Rittenhouse ordered to stand trial

[Faun]

(2) Kenosha Shooter TALKS w/ His Victim - Kyle Rittenhouse Video | LNOD - YouTube

Watch the video. It's a clear case of self-defense.

The prosecutor should be arrested for treason and punished to the full extent of the law. Capital punishment. The people demand it.

All 3 separate incidents where he shot people?
If he was threatened by 3 armed people, he would have been dead.
Only one person he killed was armed, and no weapon was ever drawn on him.

If he was threatened by armed people, he would be dead? Why is that? What kind of assumption is that? I think a safer assumption would be if he wasn’t armed himself, he may have been dead.

If by “armed” you mean in possession of a firearm... he didn’t kill the guy with the gun. He wounded him. what do you mean “no weapon was drawn on him”?? The guy had it in his hand as he came running up on rittenhouse as he was knocked to the ground. He is creeping up on him with it DRAWN in his hand as rittenhouse turns and blasts him (wounding him).
If by “armed” you meant in the traditional sense of the word... in possession of a weapon, then the guy hitting him with a skateboard who attempted to bash his head in would be considered “armed” as well. So there were 2 armed people.

You seem to be implying he wasn’t in danger in “all 3 seperate incidents where he shot people”.
Did you actually watch the videos??

Nonsense. If Rittenhouse wasn't armed, he would not have shot and killed anyone and the mob would not have been chasing him.

No...when he attempted to put out the fire in the dumpster...that the felons were using to try to set the gas pumps at the gas station on fire, they would have beaten him into the hospital or the morgue....

Bullshit. Another person there was on video putting out a dumpster fire and nobody messed with him.

 

[Faun]

Great, let's see your evidence the people who attempted to disarm him committed arson, robbery or assault....

Assault. As evidenced by the video, one of the terrorists threw a flying kick at that kid in the head. And then another one bashed him in the head with a skateboard and attempted to rob him. If you are exposed on video bashing some kid in the head with your skateboard and trying to grab his gun, that is clear evidence of attempted robbery.

View attachment 425482



View attachment 425487

It's not assault to disarm a killer.

It is assault to attack an innocent man.........

Nope, it's legal to stop someone shooting people.

 

[2aguy]

(2) Kenosha Shooter TALKS w/ His Victim - Kyle Rittenhouse Video | LNOD - YouTube

Watch the video. It's a clear case of self-defense.

The prosecutor should be arrested for treason and punished to the full extent of the law. Capital punishment. The people demand it.

All 3 separate incidents where he shot people?
If he was threatened by 3 armed people, he would have been dead.
Only one person he killed was armed, and no weapon was ever drawn on him.

If he was threatened by armed people, he would be dead? Why is that? What kind of assumption is that? I think a safer assumption would be if he wasn’t armed himself, he may have been dead.

If by “armed” you mean in possession of a firearm... he didn’t kill the guy with the gun. He wounded him. what do you mean “no weapon was drawn on him”?? The guy had it in his hand as he came running up on rittenhouse as he was knocked to the ground. He is creeping up on him with it DRAWN in his hand as rittenhouse turns and blasts him (wounding him).
If by “armed” you meant in the traditional sense of the word... in possession of a weapon, then the guy hitting him with a skateboard who attempted to bash his head in would be considered “armed” as well. So there were 2 armed people.

You seem to be implying he wasn’t in danger in “all 3 seperate incidents where he shot people”.
Did you actually watch the videos??

Nonsense. If Rittenhouse wasn't armed, he would not have shot and killed anyone and the mob would not have been chasing him.

No...when he attempted to put out the fire in the dumpster...that the felons were using to try to set the gas pumps at the gas station on fire, they would have beaten him into the hospital or the morgue....

Bullshit. Another person there was on video putting out a dumpster fire and nobody messed with him.

He was lucky....the joe biden voters have beaten and even murdered people when the joe biden voters were burning and looting cities.....

 

[2aguy]

Great, let's see your evidence the people who attempted to disarm him committed arson, robbery or assault....

Assault. As evidenced by the video, one of the terrorists threw a flying kick at that kid in the head. And then another one bashed him in the head with a skateboard and attempted to rob him. If you are exposed on video bashing some kid in the head with your skateboard and trying to grab his gun, that is clear evidence of attempted robbery.

