Neehau said:

---

petroleo y agua said:

---

You keep stating that but do not provide a reason. Why would it be bad?

---

Bad publicity. Texas A&M deserves to be a top 10 public school, just like University of Texas. The guy made a horribly stupid decision and should not have gone to the race riots with a rifle. Playing stupid games to win stupid prizes.

---

The most stupid thing about the situation was the "race riots". Democrat paid rioters with top Democrat leaders encouraging them and raising bale for those arrested for the sake of their political gain is a much bigger insurrection than anything that happened on Jan 6.

Yes, Kyle should not have had to be in the situation because the situation should never have happened in this country.

It is sad that he is a victim of the woke leftists who hate the country. These leftists should just move to their communist nirvana in Venezuela or North Korea rather than destroying the most open, least racist country on the planet.

SwigAg11 said:

---

Neehau said:

---

petroleo y agua said:

---

Defending your own life is silly? Defending property is silly? Maybe go back to the Dems with those takes.

---

You should always defend your own life. Part of that process is making wise decisions. Kenosha has a professional, trained police force? Ever been there? I go there every year for the Renaissance Festival right next door. He made silly decisions and almost paid with ruining his life for it. He should go to a school in his home state and not bring his silliness to Texas A&M.

---

During those nights of rioting, that police force you mention was overwhelmed in many parts of the city. They were pushed back multiple times and had to abandon large parts of the city that were rioting. What do law abiding citizens do in that scenario? Do they give up property and let it be destroyed? I believe that insurance policies for many businesses have exclusions in their coverage for riot damage. That would destroy family businesses and their income. What should they do then?

---

Call in the National Guard.

There is no such thing as true riot exclusion language in any state for an insurance policy. It may read such as vacated premises for 30 days or something to that effect or it may attempt to classify the behavior of cogent actors as force majeure/acts of god. Still not legal.

Neehau said:

---

SwigAg11 said:

---

Neehau said:

---

petroleo y agua said:

---

Defending your own life is silly? Defending property is silly? Maybe go back to the Dems with those takes.

---

You should always defend your own life. Part of that process is making wise decisions. Kenosha has a professional, trained police force? Ever been there? I go there every year for the Renaissance Festival right next door. He made silly decisions and almost paid with ruining his life for it. He should go to a school in his home state and not bring his silliness to Texas A&M.

---

During those nights of rioting, that police force you mention was overwhelmed in many parts of the city. They were pushed back multiple times and had to abandon large parts of the city that were rioting. What do law abiding citizens do in that scenario? Do they give up property and let it be destroyed? I believe that insurance policies for many businesses have exclusions in their coverage for riot damage. That would destroy family businesses and their income. What should they do then?

---

Call in the National Guard.

There is no such thing as true riot exclusion language in any state for an insurance policy. It may read such as vacated premises for 30 days or something to that effect or it may attempt to classify the behavior of cogent actors as force majeure/acts of god. Still not legal.

---

How do I know that you have not read your insurance policies? Civil unrest is in the exclusions from coverage in every property insurance policy that I have read.

BuddysBud said:

---

Neehau said:

---

SwigAg11 said:

---

Neehau said:

---

petroleo y agua said:

---

Defending your own life is silly? Defending property is silly? Maybe go back to the Dems with those takes.

---

You should always defend your own life. Part of that process is making wise decisions. Kenosha has a professional, trained police force? Ever been there? I go there every year for the Renaissance Festival right next door. He made silly decisions and almost paid with ruining his life for it. He should go to a school in his home state and not bring his silliness to Texas A&M.

---

During those nights of rioting, that police force you mention was overwhelmed in many parts of the city. They were pushed back multiple times and had to abandon large parts of the city that were rioting. What do law abiding citizens do in that scenario? Do they give up property and let it be destroyed? I believe that insurance policies for many businesses have exclusions in their coverage for riot damage. That would destroy family businesses and their income. What should they do then?

---

Call in the National Guard.

There is no such thing as true riot exclusion language in any state for an insurance policy. It may read such as vacated premises for 30 days or something to that effect or it may attempt to classify the behavior of cogent actors as force majeure/acts of god. Still not legal.

---

How do I know that you have not read your insurance policies? Civil unrest is exempt from coverage in every property insurance policy that I have read.

---

Read the fine print again. I have never read one that didnt protect it.

SwigAg11 said:

---

Neehau said:

---

SwigAg11 said:

---

Neehau said:

---

petroleo y agua said:

---

Defending your own life is silly? Defending property is silly? Maybe go back to the Dems with those takes.

