Has the US gone into full psycho mode? Rittenhouse spree killings

[EgonSpengler]

There's also issue with the use of the term "well-regulated". There is an argument out there that the term did not have the same definition back in 1789 that it does today and instead meant something similar to well-trained or well-equipped as opposed to "closely monitored by government oversight and laws".

I suspect they meant that the state governor should inherit the authority over the militia that the Crown-appointed governors prior to the revolution had to appoint officers, enforce discipline etc. Only a guess though.

Right. I think the Militia Act that @AmazonQueen mentioned a couple of pages back was an attempt to tell both sides of that debate that they could both be right at the same time. My grievance with the concept of the "unorganized militia" is that it's just dressing up vigilantism in fancy clothes and calling it civilized. (I have a similar bone to pick with "stand your ground" laws and the like, that it's essentially allowing every Tom, Dick and Harry to decide when someone should die, without anything resembling due process or evidence or reason or, really, anything other than fear or anger.)

The "organized militia" would be men who are normally civilians - e.g. not "regular army" - but who could help in the event of war. Today, those people are Reservists. Militias would be available to be summoned by the governor; again, we still have those today, but we call them the National Guard. And finally, militias served some peacetime duties, such as supporting the local sheriff when he needed some muscle, or serving a warrant issued by a judge if the person refused to appear before the court voluntarily; today, we call those people police officers.

The best-case scenario for an "unorganized militia", as I see it, was the U.S. War for Independence, when a bunch of insurrectionists with military experience organized themselves into a Resistance and waged an illegal uprising against the government. So if today's "militias" are drawing a line between themselves and the Minutemen, they're saying that they want to overthrow the government (some of the 'accelerationists' are explicit about that, albeit in anonymous forums). The French Resistance was another example of an "unorganized militia" whose goals I generally support. If these militiamen today think of themselves as the ancestors of the Minutemen and the French Resistance, they're nothing but trouble (I don't know if they are, I'm jus' sayin').

 

[Lexicus]

Let’s say Thomas Jefferson is brought into the 2020’s. Would he approve of the Air Force? Article 1, § 8 says Congress can raise Armies and provide a Navy. No Air Force! Well, is the “originalist” position that Jefferson would recognize the importance of airplanes, or would he be strictly against them because they didn’t write it down? We don’t know!

The "originalist" position, in all seriousness, is simply that Jefferson's opinon would be whatever redounded to the partisan benefit of the Republican Party in the case at issue. There's nothing complicated about it.

 

[EgonSpengler]

Accelerationism has been a tendency in the left for many decades. A typical left-accelerationist position would be to vote for right-wing candidates for office, who will bring about a crisis of capitalism and thus a revolution more quickly than left-wing candidates would.

One of the articles I posted mentioned that the accelerationists stole the idea from Marxism. It's not called 'accelerationism' in Marxism, though. I forget the language there. "Heighten the contradictions" or something like that.

I think the terms get confusing and “originalist” can be defined either as a strict “textualist” approach or an interpretive one.

Yes, I think that's why Scalia would raise an objection to me calling him an originalist. I think he preferred the term textualist.

 

[Farm Boy]

Just call them boogaloos, like they are. Race war. Revolution. Whatever. Wannabe rapists and murderers, some of them not wannabe. We build cages specifically for these people when they act. Some of them might ferment well. Like cheese.

 

[FriendlyFire]

Self defence right ? Or another case of mistaken threat and trigger happy civilian.
Another shooter fleeing the scene of shooting instead of staying put and calling in the police.
Someone threw a plastic bag, someone pulling out something, grounds for shooting multiple times. Hes a Hero.

Right Republicans ? Right ?

How the Fatal Shooting at a Portland Protest Unfolded
The livestream shows the man in white walking by himself toward the Justice Center and crossing the street one block south. One minute and 43 seconds later, Mr. Dunlap turns his camera toward the sound of shouting.
What happens next occurs within six seconds.
The man in white and another man dressed in black can be seen crossing the street, apparently to confront Mr. Danielson and Mr. Pappas.

