Yes. I am. Dads raise pussies these days. Instead of showing them the ropes and how to defend themselves, they are lazy and give them guns. If Rittenhouse got his ass beat, hed have learned a lesson here. Instead, he felt he needed to kill the guy in fear hed take his gun. If he didnt have a
Until the law dictates that carrying a gun is unlawful, then being in possession of one and being in fear that a violent lunatic (who has threatened to kill you already) is going to take it from you is not that unreasonable. Nobody is obliged to take a beating, as this idiot also tried to assert.
I disagree. Well have to agree to disagree. Its a provocative action and will get you shot where Im from. You can point to laws all day long, but open carry around here and the law isnt going to save you. Thats just life.
It wasn't exactly a normal day out.
Your personal beliefs on open carry are in direct conflict with the current open carry laws in WI. The laws don't care about your feelings.
Agreed. The National guard in LA, the EO revoking birthright citizenship, trumps conviction of rape(as said by the judge), trump falsifying documents, his illegal tariffs....those laws dont care about your feelings either. It is what it is.
Lol. You've been trying to bait me into a political discussion for days now. Not interested. Why would I be? You're not even accepting the facts regarding Rittenhouse.
No, you wont be goaded because youd be cooked. In all of the things ive mentioned, i have a stronger case than Rittenhouse. I have the constitution
You've already shown your lack of integrity with Rittenhouse & your refusal to accept facts. Under those conditions, I have no reason to enter into a second debate with you.
What Constitution? He's obviously not in the USA; in no State of the Union will open carry 'get you shot'. It may cause the police to confront you and require compliance but it's not a shoot-on-sight 'provocation'.
Fof example as one of the arguments I listed, EO 14160 which is blatantly unconstitutional. This guy pretends to care about the letter of the law, yet Im assuming hes fine with this unconstitutional order.
EO 14160 doesn't exist.
I was referring to other arguments the guy wont address cause hell get cooked. Not referring to Rittenhouse.
I'll debate you on any subject as long as I can nullify any evidence that doesn't support my argument. Just like you did with Rittenhouse. Deal?
Uh huh. Keep telling yourself that.
The truth in this thread. The fact that you still believe that Kyle crossed state lines with a firearm is all the proof I need. That's a claim that the prosecution didn't even make. 😂