wolfriverjoe

While the general principles of legal self defense are pretty well established, the details vary from state to state. I live in Wisconsin and am very familiar with the specifics. The kid has really failed to meet a couple of the requirements for the claim of self defense. Keep in mind that the initial reports had one of the charges (that seems to have either been dropped or was never filed in the first place) that was 'unlawful flight'. Once he murdered the first guy, any claim of self defense for the subsequent shootings went right out the window.

You forgot 'no authority.' He had none at all. No police powers. No arrest powers. Nothing but the idea of 'citizen's arrest', which is as misunderstood and over-assumed (if that's a word - people assume that it's much broader than it really is) as self defense is. Wisconsin Castle doctrine is not very broad. For businesses, the 'duty to retreat' doesn't apply to the owner or operator of the business. For example, a convenience store owner, manager or clerk don't have a duty to retreat in the face of an armed criminal. But a customer does. For these vigilantes to think they could 'stand their ground' against protesters and subsequently claim 'self defense' is, as you put it, 'fucking stupid'.

The vigilantes were there to 'protect the property of the business owners.' Right. Suuuuuuure they were. https://www.newslockdown.com/recent/pro-madison-police-post-killing-protesters?fbclid=IwAR3gJRTq3bxz6GwDge-qJRW7TWjV6ueNel0Hw5Ly0HU9mI5WphOZ0owVrMM This is a story about a page about vigilantes stopping protesters in Madison, not Kenosha. But I would bet that the FB pages (now taken down, but certainly archived) about Kenosha would have some very similar sentiments. It would be interesting to know what/if Ritterhouse had posted. And if they will be used in court.

He's currently facing 6 charges. 2 counts of homicide with a dangerous weapon. One count of attempted homicide with a dangerous weapon. 2 counts of recklessly endangering safety with a dangerous weapon. And one count of underage armed with a dangerous weapon. Any claims of 'self defense' are groundless. In Wisconsin, the situation has to be 'unavoidable' to be considered self defense. He intentionally entered the curfew zone. He was there after the curfew went into effect (not entirely sure if he arrived before or after curfew). He deliberately put himself into the situation. While illegally armed. And his presence was illegal. There's a pretty long case history that vigilantes cannot claim self defense. I would not be surprised if the judge does not even allow the jury to hear testimony claiming self defense. The other 'really fun' part of this will be the civil lawsuits. Wrongful death by the survivors of the 2 dead, injury/disability by the guy who's arm was shot off. The kid has no assets, but apparently his mom drove him (and may have been there too). There are claims that the kid didn't bring the gun from Illinois (across state lines), but 'borrowed' it from another vigilante. If true, he's going to be part of it too. There are screenshots floating around where the cops encouraged these assholes to show up armed. The cops are shown on video interacting with the kid. It's going to get expensive for the city and those who were part of getting the kid there with the gun.

No. They just died.

In the 80s under Reagan. Not that it didn't happen before, but that's when it became part of 'policy'.

There is some valid stuff on there. I have a FB friend who is graphing out the Covid case data that is released every day by WI DHS. While there are news stories about it (and the actual DHS site), nobody else that I know of has done anything like this, where you can see the numbers from day one to today, both daily and rolling averages. I have skydiver friends across the country. I have family on the West Coast. I'm part of a couple groups for things I'm involved in, including 'experienced jumper' pages for the DZs I jump at. I have friends that link to legitimate news sources. Some of it is serious, valid news. Others are just silly. I need both. You just have to ignore everything that links stupid and fake stuff. Western Journal, Palmer Report, Breitbart, Alternet, that sort of crap. You just have to be able to discern the difference. And be able to ignore the crap.

You've gotten some good answers, but here are a couple more: I'll jump with anyone, regardless of experience. I've said it a zillion times - my only requirement is that you not try to kill me. But I need to know what that experience is. I need to decide if you can safely join the group I'm with or how to build a group and dive plan that has a reasonable chance of succeeding and that will be safe(ish). The only real metrics for that experience is jump numbers, and to a certain degree, tunnel time (see post #6 for why tunnel time is not a full replacement). As was also noted in post #6, being a part of the community is also part of it. Show up on a regular basis. Jump with folks. When they get to know you and your skill level, the chances of getting invited on fun stuff goes up. I've seen 40-50 jump new folk invited on bigish (12 or so) hybrids because the guys putting the plan together knew that the new guy could make a stable exit and lay the base for a hybrid. Not a super challenging or exciting slot, but it gave the new guy a chance to be on a fun jump, show he could do what was needed and gain some experience. Hang out after jumping (you don't have to drink). Make friends so you aren't just 'the new guy'. And, the hardest part, be patient. It takes time to build kills & experience. But if you show those around you that you aren't going to do stuff beyond what you should, show them that you have a good handle on what you can & can't do, that you have some good judgement, you will have a better chance of becoming a part of the 'cool kids'. Don't be 'that guy'. Don't be Mr Madd Skillz. I know a couple guys who have earned a reputation for being stupid and dangerous. For some strange reason, they have a hard time finding people to jump with. There will always be a few that look down on you because you're new. But my experience is that they are far, far more the exception than the rule.

Not the first time that's happened, IIRC. While not major or truly significant, it's a decent example of the gross incompetence that permeates the entire Trump empire.

No. "Beer for a first" is when a person first accomplishes a goal that others have done before. "First Time EVER" is owed beer. For example, Gary Connery didn't owe beer for the first wingsuit landing without a canopy (intentional). Nor did the first one to dock an open canopy on a flying wingsuit (XRW). Anyone who follows in those footsteps and does it for the first time personally does.