View attachment 425482



View attachment 425487

It's not assault to disarm a killer.

It is assault to attack an innocent man.........

Nope, it's legal to stop someone shooting people.

And it is legal to defend yourself when 3 felons attack you.

 

[Faun]

If what you were saying were true, Rittenhouse would not be facing murder charges.

Charges != guilty.

Edit: It should be said that what I would do, is not what Kyle did. All shots on the first attack were in quick succession. He went to help after he shot the man, and then said fuck that after more showed up with intentions to harm him. I would have put another bullet in him. There would have been a pause, and another shot before others showed up. He didn't do that.

I'm not saying charges equals guilt. What I am am saying is because he was charged means it's not a clear case of self-defense. Had it been, he would not have been charged.

That's not true......when you have an anti-gun prosecutor, he can take the case to court simply to punish and exact pain and suffering on the actual victim of the crime....in this case, the hispanic teenager....

Clear cases of self defense routinely go to court simply because the prosecutor hates guns and gun owners and want to make examples of them...

LOL

Your opinion is noted and laughed at.

 

[Faun]

Great, let's see your evidence the people who attempted to disarm him committed arson, robbery or assault....

Assault. As evidenced by the video, one of the terrorists threw a flying kick at that kid in the head. And then another one bashed him in the head with a skateboard and attempted to rob him. If you are exposed on video bashing some kid in the head with your skateboard and trying to grab his gun, that is clear evidence of attempted robbery.

View attachment 425482



View attachment 425487

It's not assault to disarm a killer.

It is assault to attack an innocent man.........

Nope, it's legal to stop someone shooting people.

And it is legal to defend yourself when 3 felons attack you.

That's up to the jury in this case to decide.

 

[Faun]

Yeah, because to conservatives, shooting someone in the back is self-defense.

Are you on some sort of drugs?

No worries, I'll include you among those who think shooting someone in the back is self-defense.

Seek professional help for those hallucinations.

And by professional help, I mean an icepick lobotomy.

This is for you too, dumbfuck...

Victims of Kenosha protest shooting tried to disarm Kyle Rittenhouse: Reports

Hannah Gittings, Huber's girlfriend, told WBBM-TV that he pushed her out of the way before chasing after the man others on the street had identified as the shooter.

abc11.com

​

The medical examiner found that Rosenbaum was shot in the groin, back and left hand. The wounds fractured his pelvis and perforated his right lung and liver. He also suffered a superficial wound to his left thigh and a graze wound to his forehead.​

G'head, tell the forum again how shooting someone in the back is self-defense....

Well, I can actually give a couple of times that shooting someone in the back could be considered self-defense.

1) While being threatened or attacked, you shoot the attacker. They are spun around by the first shot and you hit them in the back with a successive shot
2) Someone is running away from you, but turning and firing a weapon at you while doing so. You return fire, which hits them in the back. I believe this is similar to what appeared to happen when the cop shot a guy in a Wendy's parking lot not too long ago: the guy he was chasing took his taser and fired it at the cop while running away. The cop shot back and hit him in the back.

Obviously the second scenario didn't happen in this case, and I have no idea if the first did. I just wanted to point out that someone being shot in the back CAN happen during a self-defense shooting incident.

Your number one point is likely what happened since the reporter who saw the first shooting stated the guy was grabbing for the hispanic teenagers gun and was then shot.....he likely spun with the first round and took one in the back as he fell.....or, someone else shot him...we still haven't seen the ballistic report on the bullet that killed him.

It's already known the shot to the back came from Rittenhouse’s gun. Time for you to make up a new excuse. One shot is heard from Ziminski firing into the air. Then Rittenhouse shoots and 4 shots are heard. Rittenhouse’s attorney confirmed his client got off 4 rounds.

Kyle Rittenhouse Attorneys Spell Out Case That He’s A Patriot Who Shot In Self-Defense

www.wbez.org

“Video captures the events as Rittenhouse turned towards the sound of the gunshot and Rosenbaum lunged for his rifle,” the defense filing adds. “Unable to retreat further and under grave risk of immediate harm, Rittenhouse fired four shots from his rifle at Rosenbaum.”​

 

[Faun]

If what you were saying were true, Rittenhouse would not be facing murder charges.

