Self defense?

[DmonSlyr]

The whole thing should have never happened because gangs should not have been rioting and burning down private property in the first place. The media and officials allowed this to happen. Unfortunately it did happen, and some of the savages got what they deserved messing with the wrong guy. Martin Luther King is rolling in his grave what the cowards have allowed in this country.

[Guppy35]

I am curious of your thoughts of the fellow he shot who pointed his illegally possessed Glock at KR's head?

Again, missing the point.  Rittenhouse should never have been there as a 17 year old carrying an AR.  I would have crucified my kid when he was 17 had he taken an AR and tried to play cop, and as mentioned my kid had access to ARs and understood they aren't toys.

The court did it's thing and he was acquitted.  I'm angry that between his parents and himself, Rittenhouse was there at all and by carrying a weapon upped the ante which resulted in the deaths of two people.  Had I been there and seen a kid walking around with a gun, odds are I'd have not seen him as a good guy, and because I would not want him to kill people, I may have tried to take it away.  Clearly not a cop so why would I assume he was a good guy?

So once again, let me be clear.  I'm pissed off that anything happened at all because a kid with an AR was someplace he should never have been.  Remove the AR and his wanting to help by providing medical care or first aid is fine.  He'd be going knowing that there is a risk.  Now, because of his stupidity, you can bet the house that anytime there is a protest of any kind, and protesting is covered by the 1st Amendment, there will be a bunch of wannabe commandos there with their weapons.  It is the police and government officials job to deal with riots etc.  Not some kid with an AR.  Based on the logic folks are trying to use, we might as well give all our kids a gun when they start at school, so if there is a disturbance, they can protect themselves.  Sound OK to you?

[rabbidrabbit]

Nothing would have stopped him from providing first aid and medical care.  You are suggesting he would have been assaulted for that?  Nothing justified him walking around with an AR.  This conversation isn't happening if he hadn't been carrying a gun.

You did not watch the actual trial have you?  I suggest you do so.  For example, pedodwarf was repeatedly provoking people and multiple witnesses testified that among the threats he repeated many times was that if he ever caught any of the people there, the ones putting out the fires pedodwarf was lighting, alone, he would kill them.  He caught Kyle alone as Kyle came over to put out another fire that pedodwarf and the two Ziminski's set.  Kyle ran away and Pedodwarf ran him down and got shot screaming "F you" as he dove for Kyle. pedodwarf was close enough at the time that he had powder burns. 

In short, you assessment is speculation and contradicted by the known facts.  Pedodwarf assaulted Kyle after telling him he was going to kill him despite Kyle having the rifle.  Even having the rifle was not deterrent enough to dissuade the attack.   

[Guppy35]

You did not watch the actual trial have you?  I suggest you do so.  For example, pedodwarf was repeatedly provoking people and multiple witnesses testified that among the threats he repeated many times was that if he ever caught any of the people there, the ones putting out the fires pedodwarf was lighting, alone, he would kill them.  He caught Kyle alone as Kyle came over to put out another fire that pedodwarf and the two Ziminski's set.  Kyle ran away and Pedodwarf ran him down and got shot screaming "F you" as he dove for Kyle. pedodwarf was close enough at the time that he had powder burns. 

In short, you assessment is speculation and contradicted by the known facts.  Pedodwarf assaulted Kyle after telling him he was going to kill him despite Kyle having the rifle.  Even having the rifle was not deterrent enough to dissuade the attack.   

What part of I'm angry that he was there at all as a 17 year old with an AR are you missing?   Are you suggesting the first guy he shot was angry at him for being there?  Or was he angry at a kid carrying a gun?

[SIM]

I get it Guppy,  you're scared. Many people fit in to that category after the Rittenhouse trial.

But uninformed comments on a forum will not assuage that fear.

[Eviscerate]

To be fair, the first guy he shot in self defense, based on other footage from throughout the night, seemed angry at the world, shouting racial slurs at anyone and everyone, getting in people's faces, having to be restrained, and just generally being very aggressive.

There were multiple other people there that had full-size rifles also. What if he were 18 rather than 17 at the time? Does that make it OK? Regardless, he was technically legal in carrying the firearm and OC is legal in WI (dumb to me, but is what it is).

I agree that he shouldn't have been there and is a moron, but he wasn't on trial for being a moron.

I agree that it doesn't bode well for future protests/riots, but this case was pretty clear cut, and there very well may be wannabes in the future who try to pull the same defense, but it likely won't turn out well in their favor.

[rabbidrabbit]

What part of I'm angry that he was there at all as a 17 year old with an AR are you missing?   Are you suggesting the first guy he shot was angry at him for being there?  Or was he angry at a kid carrying a gun?

You said there is no way he would been subject to physical threat if he wasn't carrying the rifle correct? 

Here are your words.  Did I missread them?

"Nothing would have stopped him from providing first aid and medical care.  You are suggesting he would have been assaulted for that?  Nothing justified him walking around with an AR.  This conversation isn't happening if he hadn't been carrying a gun."

Pedodwarf was repeatedly threatening everyone who was there putting out fires and cleaning up that he would kill them.  It's safe to say that since he tried to kill Kyle despite having the rifle, Kyle would likely be dead if he did not have it.

