No, I didn't encounter the Reddit/FOXNews kerfuffle on a 'partisan' news site and start parroting liberal talking points from a 'partisan' factchecker. I didn't need anyone to make my 'arguments' for me. I looked at both sides and drew my own conclusions. Just to be clear, the kerfuffle first came up in post #83 on this site. There was no link to the original information, so I went to look it up. The first result of my search was in post #88 and in post #90 the FOX News involvement was revealed. In post #93, the Newsweek FactCheck emplyed ne talking points that I could see --- just courtroom video and trial transcript material to give context to the social media's version of the kerfuffle. What bothers me is social media's taking of something barely worth mentioning, and distorting it to create baseless outrage. Seriously, doesn't anyone think there's something deeply wrong about that?
Of course; we all think there's something deeply wrong about that but it is not a new phenomenon. Sadly it appears that mostly conservative views are vilified or ridiculed. How can we control what's on social media, or what lies are perpetuated by the MSM? Answer: We cannot.
If that’s the way you took it then so be it. And the way I take it is that if you were on the jury, you would have already made up your mind before the first testimony was offered. Guilty as charged, off with his head. What is funny (not ha-ha funny) to me is that lady justice let her blindfold slip and the scales are tilted by left wing thinking via the media. There was once a case out of Baton Rouge whereby a father of a boy who was raped by a grown man, waited outside the jailhouse just to shoot the adult through the head. He too was pronounced guilty but he was served with a suspended sentence and was put on probation for a few years and did some community service. I agree with the jury and I do hope the jury for Kyle comes back about the same way. I can’t get over the fact that the media is glorifying the real criminals much the same way they still do George Floyd.
What I found 'fun' in regard to your response was your humorous take on my 'timeline' of posts in the unfolding of yesterday's kerfuffle, characterizing it as a 'lottery' of some sort. I like that a lot! But me having to explain the joke sort of ruins it. Just so you know, I don't find Kyle's plight in any way comical. He's obviously a sensitive and idealistic kid who would have benefited from an Intervention early on --- a gentle deprogramming from the alt-reality-social-media-landscape he'd become emmeshed in.
Let’s see. He’s been in the scouts, trained on a firefighting team, trained in a Jr. Police format, good grades in school and even turned himself in after the incident. I’m not sure what you mean by de-programmed. If you mean a young man who isn’t brought up to have the ability to protect his own family or wonder what gender he is or back down and shut up when his freedom is being threatened; there are already plenty of those weak individuals around now days without yet another one. Quite the contrary, I believe the guy should enlist in the military because I believe he’d make a great soldier or perhaps an officer. The same as the jury, what you have to ask yourself is this and nothing more: What did he do that was illegal? The only thing left on the table is the question of self defense and that’s it. You’ve defended the guys who got shot now it’s time to defend Kyles Constitutional Rights too. Bottom line to me is this. Since blue state mayors and governors refuse to do anything about the terrorist rioters and like Kamala Harris, keep providing their bail should they be caught by the police, I’d take a couple of dozen Kyles rather than those who just allow bad stuff to happen.
Where have I defended the guys who got shot? I imagine those guys were once much like Kyle --- overconfident kids in need of a stern reality check, before it was too late!
The men who got shot for attacking Kyle were all much older adult men with a long history of criminal offenses, at least one was a child molester, and they had all been previously arrested for their crimes. I cannot fathom how you could even begin to equate those criminals (rioters who were there, burning down homes, businesses and vehicles of innocent citizens of Kenosha) with a patriotic teenage boy who was doing his best to help in the defense of those citizens and their businesses, @Janice Lynne. Here is the criminal records of the three rioters who were attacking Kyle, in case you missed this post earlier.
It is impossible to psycho-babble the outstanding traits of any individual. We can say it’s the parents fault or society in general but the bottom line is that everyone has their own personality and characteristics that bleed into whatever environment they are accustomed to. What I am referring to in reference to you defending the guys who got shot is that you had already decided the innocence or guilt for Kyle’s deeds without even thinking of what he did that is Constitutionally wrong. There is such a thing as being in the wrong place but for the right reasons and you really haven’t examined that but instead placed a guilty verdict upon the defendant. If he’s guilty as charged then that means the other 3 guys were innocent so by pure merit of your verdict on Kyle you’re defending the other 3 and by extension you’re also defending those who were rioting as though they had some Constitutional right to do what they were doing. Note: If indeed something of ill will were to happen in your neighborhood and the mayor told the police to stand down, you’d pray to God for a couple of Kyles to come to your rescue.