Comment on Trump Haters Immediately Flood Twitter With Sick New Hashtag - Pure Evil

• breadsmasher@lemmy.world ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  fascist lefties

  Absolute LOL. Are they “antifa” (anti fascist) or are they “fascist”. Or is it just whatever label you wanna throw out?

  The right really hasnt got a clue

  source

  • HelixDab2@lemm.ee ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    I would suggest that you read more about the actual event. Go look on any left-of-center site if you want, as long as it’s covering factual information, rather than offering commentary.

    There is no information that, prior to the shooting, Rittenhouse had directly or indirectly threatened anyone.

    Rittenhouse was on his way out when he was accosted by Rosenbaum; Rosenbaum threw a bag of clothing at Rittenhouse, and tried to grab his rifle. Rittenhouse shot him four times at close range, killing him.

    Rittenhouse tried to run away; he was pursued by a crowd. Huber struck him with a skateboard and attempted to grab his rifle; Rittenhouse fatally shot him. Grosskreutz pointed a firearm at Rittenhouse, who shot him once in the arm; Grosskreutz survived, although he’s lost much of the function in his arm.

    Rittenhouse did not instigate the violence; he was leaving the protest when he was accosted and attacked.

    Should he have been there in the first place? No. Should he have brought a rifle? Also no. (And, in point of fact, his mom didn’t know that he had the rifle, because it had been bought for him by a friend–not his mom as was reported. But, all that said, he was never the aggressor in any legal sense; simply being armed is, by itself, not an immediate threat to do harm, and he was not acting in a threatening manner. Provocative, yes, but threatening, no.

    Is Rittenhouse, personally, still a shitty person? Oh yeah. But whether or not he’s a shitbag, he still has a right to defend his own life. Which is what he did, once you actually look at testimony in court.

    source

    • wintermute_oregon@lemm.ee ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      Should he have been there in the first place? No. Should he have brought a rifle? Also no. He had just as much right to be there as the rioters. He also was legally allowed to bring a rifle. Suggesting otherwise is just victim blaming.

      Something often forgotten is that Kyle was a supporter of lefty politics before this event.

      source

      • HelixDab2@lemm.ee ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

        Eh. He says that he was. But given how sharp his turn was to Proud Man-Children, et al. as soon as he was in legal trouble, I have a hard time believing it. I’ve def. seen a number of people that say that they support “progressive” politics, but they only support them as long as it doesn’t affect them in any way; as soon as it e.g. hurts their property values, they suddenly go full-conservative. I’ve got a buddy that supports criminal justice reform, but balks at college education for convicts because college cost him money, and why should they get it free? (Hint: because it sharply reduces recidivism.)

        I also have a hard time believing that someone that claimed to be in support of leftist politics would be at the protests supporting businesses, of all things. Why not go and help people that were protesting peacefully by providing support? And if he was really just there to provide medical help–as if he was a corpsman, which he ain’t–and help with clean up, why would he need a rifle at all? It’s just so goddamn stupid.

        I honestly think that, had he not been armed, he would have been fine; I think the rifle made people think he was a threat, when he wasn’t.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
  • wintermute_oregon@lemm.ee ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    www.vvdailypress.com/story/news/…/985002007/

    Right, that is why they are burning buildings, trying to quell free speech, they are the “anti fascist”. Right…

    source