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

411–420 of 442 posts

Re: Facebook reverses Kyle Rittenhouse policy

#411

Post by bigwavedave »

RC_ITR wrote: post #407
bigwavedave wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What? "Chaotic good" and "lawful evil" are common terms. Why are you trying to split up the grandparent post's wording in a way they very obviously didn't intend?

You really don't understand the split then, huh? Break the law, but don't harm anyone = Chaotic. Help people (be a medic) = Good. I mean, just because you don't like someone doesn't make them bad.

Except they're not supposed to be split. Just like splitting "therapist" into "the rapist" doesn't capture the intended meaning of the thing, neither does splitting "chaotic good" into "chaotic" and "good" capture the intended meaning. Someone of chaotic good alignment is one who "combined a good heart with a free spirit. These characters acted as their own conscience directed with little regard for the expectations of others. They were often kind, benevolent, and strong individualists who were hostile to the claims of rules, regulations and social order.[1]" I don't give two figs about which horse you have in this race- splitting a phrase to distort the intended meaning is bad faith, full stop. That's all I came to say. But thanks for being condescending in the defense of your fallacious claim, it gave me a good chuckle.

[1] Player's handbook v 3.5, page 105. Draws from version 1, 2, 3.x, and influences v 5. Essentially, everything but 4, which is largely regarded as a version to be swept quietly under the rug.

Re: Facebook reverses Kyle Rittenhouse policy

#412

Post by muzz »

hajile wrote: post #403
muzz wrote: post #401

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow, America is far more messed up than I had realized previously. Not sure I know of any developed country where armed citizens can simply chose to do that.

Let your cops leave you alone in that situation and you'll see people with bows, bats, slings, staffs, hammers, knives, shields and whatever else. Humanity is the same everywhere and looking at history shows this to happen every time a local power vacuum is created and mobs begin to rule.

Only in America do cops allow basically The Hunger Games to occur, while they stand by and do nothing

Re: Facebook reverses Kyle Rittenhouse policy

#413

Post by 1123581321 »

RC_ITR wrote: post #410
1123581321 wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The argument is that he was going to turn himself in. That might be what you meant by passive.

Sure, but we take teenagers (who just shot someone and are RUNNING away) at their word now? And if you don't, you're justified in being shot while pursuing him?

I only wanted to let you know what the argument was.

Re: Facebook reverses Kyle Rittenhouse policy

#414

Post by rufus_foreman »

PhantomGremlin wrote: post #156
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

Also the president immediately expressing disappointment on Twitter at the jury's decision... what a slap in the face to due process I don't think that's quite true. Biden's initial comment was "Look, I stand by what the jury has concluded," he said. "The jury system works, and we have to abide by it." His handlers went on to later change the narrative. https://www.cnn.com/2021/11/19/politics/joe-biden-kyle-ritte...

>> His handlers went on to later change the narrative

If only the Tsar knew!

Re: Facebook reverses Kyle Rittenhouse policy

#415

Post by yes_really »

d1sxeyes wrote: post #288
Akronymus wrote: post #281

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That would certainly be a reasonable interpretation. But in the moment he got shot himself, he already used a weapon on rittenhouse.

I would agree that Rittenhouse would be justified to believe that, yes. Although I would say that the way Huber hit Rittenhouse with the skateboard doesn't really seem as though it's intended to kill or seriously injure, it seems more like he's using it to try to push the assault rifle away from him. We'll never know, unfortunately.

He tried to hit Rittenhouse in the head with a skateboard. How does that not seem as "intended to kill or seriously injure"?

I don't think you are arguing in good faith.

Re: Facebook reverses Kyle Rittenhouse policy

#416

Post by HNTA_1 »

RC_ITR wrote: post #409
HNTA_1 wrote: post #318

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Rittenhouse had just actively shot two people. No he didn't. He had just defended himself against two assailants, while trying to flee. He was never, at any point in time, an "active shooter". An "active shooter" is "an individual actively engaged in killing or attempting to kill people in a confined and populated area; in most cases, active shooters use firearms and there is no pattern or method to their selection…

Trying to flee a crowd that attempted to detain him for shooting someone. Let's play hypothetical here. School shooter is bullied and hit in a fight. He shoots bully dead and starts running. He then shoots two people tackling him. Is he not an active shooter? Why are you doing such mental gymnastics to lionize this kid? You can debate over whether he should go to jail or not, but the reality is he extra-judicially ki…

>Trying to flee a crowd that attempted to detain him for shooting someone.