There is shouting that is hard to hear on Mr. Dunlap’s livestream, but in a second video filmed by Nathan Millsap, a Portland videographer, the audio is clearer.
A man, who Mr. Pappas later contends is the gunman, shouts: “Hey, we got some right here. We got a couple right here.”
Another man says, “He’s macing you, he’s pulling it out.”
The sound of spraying is audible, followed immediately by two gunshots.

Mr. Dunlap captures the shooting on his livestream. Mr. Danielson can be seen raising his arm and beginning to spray a pepper spray-like substance, followed almost immediately by the gunshots. The man in white backs away with his arm raised and then runs, along with the man dressed in black.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/31/video/portland-protests-shooting-investigation.html?action=click&module=Top Stories&pgtype=Homepage

 

[Commodore]

Just call them boogaloos, like they are

That's not really fair though as there are several subtypes of the whole boogaloo phenomenon. You have those who just treat the whole thing as a joke and are just in it for the memes, others who are serious about fighting if the government goes full tyranny but won't actively try to start a fight or war, and then there are the acceleration it's who are actively trying to cause trouble.

The first two types are generally harmless and really shouldn't be lumped in with the third type.

 

[Farm Boy]

So don't call them boogaloos, they're boogaloos. Gotcha.

 

[Commodore]

So don't call them boogaloos, they're boogaloos. Gotcha.

No, you call them accelerationists. It's what they are. "Boog Bois" is the term for those who are just in it for the memes and the second type I mentioned are just your run of the mill prepper types.

You are just trying to use one term to lump them all together because you can't be bothered to put in the effort to differentiate between them. Also calling them boogaloos doesn't make much sense either. Boogaloo is the name of the event (second civil war) not the people who would theoretically participate in it.

 

[Cloud_Strife]

That's not really fair though as there are several subtypes of the whole boogaloo phenomenon. You have those who just treat the whole thing as a joke and are just in it for the memes, others who are serious about fighting if the government goes full tyranny but won't actively try to start a fight or war, and then there are the acceleration it's who are actively trying to cause trouble.

The first two types are generally harmless and really shouldn't be lumped in with the third type.

Tell us more about how memes are harmless whilst I look up the new Zealand christchurch shooter, Dylan roof or anders breivik

Also I'm sorry to be so coarse @Commodore but an Ironic bigot/nazi/racist/whatever is still a bigot/nazi/racist/whatever

 

[Commodore]

Tell us more about how memes are harmless whilst I look up the new Zealand christchurch shooter, Dylan roof or anders breivik

A joke does not become harmful just because some people don't realize it's not a joke and take it seriously. It is the person who took it seriously that is harmful, not the joke.

 

[Farm Boy]

No, you call them accelerationists. It's what they are. "Boog Bois" is the term for those who are just in it for the memes and the second type I mentioned are just your run of the mill prepper types.

You are just trying to use one term to lump them all together because you can't be bothered to put in the effort to differentiate between them. Also calling them boogaloos doesn't make much sense either. Boogaloo is the name of the event (second civil war) not the people who would theoretically participate in it.

I get the feeling a lot of accellerationists(whatever term you want to use, I don't really care that much(but yes, they all look sort of the same)) are actually massive losers just hoping they can get better men to kill and be killed.

I sort of think of them as the worthless tomcats that didn't win, then go around trying to kill kittens to bring queens back into heat.

 

[Cloud_Strife]

A joke does not become harmful just because some people don't realize it's not a joke and take it seriously. It is the person who took it seriously that is harmful, not the joke.

I can't believe you're seriously this naive

 

[tetley]

The OP of this thread asked if the US has gone into full psycho mode, and from reading this thread, it's pretty obvious.

The answer's yes.

 

[tetley]

Self defence right ? Or another case of mistaken threat and trigger happy civilian.
Another shooter fleeing the scene of shooting instead of staying put and calling in the police.
Someone threw a plastic bag, someone pulling out something, grounds for shooting multiple times. Hes a Hero.

Right Republicans ? Right ?

