Eh, it's debatable still

Here's the WI state code as that would apply here
https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/statutes/statutes/939/iii/48

===================================
Some likely applicable law from that link
From SUBCHAPTER III
DEFENSES TO CRIMINAL LIABILITY
===================================
A person is privileged to threaten or intentionally use force against another for the purpose of preventing or terminating what the person reasonably believes to be an unlawful interference with his or her person by such other person. The actor may intentionally use only such force or threat thereof as the actor reasonably believes is necessary to prevent or terminate the interference. The actor may not intentionally use force which is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm unless the actor reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself.
-------------------------------------------
> It's not up to the witnesses to determine if the actions were reasonable or not, that's a question for the jury.

====================================================
====================================================

"engage in unlawful conduct likely to provoke others to attack"

"Provocation affects the privilege of self-defense as follows:
(a) A person who engages in unlawful conduct of a type likely to provoke others to attack him or her and thereby does provoke an attack is not entitled to claim the privilege of self-defense against such attack, except when the attack which ensues is of a type causing the person engaging in the unlawful conduct to reasonably believe that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm. In such a case, the person engaging in the unlawful conduct is privileged to act in self-defense, but the person is not privileged to resort to the use of force intended or likely to cause death to the person's assailant unless the person reasonably believes he or she has exhausted every other reasonable means to escape from or otherwise avoid death or great bodily harm at the hands of his or her assailant.
---------------------------------------------------------------

>excerpted/emphasized (tldnr)
>"engages in unlawful conduct of a type likely to provoke others to attack...is NOT entitled to claim the privilege of self-defense...person is NOT privileged to resort to the use of force intended or likely to cause death to the person's assailant UNLESS the person reasonably believes he or she has exhausted every other reasonable means to escape

============================
============================



He was able to run away... And while someone shot into the air they didn't shoot at HIM or point a gun at him. And the person who shot into the air isn't the one who lunged at him.

Seriously, what kind of world do you want to live in @bobknight33 ?? You want MF 17 year olds to be able to walk around with assault rifles and if you stutter-step at the wrong moment they can vigilante justice your ass ? And if that happens well they can just say

This should be great as long as it's not another reboot/origin Batman as it's co-written & directed by Reeves. I LOVE the 2011 PotA franchise, so I'm a lot of trust in Reeves' directing. However, if it's another reboot, then I'm not that excited. Looking at the trailer, it seems more like a reboot than not... so, fingers crossed.

My questions to movie franchises are alway, "is a reboot necessary? Even if the main characters went off screen for a few years/decade? If you're not doing a justifiably different interpretation of a character (comedy Batman to Dark Knight Batman), why not build on previous works?"

The Sony-to-MCU Spidies were still the same Spidey in character at the end of the day after 3 actors playing it. It didn't need those reboots but did, and the origin films were boring.

Ok, they can say that and maybe it’s true, but I just want to point out that in the amazing 1953 French film, The Wages of Fear, the main characters are Mario and Luigi, and Luigi looks just like super Mario down to the hat (the Mario character is played by Yves Montand, a skinny French actor). I’ve always found that to be far too coincidental.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wages_of_Fear

So many problems with this propaganda piece, now admittedly produced by the Sheriffs to show how dangerous their jobs are....just like almost everything police say, self serving lies.

I'm gonna add *lies and *debunked since all medical professionals agree this is not what a fentanyl overdose looks like in numerous ways and is almost certainly staged by terrible actors.

Those street poles are hired crisis actors.

Those are decent points, but have absolutely zero to do with the mass abandoning of their positions. It was 100% due to one of their own being charged after beating nonviolent protesters. They originally admitted exactly that, and now that they aren't being supported in their walkout, they are coming up with excuses that didn't matter to them the day before the officer was charged.

I think they should have to pay for the training and equipment they now refuse to use.

What are you talking about? You think budget cuts caused time off to be cancelled?! It costs double to not rotate in other officers, because you pay those on duty overtime, it doesn't make it cheaper. Budget cuts were not the issue when these cops were doing crowd control, only now that they're suddenly called to account for their own actions. No time off temporarily, because of extreme circumstances, was not an issue until one of their own was charged. It's certainly not abnormal, and absolutely not because of budget cuts, it costs more.

No prosecutions is the norm, if I recall, over 98% of charges levied at protesters have been dismissed nation wide, mostly because police had no evidence to back the charges they brought. You might note, as described in the article, "Mr. Schmidt immediately announced that he would focus on prosecuting cases of violence or vandalism; protesters who simply resisted arrest or refused to disperse after a police order would not necessarily be charged." They are taking a stand against anarchic violent protesters, but not the peaceful protesters with a legitimate gripe about violent, racist, deadly police acting as an anarchist gang that believes rules only apply to you, not them.

