So, how about that Rittenhouse trial?

[3catcircus]

From a European perspective it's such a bizarre case - A kid running around with military grade weaponry.

Thing is, if I have it right. He really shouldn't have been there (after curfew) in the first place and armed with an illegal firearm.

That said... it somewhat transcends into self-defense after that. Rosenbaum was clearly 'unhinged' and although while technically unarmed his intent was to harm Ritterhouse. Did Ritterhouse issue a warning? Did he go beyond a 'level of threat'.

Beyond that, Ritterhouse acted in self-defense (technically). Hit in the head with a skateboard and someone drew a gun at him.

However, it brings me back to the original point. Why was he there in the first place, under age and armed illegally?

Now, if he was defending his home against intruders, then that would be a whole different story.

Your assumptions are not correct at all.

As others have pointed out, a semiauto AR-15 is a standard rifle - it's not the M16/M4 used by the military. 

He was in possession of it legally.  At 17 years old, a long rifle is legal for him to be in possession of. 

If he shouldn't have been there, then it goes double for all of the rioters who were there. Rosenbaum (one of the turds that was shot after attacking Rittenhouse) was a 5x convicted child molester who anally raped young boys. He was released from a mental hospital and went immediately went to that area of Kenosha to engage in rioting.  *All* of the people who attacked Rittenhouse that he defended himself against were convicted felons - multiple convictions for each. These were not innocent protestors.  Rittenhouse's initial reaction to all three was to retreat and all three of them chased him and attacked him with deadly weapons. That's *all* you need for self-defense and the use of deadly force to be legal.

[3catcircus]

Kyle Rittenhouse is a very useful weathervane.

If you're not willing to acknowledge Kyle is a hero, then you're useless and not worth listening to. Notice the deafening silence from politicians on this very easy to adjudicate issue. They know what the right call is, they're just cowards or evil.

That boy is not only a hero, but he is also INNOCENT.  Fuck just give him medals already.

Let's not forget - he exhibited excellent trigger discipline and outstanding grouping.

Shooting on the run and in awkward positions, he hit all three of them and every shot was a hit.  He did not hit unarmed people nearby who were not a threat.  I daresay many cops could take a lesson from him in tactical shooting.

[Snowman0147]

From a European perspective it's such a bizarre case - A kid running around with military grade weaponry.

Thing is, if I have it right. He really shouldn't have been there (after curfew) in the first place and armed with an illegal firearm.

That said... it somewhat transcends into self-defense after that. Rosenbaum was clearly 'unhinged' and although while technically unarmed his intent was to harm Ritterhouse. Did Ritterhouse issue a warning? Did he go beyond a 'level of threat'.

Beyond that, Ritterhouse acted in self-defense (technically). Hit in the head with a skateboard and someone drew a gun at him.

However, it brings me back to the original point. Why was he there in the first place, under age and armed illegally?

Now, if he was defending his home against intruders, then that would be a whole different story.

Your assumptions are not correct at all.

As others have pointed out, a semiauto AR-15 is a standard rifle - it's not the M16/M4 used by the military. 

He was in possession of it legally.  At 17 years old, a long rifle is legal for him to be in possession of. 

If he shouldn't have been there, then it goes double for all of the rioters who were there. Rosenbaum (one of the turds that was shot after attacking Rittenhouse) was a 5x convicted child molester who anally raped young boys. He was released from a mental hospital and went immediately went to that area of Kenosha to engage in rioting.  *All* of the people who attacked Rittenhouse that he defended himself against were convicted felons - multiple convictions for each. These were not innocent protestors.  Rittenhouse's initial reaction to all three was to retreat and all three of them chased him and attacked him with deadly weapons. That's *all* you need for self-defense and the use of deadly force to be legal.

Not only that, but Kyle ran to the police after his first shooting.  He clearly didn't want to shoot anyone.

[Rob Necronomicon]

From a European perspective it's such a bizarre case - A kid running around with military grade weaponry.

Thing is, if I have it right. He really shouldn't have been there (after curfew) in the first place and armed with an illegal firearm.

That said... it somewhat transcends into self-defense after that. Rosenbaum was clearly 'unhinged' and although while technically unarmed his intent was to harm Ritterhouse. Did Ritterhouse issue a warning? Did he go beyond a 'level of threat'.

Beyond that, Ritterhouse acted in self-defense (technically). Hit in the head with a skateboard and someone drew a gun at him.

However, it brings me back to the original point. Why was he there in the first place, under age and armed illegally?

Now, if he was defending his home against intruders, then that would be a whole different story.

