Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Rittenhouse did not provoke any attack he was fleeing.Wisconsin Legislature: 939.48
docs.legis.wisconsin.gov
(c) A person who provokes an attack, whether by lawful or unlawful conduct, with intent to use such an attack as an excuse to cause death or great bodily harm to his or her assailant is not entitled to claim the privilege of self-defense.
Pointing a weapon at somebody is provoking an attack.Rittenhouse did not provoke any attack he was fleeing.
www.buzzfeednews.com
You guys keep saying he acted in self defense. You seem to ignore that he stupidly put himself in danger by arming himself and participating in a violent riot.he acted in self-defense.
Unless, of course, you believe the people he shot had a right to chasehim down with intent to harm.
C’mon. He went out looking for trouble and he found it.Rittenhouse did not provoke any attack he was fleeing.
You have to factor in that Rittenhouse illegally purchased a firearm, transported it across state lines into another state where he illegally possessed it.You guys keep saying he acted in self defense. You seem to ignore that he stupidly put himself in danger by arming himself and participating in a violent riot.
He obtained possession of that gun that day in Wisconsin after paying a friend to illegally purchase it for him. That friend has been charged with a crime as well.You have to factor in that Rittenhouse illegally purchased a firearm, transported it across state lines into another state where he illegally possessed it.
And committed those crimes with the intent of using his firearm against other people.
Sorry. I made the assumption he took possession in Ilinois.He obtained possession of that gun that day in Wisconsin after paying a friend to illegally purchase it for him. That friend has been charged with a crime as well.
I your own mind, the facts differ.C’mon. He went out looking for trouble and he found it.
And again, he did not participate in the riot. You know, repeating a lie over and over does not somehow make it truth.You guys keep saying he acted in self defense. You seem to ignore that he stupidly put himself in danger by arming himself and participating in a violent riot.
Where's the evidence that says the others wanted to beat him to death?Wisconsin law says that if a person is under 18, and possess a dangerous weapon they are committing misdemeanor. Rittenhouse protected himself from rioters shooting at him and trying to beat him to death. Had he not been armed, he would most likely be dead today. These are facts jurors will have to consider in November.
He was in possession of the rifle illegally...False.
In each of the instances where he shot someone, he was being chased.
Whatever he may have done to provoke being chased, as soon as he disengaged - ran away - his right to in self-defense reset.
So says WI law.
Unless you believe the people chasing him had the right to harm him, you cannot help but agree.
“I your own mind?” What does that even mean?I your own mind, the facts differ.
Such facts are completely relevant because they define exactly which crimes Rittenhouse is to be charged with.He obtained possession of that gun that day in Wisconsin after paying a friend to illegally purchase it for him. That friend has been charged with a crime as well.
When and where he took possession of the rifle is irrelevant. He acted foolishly and recklessly. He also acted criminally. He needs to be held accountable
I don’t care where he took possession. It doesn’t change the fact that he was possessed it illegally. Still to me, that’s the least of his problems.Such facts are completely relevant because they define exactly which crimes Rittenhouse is to be charged with.
He conspired to take possession of a firearm that even if he was old enough, was illegal because he wasn't a state resident.
I your own mind, the facts differ.
This isn’t a RINO issue.It was incredibly stupid to bring a 17 year old vigilante from out of state. Do these rinos EVER THINK
Watch the videos, he was being chased and knocked to the ground and threatened with a skateboard. The other guy chasing him had a handgun. Also he was shot at earlier in another video. Yes, the verdict should be based on actual facts, real videos, discovery and testimony hopefully instead of MSM news story fairytales to which you apparently lazily ascribe.Where's the evidence that says the others wanted to beat him to death?
It doesn't exist.
Also, verdicts aren't based on what "most likely" would've happened. They're based on what actually happened...
So, Rittenhouse was helping the victims. His firearm was for his protection. WTF is wrong with you? You gut a burr up your Butt for Rittenhouse or something? You are making up your own motives for another's actions and ignoring the facts while letting your emotions take over.His actions prove his intent, based on the number of laws he broke in furtherance of his later actions.
What he did was not by accident. It was done with premeditation of using the firearm against other people.
