US Politics on Yik Yak | Can I ask why so many people are actually defending Karmelo Anthony? Is it a racial bias? I honestly don’t think it should be a race thing at all, from what I’ve seen, he stabbed someone to death and that’s that.

Yik Yak

Download

Join communities on Yik Yak Download

US Politics 17w

Can I ask why so many people are actually defending Karmelo Anthony? Is it a racial bias? I honestly don’t think it should be a race thing at all, from what I’ve seen, he stabbed someone to death and that’s that.

Anonymous 17w

I’ve yet to hear one of his defenders say anything in his defense other than “he’s black” and then talking about how the justice system is rigged against black people.

Anonymous 17w

Exactly. I am black as well. It just makes no sense to me. He clearly stab somebody bullying or not. He could’ve just slapped him or something. That’s what I do.

Anonymous 17w

Anonymous 17w

There's some false rumor going around that the jury was all white people

Anonymous 17w

I heard it was an issue with the jury

-1

Anonymous 17w

If someone pushes me, they should prepared to deal with what comes next. Fuck that stupid redneck.

-3

Anonymous

#1 17w

Which, to be clear, is true! Our justice system absolutely treats minorities unfairly. This just isn’t an example of that.

Anonymous

#1 17w

Yeah that’s what I was thinking

Anonymous

OP 17w

It’s one thing to see random rage baiters on Twitter say “#FREEMELO” but another when it’s Cardi B or pro athletes

Anonymous

#4 17w

I did some research based on the area. They do have history of racism in the area and it’s a predominately white area.

Anonymous

#5 17w

Sure but that doesn't make the rumor any less false

-1

Anonymous

#1 17w

Saying that in slam dunk murder cases just invalidates any argument they have. Sure the system is corrupt but eye witnesses saying this dude killed that white kid is open and shut. Karmelo is nothing but a waste of space

Anonymous

#1 17w

I saw one person say that stabbing is a reasonable response to being shoved which is insane but they at least weren’t picking and choosing based on race I guess

Anonymous

#1 17w

I see a lot of people say “well they supported Kyle Rittenhouse so I’m going to support him” and I’m like you shouldn’t be supporting either of those people. You don’t get to pick one just because other people did something shitty.

Anonymous

#8 17w

Come push me and find out.

Anonymous

#9 17w

I don’t get in fights because it isn’t worth it. I learned that from getting in fights. Btw when I got tackled from behind I just pinned them to the ground. Even in a purely self-serving scenario, there is no way turning a shove into a murder trial makes things better. Also “I will escalate minor physical confrontations to murder” isn’t a flex that’s just concerning.

Anonymous

#8 17w

Don’t start shit, and there won’t be shit. You lay your hands on someone else? You better be prepared for retaliation in any way that eliminates that threat.

Anonymous

#9 17w

Typically, high schoolers do not stab one another to death so that is not a normal part of the fight calculus of hot-headed 17 year olds. Additionally, self-defense is usually expected to be proportional. So if you disproportionately escalate a minor confrontation don’t be surprised when that isn’t counted as self defense. But generally speaking just don’t kill someone over a shove and there won’t be a murder trial in the first place.

Anonymous

#8 17w

If you attack another person in any fashion, you have invited that person to use whatever force is at their disposal to end that attack. Period.

Anonymous

#9 17w

I mean people do be crazy and that’s why I don’t get into fights anymore. Never know when someone has a gun. Metcalf was a hot-headed high schooler like we often were. But just because an escalation is possible doesn’t mean it doesn’t carry legal consequences. I also don’t ragebait people in traffic because they might shoot me. That doesn’t make road rage shootings legal.

Anonymous

#8 17w

But it means you shouldn’t be surprised if it happens. And it also is a fact that the rules do not apply equally.

Anonymous

#8 17w

Like yeah people can do illegal shit to you. That shit is still illegal. Shoving someone is also illegal. But given Metcalf is dead it’s not like he can be tried for assault and battery. That means of the two illegal things that happened there, only one is being tried.

Anonymous

#8 17w

And it means both received consequences, but only one of them was the first to commit assault. I’d rather go to jail for life than bleed out on the ground because I started some shit I couldn’t finish.