First off, an AR-15 is not a 'military grade' weapon. It is chambered in a common rifle caliber, but lacks select-fire options. The platform is ridiculously common, too.

Two: there are questions about how 'illegal' his possession was. The statute in question seems to waive any restriction on long guns, and there have been issues raised about the statute's constitutionality (because of how vague and weird it is).

Three: As I've stated earlier in the thread, I do fault Rittenhouse for being foolish. Don't go to stupid places. But, by his own testimony (and others), he had spent a great deal of time in Kenosha. He was known there. He didn't want it to be burned down by the possibly state-supported rioters*. The media (which you should not trust, and if you do just fucking kill yourself now, you artichoke) has tried to play this as 'he drove across the state to kill people!' -- except he lived just across the state line. And unlike European subjects, the U.S. does not nominally have internal controls on travel.

* There are a couple things that jump out at me from the trial. One was how the DA's office kiboshed a search warrant on Grosskreutz's phone. Another was ADA Binger's strange comments about how people were being told to stay off the streets and in their homes. By who? Were the rioters making these demands? By what authority?

I cannot help but wonder if Grosskreutz's phone had texts and calls to someone in the Kenosha or even Wisconsin state government. Wouldn't THAT have been a hell of a can of worms?

I certainly don't believe he (or the other militia) were there just to kill people. The media are just looking to sensationalize the whole thing.

As for him being armed with 'military grade' weaponry. I'm really talking about it from an Irish perspective. But technically, you could be correct. I know very little about guns to be honest.

But you made the critical point here. 'Don't go to stupid places'. This is personal self-defense 101!

[Pat]

From a European perspective it's such a bizarre case - A kid running around with military grade weaponry.

Thing is, if I have it right. He really shouldn't have been there (after curfew) in the first place and armed with an illegal firearm.

That said... it somewhat transcends into self-defense after that. Rosenbaum was clearly 'unhinged' and although while technically unarmed his intent was to harm Ritterhouse. Did Ritterhouse issue a warning? Did he go beyond a 'level of threat'.

Beyond that, Ritterhouse acted in self-defense (technically). Hit in the head with a skateboard and someone drew a gun at him.

However, it brings me back to the original point. Why was he there in the first place, under age and armed illegally?

Now, if he was defending his home against intruders, then that would be a whole different story.

Your entire post seems to be based on the assumption that you're not allowed to defend yourself until after your attacker shoots and kills you.

[tenbones]

Foolish being there? Sure.

But when the authorities are nowhere to be found, I take exception to the idea that *we* the citizens have no responsibility to protect our own neighborhoods. That's what he was doing with his friends.

It was a riot, and yes being there was foolish, from the perspective of those of us that sit comfortably in our own homes hundreds of miles away. I worked as an EMT during the LA Riots, I can tell you right now, it takes some sand to be out there in that kind of environment. I can guarantee you he had *no idea* what he was getting himself into - that's the foolish part - but he has impulse to help. We need more people like that. That's how you maintain order when shit goes down.

And on that night - the shit was going down.

It's unfortunate this situation happened, but it's pretty clear that... the detective on the case is pretty cute.

[Ghostmaker]

From a European perspective it's such a bizarre case - A kid running around with military grade weaponry.

Thing is, if I have it right. He really shouldn't have been there (after curfew) in the first place and armed with an illegal firearm.

That said... it somewhat transcends into self-defense after that. Rosenbaum was clearly 'unhinged' and although while technically unarmed his intent was to harm Ritterhouse. Did Ritterhouse issue a warning? Did he go beyond a 'level of threat'.

Beyond that, Ritterhouse acted in self-defense (technically). Hit in the head with a skateboard and someone drew a gun at him.

However, it brings me back to the original point. Why was he there in the first place, under age and armed illegally?

Now, if he was defending his home against intruders, then that would be a whole different story.

First off, an AR-15 is not a 'military grade' weapon. It is chambered in a common rifle caliber, but lacks select-fire options. The platform is ridiculously common, too.

Two: there are questions about how 'illegal' his possession was. The statute in question seems to waive any restriction on long guns, and there have been issues raised about the statute's constitutionality (because of how vague and weird it is).

Three: As I've stated earlier in the thread, I do fault Rittenhouse for being foolish. Don't go to stupid places. But, by his own testimony (and others), he had spent a great deal of time in Kenosha. He was known there. He didn't want it to be burned down by the possibly state-supported rioters*. The media (which you should not trust, and if you do just fucking kill yourself now, you artichoke) has tried to play this as 'he drove across the state to kill people!' -- except he lived just across the state line. And unlike European subjects, the U.S. does not nominally have internal controls on travel.

