Which is why the entire case rested on their claim of citizen’s arrest. Jury buys their claim of reasonably suspecting Arbery had entered the building under construction to steal something*, and the illegal false imprisonment becomes a legal citizens arrest, and they would have kept their right to defend themselves in…

Just to add, but it’s also, surprisingly, a chemical addiction (Dopamine).

I tend to disagree that volunteering to protect other people’s property when there are apparently insufficient police to do is a moral failing. Even less so if it puts you in potential danger. The only moral failing lies with those destroying said property or endangering said person.

Oh, I 100% believe he was retaliating. I also think it’s entirely reasonable to think he was retaliating to what he thought was an attack that threatened his life. But retaliation isn’t self-defense. The sane thing to do to actually defend yourself is slam on the brakes to immediately create distance/throw off aim…

I’m more surprised they didn’t make it mandatory watching, while framing it as a documentary of what it’s really like in SK.

What happened in Rittenhouse’s and Trayvon’s cases is that there was a struggle of some kind, and by that fact alone, the verdict was some form of “self defense.”

I think one would also have to ask whether opening fire is a reasonable means of self defense against a truck full of kids where the driver swerved into your lane vs. simply hitting the brakes. (e.g. anybodies sane reaction) Particularly if you DO have a gun to defend yourself with if they do stop and get out.

The murderer of Travon Martin claimed self-defense and got off because of Florida’s ‘Stand Your Ground’ law.

Were his attackers armed?

This is a shit argument. Rittenhouse could’ve stayed home and never been in danger.

Because there has to actually be “provoking somebody into punching you”.

That isn’t exactly damning evidence. There could have been employees in said department with more experience than her that they chose to retain in spite of the department being eliminated, one of whom ended up with her old job.

And yet...

For what. Suspecting the owner of a car falsely reported it stolen a short while after it was recovered by the police after a hit and bail a couple miles away? Maybe it’s just too many T.V. shows, but I’d assume that *always* makes the owner suspect number 1. Particularly if the skin color of the fleeing driver…

Understandably so, Scott was confused. Why would he steal his own car? No wonder he found it comical.

While I’m largely of the opinion that the lawyer isn’t wrong in general... In this particular instance it seems pretty fair as his clients are accused of (and in my opinion committed) a literal one, and not merely an abstract/figurative one.

two months severance pay

When it comes to game development, kickstarter is literally paying devs to stall as long as humanly possible on releasing the game. The more they manage to stall, the more they get paid without having to come up with a new idea for a game.

a rudimentary civics lesson would show that the U.S. Constitution is amendable, and the small minority of people who think otherwise are ideologically driven to think that way.