Anonymous

#9 17w

Yeah you should expect the possibility that someone might illegally kill you if you get in a fight. That’s a great reason not to get in fights. The killing part is still illegal. And the rules should be applied more equally. People like Zimmerman and Rittenhouse should be in jail. But the misapplication of justice in those instances does not morally justify another crime.

Anonymous

#8 17w

Like honestly I’m fully open with the conversation about how Anthony is being punished while many white criminals aren’t. What that does not involve is trying to justify what Anthony did. “Three people committed crimes but only one went to jail” is different from “this crime is morally justified actually”

Anonymous

#8 17w

I guarantee if a he had shoved that redneck and the redneck killed him in retaliation, the entirety of Texas would’ve been celebrating, and no indictment would’ve been reached.

Anonymous

#9 17w

And if that was the case that would be a miscarriage of justice and I would believe he should be in jail.

Anonymous

#8 17w

I wouldn’t. Anyone who puts their hands on another person deserves whatever retaliatory force is sent back their way. Fuck that dude. One less dumbfuck.

Anonymous

#9 17w

So you support Rittenhouse?

Anonymous

#8 17w

Was anything I said unclear?

Anonymous

#9 17w

I was simply asking to see if you support this extreme view of self defense across the board, or if you pick and choose based on the race of the perpetrator. I disagree with both but I find the first one less problematic because at least it’s consistent.

Anonymous

#4 17w

Not a rumor. There were no black people on the jury.

Anonymous

#9 17w

Murdering someone because they pushed you is still murder

Anonymous

#10 17w

No black people ≠ all white people

Anonymous

#4 17w

Doesn’t mean the jury wasn’t rigged, but thanks for chiming in!

-1

Anonymous

#10 17w

Yeah I'm sure multiple people of color put aside their literal identities to be racist to this kid

Anonymous

#4 17w

Cool story.

Anonymous

#10 17w

Tbh there is a really easy way to not get charged if you want to avoid situations like this, and it has nothing to do with race. Don't stab people for no reason

Anonymous

#4 17w

Self defense isn’t no reason. But if we’re bringing up avoiding situations…

Anonymous

#10 17w

Ohhh I forgot about the part where Metcalf pointed a gun at Anthony's head. Silly me.

Anonymous

#4 17w

Wait, no. That was the rittenhouse case

Anonymous

#4 17w

I forgot how Metcalf was trying to wrestle the knife away from him and Anthony was in fear for his life. Oh wait no, Rittenhouse again.

Anonymous

#4 17w

Rittenhouse wasn’t invited into the city he brought an illegal firearm to and threatened to shoot them. Anthony was invited in and told them he’d defend himself. Ones is a murderer, the other killed someone in defense

Anonymous

#10 17w

You don't need to be invited to a city to go there, and the gun was both legally carried and legal to possess. Weapons on school premises are illegal, and Anthony started the provocation.

Anonymous

#1 17w

And is still deserved.

-2

Anonymous

#4 17w

We’re talking about avoiding situations. One was where they were allowed to be, the other broke the law to be where they were. They both killed someone, but one could have been avoided if they just didn’t go where they weren’t supposed to be with an illegal firearm and threaten people. Anthony didn’t start it, but you’d know that if you followed the case.

Anonymous

#4 17w

The gun was illegal and it was illegal for him to possess it and cross state lines.

Anonymous

#10 17w

He actually did start the provocation by sitting in the incorrect tent, refusing to leave, and proceeding to stab the person trying to get him to.

Anonymous

#4 17w

After he was attacked. But I admire your courage to speak in the absence of knowledg

Anonymous

#4 17w

Asian and Indian people in the Dallas metro are more racist than the white people. The tech industry is the second-largest employer in DFW, and it is overflowing with hyper conservative first-generation Americans, and racism is madly prevalent amongst them.

Anonymous

#10 17w

You don't get the same protections from being attacked when you start the provocation

-1

Anonymous

#4 17w

He was invited into the tent. Multiple witnesses have confirmed this.

