- Joined
- Jan 2, 2025
Guy, we already see that you can't read or process words into complete constructions of what's being described. Why are you hellbent on proving it again and again after it's been established? We get it. You don't know the difference between a conditional threat rooted in self-defense, something totally legal, and, "I'm going to go out there and murder someone!"
You're now devolving your already braindead take into, "Well, I mean, you could see how it might look to the jury then, right?" Of course I can, you annoying faggot, because the jury is filled with retards like you. That's the whole problem here. There are too many losers like you who think it's suddenly not self-defense if you acknowledged someone might try and kill you, but were prepared to kill them.
Pathetic.
You're now devolving your already braindead take into, "Well, I mean, you could see how it might look to the jury then, right?" Of course I can, you annoying faggot, because the jury is filled with retards like you. That's the whole problem here. There are too many losers like you who think it's suddenly not self-defense if you acknowledged someone might try and kill you, but were prepared to kill them.
Pathetic.