Charges != guilty.

Edit: It should be said that what I would do, is not what Kyle did. All shots on the first attack were in quick succession. He went to help after he shot the man, and then said fuck that after more showed up with intentions to harm him. I would have put another bullet in him. There would have been a pause, and another shot before others showed up. He didn't do that.

I'm not saying charges equals guilt. What I am am saying is because he was charged means it's not a clear case of self-defense. Had it been, he would not have been charged.

Sorry....that isn't even close to being true......

A look at self defense and the criminal justice establishment...

What we’re talking about here is the very rare aberration, just as certainly as having to use a gun to shoot another human being in self defense is an aberration. Most of us are going to go through our lives without having to kill somebody; most of those who do have to kill someone in self defense, will be ruled justifiable, and after that, at least the criminal side–if not the plaintiff’s side–will be over.

But every now and then, the aberration occurs. There is the false testimony by the surviving perpetrator and his partner. There are the witnesses who can misperceive what happened, who can confabulate what happened, who literally do not know what happened in front of them because they not only were not looking and therefore did not see, but had they been looking, would not have recognized what they saw in terms of the subtle cues and indications of danger.
-------
Ayoob: Certainly, we should not spill our guts at the scene. The involved victim of the near-death experience will experience distorted perceptions: you’ll not be able to keep count of your shots, and the attacker may appear to be closer and larger than he was. Answers to questions like, “Exactly what words did he say before you shot him?

Exactly how many shots did you fire? Exactly how far was he in feet and inches and how many centimeters long was his knife?” will invariably be wrong. To people who’ve never been in that situation, it will look as if you are lying or exaggerating.

You do need to establish at the scene that you were the intended victim; he was the perpetrator. You need to establish at the scene that you are the complainant and he is the perpetrator and suspect. You need to point out the evidence before it disappears. Spent cases get picked up in shoe treads, and I’ve seen them literally blown away in the wind. You need to point out the witnesses. You tell the truth of what happened before they decide, “We don’t want to get involved,” and walk away. And then, you need the self-discipline to say, “Officer, you know how serious this is, you’ll have my full cooperation, after I’ve spoken with counsel.” And stick to that.

eJournal: And this happens between you and the responding officers, because your attorney can’t roll in with a blue light on top of his or her car and be there right after the shooting?

Ayoob: Marty Hayes and I just spent an hour this week trying to do damage control for a case I can’t discuss in detail because its not yet been adjudicated. But essentially, the guy who fired was very well trained in how to shoot but had less than I would have liked him to have in how to justify why he shot. He did what he was told, he said, “I’m not saying anything until my attorney gets here.”

Well, lies were being told by three different participants, who were the perpetrators, if you accept the defense theory of the case. The witnesses, the ear witnesses who heard shouts and gunfire, are basically fungible. The key evidence that could have been locked in at the scene has disappeared, things that should have been tested that could have determined distance and threat level have not been tested and it’s a coin toss whether we will ever be able to now.

It is much easier for the defense attorney and us, if the defendant says, “The evidence is here,” and thus that evidence is preserved. “The witnesses are there,” and now those witness statement are locked in, it’s not something they can begin to confabulate a year later, or maybe someone just didn’t want to be involved, and a year later they read in the newspaper or on the Internet, “Man Convicted,” and they go, “Oh, man, I SAW that thing. The guy was coming at him with a knife and they arrested HIM? Geez!” Well, it’s a little late for that!

eJournal: What is the likelihood of a mere mortal like myself or another Network member having the presence of mind after a life-threatening incident to say enough but not too much?

Ayoob: It would be about the same as ordinary mortals who have the presence of mind to shoot the bad guy enough but not too much, which we know happens virtually every day in America.
-----
eJournal: So the armed citizen gets through the initial police response; now their lawyer is present. How do they keep that lawyer on the right track? What can they do if their lawyer goes off point, maybe they want to plead out, for example?

Ayoob: First, if the guy says, “Plead to something,” when you’ve done nothing wrong, fire him now! He does not understand how to defend innocent people; that is the strategy of the guilty man’s lawyer. My experience has been that a guilty man’s lawyer who gives you a guilty man’s defense, will get you a guilty man’s verdict.

