I think one of the best ideas people can make is when he says (paraphrasing about 18:40 ish): Some processes are not about judging a systemic problem, but about that case. I`m sorry I was told that white supremacy is on trial and won. Seems very slightly biased against rittenhouse, but still quite factual not at the level of others. Just in time to remove dislikes on Youtube. You can always count youtubelikecounter.com/ annoyed me that he missed the part where Grossgore raised his gun when he was shot Look what happened after he finally shot the 2nd incident again. He took a nice leisurely walk to the police lines and everyone stood back afterwards, as any sane person would if he was actually threatened by an active shooter. I`ve been going to the southeastern United States for a week now. I`m so focused on YT for the big media networks. This is the real reason why the aversion function has disappeared. I don`t agree that anyone involved could reasonably claim that they considered Kyle an “active shooter” and had to kill him. Not only did he not actively shoot anyone or even threaten anyone, but Großkreutz also had a brief exchange with Rittenhouse, where he ran with his gun and said he would go to the police. At least, I don`t see how Grosskreutz could argue that he saw him as a threat. This is the same guy who said Captain Marvel had the right to break a guy`s arm and steal his motorcycle for touching his card.
It`s pretty basic when it comes to self-defense. It was a good video, a little impressed by how much it could cover in 20 minutes. The whole simultaneous self-defense situation seems to be really bad, I would also say that others like Jumpkick Man and Huber didn`t see him as an active shooter or threat either. He wasn`t a lone civilian hero taking a timely risk to storm 10 feet and attack the shooter, it was a crowd of people chasing him in the middle of a wide road for 100+ meters. They chased him away so brazenly precisely because they were not threatened by him. If Kyle had acted like an active shooter, no one would have followed him outside like they did, nor brave enough to hit him closely. There is the browser extension returnyoutubedislike, which brings back the aversion ratio. But if Youtube continues to completely close the aversion field in the API, it will probably stop working or simply display the old cached aversion ratios. Yes, it really highlights the problem of open porting in such situations. If no one has a gun, you can`t really have the reasonable belief that the other person can end your life in 2 seconds, which means you don`t have to kill them. If both have weapons, you have a reasonable belief that the other will shoot you, so you have to shoot first.
Weapons make these situations much more explosive and the stakes much higher, and the only possible consequence is the loss of lives.