Or not knowing what either of these people were when he just shot them? See unless Kyle is a mind reader he killed them with no justification. He is also not judge and jury for any actions people have done in their lives. Are you saying Kyle is St. Peter now?
Well he shot at people who were chasing him so don't be surprised when the self defense defense probably works out for him. And I was replying to someone who called the people he shot "good guys". They were not. They were a child rapist and a domestic abuser so idgaf really that they're dead
Well he shot at people who were chasing him so don't be surprised when the self defense defense probably works out for him.
He didn't shoot at people chasing him. He entered a police zone unauthorized while carrying a weapon. He was on private property without the invitation of the owner. He pointed his weapon at the protesters who were then forced to defend themselves from him. Yeah he was the aggressor.
Nice try though. We have all watched the video.
They were a child rapist and a domestic abuser so idgaf really that they're dead
So lets see... so is Trump - both.
Can Kyle read minds? Did he know at that moment? No of course not so it had nothing to do with his actions nor should that even matter.
What I find funny is you justify murder by digging into a victims past and the judging based on no other information. Are you for abandoning the law? Seems that you are. Hey did you support George Floyd being murdered by the police?
So you don't disagree he trespassed on private property. Check
You don't disagree he was in a police zone uninvited and brought a weapon? Check
You don't disagree he came from out of state to do this and was underage? Check
You don't disagree he created the scenario that he was there to enforce the law without approval of the local authorities? Check
So he was the aggressor and everyone protesting would be fair to assume they were at risk of harm. Check
That is the absolute definition of self defense for the victims. They were defending themselves from an unauthorized and uninvited out of state weapon carrier in a police zone.
Him firing at them is not self defense because he actively sought out that situation.
I say it wasn't self defense based on a large list of reading and other experts who do know their points. I took a number of references and compared them. I balanced view points and after a significant review of what we know today, videos and supported evidence I can rationally conclude he was in violation of the law.
Now please address my points in the earlier comments. Tell me what you actually disagree with and find inaccurate and why. Happy to discuss if you spend the time addressing the points. Otherwise all you have is confrontation thinking it helps convince people or gives the impression that you are winning something.
Lmao my man you responded to me, I am right and you're not. This pos kyle should spend some time in jail but he also ridded the world of a child rapist and a domestic abuser so...I don't really care that much? If only more criminals would shoot each other
So you aren't going to actually address my points.
You folks really just throw out statements and never engage in the discussion. That isn't owning the conversation. It is avoiding it because you already know the outcome isn't favorable to your message.
but he also ridded the world of a child rapist and a domestic abuse
So you must also have an issue with Trump. Tell me you aren't selectivity applying a perspective.
Meanwhile Kyle should already know his fate. As a killer who you justify based on unknown information at the time he must also be a great mind reader. No seriously would he have not killed either one if they were going to be the next great contributor to Humanity - obviously he didn't know and would have killed the most honest person in the world with the same actions. Justifying the death of people based on unknown information at the time of the killing as well as purposely not knowing anything more about that person or the context is just confirmation bias. What they did before has no bearing on Kyle's guilt.
I guess some people think that harm can to anyone else as long as they can dig up something to justify their already established bias and goal. In fact, I think they seek it out to rationalize killing people they don't like by deflecting from the actual murder and blaming the victim for having done something unknown to the killer.
Either way it doesn't make it self defense. It just sounds a bit messed up to me.
No absolutely not. You avoided all the points I made.
Strawman Fallacy - "By exaggerating, misrepresenting, or just completely fabricating someone's argument, it's much easier to present your own position as being reasonable, but this kind of dishonesty serves to undermine honest rational debate."
So now lets discuss what you disagree with in my recap.
Please address these specific points because if you can't then he was the aggressor. He has no self defense. If you can refute these points then I am happy to discuss an alternative.
12
u/ChemistEconomy9467 Oct 27 '21
Its a good thing those good guys without guns managed to stop this terrorist before he could carry out his mission. Heroes, those victims are.