Kyle Rittenhouse trial...already disproving SO MANY LIES from the left

[eagle1462010]

Which cities did they burn?

Same reply as last time. Have you been living under a rock.

I'll add.........are you under that statue that pissed you off so bad that you knocked it down and it fell on you.

poor thing.

 

[surada]

Same reply as last time. Have you been living under a rock.

I'll add.........are you under that statue that pissed you off so bad that you knocked it down and it fell on you.

poor thing.

Name the cities.

 

[Turtlesoup]

No he wasn't defending anyone's property.. They turned him down. He was a stupid kid with a gun who traveled to another state to play vigilante.. He killed two people and crippled a third.

He killed two criminals and wounded a third. All three attacked him and the "stupid kid" has every right to be where he wants to be.

I am alarmed at this attitude that people can't go where they want in fear of annoying criminals.....that is some twisted way of thinking. There was a time that we held such "dumb kids" up as heros and gave them a medal for acting to protect society from the criminals who were attacking. It's bizarre that you think everyone should just back down to the criminals. It's wrong and dangerous thinking. I am afraid that things have gotten so bad, that it will only be by vigilante justice that criminals are beaten back down if ever. The WILD WEST and NY 1970's was civilized not by nitwits saying that society should back down to the criminals...quite the opposite--it was shooting and beating the snot out of the criminals that finally made a difference. Any less than this---and the criminals, gangs, and corrupt pols will destroy america as we know it.

 

[otto105]

Same reply as last time. Have you been living under a rock.

I'll add.........are you under that statue that pissed you off so bad that you knocked it down and it fell on you.

poor thing.

Yeah, which city burned down?

 

[otto105]

He killed two criminals and wounded a third. All three attacked him and the "stupid kid" has every right to be where he wants to be.

I am alarmed at this attitude that people can't go where they want in fear of annoying criminals.....that is some twisted way of thinking. There was a time that we held such "dumb kids" up as heros and gave them a medal for acting to protect society from the criminals who were attacking. It's bizarre that you think everyone should just back down to the criminals. It's wrong and dangerous thinking. I am afraid that things have gotten so bad, that it will only be by vigilante justice that criminals are beaten back down if ever. The WILD WEST and NY 1970's was civilized not by nitwits saying that society should back down to the criminals...quite the opposite--it was shooting and beating the snot out of the criminals that finally made a difference. Any less than this---and the criminals, gangs, and corrupt pols will destroy america as we know it.

Take your racist crap to parler.

Under all laws, you can't provoke a confrontation then claim self defense if you get attacked.

 

[Turtlesoup]

He had EMT training, so yes he was.

Actually anyone is---who has any sort of knowledge or even a willingness and can remain calm under pressure can be---of help. Bleeding--apply pressure change body position. Blocked airway--unblock and breathe or arrange breathing...Diabetic depending which way they are going--you have options. Dehydrated and most bleeding---give fluids. Hyperthermia--water and cool off------Hypo--warm them up. Shock change body position and water. When in doubt call 911---they will walk you through it and send help. Baby being born, oh yeah, there are things you can do to help...same goes with heart attacks and strokes. Got a smart phone---google is at your finger tips with all sorts of information as is 911.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

You know self defense law...........

When the other guy breaks contact......if you then pursue that guy and initiate more violence you are no longer innocent and defending yourself, you have become the bad guy...

Rittenhouse never initiated any violence.......all three of the other guys initiated violence against Rittenhouse who in all 3 attacks was moving away from them....they are the bad guys no matter if Rittenhouse made a bad decision in being there...

I think you don't understand what my position is here.

Yes I know self-defense laws. When I was younger I was trained to a black belt where at that point, I knew five ways to kill a man in four moves or less.
I took our CCW course, passed the test and range.

I know self-defense, and what I was taught in self-defense is that if you enter a violent situation which this was, anything after that point is your fault. You use self-defense when you are attacked through no fault of your own.

So to me it doesn't matter if Rittenhouse was attacked, if he attacked somebody else, names called, why he was there is all irrelevant to me. What my issue is that he went there to start trouble. After that, he's responsible for any trouble he caused especially murder.

