Hacker News Reader

Comment by ArkVark | Hacker News Reader

What about deplatforming BLM, which seems to be the major driver for this unrest and criminal activity? As can be seen clearly in the video, the 17 year old was running away and defending himself against multiple attackers, some of whom were themselves armed.

View on HN

Are you talking about the armed teenager who drove 12 miles across state lines and put his armed self in a dangerous situation willingly? Not sure you get to call it self-defense at that time

There was a protest/riot (depending on who you ask) that night. 12mi is probably below the median travel distance of all people from all sides who partook and everyone who partook was also putting themselves in a dangerous situation willingly. Nobody there should have that held against them.

His actions prior to getting chased by and shooting the first guy are what I have serious questions about.

What's the significance of 12 miles here?

He's not living on scene defending his property. A lot of places in the US privilege that scenario for self-defence when otherwise your actions would be prosecuted. If you take a rifle and drive to a trouble spot you could be construed as looking for trouble.

He was, however, defending his workplace. Supposedly he worked at one of the car dealerships in the area. (and then left to try to provide medical assistance and was unable to regroup with his group at that dealership)

The fact that he illegally transported a gun over state lines to "defend" a community he wasn't part of and which didn't want him there to begin with.

Depends on how you define the community.

The police were thanking him for being out there, for his support, and giving out water bottles. (Top video in the article, skip about a minute in)

1:40 something in. Police: "Are you Protecting that building" Crowd: "yes" Police: "Thank you."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2020/08/26/jacob-blake...

The US is infamous for police not policing the communities they live in. “A crowd” and “the police” say nothing about whether either belong to the local community.

Also if the police are celebrating illegal acts that should tell you something about the state of justice.

Id argue that defining community as where you live isnt the only way community can be used. Community could also be the place you work, the place you protect, the place you participate, the place you consume in, the place you interact with. Property, ownership, are only some of what make someone a community member.

Yes you can have your own local definition I suspect you will face an uphill battle for it to be accepted though. I suppose that means the protestors could be called the community too and since they outnumber both the militia types and the police they are the majority?

Ultimately it’s the transitory nature of the participation that marks it out as not part of the community. For example a landlord might not be considered part of the community despite owning property.

I guess it depends too if you consider a suburb a part of the community of the city it surrounds.

https://www.google.com/maps/dir/Antioch,+Illinois+60002/Keno...

I mean you can have fun playing semantics by changing your position per reply but this doesn’t seem fruitful or meaningful to the case at hand?

I don't see a suburb as inconsistent with my previous reply. A suburb, by definition, is going to be economically dependent on its metro. That interlinking blurs the definition of community.

I don't think it's black and white whether you can say his communitiee were or weren't a part of the larger communities.

Where is the evidence that he illegally transported a gun over state lines? He was legally in possession of a rifle in WI. I'm not sure of the law in Illinois but we don't know if he was in possession of the weapon in Illinois or if someone transferred possession to him when he reached WI where it is legal for him to possess.

I am not sure either, but it actually diminishes the significance of the drive in my eyes, as 12 miles doesn't seem very far. I would assume that 'across state lines' was more than '12 miles'.

It sounds like a dramatically long distance if you live in an urban center.

Thanks for posting this. I didn't know it was ONLY 12 miles that he drove. Based on the news I thought he went a lot farther.

In regards to the "state lines" ... it's funny when people actually care about "borders".

There is a great breakdown of his interactions and timeline on twitter by NYT or WaPo. I'll find it...

There is also no evidence (in his immediate past) or leading up to the events proving he's guilty of premeditated malicious intent.

The media inverts everything, it's how they make money right now and it's awful. CNN anchors are literally one Baghdad Bob after another. The most hilarious memes right now are those with "mostly peaceful" protests where behind the anchor huge fires are raging.

Radio Rwanda comes to mind too

When I hear people say "mostly peaceful" when referring to the protests and "a few bad apples" when referring to police I like to remind them of the fact that the peaceful majority are irrelevant when there are radicals in their ranks.

Just look back at the lesson of history. https://youtu.be/YnOF7y-KuHE?t=127

The difference between the two groups is that one is organized, and its leadership has an obligation to control the behaviour of its members.

There's no chief-of-a-protest who can take administrative action against some anonymous drunk idiot throwing a brick into a window. There is, however, a chief-of-police who can theoretically do the same about the, ah, bad apples.