* There are a couple things that jump out at me from the trial. One was how the DA's office kiboshed a search warrant on Grosskreutz's phone. Another was ADA Binger's strange comments about how people were being told to stay off the streets and in their homes. By who? Were the rioters making these demands? By what authority?

I cannot help but wonder if Grosskreutz's phone had texts and calls to someone in the Kenosha or even Wisconsin state government. Wouldn't THAT have been a hell of a can of worms?

I certainly don't believe he (or the other militia) were there just to kill people. The media are just looking to sensationalize the whole thing.

As for him being armed with 'military grade' weaponry. I'm really talking about it from an Irish perspective. But technically, you could be correct. I know very little about guns to be honest.

But you made the critical point here. 'Don't go to stupid places'. This is personal self-defense 101!

Yes. But 'don't go to stupid places' is not a legal or judicial argument. It does not negate self-defense.

Trying to use it as such is a small step from 'you shouldn't have worn that short skirt if you didn't want to get dragged into the alley and raped up against the wall'.

[Rob Necronomicon]

Trying to use it as such is a small step from 'you shouldn't have worn that short skirt if you didn't want to get dragged into the alley and raped up against the wall'.

Bit of a leap that...

[Rob Necronomicon]

Your entire post seems to be based on the assumption that you're not allowed to defend yourself until after your attacker shoots and kills you.

Not what I said either... In fact, what part of 'it transcends into a self-defense situation' did you not get? Weird...

[Ghostmaker]

Trying to use it as such is a small step from 'you shouldn't have worn that short skirt if you didn't want to get dragged into the alley and raped up against the wall'.

Bit of a leap that...

Welcome to the U.S. judicial and legal system. Lawyers pull retarded shit out of their asses on a regular basis.

[Rob Necronomicon]

Welcome to the U.S. judicial and legal system. Lawyers pull retarded shit out of their asses on a regular basis.

They do that shit here too. Bunch of wankers.

But that factor has nothing to do with my statement (as the way I see things).

[3catcircus]

Foolish being there? Sure.

But when the authorities are nowhere to be found, I take exception to the idea that *we* the citizens have no responsibility to protect our own neighborhoods. That's what he was doing with his friends.

It was a riot, and yes being there was foolish, from the perspective of those of us that sit comfortably in our own homes hundreds of miles away. I worked as an EMT during the LA Riots, I can tell you right now, it takes some sand to be out there in that kind of environment. I can guarantee you he had *no idea* what he was getting himself into - that's the foolish part - but he has impulse to help. We need more people like that. That's how you maintain order when shit goes down.

And on that night - the shit was going down.

It's unfortunate this situation happened, but it's pretty clear that... the detective on the case is pretty cute.

Yep. When seconds count, the cops are only minutes away...

[SHARK]

Greetings!

Yeah, I have to disagree with the idea that Kyle was being "Foolish" for being there, for entering the riot zone. He wasn't being foolish. He was being courageous, inspiring, caring, generous, and patriotic. If anyone of YOU lived in an area owned a business that was being attacked, burned, and raped by swarms of fucking mutant thugs--would you consider some of your neighbors riding in, and blazing on them, defending you and your property, as being foolish?

Or would you consider it to be courageous, generous, and patriotic? The ide that someone else says, yeah, I care. I'm with you, brother, and as long as I breathe, the insanity is going to fucking stop. Safety and peace will be restored, and I am armed and ready to ensure it does.

That's as fucking AMERICAN as it gets. Regardless of whether or not the fucking sheriffs are around or not. Regardless if some politician clown give you fucking permission or not.

AMERICAN FREEDOM AND SECURITY BEGINS WITH YOU.

YOU, and your family, and your neighbors. Your church. All you giving a fuck about the folks down the street, or a few blocks away, and saying, yeah, if these people aren't worthy to fight for and defend, then who the fuck is? WHAT is? If you don't do it for them, why should anyone do it for you, when your hour comes?

All of America would be far safer, far more secure, and far more peaceful if MORE people thought like Kyle, and believed just as he does.