When in doubt, call the Network. We’ll find someone for you.

eJournal: So don’t try to salvage that lawyer?

Ayoob: You’ve done the right thing! Don’t plead because the guy tells you to plead because it is going to be easier for him and cheaper for you! Is it going to be cheaper for you to be a convicted felon for the rest of your life, unable to protect your family, unable to get the kinds of jobs to earn the living that you might have earned otherwise? That does not strike me as victory. It’s the kind of thing that people do when they’re terrified of things they don’t understand and they are, in essence, being blackmailed by the other side’s threats.

eJournal: If the lawyer doesn’t exactly understand how to defend the innocent client, how can you, the self-defense expert, help?

Ayoob: A good attorney has worked in enough different areas to know that he’s not an expert in any one discipline. But if he’s got the right expert, and that expert has done a great many of those kinds of cases, the attorney asks him, “OK, in all the cases you did, what was the most successful strategy, tell me why, tell me how I can use that here.”

eJournal: And those strategies are?

Ayoob: We will establish that you (the defendant) knew certain things that the average layperson on the jury does not know, or for that matter, the average law school graduate who has a job in the prosecutor’s office and ramrods this thing through the grand jury, does not know.

Because the standard is, “What would a reasonable and prudent person have done in the same situation knowing what the defendant knew?” we will educate the jury so they understand why you recognized danger cues that the average layperson would not. We’ll explain why it would not be reasonable or prudent for you to try to kick the knife out of the hand of the man who was lunging at you and your spouse.

We can do reaction, time and motion demonstrations that no material witness can.

eJournal: What’s the difference between the expert and the lay witness? Is there greater latitude?

Ayoob: Oh, hugely! The expert, once retained as such, has access to all the discovery materials, all the reports. We can interview witnesses so long as those witnesses are agreeable to it. We can literally do a full second-stage homicide investigation, and find things that might have been missed in the beginning.

404

armedcitizensnetwork.org

LOL

Hayes' opinion is noted and laughed at. Also has nothing to do with Rittenhouse’s case specifically.

 

[Faun]

(2) Kenosha Shooter TALKS w/ His Victim - Kyle Rittenhouse Video | LNOD - YouTube

Watch the video. It's a clear case of self-defense.

The prosecutor should be arrested for treason and punished to the full extent of the law. Capital punishment. The people demand it.

All 3 separate incidents where he shot people?
If he was threatened by 3 armed people, he would have been dead.
Only one person he killed was armed, and no weapon was ever drawn on him.

If he was threatened by armed people, he would be dead? Why is that? What kind of assumption is that? I think a safer assumption would be if he wasn’t armed himself, he may have been dead.

If by “armed” you mean in possession of a firearm... he didn’t kill the guy with the gun. He wounded him. what do you mean “no weapon was drawn on him”?? The guy had it in his hand as he came running up on rittenhouse as he was knocked to the ground. He is creeping up on him with it DRAWN in his hand as rittenhouse turns and blasts him (wounding him).
If by “armed” you meant in the traditional sense of the word... in possession of a weapon, then the guy hitting him with a skateboard who attempted to bash his head in would be considered “armed” as well. So there were 2 armed people.

You seem to be implying he wasn’t in danger in “all 3 seperate incidents where he shot people”.
Did you actually watch the videos??

Nonsense. If Rittenhouse wasn't armed, he would not have shot and killed anyone and the mob would not have been chasing him.

No...when he attempted to put out the fire in the dumpster...that the felons were using to try to set the gas pumps at the gas station on fire, they would have beaten him into the hospital or the morgue....

Bullshit. Another person there was on video putting out a dumpster fire and nobody messed with him.

He was lucky....the joe biden voters have beaten and even murdered people when the joe biden voters were burning and looting cities.....

Nope. It shows no one was attacking anyone for putting out dumpster fires. Something else triggered Rosenbaum.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Nope. It shows no one was attacking anyone for putting out dumpster fires. Something else triggered Rosenbaum.

Yeah: he was nuts.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

And several posters on this very board have publicly called for Rump to PARDON this piece of shit.

So conservatives clamoring to defend homicidal maniacs now. We live in interesting times.

No reason to pardon him... He shouldn't go to jail. He'll get hit for a couple lesser crimes... But...

