Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Well I've seen that scenario play out several times in spite of the fact that the self-defense laws in most states specifically state that you can't do that, you can't be the initiator of the confrontation that ends in your shooting and killing someone.Speaking of which, I think there's a playbook forming on how to murder.
1. Instigate someone.
2. Wait for them to attack you.
3. Shoot them.
My father joined the army at age 15 too during WWI. He told me he got far enough to have a chance to shoot a machine gun. His mother finally figured out where he had went and showed up at this training camp and pulled him out.There was a time when a boy of 11 was expected to be proficient enough to hunt the family dinner.I saw a video of a guy being chased and falling, he had an AR 15 (I think), or whatever you call it. He shot one person when on the ground, someone tried to take his weapon, he shot in the air when he got up. He had apparently killed at least one person and one had been shot when attacking him (not sure if he died or not).
The question has been about self defense. The people chasing him apparently did so because he shot someone who was breaking into a car and, he was apparently a citizen militia defending a gas station from attacks.
That's what I can glean from this story from quick reading online, anyone can correct me if I'm wrong.
What is startling to me though, is that this guy is 17. Can he own a guy like that and carry it at that age? If you ask me, no way someone that age should be in that position to begin with. Even a 19 year old hardly has his head working properly, nor even fully formed (I learned that from Hannity of all places). Having a juvenile run around with that weapon is asinine.
This young man was doing the job the police refused to do. He is to be commended.
Many 17 yr. olds also fought in WWII.
My dad applied to the military at age 15, back when nobody care or asked questions.
"Age"?
"18"
"ok fill out these forms and get move over there for your physical".
Maybe you were ready to handle this situation at 17, I know I wasn't. I also don't think those of this age should be behind a wheel, especially on the high way during rush hour, but what do I know
Jumping over peoples points? He said nothing was true in my post and I simply asked how did the teen get into a middle of a right with an assault rife.Yeah, ok... If you say so, you Looney Tune. I won't sit here and argue with your insanity...jumping over and around other people's points, and proving that you're full of anger and animosity as well.
I get that you are very much upset that I bested you while you were busy stuffing your feet in your mouth, but as I stated, you are a hypocrite. Not once have you addressed the content of my comment that you and progressive seem so concerned about. Neither of you are willing to quote nor address my comment. You just troll and flame, accusing me of having the feeling your are experiencing. Anger and animosity, simply because I asked how did the teenager find himself in the middle of a riot with an assault rifle?
I am surprised you are able to respond at all given the level of intelligence or your comments.
then wheres the comment I was responding to for context of my words???I did not pull your comment out of context.why did you pull my comment out of context???
At the 1:22 mark on the video...Colin Noir is a lawyer...
He doesn't sound very optimistic about it.
I expect him to be in violation of this law.
Could be, and they may hang him on that since they are likely going to fail on the murder charges.
Seems pretty clear to me that he was in violation of that law. Not much wiggle room there. "Any person under 18 years of age who possesses or goes armed with a dangerous weapon is guilty of a Class A misdemeanor."
They're going to try to get him on the pre-meditated thing, which I believe is likely true, but will be extremely difficult for the prosecutors to actually prove. Personally, I don't see the murder charges sticking.
I don't see how they get Pre-meditated since in each case he was the one being attacked by the mob.....the reporter was an eye witness to the first provocation, and we have video of the mob attacking him while he was on the ground.
Well he went out of his way to defend a car dealership that he had no connection with. And it can at least be debated how much of a threat the first guy was. Initial claims were that he threw a Molotov cocktail, but I don't think that was the case.
I would argue that he was looking for a fight. He wanted an excuse to use deadly force in self-defense. Kind of like the Florida shooter at the convenient store.
But, even though I believe that may very well be true, I don't think it can be proven. So I think they'll try that, but I don't expect it to stick.
You think he was the one looking for a fight? Not the guy who kept coming at him on multiple videos, the guy who kept aggressing towards armed people? And then chased him?
You think the kid was the one who was there looking to start trouble?
Seriously...… wtf is wrong with you?
It's not an either/or.
The ones who got shot were definitely looking for a fight. No question about that.
I've done security work for a large part of my life, nearly all of it if you count the military...… is a bouncer in a nighclub "looking for a fight"? Yes.
Is he ready willing and able to deal with one? Yes.
Is he there to "instigate" one? No.
There is a fundamental difference here between the rioters who showed up intending to do damage and cause carnage, and the folks who showed up ready and willing to prevent them from doing so.
Does the bouncer of the night club travel across state lines to defend a club he has no connection with just for fun?
How does that distinction make a difference?
He shows up heavily armed in a different state to defend a car lot he has no connection to. Looks like an excuse to me. That's my opinion.
You're entitled to your opinion, no matter how wrong-headed it is.
Carry on, and please avoid jury duty...… don't need you sending some innocent to gaol.
Your entitled to your opinions as well.
I was on a jury not long ago, just some minor case. If I were on this jury, I don't think there would be enough evidence to convict him on murder, so I wouldn't. What I think and what I can prove are different, at least for now unless more evidence rolls in.
I expect him just to get 9 months misdemeanor charge.
