Page 2 of 4
Re: Rittenhouse trial
Posted: Fri Nov 19, 2021 4:28 pm
by tlynn78
BackInTex wrote: ↑Fri Nov 19, 2021 4:18 pm
Weyoun wrote: ↑Fri Nov 19, 2021 3:32 pm
BackInTex wrote: ↑Fri Nov 19, 2021 3:08 pm
Sociopath to the good doctor, Good Samaritan to folks who value law and order.
This child goes around pretending to be a paramedic and a soldier, and you salute him as being completely normal.
He wasn’t there to help, he was there to participate in the melee.
If you look how he reacted, he pretty clearly was in over his head.
Which only makes sense. He didn’t know what he’s doing. He has no law enforcement or military training. Just showing up with a gun to a riot is it making anything better.
And you applaud him shooting three people? I don’t have much respect for those folks either, but I’m not understanding how their deaths made anything better.
The fact you seem so gleeful about it is tempting me to make some other diagnoses…
There is a deep spiritual darkness hanging over this country right now
I fear for your patients. You ability to make assessments is terrible. Where have I applauded Rittenhouse? Where have I appeared gleeful he shot these people? Use the quote feature.
Bit, Bit, Bit. It's feelings over facts, doncha know? C'mon, man.
Re: Rittenhouse trial
Posted: Fri Nov 19, 2021 4:37 pm
by BackInTex
Just to be clear, I applauded Rittenhouse for his efforts to help protect private property that was left to the rioters by the folks who should have been doing the protecting.
And I’m thrilled, gleeful if you will, he was acquitted.
Re: Rittenhouse trial
Posted: Fri Nov 19, 2021 4:57 pm
by a1mamacat
tlynn78 wrote: ↑Fri Nov 19, 2021 2:51 pm
Weyoun wrote: ↑Fri Nov 19, 2021 2:37 pm
I would’ve voted not guilty. The kid is a sociopath, and I suspect he will be involved in something like this again.
I am sad about the situation because I do think someone down the road will die because of him.
However the video did strongly suggest it was self-defense. Even sociopaths waving guns are allowed to defend themselves when someone is stupid enough to attack first.
Aren't you just one hell of a diagnostician? Do you even need to meet with patients to diagnose them? What a time-save that must be.
That stick up your butt gets deeper every day.
Re: Rittenhouse trial
Posted: Fri Nov 19, 2021 4:59 pm
by BackInTex
a1mamacat wrote: ↑Fri Nov 19, 2021 4:57 pm
tlynn78 wrote: ↑Fri Nov 19, 2021 2:51 pm
Weyoun wrote: ↑Fri Nov 19, 2021 2:37 pm
I would’ve voted not guilty. The kid is a sociopath, and I suspect he will be involved in something like this again.
I am sad about the situation because I do think someone down the road will die because of him.
However the video did strongly suggest it was self-defense. Even sociopaths waving guns are allowed to defend themselves when someone is stupid enough to attack first.
Aren't you just one hell of a diagnostician? Do you even need to meet with patients to diagnose them? What a time-save that must be.
That stick up your butt gets deeper every day.
Maybe she’ll reach out to you sometime asking what to expect long term.
Re: Rittenhouse trial
Posted: Fri Nov 19, 2021 5:13 pm
by tlynn78
a1mamacat wrote: ↑Fri Nov 19, 2021 4:57 pm
tlynn78 wrote: ↑Fri Nov 19, 2021 2:51 pm
Weyoun wrote: ↑Fri Nov 19, 2021 2:37 pm
I would’ve voted not guilty. The kid is a sociopath, and I suspect he will be involved in something like this again.
I am sad about the situation because I do think someone down the road will die because of him.
However the video did strongly suggest it was self-defense. Even sociopaths waving guns are allowed to defend themselves when someone is stupid enough to attack first.
Aren't you just one hell of a diagnostician? Do you even need to meet with patients to diagnose them? What a time-save that must be.
That stick up your butt gets deeper every day.
LOL! I'd rather you didn't dwell on my backside, sweetie.
Re: Rittenhouse trial
Posted: Fri Nov 19, 2021 6:43 pm
by Bob Juch
It's very simple: If Rittenhouse hadn't brought an AR-15 no one would be dead.
