Kyle Rittenhouse

[freyasman]

You don't get to try to murder a kid for defending himself and then lie and call him an "active shooter".

True. But I think the kid will have a hard time establishing self-defense in court. His future relies on it, though.

I think he's got everything he needs on all the videos.
He might get some misdemeanor gun charge but so what?

 

[JohnDB]

You don't get to try to murder a kid for defending himself and then lie and call him an "active shooter".

True. But I think the kid will have a hard time establishing self-defense in court. His future relies on it, though.

I think he's got everything he needs on all the videos.
He might get some misdemeanor gun charge but so what?

Kyle was attacked with a deadly weapon. (Rock in grocery bag)

And so even the "misdemeanor" gun charge likely won't stick either. Especially since it's part of the prosecutor's case....

 

[freyasman]

So trying to save a city from destruction is in your eyes a "bad thing"

Correct, when the effort is 100% comprised of a vigilante with an illegal firearm, and "saving the city from destruction" is embarrassing, false hyperbole that, if believed in this case, shows paranoid delusion on the part of the actor.

I am calling stupid, stupid. And immoral, immoral. And vigliantiism illegal, and illegal possession of a firearm, illegal. Is this the point where you run into a brick wall and start talking about me? I have a fan club you can join.

You got some foam at the corner of your mouth.

Ha, called that one. Need the link to my fan club, son?

Need a reference to a shrink? Maybe they can prescribe you something that will help you engage with reality a little better.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

You're a statist who doesn't believe anything is legitimate unless it is done by the "authorities".

And you're an anarchist that wants to be able to watch cosplayers in their little princess soldier dresses kill protestors.

Now we know what we think of each other. Think it will matter in court? Doubtful.

 

[freyasman]

There are 2 guys in the US that are recognized as being subject matter experts on lawful self defense; Massad Ayoob, and Andrew Branca.

I am pretty sure there are more than two. I bet there are more like thousands. And perhaps finding the opinion of one who is not self-promoting his own practice would be a better idea. This is why we have arguments and evidence in court. Reiterating an opinion over and over is not really support for it. Those arguments will have to successfully be made in a court of law. And I don't see any good arguments, there. I see a series of claims; the same claims you have already repeated over and over. That is not an argument.

What I see there is an opening statement from an attorney. We already know the stances of the two sides in this case. No need to rehash them.

You did not read that...... you didn't even read half of it yet.
You are just dismissing it all out of hand because you don't like what the lawyer has to say.




You guys who want this kid punished are doing so out of spite and fear, and you don't give a shit about facts. That's evil and it makes you all way more dangerous a disease in our society than this bullshit "pandemic".

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

I'll help you out---3 adult men are out burning down the city and attacking a child all...

Haha, think the defense will get away with saying that without having evidence to support it? Doubtful.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

You did not read that...... you didn't even read half of it yet.

It was like 2 paragraphs. I read it. Most likely you did not, as is the style of all of the white wingers on this board. The next time one of you actually reads your own link might be the first.

 

[freyasman]

Not sure who you think you're fooling with this dog and pony show, but you want mobs to have carte blanche, and you want anyone who refuses to let themselves be run over by the mob, be run over by a legal system you are weaponizing against them, because you don't recognize the authority inherent in every man to defend himself and his property.

As if this is an accurate or even ballpark description of a child traveling out of State with an illegal gun to seek out protestors. You embarrass yourself.

You're not embarrassed by your bloodlust to see a young man thrown in a cage for life for not being willing to lay down and die?

You're not embarrassed by that?





You ought to be.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

You're not embarrassed by your bloodlust to see a young man thrown in a cage for life for not being willing to lay down and die?

I dont want that. I don't want tge poor child to go to jail for life. I do think he should be convicted of a serious crime, though.

Again, part of me feels bad for the poor child, even though he is a moron. He knew not the seriousness of what he was doing. His poor, stunted little mind was warped by being bombarded with pseudopatriotic white nationalist sentiments.

Were he older, i would have less sympathy. But 17 year olds are basically mildly retarded.

 

[freyasman]

You did not read that...... you didn't even read half of it yet.

It was like 2 paragraphs. I read it. Most likely you did not, as is the style of all of the white wingers on this board. The next time one of you actually reads your own link might be the first.

Read the linked article.

