ID: text says:

"Liberal: How can you go to bed at night after promoting violence? I get that they’re Nazis but it’s still violence.

Me:"

Bellow is an image of Homer Simpson asleep, tucked in to a cosy looking bed with a big contented smile on his face.

  • MutilationWave@lemmy.world
    31·
    10 hours ago

    No way. The kid took a guy illegally across state lines with the intention to intimidate if not shoot protestors to protect fucking insured business property. He went there with ill intent, it was recognized, and people fearfully reacted to subdue him.

    He got his wish. He got to shoot two and walked scott free. Then made a bunch of money while psychopaths took him on tour around the country for people to cheer because he shot some “liberals.”

    I don’t care about the fact that he thought he was fighting for his life. Maybe he was. But he engineered that situation himself. That is not at all comparable with the choosing to dress that way bullshit.

    • ObjectivityIncarnate@lemmy.world
      13·
      10 hours ago

      The kid took a gun illegally across state lines

      This is literally untrue at one end and deliberately deceitful on the other. Literally the only portion of that sentence that is correct and not misleading is “the kid”, lmao:

      • He didn’t take possession of the rifle until the morning after he arrived in Kenosha
      • “State lines” is deceitfully repeated ad nauseam, stating something that’s literally true, but is obviously stated specifically that way with the intent to create the illusion that he traveled a great distance, far away from his community. But here are the facts:
        • He traveled 20 miles–he literally lived on the other side of the border.
        • He used to work there, his father lives there, etc.–this WAS his community, lol.

      Pretty hilarious that the very first thing you retort with is both false and deceitful. People like you don’t even know the most basic facts of the matter, and what you do know, you deliberately twist with deceitful intent. You’ve got your narrative, and damned if you aren’t going to stick to it like glue, no matter what the reality is.

      Thanks for proving my point so succinctly.

      • MutilationWave@lemmy.world
        3·
        9 hours ago

        I wasn’t aware the distance was so short or he had connections to the area. That’s fair and thank you for educating me.

        The fact remains the took a gun to “protect” insured businesses. The real reason was to intimidate or get a chance to shoot a “liberal”.

        I mean no deceit.

        • OneOrTheOtherDontAskMe@lemmy.world
          21·
          8 hours ago

          I’m with you on intent. He had no place being there, and it surely wasn’t to protect anyone.

          But the guy above is correct in regards to the event’s timeline/order of action. Rittenhouse sucks, he was a child who was radicalised to hate and to fear others, and then he cried (like the child he was, at 17) in front of a panel and got brought into the conservative media fold where he now, as an adult, is an absolute shit stain for not recognizing his actions or the vitriol of the people around him. I pity 17 year old Rittenhouse, no one is adult enough at that age to be carrying a gun in that kind of a situation with that kind of mindset. The 22 year old he is now doesn’t get that pity.