Well semantics can be argued in both your paragraphs. For an example. The Rittenhouse case could arguably be one of vigilantism for the most recent incident. His stated purpose for being there was denounced by the owner of the business he claimed he went to protect also. I'll argue many protest over race issues in the past that resorted to violence have had a sense vigilantism within them also. Trump rallies in 2016!

I'll argue carry and conceal isn't always a good thing when it involves bad people. Or making bad judgments of when to pull a gun in certain situations. Your gun may very well end up being used to kill you. Again, the Rittenhouse case can be used for an example there. Open carry in a chaotic atmosphere can cause misunderstandings in his case. And at least 1 who was carrying who confronted him who didn't use it ends up shot. The sad truth is that we'll most likely never know the truth of that night. Other than what observers noted took place after his initial bail release where he was celebrating with the proud boys group, if I remember right as that was the group. Bragging and laughing about the shooting. I'd have to go back to a WSWS story.

{Kenosha County Circuit Court Judge Bruce Schroeder did not permit the jury to hear that after Rittenhouse posted bail, he celebrated the killings at a pub with top Proud Boys members, where he flashed “white power” signs, belted out the Proud Boys anthem and grinned for selfies with other Proud Boys members.}

{Nor did the judge permit the jury to hear that before the shooting, Rittenhouse was recorded saying that he wanted to shoot people he thought were shoplifting. “Bro, I wish I had my f—ing AR,” he said. “I’d start shooting rounds at them.”}

In my book that's vigilantism.

{While prosecutors could not mention that Rittenhouse was affiliated with the Proud Boys, Richards specifically emphasized that Gaige Grosskreutz, a volunteer medic Rittenhouse shot in the arm, was affiliated with “People’s Revolution.”}

Did you even bother to read the article to recognize the obvious semantics in regards to your argument? Let alone be able to produce them from history as I did above. I hate when people come here and waste my time by using rhetoric comments designed for them rather than thinking for themselves. The overwhelming problem with our society in regards to our political atmosphere.

@William_Mary you’re comical

@CourtJester @CourtJester in other words. You have no substantial means to debate my theoretical opinion of the semantics, maybe recognized its potential value but to preserve a sense of remaining correct you resorted to a personal attack, possibly incapable of an intellectual means to think for yourself to devise a response without indoctrinated rhetoric preprogramed for you. You probably fail to understand what these types of actions and or none actions indicate to people like myself. All of which are so overly found on social media.

I addressed another view yesterday of the Rittenhouse case from the help of another article which correlates with both of some of our statements above. The article also highly correlates with the agenda of this group. [agnostic.com]

I understand a degree of what you're saying, but it doesn't come in such simple terms as you seemingly put them. The end result leaves both of us, and the rest of the world, remaining in a reality of the not knows, due to the chaotic nature of the entire event. You have to be able and willing to correlate each event with others to extract the underlining reasoning to recognize when there's obviously an agenda to go with them. Which exposes how our MSCM purposely designs coverage to events to be to beneficial to a structural system of failure. Capturing as much of the public into the tribal division created by entities working against us. Until we all learn to understand this we all lose.

@William_Mary there is nothing to debate from my perspective. it all comes in very simple terms. Kyle was protecting himself. Pretty cut and dry.
The proud boys and white supremacy doesn’t stand up because everyone he shot was white.

Are you upset the he killed a convicted sex offender, a convicted career criminal, or a guy coming at him with a gun?

@CourtJester No. I'm upset because as a teenager he was permitted to illegally go into a chaotic atmosphere by family members in support of a misdirected fascist mentality. Which indoctrinated a still developing mind and character into believing carrying a AR 15 into such an atmosphere was normal in our society for accepted vigilance. I'm curious to whether you would allow your 17 year old son to march into such an atmosphere?

That a man was shot for most likely attempting to stop more shooting. Who chose not to shoot him when he had ample time and opportunity to do so before being shot.

If Rittenhouse would have simply walked away from the presence of the mentally ill man rather than participating in a obviously lengthy verbal confrontation, one less shooting. But he chose to exacerbate the confrontation even after the initial action had ended. That erases the argument of self defense.

The fact that law enforcement were purposely lacking presence during the riot like conditions that were occurring virtually opened up an arena to invite a vigilante atmosphere knowing such characters were going to be present. Everyone in the vicinity would have the responsibility to understand this and chose to be there. As a teenager he was at a disadvantage. I'll go out on the limb here and suggest there aren't to many parents or family members who would put their teenagers in such a position.