The killing of the Portland counter-protester was self-defense. They were driving around shooting paintballs at BLM protesters. The now-deceased was seen on video spraying bear mace. The protester who successfully defended himself mistook the counterprotester's paintball gun for a real gun, and he has every right to defend himself.

If I hear Trump and Trump supporters condemn the murders of unarmed black people by cops and the murders of BLM protesters, I will reconsider. Hasn't happened yet.

 

[Manfred Belheim]

The OP of this thread asked if the US has gone into full psycho mode, and from reading this thread, it's pretty obvious.

The answer's yes.

I would say "no" if only for the fact that the question implies it's something that's just happened.

 

[El_Machinae]

It's almost like walking into a powderkeg creates a lot of opportunities for 'self-defense' situations if we rely on reasonable doubt. I don't have a solution, since participating in a protest and defending yourself are both rights. It's just a recipe for disaster.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

I hope you aren't serious. The guy said that he wished he had shot the bum Rittenhouse, in retrospect. How you arrive from that, to "he meant to kill him all the time", is beyond me. Furthermore, if he meant to kill him, why didn't he kill him and tried to disarm him instead?
Maybe if the protester with the gun feared more that he would be shot, he would have acted in self-defense and removed this piece of garbage from society once and for all.

Yeah I misremembered the precise sequence of events for the criminal assailant of Rittenhouse that had a gun. He told a friend he meant to kill Rittenhouse, who then put that to the public.

Probable cause for attempted murder. That guy needs to be arrested ASAP, given we also have hard evidence that he pulled a gun and pointed it at Rittenhouse, who he told someone he intended to kill. Rittenhouse was not threatening him, he was attempting to escape.

I see you're already setting up a fictitious "social media crucifixion" angle in the event the law decides against the defendant though

If the law goes against someone while the charges should be dismissed on merits social media response is the least of our problems, or his. He was under threat of death and defended himself. If that's "homicide", any self-defense using force is potentially homicide.

Like I said. The perpetrator's race matters in cases of optics like this one.

Defendant's race matters to garbage racists. Otherwise it does not matter, as there is absolutely no evidence to suggest a racial motive in this context.

"all these other people broke the law too" is not the convincing argument you think it is in deciding moral high ground.

The key difference is that Rittenhouse was committing a misdemeanor violation of curfew, while his criminal assailants were committing felony assault and/or attempted murder.

Those are different crimes.

Maybe the real problem is everyone wading in with a concrete opinion on everything the minute even the barest details are reported, under the impression that they're somehow informed. And then arguing incessantly over everything all the time.

That does happen, but in the Rittenhouse case we have video evidence, witness testimony, and the prosecution's criminal complaint all supporting self defense as opposed to homicide. Yet this thread's title starts off with a bang by lying about it, perhaps mislead by some other lies about this situation.

Self defence right ? Or another case of mistaken threat and trigger happy civilian.

I want to know more about what was said, but if words are being exchanged and not death threats and someone starts whipping out mace I'm not sympathetic to the person initiating violence. Mace would be justified if the person using it was threatened with harm. Macing people because you don't like what they're saying not so much.

 

[Gorbles]

Defendant's race matters to garbage racists. Otherwise it does not matter, as there is absolutely no evidence to suggest a racial motive in this context.

Good thing I didn't suggest a racial motive then. Seriously, if the best you've got is slashing my replies to other posters into pedantry, at least get the pedantry right.

 

[Farm Boy]

The killing of the Portland counter-protester was self-defense. They were driving around shooting paintballs at BLM protesters. The now-deceased was seen on video spraying bear mace. The protester who successfully defended himself mistook the counterprotester's paintball gun for a real gun, and he has every right to defend himself.

If I hear Trump and Trump supporters condemn the murders of unarmed black people by cops and the murders of BLM protesters, I will reconsider. Hasn't happened yet.

It's not like randomly shooting people with a mock gun and macing people makes it less likely somebody will try to kill you. Sort of like putting out a dumpster fire started by human dumpster fires.

 

[Narz]

A joke does not become harmful just because some people don't realize it's not a joke and take it seriously. It is the person who took it seriously that is harmful, not the joke.

Whats next, video games cause violence?!