(I don't know why I bother actually..... you aren't going to heed any of it. You're going to dismiss it all because it completely contradicts your thoughts on the subject.)

 

[Muhammed]

Of course you're simply lying again, as usual.

Then use your big boy words and say why.

Only you know for sure why you are lying.

But generally people with very low intelligence such as yourself lie all the time. It's one of the reasons that you are so stupid in the first place.

 

[Muhammed]

But 17 year olds are basically mildly retarded.

Pot meet kettle.

 

[freyasman]

 

[Faun]

You clowns want to make Kyle a hero
Yet
You want to vilify the shooter of insurrectionist and traitor Ashli

I know nothing about the second case you are discussing and in truth it's a red herring.

Kyle is not a hero...far from it. He isn't exactly the brightest bulb on the tree either
BUT
He was trying to do the right thing in the face of an impossible situation. His stupidity allowed him to believe that he could do something that would be helpful that evening...he had no idea that he would run into a mob of felons wanting to commit more felonies....and he didn't think that extinguishing a dumpster fire would have caused the ire of this mob of felons. (Another mistake)

He is just a young man who was trying to do the right thing... crucifying him for it is wrong. Same with trying to make a hero out of him.
His life is pretty much toast after this...and he doesn't have the requisite skill set to do much of any trade at this point. I think that this is plenty of punishment at this point. Sitting in a jail cell for the rest of his life at taxpayer expense isn't going to do anything beneficial for anyone.

And he wanted to do the right thing by starting off committing a crime himself by obtaining and carrying a firearm illegally? That's how people do the right thing? By committing crimes?

 

[Faun]

He was trying to do the right thing in the face of an impossible situation.

An impossible situation he sought out and created by travelling to another state with an illegal firearm and confronting protestors.

He is just a young man who was trying to do the right thing...

So was Charlie Manson. Just ask him. He was trying to save our society from the pigs.

Not comparing Rittenhouse to Manson in any other way, just saying that people can twist all manner of actions into "trying to do the right thing" One might argue another view, that he was trying to exact vigilante justice using an illegal firearm. that would be "trying to do the wrong thing".

So trying to save a city from destruction is in your eyes a "bad thing" and criminally prosecuting all who do so is a "good thing"....

Got it.... you call evil good and good evil. Yeah....we Christians got a name for that too.

Saving cities isn't his job.

 

[Faun]

I can't seem to find any definite link to whether he is a felon or not; can you?

Oh, well then, you cant claim he was a felon in illegal possession of a firearm, can you?. But Rittenhouse being there illegally and possessing a gun illegally are facts we do know.

So, starting to understand why he was the only one charged?

My claims don't dictate the reality of the universe? Oh my, what an excellent point!

"So, starting to understand why he was the only one charged?"
Nope.
When is running at someone and pointing a pistol at them not assault? Or aggravated assault?
If someone does that to a cop, what happens to them? Are they charged with a crime, if they survive?





But he hasn't been charged with anything....... why is that?

For one thing, he wasn't pointing a pistol at him...

So he was just showing it to him when he ran up then?

He held the gun I'm a ready position as he approached. When he saw Huber get shot, he put his hands up to signal surrender, then he lunged at Rittenhouse who then shot him. At no time did he point his gun at Rittenhouse.

Bullshit.
He was part of a mob attacking a kid for defending himself, and he was coming at him with a gun.



Look, quit wasting my time..... you believe this kid should rot in prison for refusing to be killed by a violent mob. That tells us all how evil you are. I don't have to convince you of anything.... you're one of the bad guys.

The guy did not commit a felony. That's why he wasn't charged. You should deal with that.

And the kid had no business being there illegally in possession of a gun, which he himself knew was a crime.

You're a liar and a bad person and I don't care what you think.

 

[Faun]

The guy who got his bicep shot off was a felon with a handgun, actively attacking someone with it, when he was shot

False. Sorry. Maybe you didnt hear, but that wasnt true, and he had a perfectly legal license to carry.

Got anything else? I suppose not, since your entire diatribe rested on that error.

Really? I'd like a link to that.

Don't much care though, because I have stated more than once that I don't have any problem with felons having guns....... attacking someone with it, is still a crime though.
And he did.
On video.
And he hasn't been charged.



