Poll of the Day > Kyle Rittenhouse spent his Entire STIMULUS CHEQUE to buy the AR-15 Gun!!!

(+) Yeah! (+)

17 y/o Trailer Trash, Kyle Rottenhouse has spoken out in a jailhouse interview and said "I feel i had to protect myself" and told the Washington Post "i would have died that night if i didn't" and then revealed he paid for the AR-15 he used that night using his STIMULUS MONEY and gave it to his 19 y/o friend to buy since he was too young, who is also charged!!

The money came through after he was furloughed from the YMCA lifeguard due to COVID-19 and received 1200 from the government. Rifles of the type he could buy retail from 700 to 2000

Wisconsin state law does allow minors to shoot target practice under adult supervision but prohibited to carry or owning in public

18 y/o Dominic Black said he purchased the gun at a hardware store and kept it in Kyle's house. He bail is set at 2500 felony charges for supplying a weapon to a minor causing death

Wendy Rittenhouse, the queen heifer had been planning on applying for a firearm owner's identification card in Illinois and said she sees nothing wrong with teenagers possessing arsenal

Kyle said "Ever since i was little, i couldn't decide if i wanted to be a police officer or firefighter or a paramedic. I do consider myself patriotic. I love our country"

In explaining on the graffiti he was pictured cleaning he said "I wasn't mad but i was disappointed that they spray painted a school. Helping the community i worked for, cleaning it, made me feel like i was having a positive impact on the community. I was going into a place where people had guns and God forbid somebody brought a gun to me and decided to shoot me. I wanted to be protected, which i ended up having to protect myself".

He said he DOESN'T regret his decision in murdering the men and bringing a gun

Wendy says she feels bad for Mr Blake which caused the riots but said the police should have done their job in protecting businesses and not letting people like her son do the work for them

Trump says the shootings may have been JUSTIFIED which has made it a political flashpoint of right wing groups defending Kyle who has now amassed more than 2 million in funds

Did you know that even kids under 18 could get the stimulus cheque?

Killer Lard -

https://i.imgur.com/6VPe3wh.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/7V5pEIO.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/KKi7C2l.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/jpPEIgx.jpg
---

The only thing I'll ever think about when this kid is brought up is his mother's trainwreck of a TV interview.

"H-he's my... my son. And I know him!

_"

It's really quite baffling how many people blew their stimulus cheques immediately on luxury purchases. I can only presume they're people that were in denial about the gravity of the situation and figured it would all blow over in a couple weeks, but even that assumption is quite monumentally stupid.

---

Full Throttle posted...

He said he DOESN'T regret his decision in murdering the men and bringing a gun

No he didn't.
---

Revelation34 posted...

No he didn't.

What's he in jail for Rev?

---

EvilMegas posted...

What's he in jail for Rev?

Self defense. Reread what duckbear's line was anyway.
---

adjl posted...

It's really quite baffling how many people blew their stimulus cheques immediately on luxury purchases. I can only presume they're people that were in denial about the gravity of the situation and figured it would all blow over in a couple weeks, but even that assumption is quite monumentally stupid.

Hes seventeen, so probably doesnt pay for anything other than a cell phone.

---

zebatov posted...

Hes seventeen, so probably doesnt pay for anything other than a cell phone.

Presumably his parents do pay for his cost of living, though, so it would only be reasonable to use his stimulus to help support that. At least, I'm guessing that was the reasoning behind giving stimulus cheques to any minors. If we're going to accept the premise that minors don't have significant expenses and are therefore making a reasonable choice to blow their cheque on luxuries, then minors shouldn't be getting stimulus cheques.

---

adjl posted...

Presumably his parents do pay for his cost of living, though, so it would only be reasonable to use his stimulus to help support that. At least, I'm guessing that was the reasoning behind giving stimulus cheques to any minors. If we're going to accept the premise that minors don't have significant expenses and are therefore making a reasonable choice to blow their cheque on luxuries, then minors shouldn't be getting stimulus cheques.

I'm surprised he got one I'm pretty sure if he was still claimed as a dependent on the parent's tax returns the check his mother got would have jest been larger. Shit, they are extremely restrictive on kids coming straight out of high school getting free financial aid to go to college. You have to turn 23 or 24 if memory serves before they will even consider just looking at your own income and not your parents when dealing with free financial aid from the government.

When my dad was 14, he just walked into a hardware store and bought a rifle off the shelf. It blows my mind to think of that happening anymore the way kids are so fucking shitty now.

---

Here in the "real world" it's spelled "check".

---

Judgmenl posted...

Here in the "real world" it's spelled "check".

Doesn't literally only ONE country on Earth spell it that way?

---

WTF is a cheque?

You mean check? Minors got covid checks?

Revelation34 posted...

