I better start taking skateboarding classes for my concealed carry permit.

Wouldn't classify a skateboard as a weapon in general
That being said, you can use a lot of things as weapons to kill someone if you do it right, and if that person just sits there and takes it, you can do it pretty easily.
But what would I know, I'm just a martial artist who's trained with various weapons for over a decade

When the TSA asks you if you need to declare any weapons...

What?

I thought as a martial artist you would get the joke.

He said he was a martial artist, not that he was smart.

Let's not propagate personal attacks, even if warranted.

*thinks about it*

What's that got to do with mics? If it's a movie reference I haven't seen it

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jVogD8xflIc

eight second clip.

On the other hand, so long as I charge at you menacingly with anything, it's considered a deadly weapon and in the precedence of Rittenhouse, gives you legal grounds to shoot me? No.

A feather can be deadly.

"Your honor, I shot at him because he was coming at me with a pink feather."

Not necessarily a deadly weapon, but you can kill someone with your bare hands, soooo, if you're a full-grown man attacking a teenage boy... yes, that gives the teenage boy legal grounds to shoot you, cause unless he's got a serious amount of hand to hand combat training, he's walking away from that fight seriously injured, or maybe he doesn't walk away at all.

Well, yes, sort of, if you somehow manage to lodge it in their throat....
but at that point bare hands are certainly more deadly. Notice I said "a lot of things" can be used as weapons, not all

But I wouldn't expect you to understand, you think guns are the only thing that can kill someone

Interesting that you think I think that. It would seem that you have a delusion or heavily tainted bias to think something so ridiculous.

I would expect you to understand, being that you're a martial artist... If you're expecting a fight, the best defense is don't be there. Even when learning guns you are taught this.

I think guns are some of the only weapons that require the least amount of skill to use (having used many myself) requiring the most minimal effort or thought to use them to achieve the most damage. Notice, Rittenhouse didn't carry a tazer, or bear spray. He didn't carry a pistol. He didn't try to conceal the weapon, no.. He brandished it to be escalatory. Instead of helping his community, by tending to places that were vacated and suffered damage, he went to where the zones were hot. With a gun. He didn't stay back and wait for people to get brought back with their injuries, he went to the front.

He was looking for trouble. Trouble found him, he banked on a biased judge, and won the bet. That's it.

Using a firearm should be the last resort.

But you know, right wing nut jobs gonna be right wing nut jobs.

They tout the second amendment as a means of defense against a "tyrannical government" then turn around and use it for vigilantism against their countrymen who have no government affiliation. No, most RWNJ want to use firearms because they wanna live the Call of Duty fantasy. They wanna play army without going to Boot Camp and understanding discipline and how discretion is the better part of valor.

But you wouldn't understand any of that, right?

Sucks when people make assumptions about others, huh? I would recommend against doing it in the future. I used the rhetoric here to illustrate that it is not a good faith argument and denotes that one is incapable of carrying a decent conversation without resorting to logical fallacy. Granted, slips and other accidents in the discourse of discussion happen. But when people make deliberate attacks against one's character like that? We don't tolerate personal attacks.

He wasn't there to fight.
>> Occam's razor says otherwise.

And if I followed that advice I'd never go anywhere.
>> So you only go places where you expect a fight?

The best advice is to avoid putting yourself in that situation, that doesn't mean Kyle shouldn't have been there.
>> Correct, there were three times he could have said "How can I avoid shooting someone? Where is the least likely place I can do what I seek to do, while running minimal risk?" Obviously, this didn't happen.

Ideally, had Rosenbaum had half a brain, the fact that Kyle was carrying an AR 15 should've deterred him from trying to attack...
>> If this was the case, One of the 9/11 planes would have hit their target instead of a field. If you see someone you perceive as a threat to the environment around you, you can bum rush to protect others.

however, Rosenbaum was a child raping moron.
>> Child raping? What's that have to do with this? There's video evidence of Rittenhouse beating up two women days prior.

The point of the gun isn't only defense if you need to shoot someone, it's a deterrent. Big word I know.
>> Right, so you brandish it when you feel your life is threatened, you don't bring it out as a badge to wear. Police don't walk around with their rifles out during traffic stops to deter drivers from shooting them. They place their hands on their holsters. (Oh, hey, look. People who know what they're doing.)

Sort of true, you can do a heck of a lot of damage if you have a big heavy car and decide to plow through a bunch of people. Other than that there's nothing readily accessible to do that kind of damage.
Deterrent, not escalatory. Rosenbaum was just an idiot.
>> That's your opinion. It isn't a fact.

Right, that's why he ran from Rosenbaum instead of shooting him outright first chance he got.
>> Because he shot two others.

It was, when Rosenbaum was like 4 feet or less away. Got me?
>> It was... what? Not sure what you're talking about here.

Would you consider letting Rosenbaum smash your face in discretion? Got me again?
>> Yep, it wouldn't be an issue because if I didn't want to risk being attacked, I would've found other ways to help my community. I gotchu.

That's America. You have to choose between rapists and woman beaters.

It would seem so.

No, you don't tolerate personal attacks, but you'll tolerate pedos attacking teens just fine
>> Alright, I've warned you already about personal attacks. With this sentence, you're again, making an inference to my character that I tolerate pedophiles attacking people. Which, is just a stupid statement. That's a false statement, and you know it. I know you know this, because it wasn't some accidental assumption, it was an attack. Just like in the same post where you said "deterrant, big word I know." is making the inference that I am not educated to understand the word. As such, you're receiving a 24 hour ban, the conversation is captured for documentation. You've been warned. Reconsider you rhetoric here and thank you so much for participating in PoliticsTOO, we hope to see you again in 24 hours :)

Well, we have proof straight from the horse's mouth that Zaklog is racist AF so...

oops, don't say that, you will literally get more penalized than he ever will in his tenure here.

I'll stand by it. I have it screenshotted.