Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Rushy

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 220  Next >
1
Yes, I'm sure all the child molesters in America are terrified that some rich spoiled Punk is going to randomly shoot them.

They should be.

Unfortunately,  the 17 year old punk wandering the streets with a rifle in my neighborhood was gunned down by the cops before he could kill any child molesters.

Well sometimes the child molesters win.

2
The fact of the matter is that anyone upset about the Rittenhouse trial sees a pedo getting shot in the pelvis and thinks "that could have been me!" It's certainly scary for the grab-the-minors demographic.

3
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: President Joe Biden
« on: November 19, 2021, 11:51:48 PM »
What makes you think that? The Republican nomination for 2024 is his if he wants it, and if he runs again, I'd say he has a very good chance of winning.

If Joe Biden can defeat you in an election and turn Georgia blue, you have lost now and forever again.

4
Ok, I was mistaken that he traveled with the weapon. It doesn't functionally change the argument that he was acting as a vigilante. He was expecting violence, he was there to protect a car dealership, he had a deadly weapon. Is any of that not factual?

Having a deadly weapon isn't representative of "acting as a vigilante". I have a deadly weapon pretty often. A lot of people do. Are there a bunch of crypto-vigilantes running out there right now? And of course he was expecting violence, it was a riot, people were setting things on fire. What was he supposed to do, expect a kind and orderly group of good people on their way to church?

So? How is a law like this supposed to be enforced if cops aren't IDing people who look like minors and are carrying a weapon?

Even if the cops did ask for ID, so what? It's not against the law for a 17 year old to open carry a rifle in Wisconsin, which is why the charge was thrown out.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2020/08/29/fact-check-video-police-thanked-kyle-rittenhouse-gave-him-water/5661804002/

Those police and their dastardly *checks notes* giving people water.

The charge was thrown out because of the length of the barrel (a silly loophole, but whatever). That's not something that would have been obvious to the cops. But I see your point. IDing him might not have prevented anything.

An AR-15 having a long barrel is absolutely considered obvious.

5
No... He definitely expressly stated his intent was to act as a vigilante. Mind you, he didn't use that specific word. But his stated purpose for traveling to Kenosha with his assault rifle in tow was to protect a local business in an area where he expected there to be violence. That's literally what vigilantism is. Generalize it, and you have the definition of vigilantism.

Okay, none of that happened. Next.

Because he looks like a minor. Store clerks are expected to card anyone who looks like they could be under 35 that tries to buy a pack of cigarettes.

They're cops, not cashiers, Roundy.

Weird that you're so flippant about this given that three people are dead because they didn't ask for his ID.

Three people? Really? Just goes to show that you're yet another person who hasn't watched the trial or the videos. Sad! Kyle didn't even interact with the cops until after the shooting. Are cops supposed to omnipotently teleport around the region asking for IDs?

you Righties

lmao

6
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: President Joe Biden
« on: November 19, 2021, 08:50:01 PM »
Unless the 2024 democratic ticket is devoid of both Biden and Harris it's likely we're in for another 4 years of the Donald.

There is a virtually 0% chance that Trump wins ever again.

7
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Not Guilty!
« on: November 19, 2021, 07:42:23 PM »
One would think that the leftist media would step back and reconsider calling a defendant a domestic terrorist... Joy Reid.

But no, they double down with headlines like this...

"Kyle Rittenhouse trial was designed to protect white conservatives who kill"- MSNBC
If you can read this without puking... https://www.msnbc.com/the-reidout/reidout-blog/kyle-rittenhouse-acquitted-homicide-rcna5748

The meltdown will be amusing to watch.  Pop the popcorn

We don't need two Rittenhouse threads, merging this with the other one.

8
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Eugenics
« on: November 19, 2021, 03:02:46 PM »
We could absolutely breed out the impulse to murder or steal, but those impulses come from want and desire and drive.

Those are both two pretty big assumptions. Are murdering and stealing just fundamentally results of some 'incorrect' genes getting passed around? Do some populations exhibit those genes more than others?