Re: Rittenhouse trial
Posted: Fri Nov 19, 2021 6:50 pm
by Estonut
Bob Juch wrote: ↑Fri Nov 19, 2021 6:43 pm
It's very simple: If Rittenhouse hadn't brought an AR-15 no one would be dead.
Same could be said for the rioters who raised their own weapons at him.
Re: Rittenhouse trial
Posted: Fri Nov 19, 2021 7:24 pm
by tlynn78
Bob Juch wrote: ↑Fri Nov 19, 2021 6:43 pm
It's very simple: If Rittenhouse hadn't brought an AR-15 no one would be dead.
It's even simpler than that. He was found not guilty. Y'all just have to find something else to gnash your teeth over.
Re: Rittenhouse trial
Posted: Fri Nov 19, 2021 7:33 pm
by tlynn78
tlynn78 wrote: ↑Fri Nov 19, 2021 7:24 pm
Bob Juch wrote: ↑Fri Nov 19, 2021 6:43 pm
It's very simple: If Rittenhouse hadn't brought an AR-15 no one would be dead.
It's even simpler than that. He was found not guilty. Y'all just have to find something else to gnash your teeth over.
Oh, and his gun didn't cause a single problem until after the chi-mo and other criminals threatened, chased, kicked, struck, assaulted with a skateboard and then pointed a gun at him.
Re: Rittenhouse trial
Posted: Fri Nov 19, 2021 7:49 pm
by Spock
tlynn78 wrote: ↑Fri Nov 19, 2021 2:51 pm
Weyoun wrote: ↑Fri Nov 19, 2021 2:37 pm
I would’ve voted not guilty. The kid is a sociopath, and I suspect he will be involved in something like this again.
I am sad about the situation because I do think someone down the road will die because of him.
However the video did strongly suggest it was self-defense. Even sociopaths waving guns are allowed to defend themselves when someone is stupid enough to attack first.
Aren't you just one hell of a diagnostician? Do you even need to meet with patients to diagnose them? What a time-save that must be.
Where I lose the trail a little is that we have been lead to believe that he has been busy on the front lines of the Covid fight in a variety of hospitals from the inner city to rural areas. Interesting to note that his experiences just happen to fit exactly the expected stereotypes of such areas.
So is he also a highly trained Psychiatrist that is able to diagnose mental illnesses without seeing the patients-or does he moonlight as such or what?
Re: Rittenhouse trial
Posted: Fri Nov 19, 2021 10:33 pm
by Bob Juch
Estonut wrote: ↑Fri Nov 19, 2021 6:50 pm
Bob Juch wrote: ↑Fri Nov 19, 2021 6:43 pm
It's very simple: If Rittenhouse hadn't brought an AR-15 no one would be dead.
Same could be said for the rioters who raised their own weapons at him.
The case can be made that people raised their weapons' at him in self-defense.
Re: Rittenhouse trial
Posted: Fri Nov 19, 2021 10:51 pm
by tlynn78
Bob Juch wrote: ↑Fri Nov 19, 2021 10:33 pm
Estonut wrote: ↑Fri Nov 19, 2021 6:50 pm
Bob Juch wrote: ↑Fri Nov 19, 2021 6:43 pm
It's very simple: If Rittenhouse hadn't brought an AR-15 no one would be dead.
Same could be said for the rioters who raised their own weapons at him.
The case can be made that people raised their weapons' at him in self-defense.
It could. It would fly in the face of the actual evidence, but why bother with that nonsense, right?
Re: Rittenhouse trial
Posted: Fri Nov 19, 2021 11:34 pm
by BackInTex
Bob Juch wrote: ↑Fri Nov 19, 2021 10:33 pm
Estonut wrote: ↑Fri Nov 19, 2021 6:50 pm
Bob Juch wrote: ↑Fri Nov 19, 2021 6:43 pm
It's very simple: If Rittenhouse hadn't brought an AR-15 no one would be dead.
Same could be said for the rioters who raised their own weapons at him.
The case can be made that people raised their weapons' at him in self-defense.
Even in Texas you can’t claim self defense if you initiate the pursuit. So wrong again.