I disagree. I believe there's enough evidence to convict him. At least for the first killing. You are legally allowed to use lethal force to prevent an imminent attack you reasonably believe will result in death or great bodily harm.
He did that with the first shot he took, which took Rosenbaum down. Rosenbaum was no longer a threat at that point. The next 3 shots were intended to kill him. Including a shot to the back.
its turning out he didnt kill the first guy,,,still waiting for the investigation,,arent you??
Oh, let's see your evidence he didn't kill the first guy...
He says he did and he was right there.
watch the video posted earlier,,and kyle thought he did but he might be wrong,,,
I'm not hunting for videos. If you can't post it, I'll just assume you're full of shit again.
At the 1:22 mark on the video...Colin Noir is a lawyer...
He doesn't sound very optimistic about it.
I expect him to be in violation of this law.
Could be, and they may hang him on that since they are likely going to fail on the murder charges.
Seems pretty clear to me that he was in violation of that law. Not much wiggle room there. "Any person under 18 years of age who possesses or goes armed with a dangerous weapon is guilty of a Class A misdemeanor."
They're going to try to get him on the pre-meditated thing, which I believe is likely true, but will be extremely difficult for the prosecutors to actually prove. Personally, I don't see the murder charges sticking.
I don't see how they get Pre-meditated since in each case he was the one being attacked by the mob.....the reporter was an eye witness to the first provocation, and we have video of the mob attacking him while he was on the ground.
Well he went out of his way to defend a car dealership that he had no connection with. And it can at least be debated how much of a threat the first guy was. Initial claims were that he threw a Molotov cocktail, but I don't think that was the case.
I would argue that he was looking for a fight. He wanted an excuse to use deadly force in self-defense. Kind of like the Florida shooter at the convenient store.
But, even though I believe that may very well be true, I don't think it can be proven. So I think they'll try that, but I don't expect it to stick.
You think he was the one looking for a fight? Not the guy who kept coming at him on multiple videos, the guy who kept aggressing towards armed people? And then chased him?
You think the kid was the one who was there looking to start trouble?
Seriously...… wtf is wrong with you?
It's not an either/or.
The ones who got shot were definitely looking for a fight. No question about that.
I've done security work for a large part of my life, nearly all of it if you count the military...… is a bouncer in a nighclub "looking for a fight"? Yes.
Is he ready willing and able to deal with one? Yes.
Is he there to "instigate" one? No.
There is a fundamental difference here between the rioters who showed up intending to do damage and cause carnage, and the folks who showed up ready and willing to prevent them from doing so.
Does the bouncer of the night club travel across state lines to defend a club he has no connection with just for fun?
How does that distinction make a difference?
He shows up heavily armed in a different state to defend a car lot he has no connection to. Looks like an excuse to me. That's my opinion.
You're entitled to your opinion, no matter how wrong-headed it is.
Carry on, and please avoid jury duty...… don't need you sending some innocent to gaol.
Your entitled to your opinions as well.
I was on a jury not long ago, just some minor case. If I were on this jury, I don't think there would be enough evidence to convict him on murder, so I wouldn't. What I think and what I can prove are different, at least for now unless more evidence rolls in.
I expect him just to get 9 months misdemeanor charge.
I disagree. I believe there's enough evidence to convict him. At least for the first killing. You are legally allowed to use lethal force to prevent an imminent attack you reasonably believe will result in death or great bodily harm.
He did that with the first shot he took, which took Rosenbaum down. Rosenbaum was no longer a threat at that point. The next 3 shots were intended to kill him. Including a shot to the back.
its turning out he didnt kill the first guy,,,still waiting for the investigation,,arent you??
Oh, let's see your evidence he didn't kill the first guy...
He says he did and he was right there.
watch the video posted earlier,,and kyle thought he did but he might be wrong,,,
I'm not hunting for videos. If you can't post it, I'll just assume you're full of shit again.
I knew you were full of shit. Thanks for confirming it.
You didn't post any evidence the teen murderer didn't kill Rosenbaum -- you posted evidence someone else fired first. That's been known since the NYTimes discovered it. But that guy didn't shoot Rosenbaum, he fired one shot into the air. You can even see his arm is up above his head.
Then about 2-3 seconds later, the teen murderer shoots Rosenbaum 4 times. Then calls a friend to tell him he killed somebody.
Some gave none
At the 1:22 mark on the video...Colin Noir is a lawyer...
He doesn't sound very optimistic about it.
I expect him to be in violation of this law.
If you look at the law you will see that it is so vague that any lawyer could drive a truck through it. Kyle has a dream team legal representation. Just ask Nick Sandmann how good they are. I contributed to his defense yesterday. All Americans should.
If he is somehow guilty of possessing a gun that he should have been carrying because of his age that "crime" sure as hell ain't murder. The killing of the Communists was clear cut self defense. He never should have been charge. The Moon Bat DA is an asshole for charging him. Shame on her!
What's vague about it? The law seems perfectly clear on that infraction. "Any person under 18 years of age who possesses or goes armed with a dangerous weapon is guilty of a Class A misdemeanor."
