If they’re of similar skin tones.
Surely doesn’t come into it if your allowed to carry a gun, does it?
It definitely muddies the narrative put forward in some areas of the anti-Rittenhouse community. If the protestors were justified in seeing him as a threat because of his gun, then you have to accept a degree of the same for Rittenhouse’s reaction to having one pulled on him (nonetheless, not until after he’d killed two people).
1 Like
Are there still peaceful protests? How many times have protestors in the past 3-4 years been attacked by right-wing thugs, often with the tacit approval of police - if not the police themselves? The lesson of the Rittenhouse case is that shooting him would have been a ‘good kill’.
Legally yes, particularly in this case where the people who were shot are unable to claim they were acting in self-defence and their motivations were free to be framed anyway the defence wanted.
I more mean in the discourse of the case. Fox News/right wingers on twitter etc will support right wingers no matter what and that seeps through into the public discourse. Similar - but less dogmatic usually - happens on the left also.
I agree in theory that in Wisconsin that is the lesson. I doubt it goes down the same way if someone had killed Rittenhouse though. The case would never have reached trial because the shooter would have been killed by the police that same night.
Oh yeah. There is a phrase in philosophy that describes the situation, but I cannot think of it now, but it describes the moral licensing of people who view themselves as the “good guy” to do bad things because they are justified for the greater good, or in many cases cannot by definition be bad if you, the good guy, are carrying them out.
The issue with so many on the public carry side is they are so convinced of their righteousness that anything they do with their gun is justified. So for them, Grosskreutz having a gun and displaying it is validation of Rittenhouse’s prior perspective and justification for his being armed and ultimately using it. If you can only Rittenhouse as the good guy in the situation, the justifications for the other guy having a gun (well documented history of armed right wing counter protestors looking for violence) and feeling the need to defend himself is irrelevant. The good guy narrative is set ahead of time and all actions are then viewed through that lens, and to them the protestors were rioters and needed to be dealt with. The fact Grosskreutz was reacting to two other protesters being shot dead by this kid is not important, because the totality of the situation showed all the protestors were on the same team and therefore the first two are guilty by association because the good guy said so.
1 Like
Is it called “Nixonism”?
2 Likes
Utilitarianism? John Stuart Mill.
It allows for good people doing bad things, for the perceived greater good.
1 Like
For anyone that has not seen this…
1 Like
I’d add this one too. Same is true for politicians, great line.
Rittenhouse now saying he supports BLM and has no political affiliation is just trolling.
As shown by visiting Trump the day after that interview. Even the interview itself was given with Tucker Carlson - a white supremacist.
Public apologies are typically dumb as they are just empty words poll tested by PR people to hit the right notes. This isn’t even that. That is said with a wink and a nod to the Fox viewership who all understand it is a lie designed to just further troll the libs
1 Like
Dispicable people do despicable things and they do it for the attention they get!
Arbery defendants guilty of murder.
The only correct decision.
3 Likes
Christ Almighty…
In her closing argument this week, Laura D. Hogue, a lawyer for Gregory McMichael, tried to persuade jurors that Ahmaud Arbery should not be considered a victim.
Turning Mr. Arbery into a victim after the choices that he made does not reflect the reality of what brought him to the Satilla Shores neighborhood in his khaki shorts with no socks “to cover his long, dirty toenails,” she said.
Yep she went for full on racism as her last gambit.
I’m shocked someone could be so blatant about it, but I guess I shouldn’t be.
I’m happy to have been wrong. Feared the hung jury.
1 Like
After the way Rittenhouse panned out, which was probably to be expected given the way the judge set it up and the trial went, this verdict was needed.
Doesn’t right all the injustices in the world, but it at least indicates that America hasn’t completely abandoned the rule of law.
5 Likes