Kyle Rittenhouse given donations by police and other officials... (1 Viewer)

Users who are viewing this thread

    I like that fox analogy

    but what would that mean for the Duke voter?

    If you're a loan officer for a bank dealing with black people that's a hard no but if you're a truck driver you're good to go?

    Being racist has no bearing on being able to drive from A to B

    If we take the ultra-capitalist idea that an employee is a representative of the company they work for then there is no line. Anything that goes against what the corporation deems acceptable is by definition unacceptable. I imagine the right wouldn't care too much to have that little bit of dogma turned against them.
     
    So, yes, he is an accused murderer, multiple murders, but the facts are not really in doubt. It is a fact that he killed two men carrying an illegal weapon. I take your point, but the man who was fired used his work account, IIRC. He shouldn’t have had any expectation of privacy to begin with. I was always taught that you should probably assume everything on the internet is public always.

    A public servant used his work email to contribute to the defense of a young man who killed two men using a weapon he possessed illegally. He stated to the young man “you did nothing wrong”. Maybe it’s not such a terrible firing? I’m not sure this public servant should be in a position of public trust. His judgement is terrible.
    From article:
    “His egregious comments erode the trust between the Norfolk Police Department and those they are sworn to serve,” city official Chip Filer said of Kelly’s alleged behavior in a statement. “The City of Norfolk has a standard of behavior for all employees, and we will hold staff accountable.”​

    The HR reason for firing him will be the work email. The public statement is the real reason for firing him.

    I haven’t followed Rittenhouse closely, but I typically subscribe to innocent until proven guilty. If the officer donated from a personal email, should he be fired? If he donated to a lawyer cost or funeral page of a convicted criminal, then should he be fired?
     
    For me, it’s the juxtaposition of his donation, his statement that “you did nothing wrong” and his professional position. At best, at very best, Rittenhouse carried out vigilante killings with a weapon he had illegally. There were actually dozens of witnesses. The fact that he killed two men and that he was carrying the weapon illegally are just not in doubt. It may have been recorded, I forget.

    Innocent of murder, that remains to be seen. Guilty of carrying an illegal weapon, most certainly. This young man was reckless with a deadly weapon, and carried out his “mission”, which was to stop rioting and looting, with deadly force. The message that he did nothing wrong should disqualify this man from holding his position.

    It doesn’t matter if he used his personal account. We cannot have police officials supporting citizens carrying out vigilante capital punishment for property crimes. It absolutely erodes public trust in the police department.
     
    If the officer donated from a personal email, should he be fired? If he donated to a lawyer cost or funeral page of a convicted criminal, then should he be fired?
    It's a question that is going to come down to can someone be fired or should someone be fired. If you make the company you work for look bad then the answer to the question of can he be fired is "Yes". The answer of should he be fired basically comes down to how keeping the employee will affect the company's reputation and bottom line.

    Companies are going to do what is best for the company. Employees have to decide if they want to risk their employment by their activities. People need to be reminded that they are free to say whatever they please. They are not free from the repercussions of what they say or how they act.

    Remember when employees were getting fired for simply being gay? Pepperidge Farm remembers.
     
    It's a question that is going to come down to can someone be fired or should someone be fired. If you make the company you work for look bad then the answer to the question of can he be fired is "Yes". The answer of should he be fired basically comes down to how keeping the employee will affect the company's reputation and bottom line.

    Companies are going to do what is best for the company. Employees have to decide if they want to risk their employment by their activities. People need to be reminded that they are free to say whatever they please. They are not free from the repercussions of what they say or how they act.

    Remember when employees were getting fired for simply being gay? Pepperidge Farm remembers.