Do you know the history of pedodwarf, the first guy he shot?  He spent 15 years for raping 5 young boys repeatedly.  In prison he was punished 40 times for assault but still got released days before the riots.  That night, he just got released from a mental hospital but was not on his meds.  It's safe to say a guy like that is more than willing to follow through on repeated death threats.

[LCADolby]

Sound OK to you?

Your posts are nothing more than Reductio ad Absurdum. That is not ok to me.

To use your style of argument...

I breathe air for oxygen, therefore it is my air.

Guppy stop stealing my air! You are an oxygen thief!

[Guppy35]

I get it Guppy,  you're scared. Many people fit in to that category after the Rittenhouse trial.

But uninformed comments on a forum will not assuage that fear.

This from a guy with Lets Go Brandon in his sig.  Talk about uninformed.   If I was in a position where I could have gone and helped, I would have. This isn't about fear.  I've been in the people business a long time and have dealt with violent teenagers on more occasions than I care to remember.  During those years I was lucky enough to have to deal with a situation where a gun was involved, only one time.  Had I been carrying a gun as well, it would have upped the ante.  By keeping my cool and talking my way out of it, no one was hurt.  My knees shook after the fact, but because of the situation I had to use my smarts to not escalate things.  I had no choice at that point about being there, as I was a house parent in a shelter for abused and runaway teens.  This man I faced was looking for his daughter, who he had been abusing for a long time.  It would have broken your heart to see all the scars on that kids back and the damage he'd done to her soul.  I knew that before he barged in with his gun looking for her.  So like many folks in this thread, you'd say I'd have been justified to shoot that man if I had a gun?  I own a number of guns.  Would that solve it?

Again, a kid with a gun should never have been there.

[Guppy35]

To be fair, the first guy he shot in self defense, based on other footage from throughout the night, seemed angry at the world, shouting racial slurs at anyone and everyone, getting in people's faces, having to be restrained, and just generally being very aggressive.

There were multiple other people there that had full-size rifles also. What if he were 18 rather than 17 at the time? Does that make it OK? Regardless, he was technically legal in carrying the firearm and OC is legal in WI (dumb to me, but is what it is).

I agree that he shouldn't have been there and is a moron, but he wasn't on trial for being a moron.

I agree that it doesn't bode well for future protests/riots, but this case was pretty clear cut, and there very well may be wannabes in the future who try to pull the same defense, but it likely won't turn out well in their favor.

He wasn't 18.  He was 17.  I was 19 when I owned my first AR.  In looking back, I had it cause it was 'cool'.  A military history junkie, I was reading at the time a number of books on Vietnam and wondered what it was like to shoot.  A Colt SP1 was my answer and it was fun to shoot.  But even at 19 I would never have believed it was OK to go out and play cop.  Again having had a son go through the teenage years with ARs around, I had no problem as long as he understood it wasn't a toy that he could go to the range with me and shoot.  Cause they are fun to shoot.  But never, in a million years would I have agreed to have him go to the scene of a protest carrying one of them.  As his parent, if anyone was to go, it would have been me, because I wasn't a kid anymore.  Protecting him is my job, and letting him get into a situation where he could get hurt would not have ever been OK.

I get it. The jury acquitted him.  That doesn't let him off the hook or his parents for allowing him get into that situation to begin with.  The screwed up bigtime.  That there are folks seeing him as a hero speaks loudly at how stupid some people are becoming.

[Guppy35]

Your posts are nothing more than Reductio ad Absurdum. That is not ok to me.

To use your style of argument...

I breathe air for oxygen, therefore it is my air.

Guppy stop stealing my air! You are an oxygen thief!

Talk about wasting your breath...

With that, I'm out.  You guys win.  Hope you find a nice riot to take your guns

[rabbidrabbit]

Given how you simply seem to be thrashing around emotionally despite the factual counterpoints others are trying to help you with, I sincerely think this is the best move for you.   

[LCADolby]

Talk about wasting your breath...

With that, I'm out.  You guys win.  Hope you find a nice riot to take your guns

Indeed. 

[Eagler]

Those riots were called peaceful protests by the local liberal government and the bias media..

To me it was a display of a new mental illness we now call social justice to get away with breaking the law/ trying  to change history/cancel dissenting viewpoints...nothing stranger than a black nfl millionaire football player with end racism on the back of his helmet that if that were the case he would not be wearing....

Sadly this was just a piece of a truly screwed up 2020 and to look at it in a vacuum warps the entire event

Yes if they don't want more of all of this please arrest the violent looters and arsonist before the over stressed public takes it into their own hands again

Eagler

[DmonSlyr]

He's about to sue the living crap out of a lot of people. Kid will walk away with 100s of millions more than likely after he deals with these media clowns. He has hired the same Lawyer as Nick Sandman. Going to be glorious.

People wouldn't have died if they wouldn't have attacked. It's a simple concept. I have 0 sympathy for anyone in that riot and the ones who attacked Kyle got what they deserved. The officials should have done their job to protect the city and they didn't. Whose fault is that, who controls those forces in the city? There's your sign.