 

[surada]

He was a 17 yr old high school drop out.

Yep. Rittenhouse is drop out who idolized the police. He has no remorse.

What we know about accused Kenosha gunman Kyle Rittenhouse

Kyle Rittenhouse, the baby-face teenage vigilante charged over the deadly Kenosha shootings, was a bullied high school dropout with two all-consuming fixations — cops and guns. The 17-year-ol…

nypost.com

Excerpt:

Rittenhouse also ran afoul of the law last week — getting a speeding ticket and a citation for driving without a license in Kenosha, the report said.

As well as a police fan, he appeared to support President Trump, and posted to social media images of his front-row view at a Trump rally in Des Moines.

SEE ALSO
Joseph 'JoJo' Rosenbaum
3 victims in deadly Kenosha shootings identified
“We’re not responsible for the private conduct of people at our rallies any more than … all the crazy people who have been involved with the Obama/Biden campaigns,” Trump’s spokeswoman, Kellyanne Conway, told reporters.

Rittenhouse is being held at a Lake County juvenile detention facility pending a hearing on his potential extradition to Wisconsin, according to the sheriff’s office.

He was assigned a public defender in Illinois for a hearing Friday on his transfer to Wisconsin. The public defender’s office had no comment.

Under Wisconsin law, anyone 17 or older is treated as an adult in the criminal justice system.

 

[Turtlesoup]

Take your racist crap to parler.

Under all laws, you can't provoke a confrontation then claim self defense if you get attacked.

He provoked the criminals to attack by what? Being there? The kid had every right to be there, had ever right to defend the property and city, had every right to walk down the street. Under you defination, a woman walking down the street and attacked by a rapist, or a kid walking down the street given the killed Pedo's background, are asking for trouble for daring to be out where they could be seen.

 

[Turtlesoup]

I think you don't understand what my position is here.

Yes I know self-defense laws. When I was younger I was trained to a black belt where at that point, I knew five ways to kill a man in four moves or less.
I took our CCW course, passed the test and range.

I know self-defense, and what I was taught in self-defense is that if you enter a violent situation which this was, anything after that point is your fault. You use self-defense when you are attacked through no fault of your own.

So to me it doesn't matter if Rittenhouse was attacked, if he attacked somebody else, names called, why he was there is all irrelevant to me. What my issue is that he went there to start trouble. After that, he's responsible for any trouble he caused especially murder.

Rittenhouse had a right to defend the city and the business...he had the right to be where he wanted. The criminals attacked him and were solely at fault. We don't need a nation of pussies who hide in corners from the bad guys---

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

The families of the criminals have no bearing and are not out---their criminal family attacked a kid, and got shot in self defense. If they want justice---they need to take it up with their criminal family member. Justice was served was they were shot- Rittenhouse should be able to sue the criminals estate for pain caused him.

So if one of your kids turns out to go the wrong way in life and ends up killed, you deserve no satisfaction for the person(s) that killed him?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Rittenhouse had a right to defend the city and the business...he had the right to be where he wanted. The criminals attacked him and were solely at fault. We don't need a nation of pussies who hide in corners from the bad guys---

He did not have the right to defend the city and businesses unless he was a police officer for that city. For crying out loud he didn't even live in the state. When did vigilantism become legal in this country?

My state adopted the Stand Your Ground law, but prior to that, if somebody was screaming at me and I didn't turn around and get away from him, but used my gun instead, I would end up in jail for murder. Why? Because in our state you had a duty to retreat. You must (by law) remove yourself from any potential violent situation. Now, STG changed that, but if I seen some gang members in front of my house getting ready to brawl, and I went out there with my gun where several of them tried to attack me and I killed them, that's not self-defense. Why? Because I left my place of safety and deliberately inserted myself into a violent situation that had zero to do with me.

 

[2aguy]

So if one of your kids turns out to go the wrong way in life and ends up killed, you deserve no satisfaction for the person(s) that killed him?

It wasn't murder, it was self defense......you pretend that the violent attacks on Rittenhouse played no part in what happened.