You'd have to breed out jealousy, greed, revenge, the impulses that may cause someone to want to murder or steal.

There are plenty of murders and thefts that don't have anything to do with those emotions or any emotion at all. Kleptomania, for example, has not been shown to correlate with the actual desire of the item in question. What you've stated is the observation of criminal behavior through a lens of neurotypical motives. Generally speaking, there isn't a lot to go on in regards to the fundamental reason for many crimes, as people in general have a hard time explaining why they do what they do. The brain itself still comes across as a 'black box' of sensory inputs and outputs. What occurs between the two is mostly unknown aside from a few cursory correlations.

9
Why would the defense want a mistrial if they're winning and the law is 100% on their side?

 A mistrial with prejudice means they can't try Kyle again, it's an automatic win, and the worst the judge can say is 'no'. Why not ask?

10
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Eugenics
« on: November 17, 2021, 03:48:26 PM »
An author, Iain Banks, whose books I have been reading, turns out to have some pretty interesting beliefs. He is a very blunt supporter of eugenics and yet he's also obviously supportive of communism. The real communism, the stateless, classless society kind; as opposed to the authoritarian tankie meme communism we have today.

In his books, there is an ultra-mega-super-advanced society that has no government, no classes, no scarcity of any form. Labor is required by no one; it is all done by fully autonomous machines. There is no form of regulation or laws, even against murder or rape. People just... don't do that (most of the time). Why? Well, because they were programmed not to do it!

http://edition.cnn.com/2008/TECH/space/05/15/iain.banks/#cnnSTCText

Quote
CNN: One of the most compelling aspects of the Culture's society is that it's post-scarcity: no one wants for anything, people aren't hungry, everyone is clothed. Do you think it's within humanity's nature to build a society like that?

Iain M. Banks: Arguably not. This is why the Culture isn't us. I thought long and hard about this long before the books were published and decided, that the Culture wasn't going to be us in the future, it would be humanoid, they could kind of pass for us, because I'm not sure that we are.

It's a very pessimistic thing to say that we do seem to be wedded to war and destruction and torture and racism and sexism -- all the horrible things, all the xenophobic things -- we seem to have a xenophobic gene sequence. I think we should genetically modify ourselves, frankly -- if we could identify the bit that causes all the horrible things we can knock it out and become nicer people.

Normally, we have eugenics arguments spouted by what most would call 'right-leaning' ideologies such as Fascism. It's interesting for an author to have written such an amazing communist utopia, then turn around and say the only way we can achieve it is by reprogramming humanity into it.

I'm not even sure he's wrong. Is such a society possible without some hardcore gene editing changing the face of humanity? Is there a 'selfish gene' we can delete? Maybe eugenics isn't that bad! Is an idealistic utopia worth the cost of programming people to be inclined to enjoy it?

11
All closing arguments have been made. The jury will begin their deliberations tomorrow. Despite the shit show and (in my opinion) innocence of Rittenhouse, they could still find him guilty. We will see soon.

13
Technology & Information / Re: Cameras
« on: November 14, 2021, 06:42:02 PM »
Those are great shots. What lens were you using on the EOS Rebel XSi?

Here's a shot I took from a hilltop in the wilds of Northern California a few months back. Canon 5D with a Celestron C90 Spotting Scope mounted, focal length 1250mm. It was so hard to get critical focus. I tried for like 2 hours. I wish mine turned out as crisp as yours.

Thank you. A 150mm aperture Orion Mak-Cass.

Picture looks good to me, especially considering it was with a terrestrial scope.

14
Technology & Information / Re: Cameras
« on: November 14, 2021, 04:40:27 PM »
I use a Canon EOS Rebel XSi to do astrophotography from time to time.



Unfortunately my telescope stand was busted during the Christmas star event, so all I have are pretty blurry pictures. Not the camera's fault. The stand could not track correctly.



You can kinda sorta tell it's Jupiter and Saturn.