There are few prosecutions in large part because police declare riots when all participants are peaceful and not causing damage, and police are almost always the one's giving the orders to remove the people they declared "rioters", and in most cases they have zero evidence to back up their declarations, and are as violent as possible, beating peaceful videographers and reporters who were trapped and could not disperse, then charging them with refusal to disperse and resisting arrest, even violence against police for attacking police batons with their faces.
(Edit: remember the freeway shutdown when they marched on the freeway, and police blocked them from exiting or continuing while a second group of police came from behind, forcing them into a small fenced in area with no exit, then charged them all with refusal to disperse and the few that tried to disperse were charged with attacking police officers who blocked every escape route, violently attacking anyone trying to leave...all on live tv?)
Many peaceful protests became riots only after police moved in to violently disperse protests, fully 1/2 were riots because counter protesters and bad right wing actors like proud and boogaloo boys were planting bombs, shooting crowds, starting fires, driving through crowds, and murdering police in an effort to paint protesters as violent anarchists. That is verified fact directly from the DOJ investigation.

It's not a Portland only thing, police abandoning their communities because, as they indicated to the DA, "“It was like, ‘There’s our team and there’s their team, and you are on their team and you’re not on our team. And we’ve never had a D.A. not be on our team before,’” Police assume they are on a team against citizens, and won't do their jobs if, by doing them wrong with bias and malice, they might be prosecuted. They are used to immunity, and don't know how to do their jobs without it because they are abusers of power.

One day after charges were levied they quit in solidarity with the criminal abusive cop, and came up with fake excuses later.

You seem to have missed "the Justice Department said that the city’s Police Bureau was violating its own use-of-force policies during crowd-control operations, and that supervisors were not properly investigating complaints." part.

LOL! Trump is only liked by a very few washed up and bat shit crazy or demented actors you can count on one hand....and Kanye when he's off his meds.
Please, let's have more Maga tsunamis like 2018 and 2020.

You know that felons can't be president, neither can corpses. Afraid by 2024 that's going to leave the entire Trump clan disqualified....Some doubly so. Also, an approval rating in the mid 30's isn't a winning candidate. Please oh please don't make Trump the candidate. Anything but the briar patch...I mean Trump.

Your tears are so sweet I've stopped buying sugar.

Only 3% of BLM rallies had violence perpetrated by some of those marching, the same as had violence perpetrated against them by right wing groups like proud boys and boogaloo boys. All bombings, police assassinations, drive bys, cars driving through crowds, armed gangs hunting BLM, and planned terrorism was by right wing actors often trying to blame BLM. You don't hear that on Fox.

Oh my fucking God, did that idiot just claim ALL media bias is from the left and against the right? Lmfahs! *lies and *debunked

Hilarious to hear Stossel complain about media bias, he's so far right he turned his back on reality decades ago. Another big fail, @bobknight33

Oh no, President Trump isn't liked by a washed up actor. MAGA2024!!

Neither supports racial supremacy like your ilk, so the leading question is a red herring non sequitur.
I am not an anarchist, not since I turned 16, so I don't support Antifa, but I enjoy watching them make your head spin immensely.
I have always supported equality under the law, so yes, I absolutely support BLM....I would if they murdered a cop every time an unarmed black person was killed by police.

You are delusional.
Do, at some time, most cops act appropriately? Yes. Are you so brain damaged you take much accusations and hear "all cops are all bad all the time"? I've never said that. Pablo Escobar, by all reports, was a quite generous man who helped the poor on many occasions....he was not a good person.
Same for cops.
If you murder one person but do your job well otherwise, you are a murderous thug. If you allow fellow officers to get away with murder but don't participate, you are a murderous thug. If you spend every waking hour tending to the invalid and elderly on your own dime and you only kidnap and rape one child, you are a disgusting child rapist. If you cover for another motherfucker who's a kiddie fucker, you're no fucking better than the motherfucking rapist. That's the norm for American police, cover for the bad ones under any circumstances.

Cops can do good at times, usually when they know they're on multiple cameras, it doesn't ever erase their crimes.

Most, I would say statistically all cops are at best accomplices if not the bad actors. Good policing includes stopping other cops from committing crimes....until BLM pushed the issue, that was absolutely not the case...It might have happen once a decade nation wide, always ending with the whistleblower fired and under threat from police. Now, thanks 100% to BLM, that's slowly changing. Maybe up to .01% of the time...and that's an improvement.

Trump said to hit them harder and more often, cops listened and cheered.

Cops wear cameras. If they followed the law, they could put out ten thousand videos of themselves doing the right thing every day, not one a month, deescalation, not shooting until threatened, stopping other cops from beating handcuffed suspects to death and arresting them, defending the accused shoplifters from the racist store owner's false accusations instead of what we do see, smashing their window and pulling them through it because a racist said they think they stole something, they just don't know what or when. Have you EVER seen one of those? No, but you can see 10 disgusting abuses recorded daily with never another cop intervening, always the entire department forming a blue wall, destroying evidence, publicly pushing lies, testifying to lies, etc. They're a gang, they only protect and serve themselves when the chips are down. This is not a media perception, it's cold hard fact buddy.

Cops went to the supreme court to guarantee their right to lie. They are all professional liars. Liars cannot be trusted. I know, you can't grasp that concept because it would mean questioning daddy Trump, but it's true. When you give people authority, the power of life and death, and the legal right to lie at all times you set up a disastrous situation....it's what we have. Racist liars who kill. No good deed erases that.