---

You should always defend your own life. Part of that process is making wise decisions. Kenosha has a professional, trained police force? Ever been there? I go there every year for the Renaissance Festival right next door. He made silly decisions and almost paid with ruining his life for it. He should go to a school in his home state and not bring his silliness to Texas A&M.

---

During those nights of rioting, that police force you mention was overwhelmed in many parts of the city. They were pushed back multiple times and had to abandon large parts of the city that were rioting. What do law abiding citizens do in that scenario? Do they give up property and let it be destroyed? I believe that insurance policies for many businesses have exclusions in their coverage for riot damage. That would destroy family businesses and their income. What should they do then?

---

Call in the National Guard.

There is no such thing as true riot exclusion language in any state for an insurance policy. It may read such as vacated premises for 30 days or something to that effect or it may attempt to classify the behavior of cogent actors as force majeure/acts of god. Still not legal.

---

The governor refused to call in the national guard. Which was another failure of government to protect its citizens. So again, what should law abiding citizens have done in this scenario?

---

Collect insurance. Bringing a gun puts you in a situation like Kyle found himself in. It was a stupid decision.

Quote:

---

Civil unrest is in the exclusions from coverage in every property insurance policy that I have read

---

In Texas, the standard form lists it as a covered peril

Neehau said:

---

SwigAg11 said:

---

Neehau said:

---

SwigAg11 said:

---

Neehau said:

---

petroleo y agua said:

---

Defending your own life is silly? Defending property is silly? Maybe go back to the Dems with those takes.

---

You should always defend your own life. Part of that process is making wise decisions. Kenosha has a professional, trained police force? Ever been there? I go there every year for the Renaissance Festival right next door. He made silly decisions and almost paid with ruining his life for it. He should go to a school in his home state and not bring his silliness to Texas A&M.

---

During those nights of rioting, that police force you mention was overwhelmed in many parts of the city. They were pushed back multiple times and had to abandon large parts of the city that were rioting. What do law abiding citizens do in that scenario? Do they give up property and let it be destroyed? I believe that insurance policies for many businesses have exclusions in their coverage for riot damage. That would destroy family businesses and their income. What should they do then?

---

Call in the National Guard.

There is no such thing as true riot exclusion language in any state for an insurance policy. It may read such as vacated premises for 30 days or something to that effect or it may attempt to classify the behavior of cogent actors as force majeure/acts of god. Still not legal.

---

The governor refused to call in the national guard. Which was another failure of government to protect its citizens. So again, what should law abiding citizens have done in this scenario?

---

Collect insurance. Bringing a gun puts you in a situation like Kyle found himself in. It was a stupid decision.

---

The only time you should ever consider using a gun, in my opinion, is when someone directly threatens your life or the life of your loved ones. If Kyle had stayed home, he would not have been involved. If Kyles relatives in Kenosha stayed home, and someone damaged their place of business for example, that would probably be a blessing so they could replace everything.

BMX Bandit said:

---

Quote:

---

Civil unrest is in the exclusions from coverage in every property insurance policy that I have read

---

In Texas, the standard form lists it as a covered peril

---

yep

Chris Kyle is a hero. This kid is a dumbass.

One quick way to know who is a coward who would refuse to protect the property of others is by seeing who bashes Rittenhouse.

Wrong. Using a gun to protect property should be allowed. I know you would let someone steal from you but not me.

backintexas2013 said:

---

Wrong. Using a gun to protect property should be allowed. I know you would let someone steal from you but not me.

---

I never said it shouldnt be allowed. I am saying it is pointless and stupid unless there is a life threatened. It is one of the main reasons you hold and pay for insurance.

Neehau said:

---

backintexas2013 said:

---

Wrong. Using a gun to protect property should be allowed. I know you would let someone steal from you but not me.

---

I never said it shouldnt be allowed. I am saying it is pointless and stupid unless there is a life threatened. It is one of the main reasons you hold and pay for insurance.

---

Life is always threatened when outside your home. athis is the social contract of being American. Otherwise we wouldn't have a 2A.

You think it's pointless and stupid. I say the guy had it coming. Play stupid games win stupid prizes. Break into property or try to destroy property you get what's coming.

Y'all are getting way off track. You're supposed to be arguing about whether or not this kid should join our school or not.

Neehau said:

---

backintexas2013 said:

---

Wrong. Using a gun to protect property should be allowed. I know you would let someone steal from you but not me.

---

I never said it shouldnt be allowed. I am saying it is pointless and stupid unless there is a life threatened. It is one of the main reasons you hold and pay for insurance.

---

I agree, it's stupid someone would risk their life for my stuff.

Can we add Rittenhouse to Mt Rushmore ? Dude is a hero

Neehau said:

---

backintexas2013 said:

---

Wrong. Using a gun to protect property should be allowed. I know you would let someone steal from you but not me.