Rittenhouse did not approach any of them...in fact, in each case, he was moving away from them.......that, in and of itself, makes him the one with the claim of self defense......they pursued him, the first guy cornered him after earlier threatening to kill him.....

 

[ColonelAngus]

It's a political trial where one side of politics renders unequal justice based on party affilliation.

Just awful.

These sick MFers would have a parade if Kyle got the chair.

 

[surada]

Rittenhouse had a right to defend the city and the business...he had the right to be where he wanted. The criminals attacked him and were solely at fault. We don't need a nation of pussies who hide in corners from the bad guys---

He wasn't an EMT..He was a High School drop out.

What we know about accused Kenosha gunman Kyle Rittenhouse

Kyle Rittenhouse, the baby-face teenage vigilante charged over the deadly Kenosha shootings, was a bullied high school dropout with two all-consuming fixations — cops and guns. The 17-year-ol…

nypost.com

 

[2aguy]

He did not have the right to defend the city and businesses unless he was a police officer for that city. For crying out loud he didn't even live in the state. When did vigilantism become legal in this country?

My state adopted the Stand Your Ground law, but prior to that, if somebody was screaming at me and I didn't turn around and get away from him, but used my gun instead, I would end up in jail for murder. Why? Because in our state you had a duty to retreat. You must (by law) remove yourself from any potential violent situation. Now, STG changed that, but if I seen some gang members in front of my house getting ready to brawl, and I went out there with my gun where several of them tried to attack me and I killed them, that's not self-defense. Why? Because I left my place of safety and deliberately inserted myself into a violent situation that had zero to do with me.

At the time he was attacked he wasn't doing anything to anyone.....he was moving away from the 3 violent criminals. He wasn't standing his ground, he moved in the opposite direction of those 3 guys, and they followed him, which takes away any claims they have to any lawful actions...

He wasn't engaged in vigilantism at the time of the attack...what about that do you not understand.....

He did not approach them, he did not engage them, he did not talk to them, he was moving away from them and they followed him....he was then cornered by the first felon...who then attacked him....

Nothing you say about this case is even remotely accurate...nothing Rittenhouse did prompted the attacks against him..

 

[ColonelAngus]

Do you have me on iggy or something?

Are you a hot whore model?

Then no.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

It wasn't murder, it was self defense......you pretend that the violent attacks on Rittenhouse played no part in what happened.

As I already stated, once you attend a violent situation armed and use your gun, it's your fault because you went there for trouble. It doesn't matter who attacked who or who said what. If you didn't go there to get into trouble, those two people would likely be alive today.

 

[dudmuck]

Rittenhouse had a right to defend the city and the business...he had the right to be where he wanted. The criminals attacked him and were solely at fault. We don't need a nation of pussies who hide in corners from the bad guys---

gun illegally obtained.
There isnt anything that can be legally done with that weapon.
especially taking that weapon out of state.

 

[2aguy]

He did not have the right to defend the city and businesses unless he was a police officer for that city. For crying out loud he didn't even live in the state. When did vigilantism become legal in this country?

My state adopted the Stand Your Ground law, but prior to that, if somebody was screaming at me and I didn't turn around and get away from him, but used my gun instead, I would end up in jail for murder. Why? Because in our state you had a duty to retreat. You must (by law) remove yourself from any potential violent situation. Now, STG changed that, but if I seen some gang members in front of my house getting ready to brawl, and I went out there with my gun where several of them tried to attack me and I killed them, that's not self-defense. Why? Because I left my place of safety and deliberately inserted myself into a violent situation that had zero to do with me.

Because in our state you had a duty to retreat. You must (by law) remove yourself from any potential violent situation.

This doesn't even apply..........Rittenhouse did not know he was under threat, until he looked back and saw the first felon chasing him.....he was running away from the location of the 3 guys in order to deal with a dumpster fire.......when the first attack happened, the witness stated he was cornered by the felon...who then attacked him.

The next two felons chased him.......he was actually retreating from the scene...do you not understand that?

He was doing what your quote stated he should do......he was knocked to the ground as he was retreating, then attacked with a deadly weapon, kicked by another attacker and had a gun pointed at him...