Yes, Bob. Cops admit they shoot three citizens to death daily on average, already an abject failure, but hide likely > 95% of the deaths they cause by blaming the victim, claiming suicide by somehow beating themselves to death or claiming they died in a minor wreck that caused no injury after beating them to death. Claiming a cell phone clearly visible that they are talking to 911 on looks like a gun and shooting 47 times, running them over intentionally then stopping 10 ft away but claiming they had to because they feared for their lives, kneeling on their neck for 9 minutes and later saying the people telling them they just killed the man distracted them from knowing they killed the man. Strangling boys for 17 minutes straight while beating their heads with a giant maglight.......Daily. Multiple times daily.

You are such a delusional idiot.

Would it be considered desperate actors to agree to reenact those calls? Not just reenact the scenes but to actually mime the words from the calls... (>ლ)

Claims without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

Hrmph, looks like your bullshit has run the gamut of newtboy's patience as well. Can't say i blame him. What blinders?


Is this the section you're referring to ?


"Though much of this activity took place on the left, it was separate from the Biden campaign and crossed ideological lines, with crucial contributions by nonpartisan and conservative actors. The scenario the shadow campaigners were desperate to stop was not a Trump victory. It was an election so calamitous that no result could be discerned at all"


"crossed ideological lines, with crucial contributions by nonpartisan and conservative actors"
"crossed ideological lines, with crucial contributions by nonpartisan and conservative actors"
"crossed ideological lines, with crucial contributions by nonpartisan and conservative actors"

I'm trying to wrap my head around this. Did you read that and did your eyes go fuzzy and then your brain said "THE LEFT DID IT"???


"The scenario the shadow campaigners were desperate to stop was not a Trump victory. It was an election ... w/no result"
"The scenario the shadow campaigners were desperate to stop was not a Trump victory. It was an election ... w/no result"
"The scenario the shadow campaigners were desperate to stop was not a Trump victory. It was an election ... w/no result"

Did you read that, hit yourself in the face with a rolling pin, and then see "THEY ONLY WANT TO STOP TRUMP"???


HOLD ON, newt, gotta speak thenidiot language. I'll translate.


No collusion! No collusion! Hoax, the fake news media. Hillary! Hoax! Lock her up! Beautiful delicious wall. No collusion! Unfair!

------


Seriously though, newt I think you're missing something. You missed what he said here. Bob said that voters determined the election.

OMFG...can you even fucking read?
From your article I found on my own.....

...the forces of labor came together with the forces of capital to keep the peace and oppose Trump’s assault on democracy.

The handshake between business and labor was just one component of a vast, cross-partisan campaign to protect the election–an extraordinary shadow effort dedicated not to winning the vote but to ensuring it would be free and fair, credible and uncorrupted. For more than a year, a loosely organized coalition of operatives scrambled to shore up America’s institutions as they came under simultaneous attack from a remorseless pandemic and an autocratically inclined President. Though much of this activity took place on the left, it was separate from the Biden campaign and crossed ideological lines, with crucial contributions by nonpartisan and conservative actors. The scenario the shadow campaigners were desperate to stop was not a Trump victory. It was an election so calamitous that no result could be discerned at all, a failure of the central act of democratic self-governance that has been a hallmark of America since its founding.

Their work touched every aspect of the election. They got states to change voting systems and laws and helped secure hundreds of millions in public and private funding. They fended off voter-suppression lawsuits, recruited armies of poll workers and got millions of people to vote by mail for the first time. They successfully pressured social media companies to take a harder line against disinformation and used data-driven strategies to fight viral smears. They executed national public-awareness campaigns that helped Americans understand how the vote count would unfold over days or weeks, preventing Trump’s conspiracy theories and false claims of victory from getting more traction. After Election Day, they monitored every pressure point to ensure that Trump could not overturn the result. “The untold story of the election is the thousands of people of both parties who accomplished the triumph of American democracy at its very foundation,” says Norm Eisen, a prominent lawyer and former Obama Administration official who recruited Republicans and Democrats to the board of the Voter Protection Program.

For Trump and his allies were running their own campaign to spoil the election. The President spent months insisting that mail ballots were a Democratic plot and the election would be “rigged.” His henchmen at the state level sought to block their use, while his lawyers brought dozens of spurious suits to make it more difficult to vote–an intensification of the GOP’s legacy of suppressive tactics. Before the election, Trump plotted to block a legitimate vote count. And he spent the months following Nov. 3 trying to steal the election he’d lost–with lawsuits and conspiracy theories, pressure on state and local officials, and finally summoning his army of supporters to the Jan. 6 rally that ended in deadly violence at the Capitol.

You call that defrauding America? You are absolutely totally bat shit crazy, it describes a bipartisan effort defending democracy from Trump's baseless partisan attacks on it, on voting, and on truth....claiming if he doesn't win, it's rigged, if he wins, it's perfect. No where did anyone even imply voting machines defrauded anyone, it clearly states the obvious opposite, that they not only didn't have any serious issues, but also a physical paper backup that, in multiple recounts, still matched the results the machines gave.

You are such a non stop and just dumb liar. No doubt it effects your family life horribly.