Another police shooting - this time in Wisconsin... (1 Viewer)

[guidomerkinsrules]

I mean I thought it was pertinent. But yeah, I can see it that way too.

Yes it’s pertinent bc I’m not willing to acquiesce to a very very bad law
Grabbing your gun to defend something across the street which has a reasonable chance of coming onto your property is completely different than sitting at a computer getting ****** at a BLM rally we’ll removed from your location that has a less that 1% chance of directly effecting you
The reason to draw distinction between those two things should be drastically obvious

 

[DaveXA]

Yes it’s pertinent bc I’m not willing to acquiesce to a very very bad law
Grabbing your gun to defend something across the street which has a reasonable chance of coming onto your property is completely different than sitting at a computer getting ****** at a BLM rally we’ll removed from your location that has a less that 1% chance of directly effecting you
The reason to draw distinction between those two things should be drastically obvious

What specific law do you have an issue with?

 

[Taurus]

What specific law do you have an issue with?

If I understand Guido's position, it's similar to mine. It's not "a bad law" it's "the lack of a good law". There needs to be a clear cutoff so you can't bring a gun to a tense situation like a protest, goad someone into attacking you, then shoot them in "self defense". Especially if you're concealed carrying so they don't even know you're armed. It's one thing to get into a fistfight, another entirely to be the poor sod bringing fists to a gunfight.

 

[DaveXA]

If I understand Guido's position, it's similar to mine. It's not "a bad law" it's "the lack of a good law". There needs to be a clear cutoff so you can't bring a gun to a tense situation like a protest, goad someone into attacking you, then shoot them in "self defense". Especially if you're concealed carrying so they don't even know you're armed. It's one thing to get into a fistfight, another entirely to be the poor sod bringing fists to a gunfight.

Well, apparently, there's already a law on the books prohibiting guns at licensed protests. The problem is, there are also laws on the books that allows for self-defense. What should have happened in the case of KR, is he should have been arrested for bringing a firearm to the protest. There also should be a status disallowing the use of a firearm at a protest for self defense. I don't see the "bad laws" that GMR is referencing, but I'm not really sure what specifically he's referring to. Saying it's a generic "bad law" isnt really saying anything imo.

 

[Farb]

Just curious, are you guys this upset at Gaige Grosskrutz as well? He traveled farther to be where he should not have been. He also brought a concealed firearm to a 'protests' that he was not legally allowed to carry. He pointed that firearm at someone as well.
Sounds like he was the one that needs to be on trial.

 

[El Caliente]

If I understand Guido's position, it's similar to mine. It's not "a bad law" it's "the lack of a good law". There needs to be a clear cutoff so you can't bring a gun to a tense situation like a protest, goad someone into attacking you, then shoot them in "self defense". Especially if you're concealed carrying so they don't even know you're armed. It's one thing to get into a fistfight, another entirely to be the poor sod bringing fists to a gunfight.

Are you saying that KR goaded people into attacking him, or are you just saying that people (with guns) shouldn’t goad others into attacking them?

 

[Brad Mojo]

... people (with guns) shouldn’t goad others into attacking them?

Well this part should be obvious from a common sense objective, but also in a self preservation objective.

 

[sfidc3]

Just curious, are you guys this upset at Gaige Grosskrutz as well? He traveled farther to be where he should not have been. He also brought a concealed firearm to a 'protests' that he was not legally allowed to carry. He pointed that firearm at someone as well.
Sounds like he was the one that needs to be on trial.

Absolutely, except he never shot his gun....but that probably doesn't matter to you....

 

[Taurus]

Are you saying that KR goaded people into attacking him, or are you just saying that people (with guns) shouldn’t goad others into attacking them?

It should be illegal to do so, or at the very least it should void an attempt to claim self-defense.

 

[CoolBrees]

I am a believer that if you intentionally put yourself in a perilous, public situation and are carrying a loaded weapon, there shouldn’t be an opportunity to claim self defense in the aftermath.

That said, in this instance, the verdict agreed with the law. That is why, in my opinion, the law needs to be amended to exclude public gatherings of certain types (political for example)

 

[EGLSShin]

While we're playing could've, should've, would've, had the governor did his job which is to protect citizens and property, none of us would have ever known the names of everyone involved. The guard should have been out there in full force the moment this began. Rittenhouse fiasco was on the 25th of August, the unrest started on the 23rd. I don't know why he doesn't get blame as well. With the guard out there, none of these fools would have been on the street that night or at the very least, would have been kept in line to peacefully protest.

 

[V Chip]

Are you saying that KR goaded people into attacking him, or are you just saying that people (with guns) shouldn’t goad others into attacking them?

I wouldn't say "goad" as that implies more but KR did threaten other(s) -- possibly Rosenbaum -- by pointing his gun at them before any of the shootings went down.

 

[Yatman]

I am a believer that if you intentionally put yourself in a perilous, public situation and are carrying a loaded weapon, there shouldn’t be an opportunity to claim self defense in the aftermath.

not sure what you mean by "intentionally", but if i'm headed home from the airport in my town (which i do) and a perilous, public situation erupts onto the interstate highway along the way (which it has) and i am attacked in my car and use my loaded weapon, i should think it reasonable i have a claim to self defense

(fortunately, according to the laws of my state, i do)

 

[baarbogast]

While we're playing could've, should've, would've, had the governor did his job which is to protect citizens and property, none of us would have ever known the names of everyone involved. The guard should have been out there in full force the moment this began. Rittenhouse fiasco was on the 25th of August, the unrest started on the 23rd. I don't know why he doesn't get blame as well. With the guard out there, none of these fools would have been on the street that night or at the very least, would have been kept in line to peacefully protest.

Finally, someone gets it.

 

[DaveXA]

not sure what you mean by "intentionally", but if i'm headed home from the airport in my town (which i do) and a perilous, public situation erupts onto the interstate highway along the way (which it has) and i am attacked in my car and use my loaded weapon, i should think it reasonable i have a claim to self defense

(fortunately, according to the laws of my state, i do)

This isn't near the same thing as bringing a gun to a protest...which apparently is illegal in some states including Wisconsin. That currently doesn't take precedence over self-defense at protest using firearms.

KR should have been arrested since he was armed at the protest. Would have prevented this whole mess in the first place.