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

[Soupnazi630]

I disagree.
Everyone trained is being illegally told to shoot until the threat stops.
Threat elimination is not legal.
If it were legal, then every cop would be shot and killed instantly because the whole point of police is that they are a lethal threat.
It is only legal to shoot the minimum in order to reduce the risk to a reasonable level, and in reality a warning shot is almost always all that is needed.
The way police are trained these days are under military rules of engagement, which are totally illegal for police.

Firing ANY shot into Rosenbaum was extremely excessive.
Rittenhouse was required to first fire a warning shot.
Only if Rosenbaum was armed and about to fire, could Rittenhouse have legally aimed at Rosenbaum, and even then, at such close range, a single shot, aimed at extremities, is all that would have been legal.
The multiple burst the police are currently trained to do, is completely and entirely illegal, and any cop from 30 years ago will verify that.

You can not fire simply by being threatened.
There has to be an imminent deadly threat from a lethal weapon.

No they are not that is precisely and legally how anyone trained to shoot in self defense ifs trained and it is not illegal.

Warning shots are not legal and never reasonable.

Shooting at Rosenbaum was reasonable and legal.

 

[progressive hunter]

I disagree.
Everyone trained is being illegally told to shoot until the threat stops.
Threat elimination is not legal.
If it were legal, then every cop would be shot and killed instantly because the whole point of police is that they are a lethal threat.
It is only legal to shoot the minimum in order to reduce the risk to a reasonable level, and in reality a warning shot is almost always all that is needed.
The way police are trained these days are under military rules of engagement, which are totally illegal for police.

Firing ANY shot into Rosenbaum was extremely excessive.
Rittenhouse was required to first fire a warning shot.
Only if Rosenbaum was armed and about to fire, could Rittenhouse have legally aimed at Rosenbaum, and even then, at such close range, a single shot, aimed at extremities, is all that would have been legal.
The multiple burst the police are currently trained to do, is completely and entirely illegal, and any cop from 30 years ago will verify that.

You can not fire simply by being threatened.
There has to be an imminent deadly threat from a lethal weapon.

you forgot your link,,,

 

[Soupnazi630]

LOLOLOL

You're a fucking nut. Provable by every post you make. How does one shoot someone in the back if they're face to face?

Rittenhouse did njot shoot him in the back

 

[Faun]

Nope so syas a person smarter than you with absolute evidence proving you wrong

Sorry to be the one to break the bad news to ya, but not really... your hallucinations are not "absolute evidence."

 

[Flash]

What a blood bath!

Queerboi Grosskreutz admitted to lying to the police.

 

[Soupnazi630]

Sorry to be the one to break the bad news to ya, but not really... your hallucinations are not "absolute evidence."

I am stating fact backed by evidence you are repeating a proven lie/

Grow the fuck up and learn to admit when you are wrong boy

 

[Faun]

Or the erson who was behind him and began firing a weapon BEFORE Rittenhouse fired which is also clearly shown on video,

Either way the video proves beyond question that Rittenhouse shot him while facing him.

Fucking moron, Ziminski fired randomly into the air. You're even more retarded than before if you think Ziminski's random shot miraculously fell into Rosenbaum's back; and not from the fucker who shot him at him 4 times from inches away.

 

[Faun]

so kyle didnt shoot him in the back as you claim,,

Of course he did.

 

[Flash]

The Prosecution's case defined in one picture:

 

[Faun]

I am stating fact backed by evidence you are repeating a proven lie/

Grow the fuck up and learn to admit when you are wrong boy

Nope, you're lying.

Watch this....

I cited an image of Rosenbaum shot in the back.

I cited the charging document again Rittenhouse quoting the autopsy stating Rosenbaum was shot in the back.

You cited you.

 

[Flash]

"That's a photo of you, yes?"

"That looks like my bicep being vaporized"

"And it's being vaporized because you're point your gun directly at him, yes?"

"Yes"

"It wasn't until you pointed your gun at him, advanced on him, that he fired?"

"That's correct"

Dude just sunk the case

 

[westwall]

For what reason?

Misdemeanor gun crime. Duh.

At least try and make an effort to be acquainted with facts of the case, mkaaaay.

