearly being chased an attacked by a large group and I think in reasonable fear of great bodily harm.

The only way he gets convicted is if the State can show that in the first shooting, the people attacking him were themselves acting in self-defense against him. From what I've seen, that is a little far fetched, as he is running away, gun barrel down. It will take more than just showing he had a weapon, there will have to be evidence of him brandishing it and threatening people. That isn't in the evidence that's out there now, but it could emerge. Ironically, whether the second shooting is lawful may depend largely on whether the first shooting was self-defense. If Rittenhouse is fleeing after what has been determined a justified homicide, then the crowd has no right to attack him, and his use of force against them is now lawful. However, if the first homicide was not justified, then one could conclude that the crowd was acting in self-defense (or defense of others) when then chased him down to subdue/disarm him.

All in all, I think there is far too much gray area for a murder conviction. All it takes is one juror to vote against, and I think there will be more than that. He will definitely get convicted of some lesser charges though.

Here's another point of view a friend posted on FB. Can't vouch for the original source. Maybe you can confirm.

I don't know what the first point of conflict was, but people have been saying he was defending himself from someone trying to hit him with a skateboard, and someone else with a gun. But according to the timeline I saw, these people were chasing him because he had just shot and killed someone.

So, as a person who enjoys shooting and guns, I'm going to point out a few things about this kid in wisconsin that are basically going to wreck him in court and nullify any self defense argument he has.
Just remember I like guns, I think they are super awesome and everyone should at bare minimum know how to use one. So let's move on to the Play Stupid Games, Win Stupid Prizes section of this post.
1. He was 17. It was illegal for him to posses that rifle. In his home state you have to be 21, in wisconsin you have to be 18.
This was crime 1.
2. Crossing the state line with an illegally possessed weapon is a pretty big deal and a big fat number 2 on the crime list.
3. Wisconsin totally allows for the use of deadly force in self defense, but the caveat is that you cant be committing a crime while that use of force happens. Which we addressed above he was actively committing a crime by possessing that rifle.
4. Wisconsin has a Castle Doctrine. But you can only use deadly force if the perpetrators are in your dwelling or your place of business. For a place of business you have to own this, or be in charge of operations of the business. You can not just post up to protect a random business, also you can not chase people if they decide to retreat like This 17yo did. Wisconsin V. Charles L Chew is the case law. If you want to have a look.
5. Its not self defense when you get in your car with a rifle, drive 15mi to another town, and walk the streets with a rifle.
He had every option to stay home but he chose to get involved in this situation with the plan to be involved in confrontation(hence the rifle) also in Wisconsin self defense law you cant be the instigator and then claim self defense.
He became the instigator the second he pursued.
I get it. The kid thought he was gonna be a hero and help out. But, reality is he made a large number of bad mistakes because he's 17 and has his face buried what essentially amounts to propaganda everyday and he can't tell the difference.
Now 2 people are dead and hes headed to jail.
This is what all those "shoot the protestors" comments create.

 

[CDJ]

Where do you draw the line? Should they wait until fired upon before evaluating? How many bullets do they have to take before they can "play judge, jury, and executioner or Rambo".

Also. cops have no wish to be judge, jury, and executioner. Shooting someone is horrible. Killing someone is worse. Some cops never recover. If you hold them to a higher standard, at least realize that and stop with the cartoonish language. Ask me about a cop who had to kill a deranged man who chopped his mother into pieces, then attacked him with a machete. He was never the same afterwards. Real life ain't TV.

Nothing about what I’m saying is cartoonish, and I’ve already acknowledged that it’s a difficult job that traumatizes people.

they shouldn’t be shooting people in the back, or kneeling on necks for 8 minutes, or busting into houses in the middle of the night and killing an EMT. And they shouldn’t be allowing little vigilante dipshits go free after killing people. I just want them to do their f***ing job.

I don’t know what else to tell you. I’m not saying they need to be shot at to fire but they sure as hell need major reform. You know, maybe train more than a barber? Takes a lawyer 8 years of school to study the law, why does it take a handful of months to enforce it? But whatever you’ve already admitted this is too personal to you so I’m not gonna get too much deeper into it.


They are humans but at the end of the day they voluntarily chose to put themselves in this authority position. They have to be held to a higher standard than a drug dealer as a result. I just do not know what to tell you.

 

[CDJ]

So when someone reacts in self preservation you expect one to be human and one to be a cop.

I totally understand what you are trying to say and in my opinion the police are incredibly patient in those situations because they run into them every day of the week. Obviously some are unfit and should never be in that position but I don’t think you’re being completely fair with the human element, like it or not.

I think I’m being entirely fair when they voluntarily put themselves in that position of authority knowing that they will have to be cool under pressure some day and then are shown to be trigger happy, or just shitty people (not that there aren’t shitty ppl literally everywhere lol)


There have been 750+ police killings this year, 1000+ over the last calendar year. I’m not saying they’re all unjustified. As a matter of fact I bet most WERE justified. I’m just saying we have work to do. I don’t think that’s groundbreaking

a lot of it comes down to the gun culture we have but that’s not a can of worms we need to open right now lol