Current Events > Kyle Rittenhouse Storms Off Stage

(+) Yeah! (+)

lol at the still poor moderating.

Again - people in this topic that have done no research into the case whatsoever and try to manipulate narratives for their own purposes

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/d/d98162db.jpg

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/3/3e0ad1dc.jpg

Self defense means you were attacked and then you defended yourself.

How many people did Kyle attack before he was attacked? Zero.

What did he do when he was attacked? Run away.

If someone attacks me, I run away, am chased, get kncoked over, turn around and finally fight back, yeah.... thats self defense. Open and shut.

And btw George zimmerman is a great example! He's guilty asf and should be in prison for life. Know what he did? Found a kid, profiled him; chased him down and attacked him. Trayvon fought back too. If he'd have won that fight, and killed zimmerman; it'd be open and shut self defense.

Same scenario.

for rittenhouse defenders, how do you reconcile the fact that he showed up to a protest with a fucking rifle?

People defending rittenhouse probably think stand your ground laws make for good open and shut self defense too. Just making a mockery of real self defense.

Well no stand your ground laws just get applied to situations where you didnt even have to stand your ground, its basically licdnse to shoot someone for any reason whether or not legitimate. That's not what were discussing.

Were discussing someone who was randomly attacked by two individuals he never met who explicitly stated their intent to kill him, and ran away until given no choice to but defend his life. It achieves every prerequisite for self defense imaginable, objectively.

Why did he show up to the protest with a rifle?

Do you believe that people carry rifles in public with no intention to use them?

Whole bunch of people including legitimate protectors were exercising their rights that night.

Just like shangyboos, it's obvious that the real reason you're on Rittenhouse's side here is because you disagree with the protestors (wonder why). Just admit it.

He shot someone, so a crowd chased him. He was an active shooter at that point.

Do we want good guys to tackle armed gunmen involved in a shooting or not.

You can't play this good guy with a gun narrative then throw it out the window when there's an active shooter who will claim they were a victim. These people saw a man shoot another man, chased after him to disarm the situation. He then shot other people.

Its not just self defense. You do not show up as a protest dressed like that without the intent of looking for trouble, but maybe Im too Euro to understand this. I dont believe people who even own a gun like that are normal people.

He shot someone, so a crowd chased him. He was an active shooter at that point.

Do we want good guys to tackle armed gunmen involved in a shooting or not.

Whole bunch of people including legitimate protectors were exercising their rights that night. Thankfully those two guys who attacked him weren't.

Why thankfully?

Because those guys were described as being violent and dangerous all night, and they would've not only killed Kyle but possibly others. The one guy in particular had an extended criminal record with heinous crimes, alledgedly shouted racial slurs at people that night and was described by various eyewitnesses to be instigating conflicts all night. We'd be having a very different discussion if he wss the one with a gun.

Entire cities burned, right?

Because those guys were described as being violent and dangerous all night, and they would've not only killed Kyle but possibly others.

It's a good thing Rittenhouse had a gun

It's a fine thing they were killed because they were potentially violent,

That's actually a really good point. There was one of those fabled "good guys with a gun" at that event. It was Gaige Grosskreutz. He responded to the active shooter and had the shooter in his sights, then froze. Fair play, it should be really hard to take a human life, so I definitely can't fault him for being unable to do so. He came to that realization at the absolute worst possible time though, right after having announced himself as a threat to the active shooter who had already proven that he was very willing to end a human life.

Self defense means you were attacked and then you defended yourself.

I'm still expecting some deep red douchebag district to elect him to congress in a few years.

Its not just self defense. You do not show up as a protest dressed like that without the intent of looking for trouble, but maybe Im too Euro to understand this. I dont believe people who even own a gun like that are normal people.

That's where this piece comes into play.

Rittenhouse is a great example to use for teaching self defense if you wanted to show what not to do. Talk about poor life choices

protectors

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/3/3e0ad1dc.jpg

Self defense means you were attacked and then you defended yourself.

How many people did Kyle attack before he was attacked? Zero.

What did he do when he was attacked? Run away.

If someone attacks me, I run away, am chased, get kncoked over, turn around and finally fight back, yeah.... thats self defense. Open and shut.

And btw George zimmerman is a great example! He's guilty asf and should be in prison for life. Know what he did? Found a kid, profiled him; chased him down and attacked him. Trayvon fought back too. If he'd have won that fight, and killed zimmerman; it'd be open and shut self defense.

Same scenario.

Quick question: would Kyle Rittenhouse have had to defend himself if he had stayed home that night? Yes or no?

I DONT disagree with the protestors at all. All that stuff that happened happened because a cop murdered an unarmed black man and it got caught on video. Without these protests showing the will of the people he may well have gotten away with that murder. Not acceptable.

Im against guns in general but any one of the protectors who were carrying i fully understand why given the situation.

I have nothing to admit to lol.

I was a poster back when it was happening, and if folks like you hadn't gotten 261 nuked from orbit, it would be obvious where I stood then too. Nothing changed, the protests were the people expressing discontent that the police system is used to abuse a marginalized community, of which I am a part of, frequently and without consequence.

The only people who legitimately think that 261 was shut down because it was a liberal echo chamber are subreddit chuds, especially since its already been confirmed by people in the know that none of that was a factor.

Fandom didn't want a dedicated politics board, just like their other sites, so they axed it.

Toonstrack used to get suspended on 261 all the time for posting racist content.

Toonstrack used to get suspended on 261 all the time for posting racist content.

I personally don't think it was fair when the judge refused to allow gun charges or his prior and post actions to be addressed during the trial.

Motive wasn't allowed to be established and that alone taints the trial for me. You can disagree, and that's perfectly fine, but I think a trial for murder should absolutely allow evidence of intent.

"I wish I had my gun" shouldn't have been dismissed by the judge. Hanging out with known white supremacists shouldn't have been dismissed. If that was indeed him on video beating the shit out of a teenage girl, that should have been allowed at the trial. Not to mention dismissing his charges of illegally obtaining a gun, crossing state lines, then using it in the act of a crime.