"that 'crime' sure as hell ain't murder"
Who said a class A misdemeanor is murder? Of course it's not the same thing. I think he's going to get a relatively light sentence of 9 months.
most likely just a fine and a slap on the wrist,,,
and then he can sue the city for allowing violent riots to happen unopposed,,,
And...with Nick Sandmann's lawyer...sue all of the news networks who called him a racist and white supremacist..........
Which networks called
you called him a murderer now youre calling him a good kid,,,If you had watched the videos and read the articles you would know the answers to those questions. He works In Kenosha was helping clean graffiti after work, he also had plans to provide medic assistance to protesters. He and friends were asked to guard the business he was at,and was provided the gun by his friend. He was targeted And attacked by the rioters because he was protecting a business they wanted to destroy.Murder does make a hero.More kids need to do what this kid did.. he’s a heroGeez...he is just a kid. And he is going to have to live with this the rest of his life. Where the hell were his parents?Update: Here's the suspect:
It is still unclear whether this is a right-wing militia member or a left-wing protester belonging to a group such as antifa.
Liability would be very high for police if found to be giving right-wing militia members the right to kill. But let's not rush to judgment.
Details should be revealed soon:
Illinois teen arrested in fatal shooting at Kenosha protest, police say | CNN
A 17-year-old Illinois resident connected to an overnight shooting during a protest in Kenosha, Wisconsin, was taken into custody Wednesday morning, according to police in Antioch, Illinois.www.cnn.com
No 17 year old should have been put in that position or allowed to bring a gun that to a protest, you sick ****! They are not mature, they do not have good judgement, he got in way over his head, and ended two lives and ruined his own forever. And from all accounts he doesn’t seem like a bad kid! Where in the hell were his parents? How did he get a gun?
At least 16 shots were fired during said attack not from his gun...including the first shot that started the whole thing.
I already pointed out he was carrying a medic bag. Like I said, I don't think he is a bad kid. But a lot of idiotic decisions were made by "adults". He should NOT have armed (that was illegal) and should not have been guarding a business. He's a minor.
And there are more questions.
There was a curfew. That is usually a pretty good tool in preventing riots.
Why were the demonstrators out there after the curfew?
Why were armed citizens out there after curfew?
Why were the police out there - doing nothing to disperse the crowd, but passing out water to this private militia?
Why did the police allow an armed suspect (and, if you watch one of the videos, it shows demonstrators calling to the police that Rittenhouse had just shot someone) - walk on past and go home?
There was a lot wrong here that could have easily been prevented if people did their jobs, and that doesn't even touch on what happened with Blake. Heads ought to roll.
WTF!!!
And you are overly literal when it suits you. I said from the start I don't think he was a bad kid, but killing those people should not have happened and he should not have been there. Your main tool in defending this is to shred the characters of the dead folks so as to justify killing.
Maybe if those criminals...and yes, at least two of them were convicted criminals...hadn't tried to attack him they would still be alive...that's on them, not him....
That's an unproven claim so far. One, from what I read (the first guy he shot who was unarmed) had a 2002 conviction for statutory rape. Do you have something more definite and provable, like maybe a mainstream (even Fox) article showing they were convicted criminals? Haven't seen it, so I'm asking seriously because there is a lot of fakery flying around.
When someone guns down a person what does a crowd usually do? Run and scream, go after the shooter, attempt to subdue the shooter (and it's noteworthy that the police appeared to be doing NOTHING other than letting him walk away).
If someone has any sort of criminal record, does that in and of itself make them a legitimate target in your eyes? Does political ideology in and of itself make them a legitimate target? (lots of accusations flying around calling them commies yada yada as if that means it's ok to kill).
back to twisting the facts I see,,,
Which "facts"?
he didnt gun someone down for starters,,,he killed a guy that was chasing him trying to take his gun and when he got cornered he fired in self defense,,,
same goes for the other two,,
now stop lying,,,
Stop lying. He wasn't cornered. He was running between parked cars.
against a wall,,,
Stop lying. He was standing between 2 cars -- which he continued to around one of them after shooting his victim. That is not the definition of "cornered." "Cornered" means he would have had no place else to go. He did. And Wisconsin doesn't have a stand-your-ground law. It was his duty to retreat if he felt threatened.
17 year old being attacked by what a 36 year old pedo---and you think that he shouldn't have shot to defend himself. The boy hid from the pedo all day--------and the pedo just kept going after him and then finally he snuck up on the boy so the boy had to defend himself.
LOL
You still have zero evidence he's a "pedo."
Are you defending a pedo lol what is this mambla?
What pedo?
The one with 4 bullets In his head lol
No one there had 4 bullets in their head. Thanks for admitting you were full of shit all along.
2 bullets? Lol you still don’t know who I’m talking about ? Haha
Keep guessing, lying Russian troll ... no one had 2 shots to the head.
Democrats are supposed to protect citizens, when they don’t hero’s emergeA 17-year-old can’t legally own a firearm in Wisconsin except for hunting purposes and with the permission of a legal guardian and the gun he has was using was one a friend of his in Wisconsin gave him...there's that.How do arrest someone for self defense!? If we don’t get this child out of jail we are doing to let them
Kenosha violence: Juvenile arrested in deadly shooting amid Jacob Blake unrest, Illinois police say
A 17-year-old suspect has been arrested in connection to at least one of the two shooting deaths amid the unrest Tuesday night in Kenosha, Wis., Illinois police confirmed on Wednesday.www.foxnews.com
Arrest all of us! We need to fight back!