Self defense. Reread what duckbear's line was anyway.

citation needed

Revelation34 posted...

Self defense

Sure bud.

---

BlackScythe0 posted...

WTF is a cheque?

You mean check? Minors got covid checks?

citation needed

There is absolutely no way he said the word murder.
---

Revelation34 posted...

There is absolutely no way he said the word murder.

Citation needed

BlackScythe0 posted...

Citation needed

Duckbear's mother.
---

Raddest_Chad posted...

When my dad was 14, he just walked into a hardware store and bought a rifle off the shelf. It blows my mind to think of that happening anymore the way kids are so fucking shitty now.

you can pretty much still do that

Cacciato posted...

you can pretty much still do that

They will sell a rifle to a 14 year old?

I assumed there was more steps than that, though I'm sure in most states an adult can get one.

Here in NC I walked into a gun shop to check out the guns. Wasnt really wanting to fork out money for something I would probably never shoot but out of curiosity I asked how I could buy one and he told me it required me to get some sort of approval paper or permission from the sheriffs office.

---

Waaaiiit. So it was a recent acquisition? I hadn't been following the story closely enough to know that, but that makes it pretty conclusively damning that it was a case of having a shiny new toy and just dying to use it.

---

adjl posted...

It's really quite baffling how many people blew their stimulus cheques immediately on luxury purchases. I can only presume they're people that were in denial about the gravity of the situation and figured it would all blow over in a couple weeks, but even that assumption is quite monumentally stupid.

He's 17 and was likely living with his folks. How did you expect somebody his age and in his circumstance to spend the the money? And this is less a luxury than other things he might have done.

That said, is that really the price they run for?

adjl posted...

Presumably his parents do pay for his cost of living, though, so it would only be reasonable to use his stimulus to help support that. At least, I'm guessing that was the reasoning behind giving stimulus cheques to any minors. If we're going to accept the premise that minors don't have significant expenses and are therefore making a reasonable choice to blow their cheque on luxuries, then minors shouldn't be getting stimulus cheques.

Again, he's 17. Have you ever met a 17 y/o? Or remember when you were 17? They're not terribly likely to just hand over large amounts to their parents if they can avoid it. And most parents wouldn't ask for it if they could avoid it.

Shadowbird_RH posted...

Waaaiiit. So it was a recent acquisition? I hadn't been following the story closely enough to know that, but that makes it pretty conclusively damning that it was a case of having a shiny new toy and just dying to use it.

Which is just shitty reasoning.

---

Shadowbird_RH posted...

Waaaiiit. So it was a recent acquisition? I hadn't been following the story closely enough to know that, but that makes it pretty conclusively damning that it was a case of having a shiny new toy and just dying to use it.

My understanding is it was purchased for this event. So yea he got it specifically to kill some people.

adjl posted...

It's really quite baffling how many people blew their stimulus cheques immediately on luxury purchases. I can only presume they're people that were in denial about the gravity of the situation and figured it would all blow over in a couple weeks, but even that assumption is quite monumentally stupid.

to be fair, that was the entire point of the stimulus money.

literally in the name stimulus, to stimulate the economy by purchasing things.

yes, smarter people saved it, or paid off bills, but a fair amount of people didn't really need to and could spend it as they saw fit to.

anecdotally, my family and i didn't really need one, but we still qualified and got one.

my "portion" of the money went towards pre-ordering the ps5 and series x, while my wife opted to buy pretty much a new wardrobe. our kid got a bunch of toys. none of us really needed these things, or needed that money to be able to do those things, but since we had it, it did feel a smidge better spending it on those things than it probably would have.

not everyone had the luxury of that, though.

---

Shadowbird_RH posted...

Waaaiiit. So it was a recent acquisition? I hadn't been following the story closely enough to know that, but that makes it pretty conclusively damning that it was a case of having a shiny new toy and just dying to use it.

Lol.
---

Aaantlion posted...

Again, he's 17. Have you ever met a 17 y/o? Or remember when you were 17? They're not terribly likely to just hand over large amounts to their parents if they can avoid it. And most parents wouldn't ask for it if they could avoid it.

I didn't blow large amounts of money simply because I had it when I was 17, either, even without the very obvious issue of a growing pandemic and incoming economic recession. Even at 17, I had enough situational awareness to know that said pandemic meant I should probably hang on to that money in case my family fell on hard times in the months to come, and I definitely would have done so if my parents raised that concern with me (especially since they generally respected my financial autonomy and I could comfortably trust that they would let me keep it if it turned out they didn't need it, and wouldn't ask unless they really did).

Teenagers do have common sense. Heck, on average, I wouldn't be surprised if teenagers understand the ramifications of this pandemic better than adults, on average (though that wouldn't be that hard, given some of their competition). There's absolutely room to criticize his poor judgement, even though he's a teenager (in fact, there's always room to criticize teenagers' poor judgement, since without that criticism, they can't learn better).