If found guilty of his crimes he should certainly to go prison.

That far too many on the right perceive Rittenhouse as some sort of ‘hero’ is a symptom of the disease that is conservativism.

He might be found guilty of being a minor in possession of a firearm. That's a very minor crime and real criminal gang members are let slide on that one all the time. No impartial jury will convict him of murder UNLESS there are things not on the publicly available videos. What was shown on the videos is clearly self-defense by a pretty competent person who only shot at those who were an immediate threat to his well being.

Here is a rational, factual post. No hyperbole. No wild associations with nazi’s and fascists and communists. No name calling. Just a rational analysis of the facts of what we have seen (video), prior legal occurrences (minors in possession of a weapon is a wrist slap at worst), and a reasonable assessment of what is to come.... and yet I see the “laughing face” reaction was selected by someone.
seeing that there wasn’t any comedy in there, no joking or sarcasm, I am left to believe that someone is laughing at the post. If anything, selecting that reaction gives insight into your judgment and/or character.

Indeed, being a minor with a firearm is the least of his transgressions. Much more to the point is his deliberately taking that firearm to another state for the purpose of intimidating and/or mowing down people.

To put it in the proper phrasing, he went hunting. For humans.

The parallel would be to beg that James Fields in Charlottesville's only transgression was that the the car he used to mow people down had an expired registration.

You stupid fuck.

He was shown running from humans. He only fired when attacked and vulnerable.

And in both deaths, it is likely the victims had their hands on the guns (on the wrong end).

Yuh huh.
And these humans he was "running from" --- they ran all the way to his parents' house in Illinois from Kenosha, did they?

Strawman...

Try it again asshole.

When you can't answer the question, go straight to ad hom.

Grow the fuck up.

Eat shit and die, moron.

Your question was bullshit.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

(2) Kenosha Shooter TALKS w/ His Victim - Kyle Rittenhouse Video | LNOD - YouTube

Watch the video. It's a clear case of self-defense.

The prosecutor should be arrested for treason and punished to the full extent of the law. Capital punishment. The people demand it.

All 3 separate incidents where he shot people?
If he was threatened by 3 armed people, he would have been dead.
Only one person he killed was armed, and no weapon was ever drawn on him.

If he was threatened by armed people, he would be dead? Why is that? What kind of assumption is that? I think a safer assumption would be if he wasn’t armed himself, he may have been dead.

If by “armed” you mean in possession of a firearm... he didn’t kill the guy with the gun. He wounded him. what do you mean “no weapon was drawn on him”?? The guy had it in his hand as he came running up on rittenhouse as he was knocked to the ground. He is creeping up on him with it DRAWN in his hand as rittenhouse turns and blasts him (wounding him).
If by “armed” you meant in the traditional sense of the word... in possession of a weapon, then the guy hitting him with a skateboard who attempted to bash his head in would be considered “armed” as well. So there were 2 armed people.

You seem to be implying he wasn’t in danger in “all 3 seperate incidents where he shot people”.
Did you actually watch the videos??

Nonsense. If Rittenhouse wasn't armed, he would not have shot and killed anyone and the mob would not have been chasing him.

No...when he attempted to put out the fire in the dumpster...that the felons were using to try to set the gas pumps at the gas station on fire, they would have beaten him into the hospital or the morgue....

Bullshit. Another person there was on video putting out a dumpster fire and nobody messed with him.

He was lucky....the joe biden voters have beaten and even murdered people when the joe biden voters were burning and looting cities.....

Nope. It shows no one was attacking anyone for putting out dumpster fires. Something else triggered Rosenbaum.

When you figure out what it is, let us know.

Until then, K.R. is going to walk.

 

[Faun]

Nope. It shows no one was attacking anyone for putting out dumpster fires. Something else triggered Rosenbaum.

Yeah: he was nuts.

Can't disagree with that.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

And several posters on this very board have publicly called for Rump to PARDON this piece of shit.

So conservatives clamoring to defend homicidal maniacs now. We live in interesting times.

No reason to pardon him... He shouldn't go to jail. He'll get hit for a couple lesser crimes... But...

If found guilty of his crimes he should certainly to go prison.

That far too many on the right perceive Rittenhouse as some sort of ‘hero’ is a symptom of the disease that is conservativism.