Anonymous

#9 17w

wtf no it’s not

Anonymous

#9 17w

And he was asked to leave, to which he refused, and stabbed someone

Anonymous

#9 17w

If he had just left, there wouldn't even be a physical confrontation, let alone a death.

Anonymous

#4 17w

He was pushed first.

Anonymous

#9 17w

Whereas Rittenhouse was actively fleeing and being chased by a mob

Anonymous

#4 17w

If rittenhouse never went across state lines two innocent people would still be alive.

Anonymous

#4 17w

In a city he didn’t live in with a gun he wasn’t allowed to have.

Anonymous

#10 17w

Not true, a convicted pedophile and a felon would still be alive, not two innocent people.

Anonymous

#10 17w

But alas if Anthony never played sports in high school he wouldn't have murdered someone

Anonymous

#4 17w

Two innocent people. You never would have known their histories if they weren’t murdered in cold blood by a killer.

Anonymous

#10 17w

And if Anthony hadn’t stabbed somebody one innocent person would still be alive today. Strangely, you’re only interested in saving lives in one of those cases.

Anonymous

#10 17w

You don't know that, could have seen em on cops

-1

Anonymous

#4 17w

You’re arguing in terrible faith

Anonymous

#1 17w

Nah, he didn’t need to kill him, but he got attacked first.

Anonymous

#10 17w

As an outsider, what are your views on intelligence?

Anonymous

#10 17w

Yeah you're not trying to seriously debate the case either you just are grasping at straws to say it was the wrong decision

Anonymous

#10 17w

Y’all are both defending a murderer

Anonymous

#1 17w

It is. Keep your hands to yourself, or you might find out one day.

Anonymous

#1 17w

Rittenhouse didn't murder anyone, they were all justifiable homicides

Anonymous

#1 17w

Fine by me. That stupid redneck learned an important lesson, albeit the last one he ever learned.

Anonymous

#1 17w

I’m not defending his decision to kill. I’m defending the fact that he was provoked and made a decision. It was a tragedy 100% but the case was never fair to begin with.

Anonymous

#4 17w

*asked to leave by someone without the authority to do so.

Anonymous

#4 17w

No. They weren’t.

Anonymous

#9 17w

Sure but we aren't debating the merits of him trespassing and/or how it plays in to the case. I'm not saying he broke the law by staying in the tent, I'm saying he started the confrontation by staying in the tent and therefore lost any self defense protections.

-1

Anonymous

#4 17w

It’s nice that you’re committed to your level of understanding

Anonymous

#10 17w

Tell it to the Kenosha WI judge then

Anonymous

#4 17w

If someone invites you into a store and a different customer starts yelling at you to leave, who started the confrontation?

Anonymous

#4 17w

You have the kind of unshakable confidence that USUALLY comes with competence

Anonymous

#9 17w

If you don't leave it seems like you're not only starting a confrontation but begging for one. Let's add to this a little more though. What if you had ongoing issues with the workers of the store, one of them tells you to leave (even though store policy says they can't kick you out), maybe pushes you toward the door, and you stab him in response? That's called assault with a deadly weapon or murder when it results in death.

-1

Anonymous

#4 17w

You might be the only person who has ever reached their full potential

Anonymous

#10 17w

Nah not even close to my potential but thanks dawg not sure what compelled you to start being nice

-1

Anonymous

#4 17w

It’s been funnier the insult matches your intelligence

Anonymous

#4 17w

I don’t think you know what the word “start” means. Perhaps that is the issue.

Anonymous

#4 17w

They weren’t people with any authority to do so. You are not obligated to take commands from another customer while you are shopping, no matter how big of soon-to-be-dead redneck that customer is.

Anonymous

#9 17w

You're right, you're not breaking any laws by refusing. Just starting a confrontation.

-1

Anonymous

#4 17w

Thank you for confirming that you do not know what “start” means. Good luck with your remedial courses, kid.

Anonymous

#1 17w

I was gonna argue More for manslaughter

Anonymous

#9 17w

Someone put this guy on a watchlist

Anonymous

OP 17w

Watch all you want. You’re going to have a front row seat like redneck McGee did.