Maybe you can get off your ignorant behind and do so, Mike? They do exist and if you'd paid attention during the trial then you'd know that! Why are you here posting about something that you know so little about?
Ok, I just watched a clip of the incident.
Looks like he irresponsibly put himself in harms way and then had to shoot his way out of trouble.
So my question would (STILL) be what was he doing there in the first place?
I do understand the "taking back our streets" sentiment.
I mean technically Rittenhouse, myself, you, or anybody else SHOULD be able to safely walk the streets of ANY American city....day or night without fear.
But that isn't the case.
Let's use Albuquerque, my state's largest city and one of the nation's most violent and deadly.
Now, IF I chose to go walking down Central Avenue say, after 9PM on a Friday night anywhere east of San Mateo Blvd. my chances of getting beaten up/mugged/killed within a few blocks are probably around 100%.
However if I make the same walk with my AR I MIGHT stand a better chance....maybe not.
After all, most of my assailants out there in the dark are armed as well.
If I am lucky there would be a gun battle and I would win.
Would rhat be considered "self-defense?"
Hopefully so.
But a jury in civil court might ask the question WHAT was he doing out there in the first place KNOWING how dangerous it was.....unless he just WANTED violence?