    Yes, but employees legally can't be fired for being gay. But you can be fired for protected speech, possibly. There's a difference.
     
    reluctant to bump this b/c he is so cringe, but not worth a separate topic.
    For only $9.99 you too can shoot turkeys that say fake news and MSDNC (which I learned is a right wing term/mockery for MSNBC)

    Proceeds from the game will fund his efforts to sue media outlets for defamation

     
    reluctant to bump this b/c he is so cringe, but not worth a separate topic.
    For only $9.99 you too can shoot turkeys that say fake news and MSDNC (which I learned is a right wing term/mockery for MSNBC)

    Proceeds from the game will fund his efforts to sue media outlets for defamation



    Yes, as some on the main board defended this so-called “great kid”, I called BS then and I’m calling it now….he should be in a jail cell….
     
    He was 100% justified in all his shots, that is not even disputable. I also love that he is holding the media accountable and winning a crap ton of money. I have no idea what kind of kid he is but that is cringe. The graphics look terrible. Other than that, I wish him the best in his lawsuits.
     
    Rittenhouse is going to die alone and penniless.

    He is a less than attractive fellow that is mentally weak and easily manipulated. He has no education and, judging by his graphics, no money.

    What sucks is he’ll probably move here because we have social program to take care of the mentally ill homeless.
     
    😄

    He/She didn't know if they were going to be acquitted. They probably wanted to get in some practice just in case the verdict was guilty.
     
    If he is a she and trans, will he now be hero for killing 2 while defending himself from a hate crime?

    So now we need to open a hate crime investigation on Gaige Grosskreutz.

     
    no, still a Peice of work for taking a rifle into a dangerous area with the express intent of shooting people.
     
    no, still a Peice of work for taking a rifle into a dangerous area with the express intent of shooting people.
    What about Gaige that brought a pistol into a dangerous area? The trial proved he had not express intent of shooting people, just more lies that you all took hook line and sinker and despite the evidence given, you still believe, because your people would never lie to you.
     
    I actually agree with this. Also, Michael Bird was 100% justified dropping Jan. 6th rioters.
    Who is Bird? Is that only guy that got scared enough (no one else fired a shot, just him) that he shot an unarmed woman? That guy? Sure. He shouldn't be a cop for sure, but yeah, I can see how the case could be made that it was a justifiable. After all, the unarmed lady was acting stupidly.
    I wonder if we can apply this level to all police shootings? My guess is no, it will depend on the color of their skin as per CRT.
     
    Who is Bird? Is that only guy that got scared enough (no one else fired a shot, just him) that he shot an unarmed woman? That guy? Sure. He shouldn't be a cop for sure, but yeah, I can see how the case could be made that it was a justifiable. After all, the unarmed lady was acting stupidly.
    I wonder if we can apply this level to all police shootings? My guess is no, it will depend on the color of their skin as per CRT.

    Farb, not everyone Rittenhouse shot was armed.

    Why are you being critical of the LEO in that situation at all?

    Rittenhouse kills unarmed protestors in a situation that he crossed state lines to put himself in.

    VS

    LEO in the course of his job duties kills a lady who was warned, and was trespassing on Federal property.
     
    Farb, not everyone Rittenhouse shot was armed.

    Why are you being critical of the LEO in that situation at all?

    Rittenhouse kills unarmed protestors in a situation that he crossed state lines to put himself in.

    VS

    LEO in the course of his job duties kills a lady who was warned, and was trespassing on Federal property.
    Do you consider a skate board as a club a weapon? The Jury did.

    All shots were put into those that were attacking him, so good shot placement and all in self defense.

    How many LEO were on site during 1.6? Only one guy fired in 'self defense' at an unarmed woman? He should not be a cop. The job is apparently over his head and emotional level.

    So since she was warned and on federal property, she deserved to be killed? Ok, we need to apply that standard across the board for all LEO then.

    When did it become illegal to cross state lines? Is he in trouble for crossing state lines to go to work? I don't think so. The whole state line thing is a terrible talking from your talking heads.
     

    Create an account or login to comment

    You must be a member in order to leave a comment

    Create account

    Create an account on our community. It's easy!

    Log in

    Already have an account? Log in here.

    Advertisement

    General News Feed

    Fact Checkers News Feed

    Sponsored

    Back
    Top Bottom