LOLyou called him a murderer which to sane people means he was convicted,,,"wheres that proof he was convicted of murder???"wheres that proof he was convicted of murder???LOLOLI really wish you mother fuckers would educate yourself before commenting,,,he worked in the town and the property owner asked them for help,,,
Link please.
Kyle Rittenhouse Defended Himself, ‘Did Nothing Wrong,' Attorney Says
The attorneys representing Kyle Rittenhouse, the Antioch 17-year-old charged with the shooting deaths of two protesters in Kenosha, released a statement Friday night, saying the teen “did nothing wrong” and acted in self-defense. Earlier in the day, a judge agreed to delay for a month a decision...www.nbcchicago.com
Wut?? The teen murderer's attorney is claiming is client is innocent? The nerve.
You really should stop lying. I never said he was convicted. I said it's my opinion his actions amount to murder.
Like I always say, if rightards didn't lie, they'd have absolutely nothing to say.
At the 1:22 mark on the video...Colin Noir is a lawyer...
He doesn't sound very optimistic about it.
I expect him to be in violation of this law.
Could be, and they may hang him on that since they are likely going to fail on the murder charges.
Seems pretty clear to me that he was in violation of that law. Not much wiggle room there. "Any person under 18 years of age who possesses or goes armed with a dangerous weapon is guilty of a Class A misdemeanor."
They're going to try to get him on the pre-meditated thing, which I believe is likely true, but will be extremely difficult for the prosecutors to actually prove. Personally, I don't see the murder charges sticking.
I don't see how they get Pre-meditated since in each case he was the one being attacked by the mob.....the reporter was an eye witness to the first provocation, and we have video of the mob attacking him while he was on the ground.
Well he went out of his way to defend a car dealership that he had no connection with. And it can at least be debated how much of a threat the first guy was. Initial claims were that he threw a Molotov cocktail, but I don't think that was the case.
I would argue that he was looking for a fight. He wanted an excuse to use deadly force in self-defense. Kind of like the Florida shooter at the convenient store.
But, even though I believe that may very well be true, I don't think it can be proven. So I think they'll try that, but I don't expect it to stick.
You think he was the one looking for a fight? Not the guy who kept coming at him on multiple videos, the guy who kept aggressing towards armed people? And then chased him?
You think the kid was the one who was there looking to start trouble?
Seriously...… wtf is wrong with you?
It's not an either/or.
The ones who got shot were definitely looking for a fight. No question about that.
I've done security work for a large part of my life, nearly all of it if you count the military...… is a bouncer in a nighclub "looking for a fight"? Yes.
Is he ready willing and able to deal with one? Yes.
Is he there to "instigate" one? No.
There is a fundamental difference here between the rioters who showed up intending to do damage and cause carnage, and the folks who showed up ready and willing to prevent them from doing so.
Does the bouncer of the night club travel across state lines to defend a club he has no connection with just for fun?
How does that distinction make a difference?
He shows up heavily armed in a different state to defend a car lot he has no connection to. Looks like an excuse to me. That's my opinion.
You're entitled to your opinion, no matter how wrong-headed it is.
Carry on, and please avoid jury duty...… don't need you sending some innocent to gaol.
Your entitled to your opinions as well.
I was on a jury not long ago, just some minor case. If I were on this jury, I don't think there would be enough evidence to convict him on murder, so I wouldn't. What I think and what I can prove are different, at least for now unless more evidence rolls in.
I expect him just to get 9 months misdemeanor charge.
I disagree. I believe there's enough evidence to convict him. At least for the first killing. You are legally allowed to use lethal force to prevent an imminent attack you reasonably believe will result in death or great bodily harm.
He did that with the first shot he took, which took Rosenbaum down. Rosenbaum was no longer a threat at that point. The next 3 shots were intended to kill him. Including a shot to the back.
People with your flawed understanding of the uses of force have sent a lot of innocent people to gaol.
You should be ashamed of that.
You deserve cancer.LOL
Your idea of what men do is sucking cock in prison?? Thst's what that little terrorist is gonna be doing for the rest of his life.
At the 1:22 mark on the video...Colin Noir is a lawyer...
He doesn't sound very optimistic about it.
I expect him to be in violation of this law.
Could be, and they may hang him on that since they are likely going to fail on the murder charges.
Seems pretty clear to me that he was in violation of that law. Not much wiggle room there. "Any person under 18 years of age who possesses or goes armed with a dangerous weapon is guilty of a Class A misdemeanor."
They're going to try to get him on the pre-meditated thing, which I believe is likely true, but will be extremely difficult for the prosecutors to actually prove. Personally, I don't see the murder charges sticking.
I don't see how they get Pre-meditated since in each case he was the one being attacked by the mob.....the reporter was an eye witness to the first provocation, and we have video of the mob attacking him while he was on the ground.
