The flip side of that is people can’t evade them very easily. I’d probably be less freaked out about guns if they were easier to flee.
I think it might be the case that your philosophical objections are preventing you from fully grasping what the law is here. I think we on the left do ourselves a disservice when we try to litigate the law, as written, as applied to the facts as they occurred, in situations where I think the plain truth is that we all just think the law should be different and we don’t so much care what the law as currently understood says about it.
It is not in any way an unreasonable position–“if the law supposes that, the law is a ass, a idiot!”–but it’s a different position from the one you keep arguing in these threads, which is that you know what the law is and that it, applied to these facts, makes what happened murder.
Honestly, this sounds like pure hoplophobia, like “it’s your fault for provoking me”. Which in the case of sexual assault would be like saying “she was dressed like a slut, she was asking for it”. Let’s see police give up their guns and tasers because the mere sight of armed police makes black men run away
Spice Weasel nailed it. And it’s a “truth” that 2nd amendment enthusiasts should acknowledge. I get 2nd Amendment enthusiasts will disagree with the assertation, but nonetheless open carry raises the “danger Will Robinson” radar on a not insignificant portion of the population. One can be a dick and take the stance of “it’s the freakin’ law so TS”, or could at least make a modicum of effort to carry your rifle over the shoulder instead of in a combat ready posture or otherwise acknowledge that you’re making fellow citizens deeply uncomfortable.
I remember accidentally driving by an open carry rally in Kirkland WA about a decade ago. A bigger crowd of shirtless Rambo wannbes demonstrating their right to open carry couldn’t be found at an open call in Hollywood. It was about as non-conducive to an open and honest discussion about open carry as one could find.
Again, under the laws of WI, KR was legally able to be a 17 year old with a long gun at combat ready in a highly volatile situation at least a 30 minute drive from where he lived self-declaring himself to be protecting property and offering medical support for which he had no training or qualification. I think that’s fucked up, but I’m not saying it was illegal.
Please not with this shitty metaphor.
I will also add that this is not how policing works either. Not just theoretically but in the real world. I work in a very gun unfriendly state. If someone was walking down the street with a rifle it would illicit a very strong response that may lead to using deadly force depending on the circumstances. Police in an open carry state have to operate differently and they do. I have discussed it with many. For example Rittenhouse was not shot by police. Neither was his friend. If you believe it was only because of the side they were on go back to the prosecution testimony in the trial. Dozens of protestors were carrying weapons and not shot by police. Police in open carry states do not and can not use the mere presence of a weapon as justification to kill.
I am glad I don’t work in an open carry state. The presence of a firearm adds a level of potential chaos I would rather not deal with it in a heated situation. When I talk to officers from open carry states and ask how they deal with it they just shrug and say you get used to dealing with armed people all the time.
Not to be that guy, but where were his freakin’ parents? That would have been a hell no from me.
It’s possible to get used to it. I remember going to Kenton for the raccoon dog trials (my parents dragged me there when I was 11 or 12, I’m really not joking about growing up in this culture) and pretty much everyone open carried there. People were selling guns out of the back of trucks. And I was just taught it was normal. But I don’t know if it should be normal. I have mixed feelings because I grew up in hunting country and I really don’t care if someone wants to hunt. There are certain contexts where it doesn’t feel like a big deal. But that’s a damned sight different than flashing a gun at a riot.
Didn’t his mom drive him (and his rifle) over?
Eta: looking it up, no, she apparently didn’t, it was a meme - he drove himself like the big armed boy he was.
She WAS with him at the bar where the Proud Bois proudly bought him a drink though.
God, seriously?
I was listening to this Reply All podcast the other day and it was about this teen’s party that got completely out of control when it spread on social media. Something like 2000 people came from all over the world and just trashed the beach. Young kids shooting off fireworks in the street and pouring out gasoline at the gas pumps. Just absolute fucking mayhem.
I don’t think I ever felt older in my life. Not that it would have appealed to me as a teen either, but just… damn. I was fundamentally alienated from whatever culture produced that event.
And all Sr Weasel said was “I would be so pissed if our kid went to that party.”
I’m not sure we’re going to survive his adolescence.
Just for the record in case you missed my edit - the claim was made that she had driven him, but when on review it looks like there wasn’t any evidence for it and at his trial he testified that he drove himself; but his mom DID go with him to the bar with the Proud Boys (which is why it wasn’t a violation of his bond - in Wisconsin he was allowed to drink alcohol with a legal guardian present despite not being 21)
I’m probably a lot closer in age to those kids than to you and I gotta say it sounds like a horrible time to me, too
To those who think at least certain types of open carry are (or should be) illegal in all US jurisdictions, what do you think about Erick and Jade Jordan (16)?