Re: Rittenhouse trial
Posted: Sat Nov 20, 2021 2:34 am
by Bob78164
tlynn78 wrote: ↑Fri Nov 19, 2021 10:51 pm
Bob Juch wrote: ↑Fri Nov 19, 2021 10:33 pm
Estonut wrote: ↑Fri Nov 19, 2021 6:50 pm
Same could be said for the rioters who raised their own weapons at him.
The case can be made that people raised their weapons' at him in self-defense.
It could. It would fly in the face of the actual evidence, but why bother with that nonsense, right?
All you can say based on the verdict is that the prosecution failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that it didn’t happen the way he claimed. That’s a long way from proving that he’s right, as O.J. learned at his civil trial. —Bob
Re: Rittenhouse trial
Posted: Sat Nov 20, 2021 5:20 am
by kroxquo
Re: Rittenhouse trial
Posted: Sat Nov 20, 2021 4:11 pm
by tlynn78
Bob78164 wrote: ↑Sat Nov 20, 2021 2:34 am
tlynn78 wrote: ↑Fri Nov 19, 2021 10:51 pm
Bob Juch wrote: ↑Fri Nov 19, 2021 10:33 pm
The case can be made that people raised their weapons' at him in self-defense.
It could. It would fly in the face of the actual evidence, but why bother with that nonsense, right?
All you can say based on the verdict is that the prosecution failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that it didn’t happen the way he claimed. That’s a long way from proving that he’s right, as O.J. learned at his civil trial. —Bob
If only if it wasn't for that problematic video footage.
Re: Rittenhouse trial
Posted: Sat Nov 20, 2021 4:18 pm
by Beebs52
tlynn78 wrote: ↑Sat Nov 20, 2021 4:11 pm
Bob78164 wrote: ↑Sat Nov 20, 2021 2:34 am
tlynn78 wrote: ↑Fri Nov 19, 2021 10:51 pm
It could. It would fly in the face of the actual evidence, but why bother with that nonsense, right?
All you can say based on the verdict is that the prosecution failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that it didn’t happen the way he claimed. That’s a long way from proving that he’s right, as O.J. learned at his civil trial. —Bob
If only if it wasn't for that problematic video footage.
No one needs to watch that. You so silly.
Re: Rittenhouse trial
Posted: Sat Nov 20, 2021 4:21 pm
by Bob Juch
So let me see if I got this right:
I can carry an AK-47 to a protest and when people start attacking me because I have one, I can shoot them in self-defense? If so, I'm going to go to a MAGA rally.
Re: Rittenhouse trial
Posted: Sat Nov 20, 2021 4:27 pm
by Beebs52
Bob Juch wrote: ↑Sat Nov 20, 2021 4:21 pm
So let me see if I got this right:
I can carry an AK-47 to a protest and when people start attacking me because I have one, I can shoot them in self-defense? If so, I'm going to go to a MAGA rally.
What if you had a hand gun? They're attacking you? You aren't making sense.
Re: Rittenhouse trial
Posted: Sat Nov 20, 2021 4:32 pm
by Beebs52
Y'all do realize that no one is happy and joyous that this happened? Right?
Re: Rittenhouse trial
Posted: Sat Nov 20, 2021 4:54 pm
by BackInTex
Bob Juch wrote: ↑Sat Nov 20, 2021 4:21 pm
So let me see if I got this right:
I can carry an AK-47 to a protest and when people start attacking me because I have one, I can shoot them in self-defense? If so, I'm going to go to a MAGA rally.
Sounds like an actual threat, but fortunately for you, and more fortunately for the rest of the world, you can not carry an AK-47 to a protest. You can not carry an AK-47 to the gun range, unless you have a special permit, which I doubt you have.
Re: Rittenhouse trial
Posted: Sat Nov 20, 2021 5:37 pm
by Bob Juch
BackInTex wrote: ↑Sat Nov 20, 2021 4:54 pm
Bob Juch wrote: ↑Sat Nov 20, 2021 4:21 pm
So let me see if I got this right:
I can carry an AK-47 to a protest and when people start attacking me because I have one, I can shoot them in self-defense? If so, I'm going to go to a MAGA rally.
