About Us ThisisBigBrother.com

Alf · 20-11-2021, 07:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dezzy

Racists can choke.

Funny you mention that. Here's a video of one of the criminals this young 17 year old defended himself against, from those riots they were involved in.

What's your take on this?

Alf · 20-11-2021, 07:41 AM

Imagine if Sarah Everard had have had a weapon like a legal gun? The roles would be reversed now. She would be living her life and that scum bag would be in her place.

There's pro's and cons for USA's second ammendment, and for me the pro's outweigh the cons. The cons are usually a result of poor education and upbringing. The pro's stop needless, tragic deaths to innocent people that don't deserve to happen.

bots · 20-11-2021, 07:54 AM

it's america and their concepts on gun control and self defence are completely alien to us here in the uk, so it's impossible for us to understand what went on there. It sounds horrendous, but then lawless rioting is horrendous too

Oliver_W · 20-11-2021, 07:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dezzy

Racists can choke.

I doubt anyone here will disagree with you on that 🙂

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alf

Imagine if Sarah Everard had have had a weapon like a legal gun? The roles would be reversed now. She would be living her life and that scum bag would be in her place.

There's pro's and cons for USA's second ammendment, and for me the pro's outweigh the cons. The cons are usually a result of poor education and upbringing. The pro's stop needless, tragic deaths to innocent people that don't deserve to happen.

When it comes to the 2A, I don't quite think we should be on the exact same page as the USA
Moreover, cops are trained to deal with guns, she wouldn't necessarily have the upper hand.

BUT I do think it's ridiculous we can't legally carry non-lethals such as pepperspray or tasers. Self defence should be enabled for the most vulnerable, and all the weapons shouldn't be in the hands of criminals.

Alf · 20-11-2021, 08:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oliver_W

I doubt anyone here will disagree with you on that 🙂

When it comes to the 2A, I don't quite think we should be on the exact same page as the USA
Moreover, cops are trained to deal with guns, she wouldn't necessarily have the upper hand.

BUT I do think it's ridiculous we can't legally carry non-lethals such as pepperspray or tasers. Self defence should be enabled for the most vulnerable, and all the weapons shouldn't be in the hands of criminals.

I believe I called for that in the thread about Sarah Everard, that probably everybody but certainly females should be able to carry things like pepper spray.

There would be abuses of that law too just like there are of guns in America, but again I think the pro's would outweigh the cons for that to be a deterent.

Christmas Dynasnow · 20-11-2021, 10:05 AM

Good news, justice is done

Denver · 20-11-2021, 10:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alf

Imagine if Sarah Everard had have had a weapon like a legal gun? The roles would be reversed now. She would be living her life and that scum bag would be in her place.

There's pro's and cons for USA's second ammendment, and for me the pro's outweigh the cons. The cons are usually a result of poor education and upbringing. The pro's stop needless, tragic deaths to innocent people that don't deserve to happen.

He didn't have a legal gun, he was illegally carrying a gun and purposely went to a completely different state with the intentions to murder

arista · 20-11-2021, 10:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Denver

He didn't have a legal gun, he was illegally carrying a gun and purposely went to a completely different state with the intentions to murder

But the Judge Excepted
the Gun was used as protection.

Case Closed.

It USA Law, Adam
nothing like our laws

Alf · 20-11-2021, 10:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Denver

He didn't have a legal gun, he was illegally carrying a gun and purposely went to a completely different state with the intentions to murder

He works in that state and his father lives in that state, so he has very strong connections to that state which he enters on a regular basis. That came out at the trail.

What the MSM told you wasn't the evidence, it was them pushing an agenda to get you to hate. They're still lying about it right now.

Jordan. · 20-11-2021, 11:27 AM

If nothing he might have learned shooting people isn't the best idea. Perhaps he'll just go back to beating up young girls to make himself feel tough.

user104658 · 20-11-2021, 01:20 PM

There's a difference between morality and legality I think if what everyone needs to remember here. This case is of course HUGELY up for debate in terms of morality, you could philosophize over it for months.

In terms of the US legal system though? These states allow people to carry firearms, and they (often heavily) promote the ideas of full liberty of self/self defense by any means.