Personally, I entirely agree with Kyle Rittenhouse and his actions. I have on several occasions been in some fairly similar situations where dangerous and violent situations developed, and I intervened, to protect other people, that were innocent, against being preyed upon by criminals. In such situations, I could very well have been outmatched and killed for intervening. A supervising Sheriff at the time arriving on scene afterwards told me "Good Job, Marine!". My wife asked me why I was so willing to put my life on the line, for strangers. I can say now, just as I told her then, when someone cries for help, that makes it MY BUSINESS. When someone, a fellow citizen, is in need from being preyed upon by the monsters, I shall answer the call. Criminals and monsters should be AFRAID of us, of me, of the righteous citizen. We should live in fear of noone. We are AMERICANS. It was the way I was raised by my parents, taught by my neighbors and church, and trained in the Marine Corps. Like my father told me--he too was a veteran of World War II--he said if you aren't willing to stand up and answer the call, then who will? I have answered the call, both in uniform and as a civilian. I think every American citizen should believe the same way. At one time, in the past, probably most Americans believed similar. That's at the heart of how we became a prosperous land, ruled by Law. A land where we don't live in fear of any man.

That's where our freedom and security really lives and dies, my friends.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

[Ghostmaker]

Greetings!

Yeah, I have to disagree with the idea that Kyle was being "Foolish" for being there, for entering the riot zone. He wasn't being foolish. He was being courageous, inspiring, caring, generous, and patriotic. If anyone of YOU lived in an area owned a business that was being attacked, burned, and raped by swarms of fucking mutant thugs--would you consider some of your neighbors riding in, and blazing on them, defending you and your property, as being foolish?

Or would you consider it to be courageous, generous, and patriotic? The ide that someone else says, yeah, I care. I'm with you, brother, and as long as I breathe, the insanity is going to fucking stop. Safety and peace will be restored, and I am armed and ready to ensure it does.

That's as fucking AMERICAN as it gets. Regardless of whether or not the fucking sheriffs are around or not. Regardless if some politician clown give you fucking permission or not.

AMERICAN FREEDOM AND SECURITY BEGINS WITH YOU.

YOU, and your family, and your neighbors. Your church. All you giving a fuck about the folks down the street, or a few blocks away, and saying, yeah, if these people aren't worthy to fight for and defend, then who the fuck is? WHAT is? If you don't do it for them, why should anyone do it for you, when your hour comes?

All of America would be far safer, far more secure, and far more peaceful if MORE people thought like Kyle, and believed just as he does.

Personally, I entirely agree with Kyle Rittenhouse and his actions. I have on several occasions been in some fairly similar situations where dangerous and violent situations developed, and I intervened, to protect other people, that were innocent, against being preyed upon by criminals. In such situations, I could very well have been outmatched and killed for intervening. A supervising Sheriff at the time arriving on scene afterwards told me "Good Job, Marine!". My wife asked me why I was so willing to put my life on the line, for strangers. I can say now, just as I told her then, when someone cries for help, that makes it MY BUSINESS. When someone, a fellow citizen, is in need from being preyed upon by the monsters, I shall answer the call. Criminals and monsters should be AFRAID of us, of me, of the righteous citizen. We should live in fear of noone. We are AMERICANS. It was the way I was raised by my parents, taught by my neighbors and church, and trained in the Marine Corps. Like my father told me--he too was a veteran of World War II--he said if you aren't willing to stand up and answer the call, then who will? I have answered the call, both in uniform and as a civilian. I think every American citizen should believe the same way. At one time, in the past, probably most Americans believed similar. That's at the heart of how we became a prosperous land, ruled by Law. A land where we don't live in fear of any man.

That's where our freedom and security really lives and dies, my friends.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Eh, I stand by the time honored truism: don't go to stupid places.

But as I also said, it's irrelevant. I may think he was foolish. I also think if you have some sawed-off mental patient screaming 'SHOOT ME N-BOMB!', threatening to 'kill you if I catch you', and then charging you to try and take your weapon away from you... yeah, it's self-defense. The end. And if Pedo-Manlet Rosenbaum's shooting is self-defense, then so is everything after; firing at Jump Kick Man, killing Domestic Abuser Huber stone dead, and vaporizing Grotesque Grosskreutz's arm... it's all as legal as church on Sunday.

Rittenhouse is clearly affected by this ordeal and the aftermath. I hope he manages to move past it and live a long life, free to marry, work, and grill.

And here's something to consider that the retard brigade is NOT thinking through. Remember that recent incident where a woman was raped on a subway and nobody stopped it? And everyone hemmed and hawed over how sad it was that no one tried to interfere?

I fucking wonder why.

[Ratman_tf]

Trying to use it as such is a small step from 'you shouldn't have worn that short skirt if you didn't want to get dragged into the alley and raped up against the wall'.

Bit of a leap that...

I agree. To be comparable to the widespread riots, it would be closer to say that you'd be raped in the middle of the street.