Proof that they didn't think he was a threat, not an active shooter.

He was trying to flee a rioting mob that attempted to kill him.

>Let's play hypothetical here. School shooter

And there it is, your mask fell off. Freudian slip. You're already aligning him with a "school shooter" even though the scenario you describe is anything but that.

> School shooter is bullied and hit in a fight.

You mean a victim is bullied almost to death and feared for his life. So he...

>shoots bully dead and starts running.

Self-defends himself against a violent threat and flees the site of where he was almost bullied to death.

> He then shoots two people tackling him.

He then shoots two more bullies who also try to tackle and beat him to death. All of these instances are self-defense.

>Is he not an active shooter?

According to the definition used by the federal government, absolutely not. You don't get to magically redefine terms because the new definition is better for your narrative.

>Why are you doing such mental gymnastics to lionize this kid?

Projection much? Why are you doing such self-delusion to lionize this kid? By "mental gymnastics" you mean "what a jury decided was the truth after hours of testimony, footage, and deliberations." Facts, evidence, testimony, etc. that are not good for your narrative are not "mental gymnastics".

> You can debate over whether he should go to jail or not

Which is exactly what happened in court.

>not, but the reality is he extra-judicially killed 2 people.

There's that delusion again. It's only "reality" if you want to replace what actually happened with some narrative safe delusion.

He was within the confines of the law when he legally defended himself. That is the complete opposite of "extrajudicial". Here you are again, attempting to redefine terms and words to delusionally fit a narrative.

>Doesn't that make you feel weird to defend that

Does upholding and defending the law and a verdict decided by a jury make me feel weird? No. If it makes you feel weird, maybe it's because the facts, law, and reality are causing you mental strife. Seek help.

>even if you disagree politically with his victims?

What his assailants' political beliefs are is immaterial.

Re: Facebook reverses Kyle Rittenhouse policy

#417

Post by horns4lyfe »

muzz wrote: post #412
hajile wrote: post #403

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let your cops leave you alone in that situation and you'll see people with bows, bats, slings, staffs, hammers, knives, shields and whatever else. Humanity is the same everywhere and looking at history shows this to happen every time a local power vacuum is created and mobs begin to rule.

Only in America do cops allow basically The Hunger Games to occur, while they stand by and do nothing

Only in America? That kind of thing happens all over the world every day. What a silly statement.

Re: Facebook reverses Kyle Rittenhouse policy

#419

Post by horns4lyfe »

monkeybutton wrote: post #102
dudul wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So if you get assaulted in Germany you're supposed to just let them beat you up without making a move? Aren't there any acceptable scenarios were lethal self defense can be applied?

I'm not european, but I'm not American either, and the case is weird. In isolation the outcome is correct but take a step back and do you not see what is happening to your country? Weird is an understatement. The entire set and setting for it shouldn't be happening in the first place. But it is.

Well yes, people shouldn’t have been allowed to burn down a city, loot, and commit violent acts for days on end. Of course that’s weird, this case is really just a small part of it.

Re: Facebook reverses Kyle Rittenhouse policy

#420

Post by horns4lyfe »

Nursie wrote: post #132
monkeybutton wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not european, but I'm not American either, and the case is weird. In isolation the outcome is correct but take a step back and do you not see what is happening to your country? Weird is an understatement. The entire set and setting for it shouldn't be happening in the first place. But it is.

I am european, but no longer living in Europe (or America) and I can't help but agree. Kyle Rittenhouse isn't guilty of murder under US law, and the killings have been determined to be self defence. OK then. But you have a young person being driven to a counter-protest by a parent, picking up a firearm on the way, ostensibly to use the threat of deadly force to help prevent property damage to some businesses as part…

Why is that what’s wrong with the picture, and not the larger issue that rioters were allowed to burn parts of a city to the ground for days? This case is also far from the only violence that took place there.
Post reply on HN