---

I never said it shouldnt be allowed. I am saying it is pointless and stupid unless there is a life threatened. It is one of the main reasons you hold and pay for insurance.

---

You are either trolling, don't pay insurance, or ignorant.

I really try not to insult other posters, but those are the only options.

And there is no chance that you've ever owned a business. None.

Neehau said:

---

backintexas2013 said:

---

Wrong. Using a gun to protect property should be allowed. I know you would let someone steal from you but not me.

---

I never said it shouldnt be allowed. I am saying it is pointless and stupid unless there is a life threatened. It is one of the main reasons you hold and pay for insurance.

---

One of my "insurance policies" is called "Hellcat..."

Stupe said:

---

Neehau said:

---

backintexas2013 said:

---

Wrong. Using a gun to protect property should be allowed. I know you would let someone steal from you but not me.

---

I never said it shouldnt be allowed. I am saying it is pointless and stupid unless there is a life threatened. It is one of the main reasons you hold and pay for insurance.

---

You are either trolling, don't pay insurance, or ignorant.

I really try not to insult other posters, but those are the only options.

And there is no chance that you've ever owned a business. None.

---

Porque no Los tres?

Insurance companies don't grow their money on trees. They have property rights too.

I'd pitch in to present him one of these when he gets in

agz win said:

---

He'll need the Corps to help protect him and the target on his back. Kid's got some karma.

---

Cool post. So surprised it has zero stars.

Neehau said:

---

Neehau said:

---

SwigAg11 said:

---

Neehau said:

---

SwigAg11 said:

---

Neehau said:

---

petroleo y agua said:

---

Defending your own life is silly? Defending property is silly? Maybe go back to the Dems with those takes.

---

You should always defend your own life. Part of that process is making wise decisions. Kenosha has a professional, trained police force? Ever been there? I go there every year for the Renaissance Festival right next door. He made silly decisions and almost paid with ruining his life for it. He should go to a school in his home state and not bring his silliness to Texas A&M.

---

During those nights of rioting, that police force you mention was overwhelmed in many parts of the city. They were pushed back multiple times and had to abandon large parts of the city that were rioting. What do law abiding citizens do in that scenario? Do they give up property and let it be destroyed? I believe that insurance policies for many businesses have exclusions in their coverage for riot damage. That would destroy family businesses and their income. What should they do then?

---

Call in the National Guard.

There is no such thing as true riot exclusion language in any state for an insurance policy. It may read such as vacated premises for 30 days or something to that effect or it may attempt to classify the behavior of cogent actors as force majeure/acts of god. Still not legal.

---

The governor refused to call in the national guard. Which was another failure of government to protect its citizens. So again, what should law abiding citizens have done in this scenario?

---

Collect insurance. Bringing a gun puts you in a situation like Kyle found himself in. It was a stupid decision.

---

The only time you should ever consider using a gun, in my opinion, is when someone directly threatens your life or the life of your loved ones. If Kyle had stayed home, he would not have been involved. If Kyles relatives in Kenosha stayed home, and someone damaged their place of business for example, that would probably be a blessing so they could replace everything.

---

So we shouldn't use a gun to hunt? Just pointing out more ridiculousness from this comment.
Let's apply your logic to the entire situation. If the rioters had stayed home then they wouldn't have been involved.
According to your logic I should stand around and watch someone steal my belongings, some of which are irreplaceable and then burn my house down because I have insurance.

Neehau said:

---

backintexas2013 said:

---

You are arguing with a guy who said he would let his house get robbed while he sat there and did nothing.

---

Get new stuff from the insurance company. You aren't legally required to stop the burglars if you think your life is at risk. Get new locks and cameras outside. Zero point in getting into a firefight in my home when it is almost assuredly a one off experience that will never happen again.

---

Someone should put a sign up pointing to your house that says "Gun free zone . Free stuff for the taking. "

Neehau said:

---

backintexas2013 said:

---

Wrong. Using a gun to protect property should be allowed. I know you would let someone steal from you but not me.

---

I never said it shouldnt be allowed. I am saying it is pointless and stupid unless there is a life threatened. It is one of the main reasons you hold and pay for insurance.

---

This insurance thing. I first heard that right before Covid from an HPD officer to explain why so many repeat criminals were back on the streets (or prosecuting them was deemphasized in the first place). Basically, we (the government) aren't going to prosecute break-ins and thefts because insurance will take care of it. Not the HPD officers fault, it was coming straight from Marxist DA Kim Ogg.

It's Marxist. Let's take away individuals' right to defend themselves in favor of a centralized solution.