Hi Foxy,

This is what we should fear for our own country.

" But on August 25th, as the city braced for a third night of protests in the wake of Blake’s shooting, Mathewson, who is a private investigator, posted a call for “Armed Citizens to Protect our Lives and Property.” He invited “patriots” to meet him at the courthouse at 6 p.m., to defend Kenosha from “evil thugs.”

Thanks for the link.

Compare the jury who cleared Rittenhouse with the ignorant Leftist thugs in Australia, who jailed an innocent George Pell for 400 days.

Toss in the sanctimonious fascism of cricket administrators who have ruined the career and private life of Tim Paine for something really petty and unremarked done four years ago, which has sweet FA to do with cricket or the hoi polloi and nothing-better-to-think about witchhunters.

Paul,
You didn’t answer the question at all; the question was about the particular part of Principle 7 which says a firearm should never be used for self protection.
If you agree with Pr. 7 in its entirety then you are trying to appear as moronic as the person/s who thought it up.

Foxy,
I just compared the New Yorker article with the videos and the article bears out Rittevnhouse’s claim to have acted in self defence.
Wheather he’s should have been there is irrelevant to this claim, the fact is that he was attacked and without provocation, that his first attacker was apparently of diminished responsibility is also irrelevant, there is no way that Rittenhouse could have known his attackers mental state.
Incidentally provocation is not usually considered justification for an illegal action

Gentlemen,

I have nothing more to say on this matter.

I expected for us to have our different opinions.
What I did not expect was to be attacked for mine.

That is unfortunate because it discourages me from
any further contributions on this subject.

I see no point in continuing to be part of this discussion.

I welcome disagreement - but certainly not personal insults.