Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Facebook reverses Kyle Rittenhouse policy

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 442 posts

Re: Facebook reverses Kyle Rittenhouse policy

#81

Post by vkou »

GhettoComputers wrote: post #41
jacquesm wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoted post unavailable.

What do you expect people to do when their lives are threatened? Just lay down and die?

If we follow this argument to it's logical conclusion, then the other individual with the gun (or, quite literally, any bystander in such a situation, defending themselves from an active shooter) shooting and killing Rittenhouse would have also been a perfectly reasonable outcome.

I have no doubt that he, too, felt threatened for his life by an armed gunman at some point in that altercation.

I also assume that, as the saying goes, either of the people that Rittenhouse killed would have also rather faced a trial by twelve, than be carried by six.

Re: Facebook reverses Kyle Rittenhouse policy

#82

Post by RC_ITR »

rayiner wrote: post #2

> Facebook said it would "still remove content that celebrates the death of the individuals killed in Kenosha". But "we will no longer remove content containing praise or support of Rittenhouse", a spokesperson said. To be clear, for a year, Facebook banned content that would have been consistent with what an impartial jury ultimately found about the case. Which would have corrected a misleading media narrative about…

I mean I agree with you on the technicality, but the uniquely American view that someone can take a gun to a protest and not be looking for trouble is a very interesting one.

Re: Facebook reverses Kyle Rittenhouse policy

#83

Post by chii »

thumbellina wrote: post #25

I fully accept that FB is free to run itself how it pleases. That said, it's clear they are not in a position to act as a neutral platform for civic discourse. I try to support technologies and platforms that provide a voice to all. Decentralized over centralized. I try to curate my own list of sources, rather than rely on third-party curation. How else can I ensure a healthy and diverse information perspective?

The problem isn't you, but others who do not try to curate their own diverse sources. When time comes to make democratic decisions, if those who are influenced outnumbered people like you, there'd be no way for you to make your case and convince the others of your correctness.

Re: Facebook reverses Kyle Rittenhouse policy

#84

Post by TimeBearingDown »

vineyardmike wrote: post #64
koolba wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Personally I am sick and tired of the way this character is now put forward as some kind of saint, in my book he's a multiple murderer and there isn't anything that will change that. If you refuse to accept any concept of self defense then of course your going to convict him without looking at the evidence. By your standard it’s impossible for someone to defend themself with lethal force as the use of that force wo…

> Walking around your neighborhood is not walking into a bar fight. He didn't. He drove out of state to a new neighborhood... with a gun. Thats asking for trouble.

His father lived there, and he didn’t drive out of state with a gun. This is just factually wrong. I recommend getting your information from the trial itself as much of this is spelled out quite clearly.

Re: Facebook reverses Kyle Rittenhouse policy

#85

Post by RC_ITR »

urda wrote: post #44
jacquesm wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoted post unavailable.

Sorry, self defense is a right no matter what isle of the political spectrum you land on. Arguing otherwise here, means you A) didn't follow the case or B) are arguing in bad faith. BOTH of these options do not make for a good look on yourself.

I always wonder where the 'we need good guys with guns to stop the bad guys with guns' go when they're talking about Gaige.

He saw Kyle, an active shooter, drew on him to get him to stop shooting people, and so Kyle just gets to shoot him?

EDIT: This flamewar is not worth it (what did I expect in this thread?), but just please try to remember the lessons Batman tries to teach us about vigilante justice (it just encourages more crime by making 'justice' a personal endeavor subject to the follies of the individual).

Re: Facebook reverses Kyle Rittenhouse policy

#86

Post by School-Cotton »

Nursie wrote: post #78
School-Cotton wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The German definition of self-defense (“Notwehr”) sounds quite comprehensive to me: https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/stgb/__32.html What makes you think the case would’ve been adjudicated differently in Germany? Edit: to be clear, certainly bringing a gun to a protest at all is illegal in Germany, so he could presumably be prosecuted for that, but it's not at all clear why he'd have been guilty of murder .

In the UK, aside from guns being highly regulated, taking the gun to a protest would be taken as a sign of intent to use it and the rest of the events would be interpreted in that light. Of course in the UK he'd be looking at multiple years in prison just for the gun offence, and it's also less likely someone else would be waving a gun around in his direction.

I'm no expert on law, but it seems likely that in a country where publicly carrying a gun at all is illegal, that both Grosskreutz and Rittenhouse would have been able to legitimately claim self-defense had they shot and killed the other, because either could have reasonably assumed (even if incorrectly) that the other was some sort of terrorist or mass shooter.

Re: Facebook reverses Kyle Rittenhouse policy

#87

Post by dudul »

RC_ITR wrote: post #82
rayiner wrote: post #2

> Facebook said it would "still remove content that celebrates the death of the individuals killed in Kenosha". But "we will no longer remove content containing praise or support of Rittenhouse", a spokesperson said. To be clear, for a year, Facebook banned content that would have been consistent with what an impartial jury ultimately found about the case. Which would have corrected a misleading media narrative about…

I mean I agree with you on the technicality, but the uniquely American view that someone can take a gun to a protest and not be looking for trouble is a very interesting one.

He took a gun to a protest because he had the right to do so. He can take a gun to home depot if he wants to. Doesn't matter if he was "looking for trouble", he had the constitutional right to do that.

Re: Facebook reverses Kyle Rittenhouse policy

#88

Post by RubberMullet »

jacquesm wrote: post #35
neartheplain wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How much of the trial did you watch?

Enough to be sick of it. This is not how you run a civilized society. The problem is not so much the trial as it is the events leading up to it and the fact that kids walk around with powerful weapons. But please ignore me, and ignore the future consequences as well, this isn't going to solve anything.

And you are ignoring the events that led up to a kid walking around with powerful weapon in the middle of a riot. In your other post, that is now flagged, you talked about how other countries have a "monopoly on violence". That monopoly was lost in Kenosha when the cops didn't intervene and the governor of the state refused to call in the national guard to put in an end to the riots.

Dangerous political gamesmanship between Trump and various mayors and governors got people killed, destroyed a ton of property, and has done permanent damage to the social fabric of this country.

Re: Facebook reverses Kyle Rittenhouse policy

#90

Post by bobthechef »

jacquesm wrote: post #30
umvi wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also the president immediately expressing disappointment on Twitter at the jury's decision... what a slap in the face to due process

Quoted post unavailable.

So instead of shooting men, criminals no less, that were blatantly threatening his life, he should have filed a police report and then appear in court to make his case?
Post reply on HN