Shadowbird_RH posted...

Waaaiiit. So it was a recent acquisition? I hadn't been following the story closely enough to know that, but that makes it pretty conclusively damning that it was a case of having a shiny new toy and just dying to use it.

Better than that, he wasn't legally allowed to buy it due to being a minor, so he got a 19-year-old friend to buy it for him.

likehelly posted...

to be fair, that was the entire point of the stimulus money.

literally in the name stimulus, to stimulate the economy by purchasing things.

Ehh, yes and no. The idea is to stimulate the economy, but the need to do so was arising/expected to arise due to everybody having less money in the near future. It shouldn't have been hoarded indefinitely (since that's a major contributor to recessions), but blowing it all at once - particularly on items made outside the US (meaning the money loses its ability to stimulate local economies) - also isn't ideal.

Ultimately, it should be spent, yes, and anyone who doesn't actually need the extra money doesn't need to save it for the upcoming rainy days (there's room to question whether or not such people should have received the cheques, but that's another issue), but blowing it immediately still is not very sensible for the vast majority of people.

---

adjl posted...

I didn't blow large amounts of money simply because I had it when I was 17, either, even without the very obvious issue of a growing pandemic and incoming economic recession. Even at 17, I had enough situational awareness to have known that said pandemic meant I should probably hang on to that money in case my family fell on hard times in the months to come, and I definitely would have done so if my parents raised that concern with me (especially since they generally respected my financial autonomy and I could comfortably trust that they would let me keep it if it turned out they didn't need it, and wouldn't ask unless they really did).

Then you were hardly the typical 17 y/o, and I very much suspect you knew that even at the time.

adjl posted...

Teenagers do have common sense. Heck, on average, I wouldn't be surprised if teenagers understand the ramifications of this pandemic better than adults (though that wouldn't be that hard, given some of their competition). There's absolutely room to criticize his poor judgement, even though he's a teenager (in fact, there's always room to criticize teenagers' poor judgement, since without that criticism, they can't learn better).

Regardless, most teens who got that money were similarly spending it on things they didn't need. Hell, many adults were doing the same. (And, to Helly's point, that kinda is what a stimulus is supposed to do.)

Other than the fact that he acted illegally in making a straw purchase, I don't consider buying a gun to be poor judgment. Especially since a gun certainly has a more practical component in this day and age than it normally would due to widespread civil unrest. When emergency services are overtaxed, they're not able to respond in a prompt manner which is a problem when seconds can mean the difference between life and death.

---

Aaantlion posted...

Then you were hardly the typical 17 y/o, and I very much suspect you knew that even at the time.

I knew enough peers that were similarly responsible with their money. I also knew plenty that weren't. Doesn't mean I can't hold them to a higher standard than they're currently meeting.

Aaantlion posted...

Especially since a gun certainly has a more practical component in this day and age than it normally would due to widespread civil unrest.

Which is why I'm sure you're about to share a link that demonstrates a measurable rise in crimes that might necessitate a firearm for self-defense stemming from said "widespread civil unrest," particularly in Rittenhouse's neighbourhood.

---

adjl posted...

Which is why I'm sure you're about to share a link that demonstrates a measurable rise in crimes that might necessitate a firearm for self-defense stemming from said "widespread civil unrest," particularly in Rittenhouse's neighbourhood.

You're arguing what, that property and violent crimes don't happen during riots? Because that's about as divorced from reality as you can get.

And your counterpoint is what, unless you see an uptick in crime in a neighborhood people should also feel compelled to leave their doors unlocked? Because that doesn't even happen in Canada. Michael Moore had to check a few doors before he got the footage he needed.

---

Aaantlion posted...

You're arguing what, that property crimes don't happen during riots? Because that's about as divorced from reality as you can get.

I'm inviting you to share the empirical basis that you believe Rittenhouse would have had for expecting to need a new firearm (never mind that it's one that isn't exactly well-suited for home defense) by providing statistics on rising property crimes in his area. Since that is your point and all.

---

adjl posted...

Ultimately, it should be spent, yes, and anyone who doesn't actually need the extra money doesn't need to save it for the upcoming rainy days (there's room to question whether or not such people should have received the cheques, but that's another issue), but blowing it immediately still is not very sensible for the vast majority of people.

yes i did mention that

---

Indeed.

---

adjl posted...

I'm inviting you to share the empirical basis that you believe Rittenhouse would have had for expecting to need a new firearm (never mind that it's one that isn't exactly well-suited for home defense) by providing statistics on rising property crimes in his area. Since that is your point and all.

