Federal Judge Allows Lawsuit Against Rittenhouse To Proceed

The kid was 17, he could not run the meat slicer at Arby's and he has a firearm defending a car lot during a riot. I cannot be the only one to see how wrong the entire situation is. I do believe Kyle was in fear of his life when he fired, it was self defense, but he never should have been there.
Nobody should have been there. A curfew was in effect, remember?
 
He was not a lady walking down an alley, not even close. He was a minor hired by a car lot to provide security during a riot, and had a firearm to perform that duty. At the point he fired, he had to. But the problem was how he got to that position.

Right, so you’re blaming the victim for their lawful choices and justifying unprovoked attacks against them.

It’s literally the same thing.
 
That's why there was a curfew, stupid. The protesters went home before dark. The ones who didn't leave were trouble makers.
And if the police were doing their job all of those Antifa / BLM pieces of shit would be dead right now and there would have been no need to protect lives and property against them by private citizens, because they would be dispersed or dead.

But they stood back doing nothing, so oh well.
 
And if the police were doing their job all of those Antifa / BLM pieces of shit would be dead right now and there would have been no need to protect lives and property against them by private citizens, because they would be dispersed or dead.

But they stood back doing nothing, so oh well.

The protesters went home before dark. Oath Keepers, Proud Boys, Boogaloo Bois, Qanon..and other losers were running around in the dark.
 
The protesters went home before dark. Oath Keepers, Proud Boys, Boogaloo Bois, Qanon…
Good, they needed to be there if Anfifa / BLM was there and the cops weren’t gonna do anything.

Always good to see commie skulls get cracked.

But back in reality, no, there was effectively no counterprotest presence and you’re an insane person who is lying again.
 
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?
HE WAS THERE WITH A FIRE EXTINGUISHER!!!
You don't go with a fire extinguisher if you want "violence" you go with one if you want to put out the fires that arsonists are setting!
 
The protesters went home before dark. Oath Keepers, Proud Boys, Boogaloo Bois, Qanon..and other losers were running around in the dark.
Oh, it was rightwingers that were chasing Rittenhouse down, trying to kill him. I didn't know that. That's different.
 
Oh, it was rightwingers that were chasing Rittenhouse down, trying to kill him. I didn't know that. That's different.

The police said they were all friendly. Do you understand why there was a curfew? Would your son get a gun and go to a riot location after curfew?
 

Forum List

Back
Top