Practically, the various chiefs of police seem to be doing everything they can to protect those bad apples from the consequences of their behaviour.

Also, between civilians and police, the police should know better. We give them guns and a mandate to uphold the law, and pay them lots of money to do so. But instead of zero tolerance for criminal behaviour in their ranks, it's all coverups, collusion, the thin blue line, punishing whistleblowers, and lobbying for legislature that grants them them immunity to the consequences.

Why does a 17 year old have an illegal fire arm? Do criminals who have shot someone get to use self defense as an excuse for shooting more people that are trying to stop them?

Firearms are not illegal in Wisconsin. It is open carry. As for Rittenhouse being underage, there are exceptions for guns and rifles for 16 and 17 year olds.

https://www.jsonline.com/story/news/crime/2020/08/26/wiscons...

Someone answered your first question. I'll answer your second.

In many US-states, if a convicted felon (barred from owning a gun) uses a gun in self-defense (say defending against an intruder) they can still be charged with illegal possession. In fact, even more stringent, say their spouse used the gun, and the felon had access to it, they can be charged with what's called constructive possession of a firearm.

I enjoy seeing these political threads here on HN. It's good for this place to finally have a look in the mirror and see what's there.

It's disheartening to see so much racism among the community here.

Hopefully its more single issue trolls. They're new, low karma accounts and HN is going to be a target for proletarization.

Unfortunately not. Racism is a disease that affects all walks of life.

It's disheartening to hear people refer to anything and everything as 'racism' to the point it's lost all meaning.

Framing BLM as being a source of violence is racist AF.

I was called a racist on HN because I said "white people suck" in the context of White Nationalism.

If one doesn't think that systemic racism is real or a problem, then that individual is either ignorant or racist.

"white people suck" is a cut and dried racist comment, regardless of context.

"white people who make the color of their skin a badge of superiority suck" isn't as pithy.

Hmm, so being a white person myself and criticizing other white people for using their whiteness as proof of their so-called superiority is racist?

I don't think so, and your opinion doesn't change things.

Personally, I think "X people are Y characteristic" is racist whether X is Black, White, Asian, Jewish, American Indian or anything else, and whether Y is good or bad. The definition should be symmetric.

Let me try again: I'm calling out practitioners of racism, that those people suck. Would you care to disagree?

That is the context and the intent, so if you're interpreting it as hate for all white people then you're sadly mistaken.

Well, you were replying to this comment:

> "white people suck" is a cut and dried racist comment, regardless of context.

With something that seemed like "no, I don't think 'white people suck' is racist". Bashing white supremacists is great! But bashing an entire race isn't.

I know that reading comprehension is hard, but I believe in you! Someday, you'll be able to understand the words in the context they were written.

And I hope you eventually learn that racism in response to racism is still racism, even if it is in support of a good cause.

What I've learned is that HN has its share of racist trolls, such as yourself.

Apology to HN for the troll comment. I don't know how to respond to people who intentionally distort my words. Misreading is one thing, but flat out telling me that their misinterpretation of my intentions trumps mine is unacceptable.

I'd like to see some evidence that BLM is the major driver for any criminal activities or "unrest." Instead it seems to be the continued extrajudicial killings and woundings of American citizens that always seems to proceed these protests and the frankly appalling reaction of American law enforcement to some criticism and democratic attempts to reform what is supposed to be a constructive and positive institution in American society.

This most recent incident in Kenosha was not "extrajudicial". The man had a knife and a fireman and was not complying with the officers. And in either case, that is not a situation that justifies burning buildings and destroying properties. Anarchy is not a solution to any problem.

The knife was in his car and they found it afterwords, it wasn't on him at the time.

Not complying with officers should not mean a death sentence. This isn't Judge Dread. Other countries besides the US manage to not regularly murder black people- in fact most countries don't have anywhere near the level of police murder that the US has.

"The knife was in his car and they found it afterwords"

You mean the knife was in the car he was trying to get into at the time he was shot?

5 days of riots after MLKs death got us a landmark civil rights bill.

BLM isn't the driver for unrest. On-going (For decades) criminal behaviour by police forces is the driver for unrest.

People don't go out to protest, to get shot by less-lethal bullets, to get gassed, to have flashbangs thrown at them because they are bored. They do it because they are tired and angry, and because their cause is just.

Pro tip: Fox news viewers are ill-informed. You may want to consider opening your mind a bit more.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/quora/2016/07/21/a-rigorous-sci...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com