Alec Baldwin just shot and KILLED a woman on a movie set

Sally Vixxxxxxxxens wrote:

Armstronglivs wrote:

A law was violated, which is why he was tried. Homicide- the killing of a person - is with the rarest exceptions a crime. One of the exceptions is self defense - which is what he had to argue. Without that defense he would have been found guilty of murder. So - yes - homicide is illegal, Homer. Another legally unqualified "expert".

You have spent maybe 6 months on this and it will amount to nothing. Don't you have something better to do?

I assume you are also directing that at the others who have argued the contrary view for the same amount of time. Or is it only one opinion that you approve of? Yep. I also can't see anyone else's views here are going to make the slightest difference to the events they are discussing.

worst thread of 2021 wrote:

Sally Vixxxxxxxxens wrote:

You have spent maybe 6 months on this and it will amount to nothing. Don't you have something better to do?

Agreed. Same goes for the posters arguing with him. This won the award for worst thread of 2021.

You haven't read the Covid-denial anti-vaxx threads.

Armstronglivs wrote:

Sally Vixxxxxxxxens wrote:

You have spent maybe 6 months on this and it will amount to nothing. Don't you have something better to do?

I assume you are also directing that at the others who have argued the contrary view for the same amount of time. Or is it only one opinion that you approve of? Yep. I also can't see anyone else's views here are going to make the slightest difference to the events they are discussing.

You have argued for 6 months against nobodies and no one will care what you argued about. It is like the Chinese water torture. Just drip after drip after drip. If your only lot in life is to argue with nobodies about a stupid subject - have at it! But if you want to enjoy life - get out of here and go enjoy life! Screw this thread. Love life!

Riling dullards does have its entertainment factor, since they get so beside themselves with rage when confronted with what they don't want to hear. Higher-case words is a dead giveaway.

Sally Vixxxxxxxxens wrote:

Armstronglivs wrote:

I assume you are also directing that at the others who have argued the contrary view for the same amount of time. Or is it only one opinion that you approve of? Yep. I also can't see anyone else's views here are going to make the slightest difference to the events they are discussing.

You have argued for 6 months against nobodies and no one will care what you argued about. It is like the Chinese water torture. Just drip after drip after drip. If your only lot in life is to argue with nobodies about a stupid subject - have at it! But if you want to enjoy life - get out of here and go enjoy life! Screw this thread. Love life!

Yet here you are - and have been. For a whole 6 months.

Homicide is not a crime. You were WRONG when you said it was. You have since looked up just how wrong you were, and have came back this mushy attempt at nuance. It FAILS.

Your "exceptions-proscribed" argument is BOGUS. The MANY homicides that are NOT crimes (e.g., self defense, war, executions, euthanasia) are NOT "exceptions" (and that is YOUR word, not mine) to the BEDROCK rule that homicide is not a crime. Homicide is not a crime. If anything can be called "exceptions" to that BEDROCK rule, its that SOME types of homicides (e.g., what is characterized as "first degree murder") are crimes. You have the whole thing 180 degrees backasswards as usual, and if you had ever taken criminal law in a real law school, you would know that.

Rittenhouse didn't argue an "exception." And your BOGUS statement that "The court did say there was a crime" NEVER HAPPENED.

Here below are the Rittenhouse jury instructions and jury verdict. You don't have the first fvcking clue what these documents are, what they mean, or what their function is, because you are a FAKE lawyer. But they absolutely refute your idiot statement that: "The court did say there was a crime, which was homicide" which, again, packs an incredible amount of flat out WRONG information into a mere 11 words. Both clauses are flat out WRONG. See below.

You have no legal qualifications but think yourself an expert because you read the internet. I am bored arguing with you. You are as you describe yourself, a phony. I won't bother.

You haven't been arguing. You've been deflecting and resorting to insults. You haven't actually argued anything.

This statement by you below is DEMONSTRABLY WRONG on two counts:

"The court did say there was a crime, which was homicide"

You have said NOTHING in response. You have NO response to (1) the Rittenhouse court NEVER said there was a crime, and (2) homicide is NOT a crime. Go on and argue that, I dare you. I double dog dare ya!

You were WRONG. You have shown, yet AGAIN, that you are a FAKE lawyer.

When are you going to learn that you don't need to quote all the previous posts on the subject every time you respond to anyone? All of those previous posts are already on the thread. You cover up the boards for what are typically one sentence messages.

phony al wrote:

Armstronglivs wrote:

You have no legal qualifications but think yourself an expert because you read the internet. I am bored arguing with you. You are as you describe yourself, a phony. I won't bother.

You haven't been arguing. You've been deflecting and resorting to insults. You haven't actually argued anything.

This statement by you below is DEMONSTRABLY WRONG on two counts:

"The court did say there was a crime, which was homicide"

You have said NOTHING in response. You have NO response to (1) the Rittenhouse court NEVER said there was a crime, and (2) homicide is NOT a crime. Go on and argue that, I dare you. I double dog dare ya!

You were WRONG. You have shown, yet AGAIN, that you are a FAKE lawyer.

Right - Rittenhouse wasn't charged with anything and wasn't on trial for any crime, Phony Al. Where did you get your law degree? YouTube 101?

Cheers.

Why would he shoot someone?

Glad the fbi was able to confirm what sane people already knew.

You misspelled "believed"

Then why no charges? Oh, right - it's the NY Post.

So the charges are?

I haven't seen any charges. But he killed somebody which isn't very nice.