Ba-dum *tish*
"The jury learned that Rittenhouse, who once hoped to become a police officer or a paramedic, had received first-aid training and worked as a lifeguard"
I'm talking about the paramedic guy who teared up with tears when testifying how it hurt to be shot.
He was there as a paramedic, right? In that capacity, but armed?
T
The Big Guy
Guest
Pretty much sums it up but I was naked and on the kitchen counter
Grosskreutz, a paramedic from Milwaukee, had attended dozens of Black Lives Matter demonstrations that summer, acting as a medic and legal observer. He carried medical supplies, made livestreams of the events and wore a hat that read "paramedic."
Grosskreutz, a paramedic from Milwaukee, had attended dozens of Black Lives Matter demonstrations that summer, acting as a medic and legal observer. He carried medical supplies, made livestreams of the events and wore a hat that read "paramedic."
Grosskreutz was also carrying his handgun holstered in the small of his back. His conceal-carry permit was expired at the time — which Grosskreutz said in testimony that he was unaware of that night.
The only person who survived being shot by Kyle Rittenhouse takes the stand
Gaige Grosskreutz, who was armed with a pistol on the night of the shooting, testified that his hands were raised when Rittenhouse pointed the rifle at him. He said he believed he "was going to die."
www.npr.org
I saw a headline about him being interviewed, titled "Rittenhouse victim speaks blah blah".Grosskreutz, a paramedic from Milwaukee, had attended dozens of Black Lives Matter demonstrations that summer, acting as a medic and legal observer. He carried medical supplies, made livestreams of the events and wore a hat that read "paramedic."
Grosskreutz was also carrying his handgun holstered in the small of his back. His conceal-carry permit was expired at the time — which Grosskreutz said in testimony that he was unaware of that night.
The only person who survived being shot by Kyle Rittenhouse takes the stand
Gaige Grosskreutz, who was armed with a pistol on the night of the shooting, testified that his hands were raised when Rittenhouse pointed the rifle at him. He said he believed he "was going to die."
?
"Victim", wtf.
He's a victim of his own stupidity.
@Lars just said "colloquially".
I think we just entered a universe where sharks, Thor, and Mary Poppins are one entity.
It's a supercalifragilistic dimension between time & space, sight and sound.
my notion is that the media is portraying a plurality where none exists.
you're saying that the law is in opposition to the common morality, and your evidence is a poll in Austin?
Further, I've been very forward about how stupid and unhelpful it is to drive to a riot with an AR. That seems like a job for the police, but what if the police are just standing around watching the city burn because it's an "approved" riot for the "correct" reasons?
A whole shitload of people were walking around open carry with ARs and pistols, why do you think this incident started with a recently released mental patient with a history of violence against children who was acting in concert with the common morality? Why are you fixated on this weapon when there were dozens of guns in Kenosha?
Good lord what a scary thought pattern.
Where is Splinty & wtf did you do to him for how many bitcoin?
Working?
Some of us have lived long enough to see "opinion polls" which barely existed in mainstream news 30 years ago, become a manipulative tool.
In the same post you point out how it's faulty thinking to believe folks are too stupid to think for themselves, you highlighted the proof as an argument.
Disagree. Murica... love it or leave it.
I love it
So Do I and I'm Canadian but of Texan heritage.
You've completely lost sight of what I said or where this conversation originated.
I'm not fixated on anything. My original statement was jumping off a Canadians view of our situation and how many here unhappy with the verdict seemed to be echoing that same sentiment.
I then said
Two statements.
My Austin poll is in direct response to you asking for proof of my second statement.
Which it does.
Trying to understand why so many people are seeing this different than you isn't me calling for anything. It is trying to understand how the law, result, etc are potentially out of step with what people deem as right or wrong
i get that, but you're not addressing the possibility that it's the media narrative that's out of step with reality. How does that poll reconcile with the fact that Texas has some of the most permissive personal/property defense laws in the US? The data you provided is without context, that's always suspicious to me. For example, if I lead in to that question with 8 prior questions of "are you aware that babies can buy pistols and carry them in openly?" "Are you aware that open carry handguns account for 90% of handgun deaths?" etc and then hit the "do you think handguns should be open carry?"
along with questions about sampling, error correction method, bias correction etc. Not saying that's what happened here and it's a dirty poll, but polls are less of an indicator of the common morality than voting patterns.
Everything that goes against my opinion is fake and wrong shock.
I don't know how else to answer your question about proof that people at large feel one way and that the laws don't represent the opinions of the at large populace other than showing you at large populace opinion polls.
To answer this direct question I think there's a big difference between people's consideration for protection of their home versus consideration of carrying a weapon everywhere they go in public.
I don't think it's a big jump to say those are two totally separate conditions with separate context that would get very different opinions in the same group.
Wut??
At various levels voting doesn't even represent half the population, It usually skews older, whiter, and more conservative than any other measuring of the populaces actual opinions nearly every single level of voting from local to state to federal.