Originally Posted by
Stavros
So intent or motive has no force in law? The boy was safe at home, but chose to drive into a town, and into that part of town where he knew there was social unrest. He did not go unarmed, but armed, and not wth a stick, a knife or a pistol, but a battlefield weapon normally issued to trained soldiers -he only claimed self-defence after he was attacked by people he provoked by brandishing his locked and loaded weapon, a weapon he had no legal right to possess. It is the case that we cannot, and will never know if one of the men who allegedly attacked him intended to kill him, but we could reasonably assert that, faced with a reckless teenager with a battlefield weapon he was the citizen defending himself.
The evidence proves that there was only one person who killed and injured that night, and he was not even charged with illegal possession of the weapon that caused injury and murder!
Is there any wonder that your legal system has been turned inside out, that you have law enforcement officers who failed to arrest a teenager with a battlefield weapon, who to him had stood by while Kenosha was attacked? Again, and again, intent stands tall, waving a placard 'Guys, watch me do this!'. To leap over that and begin your case in the midde of a conflict which he created for himself, is to select those parts of the law most likely to get the kid off, rather than to punish illegal acts.
The same assumption you choose not to make, others make with regard to the alleged crimes of his victims, suggesting that armed teenagers -hell, anyone- should have the right to go into the 'bad parts of town' and shoot at will and shoot to kill because, hey, those Black kids on the corner are selling drugs and you don't need an assumption of innocence, evidence or any damn thing, just shoot the dipshits, and the law will say 'well done', now go to DC and intern for a loony who shares your love of violent cartoons!
The moment he left the safery of his home and went into a conflict zone with a weapon his intent was clear. Even Clint Eastwood's classics like Dirty Harry have their moments of ambiguity and moral doubt, but in a country where truth is a lie, compromise a failure, the rule of law an irrelevance, a teenage boy who cries without producing tears, who doesn't know the meaing of life and death, for some reason, this is an 'open and shut case' in which there was only one outcome, an interview with Tucker Carlson.
Now ask -what if that teenager in Kenosha that night was Black? He would not be a hero, he would never have had his day in court or an inteview on Fox News, a public congratulation from a former, twice impeached President, and gushing praise from Congressional representatives.
He be dead.