So far I don’t think they have been physically confronted but it seems to me some people on the SDMB suggest they should have been since they are clearly threatening, in their opinion (or since they are black it’s unbelievable that they have avoided being shot or arrested by the police). Why haven’t they been physically confronted if they are so threatening? If it’s okay for them to open carry in these instances, why is it not okay in different ones/for other people?
I thinks it’s clear that certain people just really don’t like Rittenhouse so they are okay with condemning his actions but others get a pass or are at least strangely ignored. My opinion is if what Rittenhouse did was wrong then what Jade and Erick did (and probably continue to do) is just as wrong, but we don’t hear too many condemnations about their behaviour. Of course they have not (yet) shot anyone (in self defence) but if they did, I doubt those who hate and condemn Rittenhouse would be so quick to do so in their case.
I don’t think the type of open carry the Jordans and Rittenhouse did is immoral but I can see a lot of people really don’t like it, so if the Wisconsin open carry law was repealed I wouldn’t lose sleep over it or anything.
A nice analogy to this would be driving really fast on certain German roads that don’t have a speed limit. Not allowing it would make driving safer but I don’t think the ones that drive really fast on those roads are paricularly immoral for doing so.
Why would you doubt it? I’ll happily condemn anyone who thinks a deadly weapon should be used like a sign with a slogan on it for protesting.
Wow; you sure seem to think you know what other people are thinking.
I agree.
It also means that the “what Rittenhouse was doing was just being in a public place legally” argument is ridiculous. Even the “just patrolling the streets” one is dumb - what is “patrolling the streets” if not specifically looking for people causing trouble with the intent of confronting them, backed by a firearm? It’s legal, but still provocative. And I’m speculating that Rittenhouse hadn’t really considered how it would work beyond “I show up with my gun and they run away in fear”, which is understandable but, again, part of the reason things transpired the way they did.
Makes more sense than the weird “t-shirts and guns are comparable” one earlier.
Thanks for the patient and informative response.
Yes, that is my position. Of course the jury has not agreed and my opinion carries no weight. But, this is a place for discussion of the issues regarding the trial.
See, I think this is where the disconnect really is at. To many in this thread, a gun, seemingly, is an automatic fear response and direct and open threat. My guess is because most of those saying this either don’t live in the US, or live in parts of the US where open carry isn’t common or perhaps even allowed at all. To those who do live in open carry states and who are familiar with open carry, they don’t see it the same way. This part is what I’m talking about in your statement: “And I’m speculating that Rittenhouse hadn’t really considered how it would work beyond “I show up with my gun and they run away in fear”, which is understandable but, again, part of the reason things transpired the way they did.”
Sorry, but that is YOUR projection. Basically, your speculation is you projecting yourself into Rittenhouse’s shoes and what you think he should have been thinking. To people who are familiar with open carry, it wouldn’t occur to them that folks are going to or are supposed to run away in fear at the sight of a gun being carried openly…or attach on sight for fear of their lives. In fact, all Rittenhouse would have had to do to dissuade him from this fantasy would be to look around, as I understand that many people in the crowd were openly armed…and many were armed concealed as well.
You and others are projecting your own fears and mindset on someone who doesn’t look at things the same way. The other part to this, which I haven’t seen addressed, merely handwaved, is why when you are shown pictures of others armed in similar ways, or simply armed, THEY didn’t have the reactions you are projecting…or a violent reaction by the crowd either. I mean, if it’s such an automatic reaction, why didn’t this and many other protest rallies erupt constantly into the gun fire, since in many cases when protests happen in open carry states both protesters and counter-protesters are armed. Such as at the protest in the picture a few posts up. Look around the picture at the others in it…they aren’t reacting either with fear and running away or getting ready to mob the two with the guns.
These kinds of threads are interesting to see how people can look at something in totally different ways. And how they can view events that occurred in completely different ways through the lens of their own biases, fears, and political leanings. This case is definitely a watershed for this topic in getting people to really discuss where they are at and what their base thinking is.
I’m certainly glad there are no ‘active shooters’ in open carry states. Must be reassuring to know that no one you see carrying a rifle, in hand, might ‘go postal’ and shoot you.