Given that the current major nation-wide issue is widescale rioting where you might be faced with multiple home invaders, an AR makes *perfect* sense. Regardless, it's a practical choice even for ordinary home defense. And at a time when you might not be able to get the cops to respond to a call because they're tied up elsewhere, a gun is more practical than a security system and a security system is generally a very sensible investment.

---

Aaantlion posted...

Given that the current major nation-wide issue is widescale rioting

Yes, this is the current major nation-wide issue, not a pandemic or anything.

---

Aaantlion posted...

Given that the current major nation-wide issue is widescale rioting where you might be faced with multiple home invaders

---

It's the major nation-wide issue if you follow Fox news.

Same way you can get depressed over a video game console if you follow it enough. Then you stop doing that and realize none of your major problems in life will ever effect you.

Like how I was into Anita Sarkeesian hate and my someone asked me what view I had on politics. It was at that moment I realized my world view was ass. Then I got a job and saw how pitiful the low wage worker really is and what politics is really about, problems that effect your average person.

---

Zareth posted...

Yes, this is the current major nation-wide issue, not a pandemic or anything.

I mean he did try saying the virus wasnt real at the beginning. So not shocking hes trying to distract.

---

Aaantlion posted...

Given that the current major nation-wide issue is widescale rioting where you might be faced with multiple home invaders, an AR makes *perfect* sense. Regardless, it's a practical choice even for ordinary home defense. And at a time when you might not be able to get the cops to respond to a call because they're tied up elsewhere, a gun is more practical than a security system and a security system is generally a very sensible investment.

lololololololololololololololololololololololol

Uh citation needed.

Cacciato posted...

you can pretty much still do that

No you fucking can't. Lol wtf

Aaantlion posted...

Given that the current major nation-wide issue is widescale rioting where you might be faced with multiple home invaders

Yes, that does seem to be your premise. I'm inviting you to share the empirical basis that I'm sure you have for believing that facing multiple home invaders is more likely for the average person now than it was prior to the "widespread civil unrest" you speak of. You seem rather convinced of this, after all, and it only seems fair to presume that you are so convinced because you have seen convincing evidence and not because you're gullible enough to fall for alt-right fearmongering. At least, it did seem fair, until you spent three posts simply reiterating your point instead of taking advantage of my generosity. Now I'm not sure quite what to think.

Aaantlion posted...

Regardless, it's a practical choice even for ordinary home defense.

You'd generally be better off with a handgun than any sort of rifle for home defense. Long barrels work against you in close quarters, plus it's not exactly practical to keep a weapon of that size close to hand. Toss in that higher penetration dramatically increases the risk of shooting through walls/doors accidentally and potentially hitting the people you're trying to protect, and it's really not ideal. It's better than nothing, but if home defense is what you want, a handgun or shotgun would be more sensible (the latter has some of the same unwieldiness issues, but offsets that by not needing to be aimed as precisely).

Bearing in mind that I've told you all of this at least once before, and there's really no excuse for making the same mistake again. Please pay more attention this time.

---

OhhhJa posted...

No you fucking can't. Lol wtf

Yes you fucking can. Lol wtf

especially in rural areas with when it comes to hunting rifles

you bump that age up to 16 and the list gets bigger. And once you hit 18 you walk out with a long gun the same day in a majority of states.

Cacciato posted...

Yes you fucking can. Lol wtf

especially in rural areas with when it comes to hunting rifles

you bump that age up to 16 and the list gets bigger. And once you hit 18 you walk out with a long gun the same day in a majority of states.

Even in rural areas, you'd be hard pressed to find a place that will sell a rifle to someone without ID

adjl posted...

You'd generally be better off with a handgun than any sort of rifle for home defense. Long barrels work against you in close quarters, plus it's not exactly practical to keep a weapon of that size close to hand.

That's what SBRs and PCRs are for, but check your state's licensing on those.
---

BlackScythe0 posted...

My understanding is it was purchased for this event. So yea he got it specifically to kill some people.

It's really easy to buy a gun in April and claim it was for an event in August after all.
---

Revelation34 posted...

It's really easy to buy a gun in April and claim it was for an event in August after all.

Citation needed

BlackScythe0 posted...

Citation needed

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2020/11/10/kenosha-dominick-black-gun-charges-rittenhouse/
---

Revelation34 posted...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2020/11/10/kenosha-dominick-black-gun-charges-rittenhouse/

Well, there goes that narrative. Not only was the gun bought in April, but someone else bought it for him because he's 17

---

Far-Queue posted...

Nice anecdotal "evidence." Also, being a combat veteran doesn't make your opinion more valid than anyone else's. Also also, nice to see someone finally admitting the rioters there were violent

OhhhJa posted...

Nice anecdotal "evidence." Also, being a combat veteran doesn't make your opinion more valid than anyone else's. Also also, nice to see someone finally admitting the rioters there were violent

Nothing he said was wrong.