The difference between the 17 yo & the 30 yo is that the adult can legally waive rights. The minor cannot, nor can anyone else for him (or her). A properly written waiver includes everybody, including gear manufacturers (for student jumps or rental gear). Doesn't mean a slimy ambulance chaser can't try to sue, but the waivers have been upheld in courts a bunch of times. I have no idea how the other industries protect themselves from frivolous lawsuits involving minors using their gear. It probably has something to do with the availability of liability insurance for those manufacturers. And the size of the legal departments of those insurance companies. Don't forget that UPT is more properly known as "Uninsured United Parachute Technologies". If you aren't aware (and many folks are so you may well be), Bill Booth changed the name after a court decided that he wasn't allowed to testify that his company had no liability insurance for these sorts of lawsuits because it wasn't available.

Ok, I see what you mean. I'm not sure I fully agree with it, but there's a lot of truth in it. I see it more as 'reinforcing' the beliefs, rather than 'force feeding.' As I sort of noted in my previous post (I got distracted and didn't fully finish typing out the thought), the echo chambers are largely voluntary. People join, say, a car forum. That group is pretty clearly defined (the one I'm part of is more or less older, affluent white guys). While it won't be 100% of one belief, there will be a strong tendency towards one. As it dominates, the opposing viewpoints drop away and it just gets stronger. That is exactly what has happened on the car forum I'm part of. Take a subject that is politically charged (guns is the best example I can think of) and it will be even more powerful. Real objectivity is pretty hard. It takes a wide variety of experiences, a reliance on facts over 'feels', a willingness to admit when one is wrong and an equal willingness to learn what is the truth. There are a couple folks on here who are pretty good at it, but they are a minority. Somehow it's not surprising that they are usually ones with 'STEM' backgrounds.

It fires up the base and scares stupid people. There are a few posts going around FB pointing out that there were BLM protests during the Obama administration that didn't descend into the chaos we have today. There was some violence/damage/destruction (Ferguson MO comes to mind), but it was much less. Not sure how much can legitimately be blamed on Trump. Not all of it. But at least some.

I gotta love how they are claiming that the country would descend into chaos & anarchy if Biden wins. We have that now.

They should include Don Jr in that challenge.

And some people laugh at me because I still use a flip phone.

Just out of curiosity, how has 'retail' polluted the web? How have they created the echo chambers? Honest question. I see it as more of the 'groups' that form FB pages or join 'subject' forums. I fully agree with the first part of your statement. I'm part of a car forum. The free 'user' membership doesn't include access to the 'off topic' section, so I don't see that. But considering that the vast majority of the people on that forum are older, white males, the political section is pretty much a conservative echo chamber. A few of the discussions have 'leaked' over to the tech part, and I also read the FB groups for the car. Some of those allow a fair amount of political discussion. Not surprisingly, it's pretty strong conservative, and not willing to listen to or consider alternative viewpoints. Very much an echo chamber. Not here. Although many of the Trump supporters have gone away, there are still a wide variety of views. And not just American ones. That's a good thing, IMO. I'm fairly set in my opinions, but I'm not so conceited that I think everything I believe is correct.

There's also the very simple fact that the majority of illegal immigrants (and drugs) enter the country through established crossing points. A wall is a huge waste of money. There's a lot better places that the money can be spent. And, of course, the Trumpettes fall for the con that it will cure the problem.

This sort of question is a really good one to ask over beers (or other drinks of your preference) after jumping is done for the day. In a perfect world, it can (and should) be asked during the 'after jump debrief'. Unfortunately, many instructors are in a hurry to get done and on to the next jump, so those debriefs cover the essentials of the jump and not a lot extra.

Nah. That'll be Nov 4th.

Ummm... Nope. Which candidate is a lifelong, devout Catholic? Which one has been married 3 times, and cheated on all three of them? All the other claims are just as false, and just as provably so. I just don't feel like typing it all out.

In a perfect world, maybe. But the problem is that if/when someone gets hurt, the lawyers cast as big of a net as they can. There's no way any manufacturer can shield themselves from that liability. It doesn't matter what the contract for the user says. It doesn't matter what the waiver says. It doesn't even matter what the BSRs say. The only way to prevent those lawsuits is to prevent the underage tandems from happening in the first place. By making the age limit a BSR, and enforcing it, they are trying to accomplish that. As as far as actual 'underagers' jumping, I've known a few. All were 'DZ Brats' who were allowed to start underage, mainly because the parents were deeply involved in the DZ (owned it or were long time, high ranking club officers). Since the change, I've only known of one. DZO's son. DZO stated very clearly that since a BoD member was an occasional fun jumper, and conducted instructor ratings courses on the DZ, there was no way the rules weren't going to be followed. I have no doubt that the relationship between the DZO & the BoD member helped the process. But I don't think it was a necessary part of it. However, despite the BSR waiver, there were very few DZs that would let the underager jump. They wouldn't accept the risk.

The OP asked about a video. I honestly have no clue if the video he was looking for was from Freedom Freefall or not, but is sounded like it could be one. At risk of sending this off to SC, it's the government that takes these kids, sends them off to do it's bidding, then throws them away. They are the ones who should be tending to the 'tourniquet wound' that is the Veteran Suicide issue. But, as is normal throughout history, they ignore the needs of those veterans, despite pretending to honor them.

From NPR? No. But to see them enjoy the fall of someone this disgusting, this hypocritical, this much of an asshole is not surprising.

This is the asshole who filed lawsuits against the press for 'trespassing' on the University and defamation for factual reporting on the way they handled Covid. Do you really expect them to be nice?