Sounds like an actual threat, but fortunately for you, and more fortunately for the rest of the world, you can not carry an AK-47 to a protest. You can not carry an AK-47 to the gun range, unless you have a special permit, which I doubt you have.
That's mean I can't do it, it's just illegal to do so.
Re: Rittenhouse trial
Posted: Sat Nov 20, 2021 5:40 pm
by Bob Juch
Bob Juch wrote: ↑Sat Nov 20, 2021 5:37 pm
BackInTex wrote: ↑Sat Nov 20, 2021 4:54 pm
Bob Juch wrote: ↑Sat Nov 20, 2021 4:21 pm
So let me see if I got this right:
I can carry an AK-47 to a protest and when people start attacking me because I have one, I can shoot them in self-defense? If so, I'm going to go to a MAGA rally.
Sounds like an actual threat, but fortunately for you, and more fortunately for the rest of the world, you can not carry an AK-47 to a protest. You can not carry an AK-47 to the gun range, unless you have a special permit, which I doubt you have.
That's means I can't do it, it's just illegal to do so.
You can buy a semiautomatic AK-47 clone and like any semiautomatic which is 80% of all handguns sold and 60% of all rifles sold it's legal in Arizona.
Re: Rittenhouse trial
Posted: Sat Nov 20, 2021 5:52 pm
by Weyoun
Spock wrote: ↑Fri Nov 19, 2021 7:49 pm
tlynn78 wrote: ↑Fri Nov 19, 2021 2:51 pm
Weyoun wrote: ↑Fri Nov 19, 2021 2:37 pm
I would’ve voted not guilty. The kid is a sociopath, and I suspect he will be involved in something like this again.
I am sad about the situation because I do think someone down the road will die because of him.
However the video did strongly suggest it was self-defense. Even sociopaths waving guns are allowed to defend themselves when someone is stupid enough to attack first.
Aren't you just one hell of a diagnostician? Do you even need to meet with patients to diagnose them? What a time-save that must be.
Where I lose the trail a little is that we have been lead to believe that he has been busy on the front lines of the Covid fight in a variety of hospitals from the inner city to rural areas. Interesting to note that his experiences just happen to fit exactly the expected stereotypes of such areas.
So is he also a highly trained Psychiatrist that is able to diagnose mental illnesses without seeing the patients-or does he moonlight as such or what?
Was I acting as a psychiatrist when I called that kid a sociopath? No, but the kid sure acts and sounds like a sociopath.
"Interesting" that you seem to imply that I am making up where I work, or what I do.
The need to think everyone who is disagreeing with you is just making things up... well it's psychiatrically interesting, let's put it that way. Let's avoid a formal diagnosis since that's not my job and that seems to particularly get under your skin.
More Covid deaths this year than last, by the way. Good job, team.
Re: Rittenhouse trial
Posted: Sat Nov 20, 2021 6:17 pm
by Weyoun
BackInTex wrote: ↑Fri Nov 19, 2021 4:18 pm
Weyoun wrote: ↑Fri Nov 19, 2021 3:32 pm
BackInTex wrote: ↑Fri Nov 19, 2021 3:08 pm
Sociopath to the good doctor, Good Samaritan to folks who value law and order.
This child goes around pretending to be a paramedic and a soldier, and you salute him as being completely normal.
He wasn’t there to help, he was there to participate in the melee.
If you look how he reacted, he pretty clearly was in over his head.
Which only makes sense. He didn’t know what he’s doing. He has no law enforcement or military training. Just showing up with a gun to a riot is it making anything better.
And you applaud him shooting three people? I don’t have much respect for those folks either, but I’m not understanding how their deaths made anything better.
The fact you seem so gleeful about it is tempting me to make some other diagnoses…
There is a deep spiritual darkness hanging over this country right now
I fear for your patients. You ability to make assessments is terrible. Where have I applauded Rittenhouse? Where have I appeared gleeful he shot these people? Use the quote feature.
Why the need to make it so personal?
If you think I am wrong, say so, and then explain so.
It's interesting how you and your buddies keep going back to "oh he must be awful at his profession" instead of offering arguments.
I realize that my job probably does make your uncomfortable - since I have the actual knowledge and experience to call you and others on their garbage arguments - but, please, don't question my ability to practice my profession based on Internet arguments.
Thanks.