15
Just to summarize, your opinion is that:

- The judge was wrong to disallow Rosenbaums priors
- Rosenbaum deserved to be killed

Yes.

Further speculating that maybe your opinion is as well that:

- The skateboard wielding guy deserved to be killed
- The gun-wielding guy who got shot in the arm should have been killed

Seems like almost everyone got what they wanted and/or deserved. If so, fair enough, strong opinions you have.

Yes. If anything, gun-wielding man got off the easiest. He faked a surrender to lull Rittenhouse into a false sense of security and then tried to shoot him anyway. Getting away with only part of his arm blown off was too easy in my hot opinion. Gaige had a hero complex and it should have cost him his life.

My thing is with the cops. Pure speculation and opinion here - But I wonder what the cops who rolled up on Rittenhouse and co and offered them water and thanked them for their service would have done if instead of the white militia group there, it was a black militia group there. A bunch of black dudes, breaking curfew, in tactical gear with AR-15's strapped to their chests. I wonder if they would have been given water and thanked for their service?

I wonder if Rosenbaum would have chased a black man around and said "shoot me, nigga!". We'll never know.

16
Do you really believe behaving like a pork chop warrants the death penalty?

Describing a psychopathic rapist chasing after someone with a gun saying "shoot me, nigga!" and then grabbing the muzzle of the gun as "behaving like a pork chop" is a level of spin that should earn you a position at CNN. I'm getting the feeling that you're yet another person who has yet to bother actually watching the damn videos before commenting on them.

And that regular citizens can dole it out without any reprisal? Yeah, just flap the judicial system off. Who needs it. Everyone in America has a gun so everyone should be able to enact justice as they see fit ::)

The judicial system is probably about to find that he didn't do anything wrong, so I don't see the point of this line of discussion. Rosenbaum is a classic case of "fuck around and find out". Don't chase people with guns and try to take their gun away, folks, you will get shot to death and then anyone diligent enough to actually watch a video of the incident will say you deserved it.

You are responsible for your actions. Rosenbaum took responsibility for his actions to the tune of 4 rounds of 5.56. I'm just laughing at the karmic justice of a rapist chasing a kid around only to get his pelvis shattered shortly before death.

17
The opinion of the judge is just that, an opinion, and I'm stating that my opinion is different and that I disagree with the judge. Regardless, with or without the additional character evidence, it's obvious Rosenbaum was the aggressor and got what was coming to him. One more degenerate deleted from society.

Are you saying it's okay for civilians to kill people if they've done sufficiently bad things in their past?

I would agree that's the case but that's not the argument I'm making here. My argument is that a person with a past trend of aggression is more likely to act aggressive again in the future.

Do you disagree with the idea of the state's monopoly on violence?

I don't think the state should exist at all but that's another discussion entirely and doesn't belong here.  ;)

18
Exactly. It unfairly prejudices the jury. His history in this case, has nothing to do with the events under investigation.

But his history does have everything to do with this case. Are you even reading my posts? The point of the case is to show that he was a violent aggressor and Rittenhouse had to defend himself. That the man has a history of violence is obviously relevant. His violent personality got him killed (deservedly).

And here we see the exact reason why a prior conviction would not be allowed to be introduced in a trial.

It's not a good reason.

19
I’m not 100% sure, but I thought I read that the dead guy’s prior convictions could not be introduced in the trial. There was a motion from the defense to do so but I think it was denied.

Precisely because they knew it'd affect the jury's opinion of him. If I were on the jury and I knew he'd killed a child rapist, I'd vote not guilty, whether it were self-defense or not.

If so, however much of a monster that guy was, his priors would have been irrelevant in this trial.

Nice opinion.

20
You hating a rapist is not the same as it being relevant to a self-defense argument where the shooter had no idea they shot a rapist.

The fact that he was a rapist (five times, even) constitutes a certain behavior pattern. It makes the idea that Rosenbaum wasn't an aggressive lunatic far tougher to believe and therefore makes self-defense that much more likely.

A person's background sets the tone for their character.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 220  Next >