He might be found guilty of being a minor in possession of a firearm. That's a very minor crime and real criminal gang members are let slide on that one all the time. No impartial jury will convict him of murder UNLESS there are things not on the publicly available videos. What was shown on the videos is clearly self-defense by a pretty competent person who only shot at those who were an immediate threat to his well being.

Here is a rational, factual post. No hyperbole. No wild associations with nazi’s and fascists and communists. No name calling. Just a rational analysis of the facts of what we have seen (video), prior legal occurrences (minors in possession of a weapon is a wrist slap at worst), and a reasonable assessment of what is to come.... and yet I see the “laughing face” reaction was selected by someone.
seeing that there wasn’t any comedy in there, no joking or sarcasm, I am left to believe that someone is laughing at the post. If anything, selecting that reaction gives insight into your judgment and/or character.

Indeed, being a minor with a firearm is the least of his transgressions. Much more to the point is his deliberately taking that firearm to another state for the purpose of intimidating and/or mowing down people.

To put it in the proper phrasing, he went hunting. For humans.

The parallel would be to beg that James Fields in Charlottesville's only transgression was that the the car he used to mow people down had an expired registration.

You stupid fuck.

He was shown running from humans. He only fired when attacked and vulnerable.

And in both deaths, it is likely the victims had their hands on the guns (on the wrong end).

Yuh huh.
And these humans he was "running from" --- they ran all the way to his parents' house in Illinois from Kenosha, did they?

Strawman...

Try it again asshole.

When you can't answer the question, go straight to ad hom.

Grow the fuck up.

Pogo

Your question "And these humans he was "running from" --- they ran all the way to his parents' house in Illinois from Kenosha, did they?

It's a strawman. Who argued that they chased him all the way from Kenosha to his parents' house in Illinois? The video is clear. Kyle ran a couple of blocks before the mob of predators knocked him to the pavement.

Nobody argued that. It's called "sarcasm". You actually need sarcasm explained? It's designed to put the adversary in an impossible quandary --- he can't agree with the absurd premise, therefore he has to concede that Rittenhouse went there deliberately looking to start some shit.

Can't believe I have to spell this out.

Let's spell this out......

You are full of shit.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Let's spell this out......

You are full of shit.

You are just NOW realizing that?

 

[Polishprince]

What's really going to screw up the Liberal Case against Rittenhouse is the witnesses lack of willingness to come forward and actually testify.

The witnesses are all rioters, people in the act of committing Class A felonies like arson, assault and looting when the shit was coming down. If they testified , they'd have to admit what they were there for.

Bad news for them. Even if the Liberal DA gives them criminal immunity, they still have civil liability. The state can't excuse them for having to pay back for the properties they burned or the property they looted.

 

[Beef_Supreme]

It’s so cool the way you and others cheer for this kid to go to jail because of political alignment of those involved.

If the story was “black teen shoots and kills 2 felons and wounds a 3rd felon as they chased and attacked him while wearing klan robes” your reaction would be completely different.

Um, yeah, wearing Klan Robes would be an entirely different circumstance.

Now, if it was "Shot three white people at a MAGA rally", there wouldn't be an issue here. That guy would be convicted already. He probably wouldn't have made it off the street alive.

But I would argue that he is a free man, an American, and he is free to go wherever he chooses regardless of what law breaking assholes are doing. And he was there doing good (cleaning graffiti, not participating in rioting).

Actually, no. he was in violation of a curfew order... So he wasn't "Free to go there'. The problem, of course, was the Kenosha PD allowed the Militia Thugs to be there. Even gave them water.

However, the actual shootings are open and shut. He was attacked by “shoot me nigga” pedophile, and he retreated. He ran u til he was cornered, at which time he fired. That’s self defense, and he even tried to flee first. He then left and was pursued by the next group of rocket scientists. He was chased and was hit, knocked to the ground, hit again, and was facing multiple attackers. He then defended himself. He fired at only those who were still an immediate threat, and didn’t turn and fire on the guy who InitialIy chased and kicked him who had moved away. That’s self defense, and a perfect example of appropriate force and restraint. There should be no “murder” charges.

Yeah, you tell yourself that.

