Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: taxcontrol

Yes I did read it. he KNEW like you do now the context was self defense where a violent thug was trying to hurt people. So Your implication is Trump is inciting to violence whe the fact is its supporting the right of self defense, Both you aand Cruz need to read the Constitution. In self defense you do not bend over for the attacker.


47 posted on 03/16/2016 12:00:31 PM PDT by Mechanicos
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies ]


To: Mechanicos

What I know is that it was NOT self defense.

The protester was in the custody (detained) of either security or police or both. The protester was being escorted out because he was using his WORDS to shout and disrupt. That was a legal and proper.

Then the 78 year old man violent and viciously attacked the protester. That was ILLEGAL and should have been called such by Trump. When he did not, he missed the opportunity to be Presidential. That is what he got called on.

Self defense is a point of law where a person is actually attacking you. The video SHOWS that the protester was NOT attacking anyone and the 78 year old BOY, was the attacker. There clearly is no basis for a claim of self defense.


48 posted on 03/16/2016 12:11:37 PM PDT by taxcontrol ( The GOPe treats the conservative base like slaves by taking their votes and refuses to pay)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson