Milwaukee, WI man arrested for menacing BLM mob with a gun

[Faun]

Watch all of the videos in the main link at the bottom of the OP, then tell me who was doing the menacing.



This one ^^^^^^ shows what was going on prior to the arrival of the police. Pay close attention to the audio. The man is clearly sitting behind a closed window handling a pump action shotgun. The audio is both deceptive and revealing.

One protester says that he's pointing a shotgun "out the window"...

Listen near the end where the man with the megaphone is warning the man in house...(from about 1:08 to the end)...about "what is out here pointing at you"...

...and then at the very end seeming to ask the crowd around him, "Is this a white man?"

Home - www.independentsentinel.com

Home

www.independentsentinel.com

The crowd was. Wisconsin has a castle doctrine so I don't understand why the guy in the house was arrested while there were people protesting on his property?

BBbbut you also failed to understand that Kyle Rittenhouse was acting in self defense, right?


SAME reason this guy was arrested for clearly acting within his rights.


Run amok mayors , prosecutors and police.

^^^ a moron who doesn't understand the castle doctrine.

Obvious distinctions of Stand your Ground and Castle Doctrine in play. BOTH were disrespected. For a common reason over your empty head, fuckbubble.

^^^ a moron who doesn't understand Wisconsin isn't a stand your ground state.

Interesting distinction. Did you happen to stay at a Holiday Inn Express full of lawyers?

Wisconsin law allows deadly force in self-defense in the limited circumstances where the person defending themselves “reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm” to their person. Importantly, some states impose a duty to retreat from a conflict, but Wisconsin is not among them.​

​

Wisconsin Court Clarifies New Self-Defense Rule

A Wisconsin court's recent ruling could affect defendants who claim self-defense when facing criminal charges. Call a Milwaukee defense lawyer to learn more.

www.grgblaw.com

Please edify us as to the distinction. What would "stand your ground", per se, offer Kyle as a defense that Wisconsin law lacks?

Are you one of those who thinks the ANIFA scum were chasing Kyle to " disarm " him to prevent further shooting?



View attachment 389439

LOL

You should have stayed in your safe space.

• States That Have Stand Your Ground Laws

​

[among the states NOT listed: Wisconsin]​

• Is Wisconsin a Stand Your Ground State?

​

Wisconsin does not have a stand your ground law. ​

• Stand Your Ground – The Law

​

Wisconsin does not have a stand your ground law.​

• Wisconsin Self-Defense Laws

​

Wisconsin does not have a "stand your ground" law.​

• 939.48 Self-defense and defense of others

​

(ar) If an actor intentionally used force that was intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm, the court may not consider whether the actor had an opportunity to flee or retreat before he or she used force and shall presume that the actor reasonably believed that the force was necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself if the actor makes such a claim under sub. (1) and either of the following applies:​

​

1. The person against whom the force was used was in the process of unlawfully and forcibly entering the actor's dwelling, motor vehicle, or place of business, the actor was present in the dwelling, motor vehicle, or place of business, and the actor knew or reasonably believed that an unlawful and forcible entry was occurring.​

​

2. The person against whom the force was used was in the actor's dwelling, motor vehicle, or place of business after unlawfully and forcibly entering it, the actor was present in the dwelling, motor vehicle, or place of business, and the actor knew or reasonably believed that the person had unlawfully and forcibly entered the dwelling, motor vehicle, or place of business.​

​

[Stand your ground, applies only to "an actor's dwelling, motor vehicle, or place of business," i.e., castle doctrine.]​

And what was the point of the SPAM you posted ? Since you conceded that there is NO defense available in a Stand your Ground state that Kyle is not entitled to in Wisconsin.



WHAT WAS YOUR POINT other than to show all what an insufferable asshole you are ?

Again, you're the one who started talking about stand your ground in Wisconsin. A state that is not a stand your ground state. I merely pounded you into the sand over your denials of that.

 

[Otium]

I believe none. But that opinion depends on the ballistics tests. If they show he shot Rosenbaum 4 times, that's murder, not self defense. That's in Wisconsin or Florida. And has nothing to do with a duty to retreat, which he attempted.

None?

So after all that blabbering BULLSHIT deflection and obfuscation and SPAMMING , you admit that there is NO material distinction in the lack of a per se " Stand your Ground" law and Wisconsin's self defenses available to Kyle" ?

Are you serious? Then what was your point?


What is the matter with you? Seriously. What an obnoxious prick you are.

And the number of times one shoots to ELIMINATE a lethal threat is not germane to anything other than the extent of the threat , to idiots who have no understanding of what a gun is or how terminal ballistics operate. If you fail to hit a vital organ? It may take long enough for a drugged up human to fall and certainly would leave them sufficient time to shoot you or knife you. etc.


" Why did he have to shoot the man 7 times" is a question born of total ignorance. Easy explained to a jury unless they are all of your intellect.

Same with the asshole recently shot and paralyzed. Shot 7 times Not dead. After the first 3 he could easily and turned and fired on police.


Easy to show a jury video of police shooting a suspect multiple times and the suspect continuing his attack. It is not that unusual. In fact, the more shots fired the more fear was likely present in the shooter.

This is gonna be fun . . .

"None? So after all that blabbering BULLSHIT deflection and obfuscation and SPAMMING , you admit that there is NO material distinction in the lack of a per se " Stand your Ground" law and Wisconsin's self defenses available to Kyle" ? Are you serious? Then what was your point?"

I never said Rittenhouse's defense had anything to do with stand your ground. And why would I since Rittenhouse's defense is not a stand your ground case. Who knows from where you pulled that demented gem? As I pointed out already, but you can't understand, it doesn't matter if Rittenhouse had a duty to retreat or not, he tried to retreat. He's not going to be claiming stand your ground, which would fail him had he not run and tried that defense is again, Wisconsin is not a stand your ground state. And you clearly still don't know the difference between a stand your ground state and a non-stand your ground state.

"And the number of times one shoots to ELIMINATE a lethal threat is not germane to anything other than the extent of the threat "

I never said the number of shots matters. You're just not bright enough to understand what I said. That's on you, not me. What I did say is that the level of force allowed is only enough to stop a threat of death or great bodily harm. If a firearm is used in self defense, that could be one shot or it could be any number of shots. In Rittenhouse's case, his first shot sent Rosenbaum down. Maybe a second shot was reasonable. But one of the shots, possibly the fatal shot, was to Rosenbaum's back. How the fuck can you shoot someone in the back and claim self defense?

"Why did he have to shoot the man 7 times" is a question born of total ignorance. Easy explained to a jury unless they are all of your intellect."

Same as above, I never said the number of shots needed to stop a threat matters. I said you can't keep shooting someone after you've neutralized the threat.

"Easy to show a jury video of police shooting a suspect multiple times and the suspect continuing his attack. It is not that unusual. In fact, the more shots fired the more fear was likely present in the shooter."

Same as above, I never said the number of shots needed to stop a threat matters. I said you can't keep shooting someone after you've neutralized the threat. It's a pity you're so flaming retarded that you keep repeating the same mistake over and over and over.

FAUN: "I never said the number of shots matters."​

I am done with you as you are a demonstrable LIAR. THIS is what you just said:

FAUN : " If they show he shot Rosenbaum 4 times, that's murder, not self defense."​

​

​

Sounds like you just said the number of shots mattered.

 

[Faun]

I believe none. But that opinion depends on the ballistics tests. If they show he shot Rosenbaum 4 times, that's murder, not self defense. That's in Wisconsin or Florida. And has nothing to do with a duty to retreat, which he attempted.

None?

So after all that blabbering BULLSHIT deflection and obfuscation and SPAMMING , you admit that there is NO material distinction in the lack of a per se " Stand your Ground" law and Wisconsin's self defenses available to Kyle" ?

Are you serious? Then what was your point?


What is the matter with you? Seriously. What an obnoxious prick you are.

And the number of times one shoots to ELIMINATE a lethal threat is not germane to anything other than the extent of the threat , to idiots who have no understanding of what a gun is or how terminal ballistics operate. If you fail to hit a vital organ? It may take long enough for a drugged up human to fall and certainly would leave them sufficient time to shoot you or knife you. etc.


" Why did he have to shoot the man 7 times" is a question born of total ignorance. Easy explained to a jury unless they are all of your intellect.

Same with the asshole recently shot and paralyzed. Shot 7 times Not dead. After the first 3 he could easily and turned and fired on police.


Easy to show a jury video of police shooting a suspect multiple times and the suspect continuing his attack. It is not that unusual. In fact, the more shots fired the more fear was likely present in the shooter.

This is gonna be fun . . .

"None? So after all that blabbering BULLSHIT deflection and obfuscation and SPAMMING , you admit that there is NO material distinction in the lack of a per se " Stand your Ground" law and Wisconsin's self defenses available to Kyle" ? Are you serious? Then what was your point?"

I never said Rittenhouse's defense had anything to do with stand your ground. And why would I since Rittenhouse's defense is not a stand your ground case. Who knows from where you pulled that demented gem? As I pointed out already, but you can't understand, it doesn't matter if Rittenhouse had a duty to retreat or not, he tried to retreat. He's not going to be claiming stand your ground, which would fail him had he not run and tried that defense is again, Wisconsin is not a stand your ground state. And you clearly still don't know the difference between a stand your ground state and a non-stand your ground state.

"And the number of times one shoots to ELIMINATE a lethal threat is not germane to anything other than the extent of the threat "

I never said the number of shots matters. You're just not bright enough to understand what I said. That's on you, not me. What I did say is that the level of force allowed is only enough to stop a threat of death or great bodily harm. If a firearm is used in self defense, that could be one shot or it could be any number of shots. In Rittenhouse's case, his first shot sent Rosenbaum down. Maybe a second shot was reasonable. But one of the shots, possibly the fatal shot, was to Rosenbaum's back. How the fuck can you shoot someone in the back and claim self defense?

"Why did he have to shoot the man 7 times" is a question born of total ignorance. Easy explained to a jury unless they are all of your intellect."

Same as above, I never said the number of shots needed to stop a threat matters. I said you can't keep shooting someone after you've neutralized the threat.

"Easy to show a jury video of police shooting a suspect multiple times and the suspect continuing his attack. It is not that unusual. In fact, the more shots fired the more fear was likely present in the shooter."

Same as above, I never said the number of shots needed to stop a threat matters. I said you can't keep shooting someone after you've neutralized the threat. It's a pity you're so flaming retarded that you keep repeating the same mistake over and over and over.

You redefine dumbass.

There must be a word for the type of jack ass Faun is. Argumentative for the sake of it and never , ever concedes when he is wrong. He admits that I was right , and then launches into more BULLSHIT about the number of shots fired into the ASSHOLE COMMIE #1 as determinative per se of murder vs self defense.

Like when women ask, " Why can't the police just shoot him in the leg? "

"Argumentative for the sake of it and never , ever concedes when he is wrong."

LOLOL

Now watch as I prove yet again that you're a complete moron ... Here I am, doing what you claim I never, ever do ....

I stand corrected. You're right, they declared their caliphate in 2014.

What I enjoy most about you is you never tire of me bitch-slapping you. You always come back for more.

 

[Faun]

Watch all of the videos in the main link at the bottom of the OP, then tell me who was doing the menacing.



This one ^^^^^^ shows what was going on prior to the arrival of the police. Pay close attention to the audio. The man is clearly sitting behind a closed window handling a pump action shotgun. The audio is both deceptive and revealing.

One protester says that he's pointing a shotgun "out the window"...

Listen near the end where the man with the megaphone is warning the man in house...(from about 1:08 to the end)...about "what is out here pointing at you"...

...and then at the very end seeming to ask the crowd around him, "Is this a white man?"

Home - www.independentsentinel.com

Home

www.independentsentinel.com

The crowd was. Wisconsin has a castle doctrine so I don't understand why the guy in the house was arrested while there were people protesting on his property?

BBbbut you also failed to understand that Kyle Rittenhouse was acting in self defense, right?


SAME reason this guy was arrested for clearly acting within his rights.


Run amok mayors , prosecutors and police.

^^^ a moron who doesn't understand the castle doctrine.

Obvious distinctions of Stand your Ground and Castle Doctrine in play. BOTH were disrespected. For a common reason over your empty head, fuckbubble.

^^^ a moron who doesn't understand Wisconsin isn't a stand your ground state.

SO WHAT?????? After this gem I asked you to cite the DISTINCTION and after SPAMMING the thread you conceded, "NONE".


So please , just STFU, already.

LOLOL

Seriously, 100Retards, what the fuck is wrong with you? Of course there's a distinction between these two cases, even had Rittenhouse not tried to get away. I merely said Rittenhouse's case is not a stand your ground case because he didn't try to stand his ground.

 

[Faun]

You're the one who started talking about stand your ground.

Liar.

LOLOL

Imbecile....

Here's the first mention of stand your ground in this thread....

Milwaukee, WI man arrested for menacing BLM mob with a gun

Watch all of the videos in the main link at the bottom of the OP, then tell me who was doing the menacing. This one ^^^^^^ shows what was going on prior to the arrival of the police. Pay close attention to the audio. The man is clearly sitting behind a closed window handling a pump action...

www.usmessageboard.com

Look who the poster is to see why you're an imbecile.

And my point was ceded. There is NO material distinction between " Stand your Ground" and defenses available to Kyle per Wisconsin law.

ME: SO what defense is Kyle NOT entitled to in Wisconsin that he would have in Florida, F. Lee Shitbird?

F. Lee SHitbird [ Faun] : I believe none.

And you're a moron. Had Rittenhouse attempted to stand his ground, that would fail as a defense in Wisconsin since Wisconsin is not a stand your ground state.

 

[iceberg]

I believe none. But that opinion depends on the ballistics tests. If they show he shot Rosenbaum 4 times, that's murder, not self defense. That's in Wisconsin or Florida. And has nothing to do with a duty to retreat, which he attempted.

None?

So after all that blabbering BULLSHIT deflection and obfuscation and SPAMMING , you admit that there is NO material distinction in the lack of a per se " Stand your Ground" law and Wisconsin's self defenses available to Kyle" ?

Are you serious? Then what was your point?


What is the matter with you? Seriously. What an obnoxious prick you are.

And the number of times one shoots to ELIMINATE a lethal threat is not germane to anything other than the extent of the threat , to idiots who have no understanding of what a gun is or how terminal ballistics operate. If you fail to hit a vital organ? It may take long enough for a drugged up human to fall and certainly would leave them sufficient time to shoot you or knife you. etc.


" Why did he have to shoot the man 7 times" is a question born of total ignorance. Easy explained to a jury unless they are all of your intellect.

Same with the asshole recently shot and paralyzed. Shot 7 times Not dead. After the first 3 he could easily and turned and fired on police.


Easy to show a jury video of police shooting a suspect multiple times and the suspect continuing his attack. It is not that unusual. In fact, the more shots fired the more fear was likely present in the shooter.

This is gonna be fun . . .

"None? So after all that blabbering BULLSHIT deflection and obfuscation and SPAMMING , you admit that there is NO material distinction in the lack of a per se " Stand your Ground" law and Wisconsin's self defenses available to Kyle" ? Are you serious? Then what was your point?"

I never said Rittenhouse's defense had anything to do with stand your ground. And why would I since Rittenhouse's defense is not a stand your ground case. Who knows from where you pulled that demented gem? As I pointed out already, but you can't understand, it doesn't matter if Rittenhouse had a duty to retreat or not, he tried to retreat. He's not going to be claiming stand your ground, which would fail him had he not run and tried that defense is again, Wisconsin is not a stand your ground state. And you clearly still don't know the difference between a stand your ground state and a non-stand your ground state.

"And the number of times one shoots to ELIMINATE a lethal threat is not germane to anything other than the extent of the threat "

I never said the number of shots matters. You're just not bright enough to understand what I said. That's on you, not me. What I did say is that the level of force allowed is only enough to stop a threat of death or great bodily harm. If a firearm is used in self defense, that could be one shot or it could be any number of shots. In Rittenhouse's case, his first shot sent Rosenbaum down. Maybe a second shot was reasonable. But one of the shots, possibly the fatal shot, was to Rosenbaum's back. How the fuck can you shoot someone in the back and claim self defense?

"Why did he have to shoot the man 7 times" is a question born of total ignorance. Easy explained to a jury unless they are all of your intellect."

Same as above, I never said the number of shots needed to stop a threat matters. I said you can't keep shooting someone after you've neutralized the threat.

"Easy to show a jury video of police shooting a suspect multiple times and the suspect continuing his attack. It is not that unusual. In fact, the more shots fired the more fear was likely present in the shooter."

Same as above, I never said the number of shots needed to stop a threat matters. I said you can't keep shooting someone after you've neutralized the threat. It's a pity you're so flaming retarded that you keep repeating the same mistake over and over and over.

You redefine dumbass.

There must be a word for the type of jack ass Faun is. Argumentative for the sake of it and never , ever concedes when he is wrong. He admits that I was right , and then launches into more BULLSHIT about the number of shots fired into the ASSHOLE COMMIE #1 as determinative per se of murder vs self defense.

Like when women ask, " Why can't the police just shoot him in the leg? "

There is.

Troll.

 

[Faun]

I believe none. But that opinion depends on the ballistics tests. If they show he shot Rosenbaum 4 times, that's murder, not self defense. That's in Wisconsin or Florida. And has nothing to do with a duty to retreat, which he attempted.

None?

So after all that blabbering BULLSHIT deflection and obfuscation and SPAMMING , you admit that there is NO material distinction in the lack of a per se " Stand your Ground" law and Wisconsin's self defenses available to Kyle" ?

Are you serious? Then what was your point?


What is the matter with you? Seriously. What an obnoxious prick you are.

And the number of times one shoots to ELIMINATE a lethal threat is not germane to anything other than the extent of the threat , to idiots who have no understanding of what a gun is or how terminal ballistics operate. If you fail to hit a vital organ? It may take long enough for a drugged up human to fall and certainly would leave them sufficient time to shoot you or knife you. etc.


" Why did he have to shoot the man 7 times" is a question born of total ignorance. Easy explained to a jury unless they are all of your intellect.

Same with the asshole recently shot and paralyzed. Shot 7 times Not dead. After the first 3 he could easily and turned and fired on police.


Easy to show a jury video of police shooting a suspect multiple times and the suspect continuing his attack. It is not that unusual. In fact, the more shots fired the more fear was likely present in the shooter.

This is gonna be fun . . .

"None? So after all that blabbering BULLSHIT deflection and obfuscation and SPAMMING , you admit that there is NO material distinction in the lack of a per se " Stand your Ground" law and Wisconsin's self defenses available to Kyle" ? Are you serious? Then what was your point?"

I never said Rittenhouse's defense had anything to do with stand your ground. And why would I since Rittenhouse's defense is not a stand your ground case. Who knows from where you pulled that demented gem? As I pointed out already, but you can't understand, it doesn't matter if Rittenhouse had a duty to retreat or not, he tried to retreat. He's not going to be claiming stand your ground, which would fail him had he not run and tried that defense is again, Wisconsin is not a stand your ground state. And you clearly still don't know the difference between a stand your ground state and a non-stand your ground state.

"And the number of times one shoots to ELIMINATE a lethal threat is not germane to anything other than the extent of the threat "

I never said the number of shots matters. You're just not bright enough to understand what I said. That's on you, not me. What I did say is that the level of force allowed is only enough to stop a threat of death or great bodily harm. If a firearm is used in self defense, that could be one shot or it could be any number of shots. In Rittenhouse's case, his first shot sent Rosenbaum down. Maybe a second shot was reasonable. But one of the shots, possibly the fatal shot, was to Rosenbaum's back. How the fuck can you shoot someone in the back and claim self defense?

"Why did he have to shoot the man 7 times" is a question born of total ignorance. Easy explained to a jury unless they are all of your intellect."

Same as above, I never said the number of shots needed to stop a threat matters. I said you can't keep shooting someone after you've neutralized the threat.

"Easy to show a jury video of police shooting a suspect multiple times and the suspect continuing his attack. It is not that unusual. In fact, the more shots fired the more fear was likely present in the shooter."

Same as above, I never said the number of shots needed to stop a threat matters. I said you can't keep shooting someone after you've neutralized the threat. It's a pity you're so flaming retarded that you keep repeating the same mistake over and over and over.

FAUN: "I never said the number of shots matters."​

I am done with you as you are a demonstrable LIAR. THIS is what you just said:

FAUN : " If they show he shot Rosenbaum 4 times, that's murder, not self defense."​

​

​

Sounds like you just said the number of shots mattered.

Aww, look at how dishonest you are. Here's why I said 4 shots matter in his case...

Of course the number of shots matters. If someone shoots an attacker more times than is necessary to stop the threat, it's no longer self defense, but murder. In this case, if Rittenhouse fired all 4 shots, that means one of his shots was to Rosenbaum's back. The law allows force to only stop the threat. Anything beyond that is no longer self defense.

... which is entirely consistent with what I've been saying and entirely consistent with Wisconsin law.

 

[Faun]

I believe none. But that opinion depends on the ballistics tests. If they show he shot Rosenbaum 4 times, that's murder, not self defense. That's in Wisconsin or Florida. And has nothing to do with a duty to retreat, which he attempted.

None?

So after all that blabbering BULLSHIT deflection and obfuscation and SPAMMING , you admit that there is NO material distinction in the lack of a per se " Stand your Ground" law and Wisconsin's self defenses available to Kyle" ?

Are you serious? Then what was your point?


What is the matter with you? Seriously. What an obnoxious prick you are.

And the number of times one shoots to ELIMINATE a lethal threat is not germane to anything other than the extent of the threat , to idiots who have no understanding of what a gun is or how terminal ballistics operate. If you fail to hit a vital organ? It may take long enough for a drugged up human to fall and certainly would leave them sufficient time to shoot you or knife you. etc.


" Why did he have to shoot the man 7 times" is a question born of total ignorance. Easy explained to a jury unless they are all of your intellect.

Same with the asshole recently shot and paralyzed. Shot 7 times Not dead. After the first 3 he could easily and turned and fired on police.


Easy to show a jury video of police shooting a suspect multiple times and the suspect continuing his attack. It is not that unusual. In fact, the more shots fired the more fear was likely present in the shooter.

This is gonna be fun . . .

"None? So after all that blabbering BULLSHIT deflection and obfuscation and SPAMMING , you admit that there is NO material distinction in the lack of a per se " Stand your Ground" law and Wisconsin's self defenses available to Kyle" ? Are you serious? Then what was your point?"

I never said Rittenhouse's defense had anything to do with stand your ground. And why would I since Rittenhouse's defense is not a stand your ground case. Who knows from where you pulled that demented gem? As I pointed out already, but you can't understand, it doesn't matter if Rittenhouse had a duty to retreat or not, he tried to retreat. He's not going to be claiming stand your ground, which would fail him had he not run and tried that defense is again, Wisconsin is not a stand your ground state. And you clearly still don't know the difference between a stand your ground state and a non-stand your ground state.

"And the number of times one shoots to ELIMINATE a lethal threat is not germane to anything other than the extent of the threat "

I never said the number of shots matters. You're just not bright enough to understand what I said. That's on you, not me. What I did say is that the level of force allowed is only enough to stop a threat of death or great bodily harm. If a firearm is used in self defense, that could be one shot or it could be any number of shots. In Rittenhouse's case, his first shot sent Rosenbaum down. Maybe a second shot was reasonable. But one of the shots, possibly the fatal shot, was to Rosenbaum's back. How the fuck can you shoot someone in the back and claim self defense?

"Why did he have to shoot the man 7 times" is a question born of total ignorance. Easy explained to a jury unless they are all of your intellect."

Same as above, I never said the number of shots needed to stop a threat matters. I said you can't keep shooting someone after you've neutralized the threat.

"Easy to show a jury video of police shooting a suspect multiple times and the suspect continuing his attack. It is not that unusual. In fact, the more shots fired the more fear was likely present in the shooter."

Same as above, I never said the number of shots needed to stop a threat matters. I said you can't keep shooting someone after you've neutralized the threat. It's a pity you're so flaming retarded that you keep repeating the same mistake over and over and over.

You redefine dumbass.

There must be a word for the type of jack ass Faun is. Argumentative for the sake of it and never , ever concedes when he is wrong. He admits that I was right , and then launches into more BULLSHIT about the number of shots fired into the ASSHOLE COMMIE #1 as determinative per se of murder vs self defense.

Like when women ask, " Why can't the police just shoot him in the leg? "

There is.

Troll.

It's not nice for you to call him that.

 

[MarathonMike]

The state will probably disarm the man, insuring the mob can has it's way with him and his property.

 

[WTF19]

Watch all of the videos in the main link at the bottom of the OP, then tell me who was doing the menacing.



This one ^^^^^^ shows what was going on prior to the arrival of the police. Pay close attention to the audio. The man is clearly sitting behind a closed window handling a pump action shotgun. The audio is both deceptive and revealing.

One protester says that he's pointing a shotgun "out the window"...

Listen near the end where the man with the megaphone is warning the man in house...(from about 1:08 to the end)...about "what is out here pointing at you"...

...and then at the very end seeming to ask the crowd around him, "Is this a white man?"

Home - www.independentsentinel.com

Home

www.independentsentinel.com

The crowd was. Wisconsin has a castle doctrine so I don't understand why the guy in the house was arrested while there were people protesting on his property?

Because of people like you.

LOLOL

You're fucked in the head, con. People like me don't understand why he was arrested.

people like you dont understand much at all.

Great, let's see you prove why he was arrested.....

im not the DA or a lawyer, burden of proof is off me

 

[WTF19]

I believe none. But that opinion depends on the ballistics tests. If they show he shot Rosenbaum 4 times, that's murder, not self defense. That's in Wisconsin or Florida. And has nothing to do with a duty to retreat, which he attempted.

None?

So after all that blabbering BULLSHIT deflection and obfuscation and SPAMMING , you admit that there is NO material distinction in the lack of a per se " Stand your Ground" law and Wisconsin's self defenses available to Kyle" ?

Are you serious? Then what was your point?


What is the matter with you? Seriously. What an obnoxious prick you are.

And the number of times one shoots to ELIMINATE a lethal threat is not germane to anything other than the extent of the threat , to idiots who have no understanding of what a gun is or how terminal ballistics operate. If you fail to hit a vital organ? It may take long enough for a drugged up human to fall and certainly would leave them sufficient time to shoot you or knife you. etc.


" Why did he have to shoot the man 7 times" is a question born of total ignorance. Easy explained to a jury unless they are all of your intellect.

Same with the asshole recently shot and paralyzed. Shot 7 times Not dead. After the first 3 he could easily and turned and fired on police.


Easy to show a jury video of police shooting a suspect multiple times and the suspect continuing his attack. It is not that unusual. In fact, the more shots fired the more fear was likely present in the shooter.

This is gonna be fun . . .

"None? So after all that blabbering BULLSHIT deflection and obfuscation and SPAMMING , you admit that there is NO material distinction in the lack of a per se " Stand your Ground" law and Wisconsin's self defenses available to Kyle" ? Are you serious? Then what was your point?"

I never said Rittenhouse's defense had anything to do with stand your ground. And why would I since Rittenhouse's defense is not a stand your ground case. Who knows from where you pulled that demented gem? As I pointed out already, but you can't understand, it doesn't matter if Rittenhouse had a duty to retreat or not, he tried to retreat. He's not going to be claiming stand your ground, which would fail him had he not run and tried that defense is again, Wisconsin is not a stand your ground state. And you clearly still don't know the difference between a stand your ground state and a non-stand your ground state.

"And the number of times one shoots to ELIMINATE a lethal threat is not germane to anything other than the extent of the threat "

I never said the number of shots matters. You're just not bright enough to understand what I said. That's on you, not me. What I did say is that the level of force allowed is only enough to stop a threat of death or great bodily harm. If a firearm is used in self defense, that could be one shot or it could be any number of shots. In Rittenhouse's case, his first shot sent Rosenbaum down. Maybe a second shot was reasonable. But one of the shots, possibly the fatal shot, was to Rosenbaum's back. How the fuck can you shoot someone in the back and claim self defense?

"Why did he have to shoot the man 7 times" is a question born of total ignorance. Easy explained to a jury unless they are all of your intellect."

Same as above, I never said the number of shots needed to stop a threat matters. I said you can't keep shooting someone after you've neutralized the threat.

"Easy to show a jury video of police shooting a suspect multiple times and the suspect continuing his attack. It is not that unusual. In fact, the more shots fired the more fear was likely present in the shooter."

Same as above, I never said the number of shots needed to stop a threat matters. I said you can't keep shooting someone after you've neutralized the threat. It's a pity you're so flaming retarded that you keep repeating the same mistake over and over and over.

I believe none. But that opinion depends on the ballistics tests. If they show he shot Rosenbaum 4 times, that's murder, not self defense. That's in Wisconsin or Florida. And has nothing to do with a duty to retreat, which he attempted.

None?

So after all that blabbering BULLSHIT deflection and obfuscation and SPAMMING , you admit that there is NO material distinction in the lack of a per se " Stand your Ground" law and Wisconsin's self defenses available to Kyle" ?

Are you serious? Then what was your point?


What is the matter with you? Seriously. What an obnoxious prick you are.

And the number of times one shoots to ELIMINATE a lethal threat is not germane to anything other than the extent of the threat , to idiots who have no understanding of what a gun is or how terminal ballistics operate. If you fail to hit a vital organ? It may take long enough for a drugged up human to fall and certainly would leave them sufficient time to shoot you or knife you. etc.


" Why did he have to shoot the man 7 times" is a question born of total ignorance. Easy explained to a jury unless they are all of your intellect.

Same with the asshole recently shot and paralyzed. Shot 7 times Not dead. After the first 3 he could easily and turned and fired on police.


Easy to show a jury video of police shooting a suspect multiple times and the suspect continuing his attack. It is not that unusual. In fact, the more shots fired the more fear was likely present in the shooter.

This is gonna be fun . . .

"None? So after all that blabbering BULLSHIT deflection and obfuscation and SPAMMING , you admit that there is NO material distinction in the lack of a per se " Stand your Ground" law and Wisconsin's self defenses available to Kyle" ? Are you serious? Then what was your point?"

I never said Rittenhouse's defense had anything to do with stand your ground. And why would I since Rittenhouse's defense is not a stand your ground case. Who knows from where you pulled that demented gem? As I pointed out already, but you can't understand, it doesn't matter if Rittenhouse had a duty to retreat or not, he tried to retreat. He's not going to be claiming stand your ground, which would fail him had he not run and tried that defense is again, Wisconsin is not a stand your ground state. And you clearly still don't know the difference between a stand your ground state and a non-stand your ground state.

"And the number of times one shoots to ELIMINATE a lethal threat is not germane to anything other than the extent of the threat "

I never said the number of shots matters. You're just not bright enough to understand what I said. That's on you, not me. What I did say is that the level of force allowed is only enough to stop a threat of death or great bodily harm. If a firearm is used in self defense, that could be one shot or it could be any number of shots. In Rittenhouse's case, his first shot sent Rosenbaum down. Maybe a second shot was reasonable. But one of the shots, possibly the fatal shot, was to Rosenbaum's back. How the fuck can you shoot someone in the back and claim self defense?

"Why did he have to shoot the man 7 times" is a question born of total ignorance. Easy explained to a jury unless they are all of your intellect."

Same as above, I never said the number of shots needed to stop a threat matters. I said you can't keep shooting someone after you've neutralized the threat.

"Easy to show a jury video of police shooting a suspect multiple times and the suspect continuing his attack. It is not that unusual. In fact, the more shots fired the more fear was likely present in the shooter."

Same as above, I never said the number of shots needed to stop a threat matters. I said you can't keep shooting someone after you've neutralized the threat. It's a pity you're so flaming retarded that you keep repeating the same mistake over and over and over.

from the famous lawyer---shit for brains---picture included

 

[Faun]

Watch all of the videos in the main link at the bottom of the OP, then tell me who was doing the menacing.



This one ^^^^^^ shows what was going on prior to the arrival of the police. Pay close attention to the audio. The man is clearly sitting behind a closed window handling a pump action shotgun. The audio is both deceptive and revealing.

One protester says that he's pointing a shotgun "out the window"...

Listen near the end where the man with the megaphone is warning the man in house...(from about 1:08 to the end)...about "what is out here pointing at you"...

...and then at the very end seeming to ask the crowd around him, "Is this a white man?"

Home - www.independentsentinel.com

Home

www.independentsentinel.com

The crowd was. Wisconsin has a castle doctrine so I don't understand why the guy in the house was arrested while there were people protesting on his property?

Because of people like you.

LOLOL

You're fucked in the head, con. People like me don't understand why he was arrested.

people like you dont understand much at all.

Great, let's see you prove why he was arrested.....

im not the DA or a lawyer, burden of proof is off me

No worries. I knew you were full of shit all along.

 

[Correll]

Watch all of the videos in the main link at the bottom of the OP, then tell me who was doing the menacing.



This one ^^^^^^ shows what was going on prior to the arrival of the police. Pay close attention to the audio. The man is clearly sitting behind a closed window handling a pump action shotgun. The audio is both deceptive and revealing.

One protester says that he's pointing a shotgun "out the window"...

Listen near the end where the man with the megaphone is warning the man in house...(from about 1:08 to the end)...about "what is out here pointing at you"...

...and then at the very end seeming to ask the crowd around him, "Is this a white man?"

Home - www.independentsentinel.com

Home

www.independentsentinel.com

The crowd was. Wisconsin has a castle doctrine so I don't understand why the guy in the house was arrested while there were people protesting on his property?

Because of people like you.

LOLOL

You're fucked in the head, con. People like me don't understand why he was arrested.

I agree you understand nothing. You and people like you are the reason.

People are being arrested by people like you, for defending themselves from violent racist mobs. You people are tyrants of the worst sort.

 

[Faun]

Watch all of the videos in the main link at the bottom of the OP, then tell me who was doing the menacing.



This one ^^^^^^ shows what was going on prior to the arrival of the police. Pay close attention to the audio. The man is clearly sitting behind a closed window handling a pump action shotgun. The audio is both deceptive and revealing.

One protester says that he's pointing a shotgun "out the window"...

Listen near the end where the man with the megaphone is warning the man in house...(from about 1:08 to the end)...about "what is out here pointing at you"...

...and then at the very end seeming to ask the crowd around him, "Is this a white man?"

Home - www.independentsentinel.com

Home

www.independentsentinel.com

The crowd was. Wisconsin has a castle doctrine so I don't understand why the guy in the house was arrested while there were people protesting on his property?

Because of people like you.

LOLOL

You're fucked in the head, con. People like me don't understand why he was arrested.

I agree you understand nothing. You and people like you are the reason.

People are being arrested by people like you, for defending themselves from violent racist mobs. You people are tyrants of the worst sort.

Do you have any idea how insane you appear when you say people are being arrested by people like me when I said it doesn't make sense to me why this guy was arrested? People like me think he shouldn't have been arrested. He was in his home protecting his 'castle' from a mob on his property who were harassing him. They should have been arrested, not him. Unless there's more to this story than has been revealed so far.

 

[WTF19]

Watch all of the videos in the main link at the bottom of the OP, then tell me who was doing the menacing.



This one ^^^^^^ shows what was going on prior to the arrival of the police. Pay close attention to the audio. The man is clearly sitting behind a closed window handling a pump action shotgun. The audio is both deceptive and revealing.

One protester says that he's pointing a shotgun "out the window"...

Listen near the end where the man with the megaphone is warning the man in house...(from about 1:08 to the end)...about "what is out here pointing at you"...

...and then at the very end seeming to ask the crowd around him, "Is this a white man?"

Home - www.independentsentinel.com

Home

www.independentsentinel.com

The crowd was. Wisconsin has a castle doctrine so I don't understand why the guy in the house was arrested while there were people protesting on his property?

Because of people like you.

LOLOL

You're fucked in the head, con. People like me don't understand why he was arrested.

people like you dont understand much at all.

Great, let's see you prove why he was arrested.....

im not the DA or a lawyer, burden of proof is off me

No worries. I knew you were full of shit all along.

i wonder how much smoke is leaking out of your head after that 1---wow intelligent comment---not

 

[Faun]

Watch all of the videos in the main link at the bottom of the OP, then tell me who was doing the menacing.



This one ^^^^^^ shows what was going on prior to the arrival of the police. Pay close attention to the audio. The man is clearly sitting behind a closed window handling a pump action shotgun. The audio is both deceptive and revealing.

One protester says that he's pointing a shotgun "out the window"...

Listen near the end where the man with the megaphone is warning the man in house...(from about 1:08 to the end)...about "what is out here pointing at you"...

...and then at the very end seeming to ask the crowd around him, "Is this a white man?"

Home - www.independentsentinel.com

Home

www.independentsentinel.com

The crowd was. Wisconsin has a castle doctrine so I don't understand why the guy in the house was arrested while there were people protesting on his property?

Because of people like you.

LOLOL

You're fucked in the head, con. People like me don't understand why he was arrested.

people like you dont understand much at all.

Great, let's see you prove why he was arrested.....

im not the DA or a lawyer, burden of proof is off me

No worries. I knew you were full of shit all along.

i wonder how much smoke is leaking out of your head after that 1---wow intelligent comment---not

LOL

Perhaps not, but at least you confirmed you were full of shit. So there's that.

 

[Turtlesoup]

Watch all of the videos in the main link at the bottom of the OP, then tell me who was doing the menacing.