This punk is going to jail. It would help if his lawyers weren't all fighting amongst themselves...

Controversial attorney withdraws from Kyle Rittenhouse criminal case, launches new fundraising appeal

John Pierce will still represent Rittenhouse in any civil defamation lawsuits.

abcnews.go.com

A case study proving the unorganized militia is worthless to the security of our free States?

The defense and protection of the state and of the United States is an obligation of all persons within the state. The legislature shall provide for the discharge of this obligation and for the maintenance and regulation of an organized militia.

Ok... what’s your point? Please expound.

We have a Second Amendment and should have no security problems in our free States.

Don't grab guns, grab gun lovers and Regulate them Well!

For someone who loves to quote the constitution and such, you have a poor grasp of its meaning.
I’ll give you a hint.... “regulated” as it’s used in the constitution has a different definition that when we use the word “regulate” today.
Now go forth and educate yourself by looking into this. If you can’t figure it out come back and I’ll help you.

 

[Beef_Supreme]

(2) Kenosha Shooter TALKS w/ His Victim - Kyle Rittenhouse Video | LNOD - YouTube

Watch the video. It's a clear case of self-defense.

The prosecutor should be arrested for treason and punished to the full extent of the law. Capital punishment. The people demand it.

All 3 separate incidents where he shot people?
If he was threatened by 3 armed people, he would have been dead.
Only one person he killed was armed, and no weapon was ever drawn on him.

So you don't consider getting whacked with a skateboard as assault ?

It is very likely the second guy was shot when he pulled the gun from KW and his finger was on the trigger.

Real bright being in front the muzzle like that.

The guy he shot was brandishing a gun.

Can't help you there.

The first guy may have been the victim of the same thing (pulling on a gun while standing in front of it).

The first guy who was shot, aka “shoot me nigga” pedo-manlet, was simply having his wish granted. He is on film demanding to be shot, and his wish was fulfilled. Perhaps rittenhouse can work as a mall Santa this holiday season.

It turns out that Joseph Rosenbaum was a very unstable individual. He did 12 years in prison for raping 2 little boys in the ass and molesting 3 other kids. And that's just what he got caught doing. Then while he was in prison he apparently sodomized another inmate and "gassed" several guards. "Gassed" means he shit and pissed in a bag and let it ferment for several days, then used the concoction as a biological/chemical weapon against the prison staff. That was in Arizona.

And, under court order, Joseph Rosenbaum was not legally allowed to have any contact with any minor under 18 years of age. Kyle Rittenhouse was 17. He was also required to register as a sex offender.

Joseph Rosenbaum is on video aggressively taunting people to shoot him.

The day before Joseph Rosenbaum attacked Kyle Rittenhouse, he was discharged from a mental institution. He was in there because he was suicidal. Since he was an indigent homeless person, he was given a care package when he was discharged from the hospital. Toothbrush, toothpaste, soap, mouthwash. That was in the white plastic bag that he threw at Kyle Rittenhouse after the predators had separated him from the pack and cornered him.

Rosenbaum got shot in the groin by his victim. Don't you just love it when some lowlife scumbag child molester gets shot in the groin by a kid with a rifle?

Nice. And nicely broken down.
However I have one point of contention.... you referred to him as Joseph rosenbaum.
This is incorrect. His true name is “shoot-me-nigga pedo-manlet”. It’s like his spirit animal, or Indian name, or some shit.

 

[Jarlaxle]

What's really going to screw up the Liberal Case against Rittenhouse is the witnesses lack of willingness to come forward and actually testify.

The witnesses are all rioters, people in the act of committing Class A felonies like arson, assault and looting when the shit was coming down. If they testified , they'd have to admit what they were there for.

Bad news for them. Even if the Liberal DA gives them criminal immunity, they still have civil liability. The state can't excuse them for having to pay back for the properties they burned or the property they looted.

I expect most are judgment proof: they have no assets.

 

[JoeB131]

Dipshit.....the videos clearly show that the 3 thugs initiated the attacks against the Hispanic Teenager........he fired in self defense in each case....

You guys can lie about what happened but the video is clear......as is the first hand account by the reporter who saw the first attack....you fucking twit.

the prosecutor and grand jury saw the same tape and indicted him for two counts of murder and four other charges.. you fucking twat.