Whatever the circumstances, he was at genuine physical risk and he used a firearm to defend himself. Legally, the US allows this. Thus, legally, it's the "correct" result.

Christmas Dynasnow · 20-11-2021, 02:42 PM

Ben fully exposing the left wing media who created this lie and perpetuated it

sickening what they did

until the jury and the court did their duty

Youtube video

arista · 20-11-2021, 02:47 PM

Live Debate CNN HD
now

arista · 20-11-2021, 02:54 PM

arista · 20-11-2021, 07:43 PM

I can see why the Jury
found him Not Guity.

He was being Hunted Down
they did not care about his Rifle Gun.

They wanted to murder him.

This is the Rage in the USA, right now
it is a Split Nation.

If you can,
Watch Bill Mayer on Monday
on SkyComedyHD
Great Political Debates.

arista · 20-11-2021, 07:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jordan.

If nothing he might have learned shooting people isn't the best idea. Perhaps he'll just go back to beating up young girls to make himself feel tough.

He is not Tough
never will be.
The Gun Rifle saved his life

Jordan
you are a Clever man.
They were hunting him.

The jury understood the truth.

He will need to carry a Pistol
the rest of his life
That is what America is built on.

I have Been In LA, NYC and Houston,
and Toronto and Ottawa in Canada.

America is a Great Place to Visit.
Try and Visit Canada as well.

user104658 · 20-11-2021, 07:56 PM

It's really just that it's complicated, but also not, like I said...

Complicated:

1) He kinda seems like a piece of ****
2) There's no GOOD reason for him to have been there
3) There's no GOOD reason for him to have been armed
4) America's gun laws/gun problems are insane and NO ONE should be walking around armed like this
5) The whole situation shouldn't have been happening and is a political mess

Not so complicated:

6) America's gun situation is what it is and isn't changing any time soon
7) He didn't fire when not at personal risk
8) He would, at the point of firing said gun, almost certainly have been seriously injured or killed if he hadn't used it.

But for the purposes of the trial? Points 1 - 5 don't matter. The jury had to make the decision on points 6, 7 and 8. It was the only outcome that wouldn't have been extremely questionable legally.

The thing people should be angry about, and the thing people should seek to change, is America's gun laws and gun culture. As it has been for ... well, since the US was the US. But that's a question for future incidents and future trials - you can't make up the rules as you go along and THEN say "these are the new rules now". This trial had to be answered based on how things stand today. Not how they "should be".

bots · 20-11-2021, 08:06 PM

in a lawless situation, americans always revert back to their right to basically protect themselves at all costs. By default, they have the means to do this by shooting people, it's embedded in their constitution.

We just cant view it from that perspective because we just don't have the same culture. Also, i think Biden has made a complete idiot of himself. He knows the law and he knows the judicial system

arista · 20-11-2021, 08:14 PM

TS

He wanted to Protect shops and windows

Thats why he went there
he was Armed as he knew his life would be in danger.

That is what USA is.

Tom4784 · 20-11-2021, 08:14 PM

Deleted Post

Tom4784 · 20-11-2021, 08:15 PM

Deleted Post

Oliver_W · 20-11-2021, 08:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dezzy

Arista, defending a racist murderer.

A "racist" "murderer", who only shot
1) white people
2) who were threatening his life?

Given that it happened during a BLM riot, you'd think a racist murderer's kill list would look a little different!

user104658 · 20-11-2021, 08:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

it's embedded in their constitution.

It's imbedded in the very roots of their constitution and the philosophical justification of colonization. Hobbes, Locke, social contract theory that's 300+ years old but carved in stone in the foundations of US law. It's like a coding bug so deep in the code that to fix it, you'd have to write a whole new programme.

Oliver_W · 20-11-2021, 08:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

in a lawless situation, americans always revert back to their right to basically protect themselves at all costs. By default, they have the means to do this by shooting people, it's embedded in their constitution.

I'm sure Rittenhouse wasn't the only person who needed to defend himself as a result of the riots tbh.

Quote:

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

Also, i think Biden has made a complete idiot of himself.

Well. Duh.