This one ^^^^^^ shows what was going on prior to the arrival of the police. Pay close attention to the audio. The man is clearly sitting behind a closed window handling a pump action shotgun. The audio is both deceptive and revealing.

One protester says that he's pointing a shotgun "out the window"...

Listen near the end where the man with the megaphone is warning the man in house...(from about 1:08 to the end)...about "what is out here pointing at you"...

...and then at the very end seeming to ask the crowd around him, "Is this a white man?"

Home - www.independentsentinel.com

Home

www.independentsentinel.com

The crowd was. Wisconsin has a castle doctrine so I don't understand why the guy in the house was arrested while there were people protesting on his property?

BBbbut you also failed to understand that Kyle Rittenhouse was acting in self defense, right?


SAME reason this guy was arrested for clearly acting within his rights.


Run amok mayors , prosecutors and police.

^^^ a moron who doesn't understand the castle doctrine.

Obvious distinctions of Stand your Ground and Castle Doctrine in play. BOTH were disrespected. For a common reason over your empty head, fuckbubble.

^^^ a moron who doesn't understand Wisconsin isn't a stand your ground state.

Interesting distinction. Did you happen to stay at a Holiday Inn Express full of lawyers?

Wisconsin law allows deadly force in self-defense in the limited circumstances where the person defending themselves “reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm” to their person. Importantly, some states impose a duty to retreat from a conflict, but Wisconsin is not among them.​

​

Wisconsin Court Clarifies New Self-Defense Rule

A Wisconsin court's recent ruling could affect defendants who claim self-defense when facing criminal charges. Call a Milwaukee defense lawyer to learn more.

www.grgblaw.com

Please edify us as to the distinction. What would "stand your ground", per se, offer Kyle as a defense that Wisconsin law lacks?

Are you one of those who thinks the ANIFA scum were chasing Kyle to " disarm " him to prevent further shooting?



View attachment 389439

LOL

You should have stayed in your safe space.

• States That Have Stand Your Ground Laws

​

[among the states NOT listed: Wisconsin]​

• Is Wisconsin a Stand Your Ground State?

​

Wisconsin does not have a stand your ground law. ​

• Stand Your Ground – The Law

​

Wisconsin does not have a stand your ground law.​

• Wisconsin Self-Defense Laws

​

Wisconsin does not have a "stand your ground" law.​

• 939.48 Self-defense and defense of others

​

(ar) If an actor intentionally used force that was intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm, the court may not consider whether the actor had an opportunity to flee or retreat before he or she used force and shall presume that the actor reasonably believed that the force was necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself if the actor makes such a claim under sub. (1) and either of the following applies:​

​

1. The person against whom the force was used was in the process of unlawfully and forcibly entering the actor's dwelling, motor vehicle, or place of business, the actor was present in the dwelling, motor vehicle, or place of business, and the actor knew or reasonably believed that an unlawful and forcible entry was occurring.​

​

2. The person against whom the force was used was in the actor's dwelling, motor vehicle, or place of business after unlawfully and forcibly entering it, the actor was present in the dwelling, motor vehicle, or place of business, and the actor knew or reasonably believed that the person had unlawfully and forcibly entered the dwelling, motor vehicle, or place of business.​

​

[Stand your ground, applies only to "an actor's dwelling, motor vehicle, or place of business," i.e., castle doctrine.]​

SO what defense is Kyle NOT entitled to in Wisconsin that he would have in Florida, F. Lee Shitbird?

I believe none. But that opinion depends on the ballistics tests. If they show he shot Rosenbaum 4 times, that's murder, not self defense. That's in Wisconsin or Florida. And has nothing to do with a duty to retreat, which he attempted.

Why do you ramble on---haven't we already explained to you---that the number of shots does not affect self defense or not. You are supposed to shoot and keep shooting till the attacker is unable to attack again-----------and on top of this----with rapid fire weapons and the human condition of adrenaline firing mutliple shots is the most common and almost impossible to avoid.

Of course the number of shots matters. If someone shoots an attacker more times than is necessary to stop the threat, it's no longer self defense, but murder. In this case, if Rittenhouse fired all 4 shots, that means one of his shots was to Rosenbaum's back. The law allows force to only stop the threat. Anything beyond that is no longer self defense.

We have already explained this to you-----when someone is shot--they don't stop......it takes a while for the body to bleed out forcing the attacker to stop for one so people are trained to keep shooting once they start. The video clearly shows that the shots fired took what 2 and 1/2 seconds? And oh btw, the shot to the back---did we get ballistic reports back to confirm that this bullet too came from Kyle---as the ME could not explain how 3 shots went to the front and one went to the back unless he turned after Kyle started firing. Number of shots does not matter----once again once adrenaline takes over from the person being attacked---humans squeeze and keep squeezing the hair trigger of the new guns and it takes over-----making it impossible to stop firing.

 

[Turtlesoup]

You're the one who started talking about stand your ground.

Liar.

LOLOL

Imbecile....

Here's the first mention of stand your ground in this thread....

Milwaukee, WI man arrested for menacing BLM mob with a gun

Watch all of the videos in the main link at the bottom of the OP, then tell me who was doing the menacing. This one ^^^^^^ shows what was going on prior to the arrival of the police. Pay close attention to the audio. The man is clearly sitting behind a closed window handling a pump action...

www.usmessageboard.com

Look who the poster is to see why you're an imbecile.

And my point was ceded. There is NO material distinction between " Stand your Ground" and defenses available to Kyle per Wisconsin law.

ME: SO what defense is Kyle NOT entitled to in Wisconsin that he would have in Florida, F. Lee Shitbird?

F. Lee SHitbird [ Faun] : I believe none.

And you're a moron. Had Rittenhouse attempted to stand his ground, that would fail as a defense in Wisconsin since Wisconsin is not a stand your ground state.

Everyone has the right to stand up for what is right--------------which is to stand up to the bullies in the blm and anti fa terror groups and everyone has the right to self defense when the blm and anti-fa terror groups attack them as they did KYLE.

 

[WTF19]

Watch all of the videos in the main link at the bottom of the OP, then tell me who was doing the menacing.



This one ^^^^^^ shows what was going on prior to the arrival of the police. Pay close attention to the audio. The man is clearly sitting behind a closed window handling a pump action shotgun. The audio is both deceptive and revealing.

One protester says that he's pointing a shotgun "out the window"...

Listen near the end where the man with the megaphone is warning the man in house...(from about 1:08 to the end)...about "what is out here pointing at you"...

