The Kittenmouse Saga

1. 93

   Paragliderposted 3 years ago

   Little Kittenmouse was proud of his big gun. He liked it because, though only semi-automatic, it looked like a big grown-up assault weapon. He liked to pose with it in front of the mirror, practising his hard face, his stern face, his mean face. He liked knowing that, though only semi-automatic, it was capable in the right hands - his hands - of killing lots of people in a very short time. What more could a little Kittenmouse want?
   
   Because here's the thing. Kittenmouse made choices. Choices have consequences. He chose to take his gun to a highly charged gathering. Whether demonstration or riot, it matters not. It was a stupid choice to make. He was not a policeman or a security guard. He had no mandate to 'protect' property. He was a little Kittenmouse with no authority. He had fooled himself into believing his own infantile posturing.
   
   And when he found out the truth, that he was just another inadequate with a big toy, it was too late. We know the rest. Little Kittenmouse survived. He caused two deaths and a wounding.
   
   A court of law has pronounced him not guilty. The court did not deny that he was an irresponsible delusional young fool whose bad choices led to loss of life. No-one can deny that.

   replyreport
   1. 81

      Credence2posted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Thank you , Paraglider, and welcome aboard.
      
      When you think about it, it is sort of odd that in the brouhaha and mele of that evening, the only fatalities in the entire affair were the ones caused by Rittenhouse.

      replyreport
      1. 93

         Paragliderposted 3 years agoin reply to this

         Credence2 - I haven't visited these forums for many years. Good to see you are still here!

         replyreport
         1. 81

            Credence2posted 3 years agoin reply to this

            Nice to see you too, Paraglider.
            
            You know me, always fighting the good fight and for that I have to keep my quill constantly sharpened.
            
            Your voice of reason has been missed along with many of the other "good ones" over the past years.

            replyreport
      2. 77

         wildernessposted 3 years agoin reply to this

         Perhaps because he took out the only people eager to attack and harm others?

         replyreport
         1. 81

            Credence2posted 3 years agoin reply to this

            Possibly, but that is probably more unlikely than otherwise. No other fatalities from anyone involved over the entire affair, I doubt it.

            replyreport
            1. 77

               wildernessposted 3 years agoin reply to this

               I do too...but it is quite a coincidence that the only violence was started by those three.  And that they were stupid enough to physically attack a man armed with a rifle.
               
               Perhaps they assumed it was empty and he was an easy target.  A fatal mistake if true.

               replyreport
               1. 81

                  Credence2posted 3 years agoin reply to this

                  How do we know that the only violence in the riot came from those two?
                  
                  There was probably much more but it did not end with any fatalities.

                  replyreport
               2. 93

                  Paragliderposted 3 years agoin reply to this

                  Had he been carrying a concealed handgun, chances are no-one would have given him a second glance. It is still a cowardly thing to do but at least it is not provocative. Openly carrying a semi-auto rifle is deliberate provocation.

                  replyreport
   2. 91

      James A Watkinsposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Plenty of Leftists burning down the city also had guns. The right to bear arms and the right to self defense predate any government. A man has a natural right to defend himself, which is what he did. And he was asked to protect the car lot by its owner, a man he knew, since police had decided to just let the evil ones burn down the city. Dost thou also protest against the aggressors burning, looting, vandalizing, and destroying?

      replyreport
      1. 93

         Paragliderposted 3 years agoin reply to this

         James, climb down from your boring leftist/rightist claptrap and look at what I wrote. Kittenmouse might be entitled to defend himself if attacked, but only a weak minded deluded fool provokes trouble while hiding behind a gun. He had no authority. He should not have been there. He was not police or security. I think my description of his type is fairly accurate.

         replyreport
   3. 86

      snakeslaneposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Good to see you Dave! Always a voice of reason.
      I couldn’t watch the “kittenhouse” story unfold. I literally couldn’t stomach it. But a quote on Twitter caught my eye and I was amazed at the responses it got (thousands weighed in). This story has touched a nerve. So I’m not surprised really to see your post.
      The quote:
      “So if I’m in a store and someone starts shooting, and I grab their gun and tackle them, they can legally shoot me in self defense?”
      Just putting it out there.
      Glad I don’t live in the U.S.A.

      replyreport
      1. 93

         Paragliderposted 3 years agoin reply to this

         Hi - it's been a long time, Hope you're still writing poetry
         In most countries, even to step outdoors openly carrying a lethal weapon is a felony. US has so normalised guns that they simply don't see there are viable alternative ways to organise society. Maybe some day that will change.

         replyreport
         1. 86

            snakeslaneposted 3 years agoin reply to this

            Yeah still writing poetry, I keep trying. Sorry, I see I misspelled the  “kittenmouse” moniker you used here.

            replyreport