I'm upset because the media used a teenager to feed a tribal division agenda who is now being propelled into heroism towards a societal propagandist dis/misinformation agenda. How afterwards went to meet Trump just recently to be further used in that cause. Relatively still an under developed minor he is being drawn further into a rabbit hole of deceit to benefit capitalism that could very well destroy his life.

@William_Mary

It wasn’t illegal for him to go there or be there. He had ever right to do so.

Do you have proof of his ‘indoctrination’?

I would allow my 17 year old to protect businesses. Hell, I’d probably be with him. I was in bootcamp at 18 and protecting locations in other countries at 19 with something bigger than an AR15.

The fact that you say “most likely” proves that you’re working on feelings, emotion, and assumptions rather than the facts of the case.

He wasn’t walking away, but was being chased by the mentally ill. And running towards the police location.

He eliminated three criminals. You have no argument that he was at a disadvantage.

Democrat defund the police movements give police a great reason to just stand back and watch you guys do what you do best; destroy things.

You’re upset because you only rely on the left leaning media to get you information and you came up with your own narrative in your head. You’re upset because the jury based their decision on the facts of the case rather than your feelings.

And that’s why I find your arguments comical.

@CourtJester thank you for the lesson. I'm now well aware of your one dimensional tunnel vision on how to intellectually apply critical thinking and a waste of my time.

My primary information doesn't come from left leaning media. The fact that you missed this, which correlates with the groups narrative, of being primarily an agenda of exposing global imperialism that the US is vastly used towards for the benefit of a failing global capitalist system speaks volumes to my statement above. Every primary independent source I use here, and most political commentators of various backgrounds and achievements are censored from not only left leaning MSCM outlets, but right leaning also. The fact that you haven't made that connection yet again speaks volumes to my above statement. It's plastered all over the group introduction and pinned pages at the top of the message board. You're in a realm to that which you never took the time to learn to understand, leaving your participation within as a measure of ignorance. Which delivers us the reasoning you're unable to comprehend both the group and reality around you. This indicates you're as indoctrinated as Rittenhouse is, and he's still only 18.

I don't come up with my own narrative. I come up with my own conclusions to build on or change a developed opinion which often correlates with the information my sources provide. Which this groups narrative and agenda is also based on. This information is based on more factual disclosure of all sides of an issue, a long history of repeated cycles of events and people involved over that history, and proven results. In which they often take MSCM coverage and show how they attempt to mislead the public. And yes, I add a good degree of conjecture to my commentary in my post. I'm often right also. But then we all weigh matters within our lives with conjecture to make decisions. So why is my use of most likely being made out to be a bad thing?

Which is why you fail to understand that your time in the service wasn't protecting property, it was securing capitalism through a sense of their colonialism. According to your time line that seems to put you in the midst of the warring soon after 9/11. In which to date nearly 10,000 of your comrades were sent to their deaths over manufactured lies in wars of progression they knew couldn't be won and still linger today. Essentially, murdered, for only the benefit of the capitalist military complex. Let alone 10's of thousands mentally and physically harmed. Which all my independent sources dissent against. Neither the left or right MSCM can argue that fact for themselves as they are a tool for that agenda, being owned by only 6 elite billionaire companies who control the information they spew out.

You were essentially caught in a repeated cycle from past history manufactured by some of the same characters, and new characters, for the same colonial agendas and capitalist profit. Many of your comrades understand this and have made groups to speak out about it. You won't find them on MSCM either. Some of them are within my sources though and have exposed the criminal unethical practices of our military and government.

Which Jonathan Cook did in his article targeting primarily the media which I attempted to get you to read in a reply above. Obviously you didn't give me the respect of that being you obviously missed my commentary within that post. In short. I don't like anything about Rittenhouse. But the video does provide a sense of self defense. How ever the means the situation progressed into is questionable. It was illegal for a 17 year old to have acquired the AR15 the way he did. And having it handed over to him from a family member was also illegal. Especially for the purpose of known intent. Unless hunting people is a valid reason to you, which he basically spoke of.

We're all indoctrinated into some means of beliefs, thoughts, and actions. One of his is clearly the agenda of groups of the likes of the proud boys and Trump. You're leaving the impression that may be your pill also. And you'd pay with your own blood to support it, even before one could have matured to a point to have a coherent knowledge of the reality around them.

@CourtJester is that a threat?

@William_Mary And you keep waisting it

@CourtJester it? Incoherence messaging is evident.

@William_Mary Yeah. I just saw Biden give a speech and it rubbed off on me there for a second.