 

[Soupnazi630]

Fucking moron, Ziminski fired randomly into the air. You're even more retarded than before if you think Ziminski's random shot miraculously fell into Rosenbaum's back; and not from the fucker who shot him at him 4 times from inches away.

No he did not fire randomly into the air he fired generally in the direction of Rittenhouse and Rosenbaum

 

[Soupnazi630]

Nope, you're lying.

Watch this....

I cited an image of Rosenbaum shot in the back.

I cited the charging document again Rittenhouse quoting the autopsy stating Rosenbaum was shot in the back.

You cited you.

You coted an image of a bullet wound of unknown origin

The video proves Rosenbaum was facing Rittenhouse when he was shot.

I cited that which proves you wrong

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

I disagree.
Everyone trained is being illegally told to shoot until the threat stops.
Threat elimination is not legal.

threat stops =/= person is dead

The threat is the action of the person threatening. When that action stops, the threat has stopped. Unfortunately, many times that does not happen until the assailant is dead.

If it were legal, then every cop would be shot and killed instantly because the whole point of police is that they are a lethal threat.
It is only legal to shoot the minimum in order to reduce the risk to a reasonable level, and in reality a warning shot is almost always all that is needed.
The way police are trained these days are under military rules of engagement, which are totally illegal for police.

You are conflating "threat" with "assailant."

Threat is the actions of the assailant. When that stops, the shooting stops.

That is perfectly legal and proper.

Firing ANY shot into Rosenbaum was extremely excessive.
Rittenhouse was required to first fire a warning shot.
Only if Rosenbaum was armed and about to fire, could Rittenhouse have legally aimed at Rosenbaum, and even then, at such close range, a single shot, aimed at extremities, is all that would have been legal.
The multiple burst the police are currently trained to do, is completely and entirely illegal, and any cop from 30 years ago will verify that.

Warning shots are bullshit. That's a good way to get killed.

I suppose you and I will agree to disagree about whether Rosenbaum trying to take Rittenhouse's rifle warranted deadly force. I believe the consequences of NOT firing INTO Rosenbaum are way too dire. Had Rittenhouse not shot Rosenbaum, Rittenhouse would most likely be dead, killed with his own weapon. (See also, McMichaels)

What legal authority are you relying on when you say being trained to fire multiple bursts is illegal?

You can not fire simply by being threatened.
There has to be an imminent deadly threat from a lethal weapon.

You obviously have no training.

Are you familiar with the 21-foot rule?

 

[Flash]

This kills the Prosecution's case:

 

[westwall]

Again, loon...

Dr. Kelley of the Milwaukee Medical Examiner’s Office conducted an autopsy on Joseph Rosenbaum. Dr. Kelley indicated that Rosenbaum had a gunshot wound to the right groin which fractured his pelvis, a gunshot wound to the back which perforated his right lung and liver, a gunshot wound to the left hand, a superficial gunshot wound to his lateral left thigh, and a graze gunshot wound to the right side of his forehead.​

There was a shot prior to Kyle airing out your pedo friend. Perhaps that is the shot that killed your pedo friend.

He clearly wasn't liked by very many people.

 

[progressive hunter]

Of course he did.

a shot may have hit him in the back but kyle didnt shoot him in the back the way you are claiming,,

 

[westwall]

With the last shot hitting Rosenbaum in the back.

That is a much larger hole than a 5.56 will make. Looks like your pedo friend got shot by someone else too.

 

[jc456]

I disagree.
Everyone trained is being illegally told to shoot until the threat stops.
Threat elimination is not legal.
If it were legal, then every cop would be shot and killed instantly because the whole point of police is that they are a lethal threat.
It is only legal to shoot the minimum in order to reduce the risk to a reasonable level, and in reality a warning shot is almost always all that is needed.
The way police are trained these days are under military rules of engagement, which are totally illegal for police.

Firing ANY shot into Rosenbaum was extremely excessive.
Rittenhouse was required to first fire a warning shot.
Only if Rosenbaum was armed and about to fire, could Rittenhouse have legally aimed at Rosenbaum, and even then, at such close range, a single shot, aimed at extremities, is all that would have been legal.
The multiple burst the police are currently trained to do, is completely and entirely illegal, and any cop from 30 years ago will verify that.

You can not fire simply by being threatened.
There has to be an imminent deadly threat from a lethal weapon.

stay on the drugs bub.