Armed BLM protester shot by Kyle Rittenhouse sues police for ‘deputizing’ white nationalist vigilantes

[bripat9643]

Doesn't matter if you can kill someone with bare hands.
The law says you still can not immediately escalate to a gun and shoot.
At no time was Kyle ever at a lethal risk.

Dead wrong. You don't know what the fuck you're talking about.

 

[bripat9643]

Wrong.
The law is clear, and I studied the WI gun law to get a WI CCW.
There is nothing remotely vague about the law Kyle was clearly in violation of.
The judge simply lied.
And the image shows you also are lying.
The gun is not only not aimed, but is slightly behind Grosskreitz, not at all pointed at Kyle.

You're lying..

 

[bripat9643]

Actually, the violent provocation of Kyle being armed does give everyone there the right to end the lethal threat by whatever means necessary.

being armed is not a provocation according to the law, which specifically allows you to be armed. WI is an open carry state, which means you can walk around in public armed.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The point is the arm is PERPENDICULAR to Kyle, so could not have been aiming at Kyle.
And clearly you can see he is NOT aiming at all at Kyle, and could not have been.
His back is slightly toward Kyle, with the right arm with the pistol, behind his own head.
Totally and completely impossible for that to at all be threatening.

The point is the arm is PERPENDICULAR to Kyle, so could not have been aiming at Kyle.

Pointing toward Kyle.

His back is slightly toward Kyle, with the right arm with the pistol, behind his own head.

And pointing toward Kyle.

When questioned on the stand, Grosskreutz admitted that it wasn’t until he pointed his gun at Rittenhouse that the accused fired.

See, he even admits he pointed his gun at Rittenhouse.

 

[bripat9643]

Wrong.
The law does NOT allow you to use lethal for against an attempt to take a weapon if you should not have had the weapon in the first place.

Wrong, and the allowed Kyle to have the weapon.

The weapon constituted a death threat to everyone there, so everyone was authorized to remove that deadly threat by whatever means necessary.

Bullshit. That would contradict Wisconsin's open carry law.

You are too stupid for words to describe.

 

[bripat9643]

That is silly.
If we were to delegate the authority for police to shoot, then we would have to already have that right ourselves.
Which means we can legally shoot cops pointing guns at us.

No it doesn't, moron, and cops don't point their guns at anyone who isn't armed.

You can't have it both ways.
Either no one can shoot, or everyone can.
Police as shooting when there is no gun at all, but they just thought there might be one.
That is clearly illegal.

Bullshit. If they are mistaken, then they are mistaken. They followed the law, even if they made a wrong conclusion about the perp's actions.

 

[lantern2814]

Drawing a gun is not a sufficient lethal threat for you to shoot.
Police draw guns on me all the time, so can they then be shot?
This was an official MedTech in uniform, with full lettering on vest and hat, with pistol pointed up when Kyle pulled the trigger.

Grasping at straws now. If police truly are drawing guns on you “all the time” you’re obviously a hoodlum. There was this thing called a trial. With evidence and everything. Which shows that you’re lying.

 

[lantern2814]

That is ridiculous.
For example, if there was no bias, then how did the illegal possession by a juvenile get dropped?
That was a slam/dunk.

Hey dimbulb, the prosecution agreed to the dropping of the charge. Due to the lousy way that law is written. Where even legal experts have stated the law would be extremely difficult for a regular citizen to decipher.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

Still arguing that the verdict could not possibly have been what it, in fact, was, There is absolutely no way Kyle Rittenhouse is going to be found guilty of anything.

 

[AZrailwhale]

He picked the pocket knife off the ground and put it in his pocket.

It was still in his hand when he walked around the front of the car.

He was not stealing a car.

He was stealing his ex's rental car.

He was not kidnapping his children.

His ex told police, "He's got my kid. He's got my keys"

He did have an arrest warrant, but it was purely administrative and not criminal.

A warrant for sexual assault, trespassing, and disorderly conduct for domestic abuse

He was not resisting arrest.
We all saw the video.

He was. They tased him, twice, they had guns drawn.
That's not resisting arrest? Are you retarded?

YES

 

[Soupnazi630]

Nope.
At no time was Kyle threatened by deadly force or a deadly weapon.
The prosecutor and judge clearly need to be prosecuted for misconduct.

Yes he was liar

 

[bripat9643]

Nope.
At no time was Kyle threatened by deadly force or a deadly weapon.
The prosecutor and judge clearly need to be prosecuted for misconduct.

He certainly was. One of them was carrying a gun and pointed it at Kyle

 

[Robert W]

He certainly was. One of them was carrying a gun and pointed it at Kyle

The Jury correctly ruled in this case. It is over and done. Kyle has in the past sought donations for his defense costs. Suing the city and other government agencies is where this suit hopes to make a gold mine.

 

[Freedomisneverfree]

Kyle should be rich by now! Didn't he sue CNN? Anyone know if there was a settlement?