Well he went out of his way to defend a car dealership that he had no connection with. And it can at least be debated how much of a threat the first guy was. Initial claims were that he threw a Molotov cocktail, but I don't think that was the case.
I would argue that he was looking for a fight. He wanted an excuse to use deadly force in self-defense. Kind of like the Florida shooter at the convenient store.
But, even though I believe that may very well be true, I don't think it can be proven. So I think they'll try that, but I don't expect it to stick.
You think he was the one looking for a fight? Not the guy who kept coming at him on multiple videos, the guy who kept aggressing towards armed people? And then chased him?
You think the kid was the one who was there looking to start trouble?
Seriously...… wtf is wrong with you?
It's not an either/or.
The ones who got shot were definitely looking for a fight. No question about that.
I've done security work for a large part of my life, nearly all of it if you count the military...… is a bouncer in a nighclub "looking for a fight"? Yes.
Is he ready willing and able to deal with one? Yes.
Is he there to "instigate" one? No.
There is a fundamental difference here between the rioters who showed up intending to do damage and cause carnage, and the folks who showed up ready and willing to prevent them from doing so.
Does the bouncer of the night club travel across state lines to defend a club he has no connection with just for fun?
How does that distinction make a difference?
He shows up heavily armed in a different state to defend a car lot he has no connection to. Looks like an excuse to me. That's my opinion.
You're entitled to your opinion, no matter how wrong-headed it is.
Carry on, and please avoid jury duty...… don't need you sending some innocent to gaol.
Your entitled to your opinions as well.
I was on a jury not long ago, just some minor case. If I were on this jury, I don't think there would be enough evidence to convict him on murder, so I wouldn't. What I think and what I can prove are different, at least for now unless more evidence rolls in.
I expect him just to get 9 months misdemeanor charge.
I disagree. I believe there's enough evidence to convict him. At least for the first killing. You are legally allowed to use lethal force to prevent an imminent attack you reasonably believe will result in death or great bodily harm.
He did that with the first shot he took, which took Rosenbaum down. Rosenbaum was no longer a threat at that point. The next 3 shots were intended to kill him. Including a shot to the back.
its turning out he didnt kill the first guy,,,still waiting for the investigation,,arent you??
Oh, let's see your evidence he didn't kill the first guy...
He says he did and he was right there.
watch the video posted earlier,,and kyle thought he did but he might be wrong,,,
I'm not hunting for videos. If you can't post it, I'll just assume you're full of shit again.
I knew you were full of shit. Thanks for confirming it.
You didn't post any evidence the teen murderer didn't kill Rosenbaum -- you posted evidence someone else fired first. That's been known since the NYTimes discovered it. But that guy didn't shoot Rosenbaum, he fired one shot into the air. You can even see his arm is up above his head.
Then about 2-3 seconds later, the teen murderer shoots Rosenbaum 4 times. Then calls a friend to tell him he killed somebody.
He called the police to tell them he shot someone.
At the 1:22 mark on the video...Colin Noir is a lawyer...
He doesn't sound very optimistic about it.
I expect him to be in violation of this law.
If you look at the law you will see that it is so vague that any lawyer could drive a truck through it. Kyle has a dream team legal representation. Just ask Nick Sandmann how good they are. I contributed to his defense yesterday. All Americans should.
If he is somehow guilty of possessing a gun that he should have been carrying because of his age that "crime" sure as hell ain't murder. The killing of the Communists was clear cut self defense. He never should have been charge. The Moon Bat DA is an asshole for charging him. Shame on her!
What's vague about it? The law seems perfectly clear on that infraction. "Any person under 18 years of age who possesses or goes armed with a dangerous weapon is guilty of a Class A misdemeanor."
"that 'crime' sure as hell ain't murder"
Who said a class A misdemeanor is murder? Of course it's not the same thing. I think he's going to get a relatively light sentence of 9 months.
most likely just a fine and a slap on the wrist,,,
and then he can sue the city for allowing violent riots to happen unopposed,,,
And...with Nick Sandmann's lawyer...sue all of the news networks who called him a racist and white supremacist..........
Which networks called
you called him a murderer now youre calling him a good kid,,,If you had watched the videos and read the articles you would know the answers to those questions. He works In Kenosha was helping clean graffiti after work, he also had plans to provide medic assistance to protesters. He and friends were asked to guard the business he was at,and was provided the gun by his friend. He was targeted And attacked by the rioters because he was protecting a business they wanted to destroy.Murder does make a hero.More kids need to do what this kid did.. he’s a heroGeez...he is just a kid. And he is going to have to live with this the rest of his life. Where the hell were his parents?Update: Here's the suspect:
It is still unclear whether this is a right-wing militia member or a left-wing protester belonging to a group such as antifa.
Liability would be very high for police if found to be giving right-wing militia members the right to kill. But let's not rush to judgment.
Details should be revealed soon:
Illinois teen arrested in fatal shooting at Kenosha protest, police say | CNN
A 17-year-old Illinois resident connected to an overnight shooting during a protest in Kenosha, Wisconsin, was taken into custody Wednesday morning, according to police in Antioch, Illinois.