Why do you suppose that is, if not politics?
What other reason is there?

Still waiting.... what felony did he commit...?

Other than aggravated assault with a firearm on the night in question, which it seems he won't be charged with, I can't find anything...... so I guess I was wrong about him being a convicted felon.
Mea culpa


You guys should all hire him as a babysitter, since he is clearly a man of sterling character, lol.

Uh, you claimed Grosskreutz is a felon.

And it wasn't assault as he never pointed the gun at Rittenhouse.

I did, as all the news stories claimed he was.
I guess that was wrong.

He did however, attack Rittenhouse with a pistol. And got shot for it, as he should have.
Why do you object to that?
Other than the political affiliations of the parties in question, that is?

I object because Grosskreutz had a right to try to disarm an active shooter. In retrospect, Grosskreutz should have just shot Rittenhouse when he had the chance. A missed opportunity he himself regrets not taking.

No he didn't.

Give it up already.... you're just making up lies to support the mob.
And you are just as evil as they are.

You're a fucking nut. People have a right to disarm an active shooter.

You don't get to try to murder a kid for defending himself and then lie and call him an "active shooter".



You're a really horrible person....... how did your mom carry you for 9 months? I would think something as toxic as you inside her would have been fatal.

LOL

WTF?? In the previous post, you said you don't care what I think. So why are you still responding to posts from someone if you really don't care what they think?

At any rate, they were trying to disarm him as he was an active shooter. Not the brightest thing in the world to attempt but I suppose mob mentality can lead folks to make bad decisions. If they wanted to murder him, someone would have shot him. Like the guy he shot in the arm; who was armed himself.

As far as my mom -- she carried me the same way yours carried you. Ironic, huh?

 

[Faun]

freyasman

Another fun little fact:

The little lie the child killer told about going there to provide "medical services" was a lie.

Ironically, the guy whose arm he shot is a trained medic who was there providing medical services to injured people.

It's pretty clear with are dealing with two levels of quality of people, here.

Ironically the third guy that Kyle shot was also another violent druggy and convicted Criminal. Kyle shot 3 criminals that day. The child deserves a medal.

LOL

No worries -- he'll be getting lots of "medals" where he's going for about the next 40 years. He learn to like them.

 

[Faun]

Why is he the only one being prosecuted?

I am not your assistant. Make your points.

Maybe it's because he is the only one who harmed and killed people? Good luck.

And maybe it's for political reasons.
The state wants a monopoly on force, and always seeks to punish anyone who uses force without their okay, whether justified or not.
If it is demonstrated that a riot can be put down by just a few men with rifles, then why do we need the state, then?
Why then, do we need police and DA's and judges and all the rest?



“The rifle itself has no moral stature, since it has no will of its own. Naturally, it may be used by evil men for evil purposes, but there are more good men than evil, and while the latter cannot be persuaded to the path of righteousness by propaganda, they can certainly be corrected by good men with rifles.” ― Jeff Cooper, Art of the Rifle

So you just better hope there are more “good men” with rifles than idiotic wannabes like Rittenhouse who shot and killed two unarmed men.

At least those employed by the state know law and can be held accountable. Vigilantes? Not so much. History is full of bad examp,es.

Did you really just state that agents of the state are held accountable for misconduct?

Wow........

Wow is right.

I said CAN BE. The system isn’t perfect but it is a hell of a lot better than a bunch vigilantes taking it upon themselves to be judge, jury and executioner.

Is it?

You sure about that?

Because I'm not, and based on the last year's worth of riots, neither are a lot of other folks.

Yup. I am sure of that.

Ahmaud Arbery’s alleged killer was vigilante relied upon by cops: report

A Georgia cop anointed the man charged with killing unarmed jogger Ahmaud Arbery as an unofficial neighborhood watchdog, according to a new report. “Your neighbor … is Greg McMichael. Greg is…

nypost.com

And these two winners:

Were DEms well within their rights to get their guns and defend their homes from the BLM and anti-fa criminals. Fucking dem and their brown shirts are abusing the criminal system to harass the law abidding in favor of the violent criminal druggies.

Poor, baby.

 

[Correll]

A man being charged as an adult, facing adult time in an adult prison, being held to a law that only criminalizes his behavior because he was a child at the time,

is complete bullshit. Only an asshole would support that.