...and then at the very end seeming to ask the crowd around him, "Is this a white man?"

Home - www.independentsentinel.com

Home

www.independentsentinel.com

The crowd was. Wisconsin has a castle doctrine so I don't understand why the guy in the house was arrested while there were people protesting on his property?

Because of people like you.

LOLOL

You're fucked in the head, con. People like me don't understand why he was arrested.

people like you dont understand much at all.

Great, let's see you prove why he was arrested.....

im not the DA or a lawyer, burden of proof is off me

No worries. I knew you were full of shit all along.

i wonder how much smoke is leaking out of your head after that 1---wow intelligent comment---not

LOL

Perhaps not, but at least you confirmed you were full of shit. So there's that.

if thats what makes you feel macho---have at ---shit for brains

 

[Faun]

Watch all of the videos in the main link at the bottom of the OP, then tell me who was doing the menacing.



This one ^^^^^^ shows what was going on prior to the arrival of the police. Pay close attention to the audio. The man is clearly sitting behind a closed window handling a pump action shotgun. The audio is both deceptive and revealing.

One protester says that he's pointing a shotgun "out the window"...

Listen near the end where the man with the megaphone is warning the man in house...(from about 1:08 to the end)...about "what is out here pointing at you"...

...and then at the very end seeming to ask the crowd around him, "Is this a white man?"

Home - www.independentsentinel.com

Home

www.independentsentinel.com

The crowd was. Wisconsin has a castle doctrine so I don't understand why the guy in the house was arrested while there were people protesting on his property?

BBbbut you also failed to understand that Kyle Rittenhouse was acting in self defense, right?


SAME reason this guy was arrested for clearly acting within his rights.


Run amok mayors , prosecutors and police.

^^^ a moron who doesn't understand the castle doctrine.

Obvious distinctions of Stand your Ground and Castle Doctrine in play. BOTH were disrespected. For a common reason over your empty head, fuckbubble.

^^^ a moron who doesn't understand Wisconsin isn't a stand your ground state.

Interesting distinction. Did you happen to stay at a Holiday Inn Express full of lawyers?

Wisconsin law allows deadly force in self-defense in the limited circumstances where the person defending themselves “reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm” to their person. Importantly, some states impose a duty to retreat from a conflict, but Wisconsin is not among them.​

​

Wisconsin Court Clarifies New Self-Defense Rule

A Wisconsin court's recent ruling could affect defendants who claim self-defense when facing criminal charges. Call a Milwaukee defense lawyer to learn more.

www.grgblaw.com

Please edify us as to the distinction. What would "stand your ground", per se, offer Kyle as a defense that Wisconsin law lacks?

Are you one of those who thinks the ANIFA scum were chasing Kyle to " disarm " him to prevent further shooting?



View attachment 389439

LOL

You should have stayed in your safe space.

• States That Have Stand Your Ground Laws

​

[among the states NOT listed: Wisconsin]​

• Is Wisconsin a Stand Your Ground State?

​

Wisconsin does not have a stand your ground law. ​

• Stand Your Ground – The Law

​

Wisconsin does not have a stand your ground law.​

• Wisconsin Self-Defense Laws

​

Wisconsin does not have a "stand your ground" law.​

• 939.48 Self-defense and defense of others

​

(ar) If an actor intentionally used force that was intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm, the court may not consider whether the actor had an opportunity to flee or retreat before he or she used force and shall presume that the actor reasonably believed that the force was necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself if the actor makes such a claim under sub. (1) and either of the following applies:​

​

1. The person against whom the force was used was in the process of unlawfully and forcibly entering the actor's dwelling, motor vehicle, or place of business, the actor was present in the dwelling, motor vehicle, or place of business, and the actor knew or reasonably believed that an unlawful and forcible entry was occurring.​

​

2. The person against whom the force was used was in the actor's dwelling, motor vehicle, or place of business after unlawfully and forcibly entering it, the actor was present in the dwelling, motor vehicle, or place of business, and the actor knew or reasonably believed that the person had unlawfully and forcibly entered the dwelling, motor vehicle, or place of business.​

​

[Stand your ground, applies only to "an actor's dwelling, motor vehicle, or place of business," i.e., castle doctrine.]​

SO what defense is Kyle NOT entitled to in Wisconsin that he would have in Florida, F. Lee Shitbird?

I believe none. But that opinion depends on the ballistics tests. If they show he shot Rosenbaum 4 times, that's murder, not self defense. That's in Wisconsin or Florida. And has nothing to do with a duty to retreat, which he attempted.

Why do you ramble on---haven't we already explained to you---that the number of shots does not affect self defense or not. You are supposed to shoot and keep shooting till the attacker is unable to attack again-----------and on top of this----with rapid fire weapons and the human condition of adrenaline firing mutliple shots is the most common and almost impossible to avoid.

Of course the number of shots matters. If someone shoots an attacker more times than is necessary to stop the threat, it's no longer self defense, but murder. In this case, if Rittenhouse fired all 4 shots, that means one of his shots was to Rosenbaum's back. The law allows force to only stop the threat. Anything beyond that is no longer self defense.

We have already explained this to you-----when someone is shot--they don't stop......it takes a while for the body to bleed out forcing the attacker to stop for one so people are trained to keep shooting once they start. The video clearly shows that the shots fired took what 2 and 1/2 seconds? And oh btw, the shot to the back---did we get ballistic reports back to confirm that this bullet too came from Kyle---as the ME could not explain how 3 shots went to the front and one went to the back unless he turned after Kyle started firing. Number of shots does not matter----once again once adrenaline takes over from the person being attacked---humans squeeze and keep squeezing the hair trigger of the new guns and it takes over-----making it impossible to stop firing.

"We have already explained this to you-----when someone is shot--they don't stop"

You're fucking deranged.

Sometimes they do. In that case, Rosenbaum is see going down when the first shot hit him. Another shot or two may even be reasonable. But shooting him in the back is not.

"And oh btw, the shot to the back---did we get ballistic reports back to confirm that this bullet too came from Kyle"

Dumbfuck, I addressed that already. Were you not paying attention or are you not capable of understanding?

I believe none. But that opinion depends on the ballistics tests. If they show he shot Rosenbaum 4 times, that's murder, not self defense. That's in Wisconsin or Florida. And has nothing to do with a duty to retreat, which he attempted.

"...making it impossible to stop firing"

What a retarded comment. Of course it's possible to stop firing. Otherwise, he would have emptied his magazine.