No 17 year old should have been put in that position or allowed to bring a gun that to a protest, you sick ****! They are not mature, they do not have good judgement, he got in way over his head, and ended two lives and ruined his own forever. And from all accounts he doesn’t seem like a bad kid! Where in the hell were his parents? How did he get a gun?
At least 16 shots were fired during said attack not from his gun...including the first shot that started the whole thing.
I already pointed out he was carrying a medic bag. Like I said, I don't think he is a bad kid. But a lot of idiotic decisions were made by "adults". He should NOT have armed (that was illegal) and should not have been guarding a business. He's a minor.
And there are more questions.
There was a curfew. That is usually a pretty good tool in preventing riots.
Why were the demonstrators out there after the curfew?
Why were armed citizens out there after curfew?
Why were the police out there - doing nothing to disperse the crowd, but passing out water to this private militia?
Why did the police allow an armed suspect (and, if you watch one of the videos, it shows demonstrators calling to the police that Rittenhouse had just shot someone) - walk on past and go home?
There was a lot wrong here that could have easily been prevented if people did their jobs, and that doesn't even touch on what happened with Blake. Heads ought to roll.
WTF!!!
And you are overly literal when it suits you. I said from the start I don't think he was a bad kid, but killing those people should not have happened and he should not have been there. Your main tool in defending this is to shred the characters of the dead folks so as to justify killing.
Maybe if those criminals...and yes, at least two of them were convicted criminals...hadn't tried to attack him they would still be alive...that's on them, not him....
That's an unproven claim so far. One, from what I read (the first guy he shot who was unarmed) had a 2002 conviction for statutory rape. Do you have something more definite and provable, like maybe a mainstream (even Fox) article showing they were convicted criminals? Haven't seen it, so I'm asking seriously because there is a lot of fakery flying around.
When someone guns down a person what does a crowd usually do? Run and scream, go after the shooter, attempt to subdue the shooter (and it's noteworthy that the police appeared to be doing NOTHING other than letting him walk away).
If someone has any sort of criminal record, does that in and of itself make them a legitimate target in your eyes? Does political ideology in and of itself make them a legitimate target? (lots of accusations flying around calling them commies yada yada as if that means it's ok to kill).
back to twisting the facts I see,,,
Which "facts"?
he didnt gun someone down for starters,,,he killed a guy that was chasing him trying to take his gun and when he got cornered he fired in self defense,,,
same goes for the other two,,
now stop lying,,,
Stop lying. He wasn't cornered. He was running between parked cars.
You mean till he tripoed and one of them ran up and hit him in the head with a skakeboard and another tried to pull a gun as he was trapped on the ground----he didn't look like he was between cars to me. And don't even get me started on the first---the child didn't fire the first shots----who did is the question is who did. Was it the pedo midget who was the first killed, was it his buddy the skateboard dude, or was it the one armed bandit who was trying to hide the gun in his wasteband.......maybe dippy didn't realize how to aim gun which is likely since he couldn't even get the kid as he laid on the ground.
Try harder to pay attention -- we were talking about his first murder.
I've seen the video dozens of times. You're lying.
Slobbers the USMB fucking moron.
It all on video ... Rosenbaum chased across the front of a boarded up auto shop. The teen murderer ran in between 2 cars where Rosenbaum followed and got shot as he got near the teen murderer. It was then the teen murderer shot Rosenbaum and then continued walking between those same two cars, emerging past them and then circling around the car on the left. That shows he was not cornered. He just stopped running.
He was def cornered.. it’s a figure of speech .. don’t get hung up on speech .. it was self
Defense
Lying Russian troll, "cornered" means no other means of escape. He clearly had another means of escape as he continued walking between the cars, emerging on the back side of them, just as I said and just as you were too retarded to understand.
You also claimed Kyle shot Rosenbaum when there's no way you can see that in the video.
Fucking moron, the teen murderer says he killed him. Are you so deranged you think you know better than him??
Kyle didn't murder anyone. He may believe he killed Rosenbaum, but I've seen some analysis that another shooter may have been the source of those shots. There were a number of people with firearms in the crowd, like one of the other assailants. A shot was fired just before the action in near the car dealership.
The bottom line is that Rosenbaum was chasing Kyle, so he got what he deserved.
Fucking moron, the first shot was fired into the air. Of course, I'm saying that to a fucking moron who denied what he saw with his own eyes on video; so there's that.
You can't see it, moron. It's 200 yards away and in the dark. Even the police admitted they didn't see what happened in that moment.
Fucking moron, I showed you how the scene was described in the charging document which matches the video. Anyone with a functioning brain and eyes can see it.
@ 0:35
Try posting words.
At the 1:22 mark on the video...Colin Noir is a lawyer...
He doesn't sound very optimistic about it.
I expect him to be in violation of this law.
If you look at the law you will see that it is so vague that any lawyer could drive a truck through it. Kyle has a dream team legal representation. Just ask Nick Sandmann how good they are. I contributed to his defense yesterday. All Americans should.
If he is somehow guilty of possessing a gun that he should have been carrying because of his age that "crime" sure as hell ain't murder. The killing of the Communists was clear cut self defense. He never should have been charge. The Moon Bat DA is an asshole for charging him. Shame on her!
What's vague about it? The law seems perfectly clear on that infraction. "Any person under 18 years of age who possesses or goes armed with a dangerous weapon is guilty of a Class A misdemeanor."
"that 'crime' sure as hell ain't murder"
Who said a class A misdemeanor is murder? Of course it's not the same thing. I think he's going to get a relatively light sentence of 9 months.
most likely just a fine and a slap on the wrist,,,
and then he can sue the city for allowing violent riots to happen unopposed,,,
And...with Nick Sandmann's lawyer...sue all of the news networks who called him a racist and white supremacist..........
Which networks called
you called him a murderer now youre calling him a good kid,,,If you had watched the videos and read the articles you would know the answers to those questions. He works In Kenosha was helping clean graffiti after work, he also had plans to provide medic assistance to protesters. He and friends were asked to guard the business he was at,and was provided the gun by his friend. He was targeted And attacked by the rioters because he was protecting a business they wanted to destroy.Murder does make a hero.More kids need to do what this kid did.. he’s a heroGeez...he is just a kid. And he is going to have to live with this the rest of his life. Where the hell were his parents?Update: Here's the suspect:
It is still unclear whether this is a right-wing militia member or a left-wing protester belonging to a group such as antifa.
Liability would be very high for police if found to be giving right-wing militia members the right to kill. But let's not rush to judgment.
Details should be revealed soon:
Illinois teen arrested in fatal shooting at Kenosha protest, police say | CNN
A 17-year-old Illinois resident connected to an overnight shooting during a protest in Kenosha, Wisconsin, was taken into custody Wednesday morning, according to police in Antioch, Illinois.
No 17 year old should have been put in that position or allowed to bring a gun that to a protest, you sick ****! They are not mature, they do not have good judgement, he got in way over his head, and ended two lives and ruined his own forever. And from all accounts he doesn’t seem like a bad kid! Where in the hell were his parents? How did he get a gun?
At least 16 shots were fired during said attack not from his gun...including the first shot that started the whole thing.
I already pointed out he was carrying a medic bag. Like I said, I don't think he is a bad kid. But a lot of idiotic decisions were made by "adults". He should NOT have armed (that was illegal) and should not have been guarding a business. He's a minor.
And there are more questions.
There was a curfew. That is usually a pretty good tool in preventing riots.
Why were the demonstrators out there after the curfew?
Why were armed citizens out there after curfew?
Why were the police out there - doing nothing to disperse the crowd, but passing out water to this private militia?
Why did the police allow an armed suspect (and, if you watch one of the videos, it shows demonstrators calling to the police that Rittenhouse had just shot someone) - walk on past and go home?
There was a lot wrong here that could have easily been prevented if people did their jobs, and that doesn't even touch on what happened with Blake. Heads ought to roll.
WTF!!!
And you are overly literal when it suits you. I said from the start I don't think he was a bad kid, but killing those people should not have happened and he should not have been there. Your main tool in defending this is to shred the characters of the dead folks so as to justify killing.
Maybe if those criminals...and yes, at least two of them were convicted criminals...hadn't tried to attack him they would still be alive...that's on them, not him....
That's an unproven claim so far. One, from what I read (the first guy he shot who was unarmed) had a 2002 conviction for statutory rape. Do you have something more definite and provable, like maybe a mainstream (even Fox) article showing they were convicted criminals? Haven't seen it, so I'm asking seriously because there is a lot of fakery flying around.
When someone guns down a person what does a crowd usually do? Run and scream, go after the shooter, attempt to subdue the shooter (and it's noteworthy that the police appeared to be doing NOTHING other than letting him walk away).
If someone has any sort of criminal record, does that in and of itself make them a legitimate target in your eyes? Does political ideology in and of itself make them a legitimate target? (lots of accusations flying around calling them commies yada yada as if that means it's ok to kill).
back to twisting the facts I see,,,
Which "facts"?
he didnt gun someone down for starters,,,he killed a guy that was chasing him trying to take his gun and when he got cornered he fired in self defense,,,
same goes for the other two,,
now stop lying,,,
Stop lying. He wasn't cornered. He was running between parked cars.
You mean till he tripoed and one of them ran up and hit him in the head with a skakeboard and another tried to pull a gun as he was trapped on the ground----he didn't look like he was between cars to me. And don't even get me started on the first---the child didn't fire the first shots----who did is the question is who did. Was it the pedo midget who was the first killed, was it his buddy the skateboard dude, or was it the one armed bandit who was trying to hide the gun in his wasteband.......maybe dippy didn't realize how to aim gun which is likely since he couldn't even get the kid as he laid on the ground.
Try harder to pay attention -- we were talking about his first murder.
I've seen the video dozens of times. You're lying.
Slobbers the USMB fucking moron.
It all on video ... Rosenbaum chased across the front of a boarded up auto shop. The teen murderer ran in between 2 cars where Rosenbaum followed and got shot as he got near the teen murderer. It was then the teen murderer shot Rosenbaum and then continued walking between those same two cars, emerging past them and then circling around the car on the left. That shows he was not cornered. He just stopped running.
He was def cornered.. it’s a figure of speech .. don’t get hung up on speech .. it was self
Defense
Lying Russian troll, "cornered" means no other means of escape. He clearly had another means of escape as he continued walking between the cars, emerging on the back side of them, just as I said and just as you were too retarded to understand.
You also claimed Kyle shot Rosenbaum when there's no way you can see that in the video.
Fucking moron, the teen murderer says he killed him. Are you so deranged you think you know better than him??
Kyle didn't murder anyone. He may believe he killed Rosenbaum, but I've seen some analysis that another shooter may have been the source of those shots. There were a number of people with firearms in the crowd, like one of the other assailants. A shot was fired just before the action in near the car dealership.
The bottom line is that Rosenbaum was chasing Kyle, so he got what he deserved.
Fucking moron, the first shot was fired into the air. Of course, I'm saying that to a fucking moron who denied what he saw with his own eyes on video; so there's that.
You can't see it, moron. It's 200 yards away and in the dark. Even the police admitted they didn't see what happened in that moment.
Fucking moron, I showed you how the scene was described in the charging document which matches the video. Anyone with a functioning brain and eyes can see it.
@ 0:35
Try posting words.
It was this guy View attachment 382024
At the 1:22 mark on the video...Colin Noir is a lawyer...
He doesn't sound very optimistic about it.
I expect him to be in violation of this law.
If you look at the law you will see that it is so vague that any lawyer could drive a truck through it. Kyle has a dream team legal representation. Just ask Nick Sandmann how good they are. I contributed to his defense yesterday. All Americans should.
If he is somehow guilty of possessing a gun that he should have been carrying because of his age that "crime" sure as hell ain't murder. The killing of the Communists was clear cut self defense. He never should have been charge. The Moon Bat DA is an asshole for charging him. Shame on her!
What's vague about it? The law seems perfectly clear on that infraction. "Any person under 18 years of age who possesses or goes armed with a dangerous weapon is guilty of a Class A misdemeanor."
"that 'crime' sure as hell ain't murder"
Who said a class A misdemeanor is murder? Of course it's not the same thing. I think he's going to get a relatively light sentence of 9 months.
most likely just a fine and a slap on the wrist,,,
and then he can sue the city for allowing violent riots to happen unopposed,,,
And...with Nick Sandmann's lawyer...sue all of the news networks who called him a racist and white supremacist..........
Which networks called
you called him a murderer now youre calling him a good kid,,,If you had watched the videos and read the articles you would know the answers to those questions. He works In Kenosha was helping clean graffiti after work, he also had plans to provide medic assistance to protesters. He and friends were asked to guard the business he was at,and was provided the gun by his friend. He was targeted And attacked by the rioters because he was protecting a business they wanted to destroy.Murder does make a hero.More kids need to do what this kid did.. he’s a heroGeez...he is just a kid. And he is going to have to live with this the rest of his life. Where the hell were his parents?Update: Here's the suspect:
It is still unclear whether this is a right-wing militia member or a left-wing protester belonging to a group such as antifa.
Liability would be very high for police if found to be giving right-wing militia members the right to kill. But let's not rush to judgment.
Details should be revealed soon:
Illinois teen arrested in fatal shooting at Kenosha protest, police say | CNN
A 17-year-old Illinois resident connected to an overnight shooting during a protest in Kenosha, Wisconsin, was taken into custody Wednesday morning, according to police in Antioch, Illinois.
No 17 year old should have been put in that position or allowed to bring a gun that to a protest, you sick ****! They are not mature, they do not have good judgement, he got in way over his head, and ended two lives and ruined his own forever. And from all accounts he doesn’t seem like a bad kid! Where in the hell were his parents? How did he get a gun?
At least 16 shots were fired during said attack not from his gun...including the first shot that started the whole thing.
I already pointed out he was carrying a medic bag. Like I said, I don't think he is a bad kid. But a lot of idiotic decisions were made by "adults". He should NOT have armed (that was illegal) and should not have been guarding a business. He's a minor.
And there are more questions.
There was a curfew. That is usually a pretty good tool in preventing riots.
Why were the demonstrators out there after the curfew?
Why were armed citizens out there after curfew?
Why were the police out there - doing nothing to disperse the crowd, but passing out water to this private militia?
Why did the police allow an armed suspect (and, if you watch one of the videos, it shows demonstrators calling to the police that Rittenhouse had just shot someone) - walk on past and go home?
There was a lot wrong here that could have easily been prevented if people did their jobs, and that doesn't even touch on what happened with Blake. Heads ought to roll.
WTF!!!
And you are overly literal when it suits you. I said from the start I don't think he was a bad kid, but killing those people should not have happened and he should not have been there. Your main tool in defending this is to shred the characters of the dead folks so as to justify killing.
Maybe if those criminals...and yes, at least two of them were convicted criminals...hadn't tried to attack him they would still be alive...that's on them, not him....
That's an unproven claim so far. One, from what I read (the first guy he shot who was unarmed) had a 2002 conviction for statutory rape. Do you have something more definite and provable, like maybe a mainstream (even Fox) article showing they were convicted criminals? Haven't seen it, so I'm asking seriously because there is a lot of fakery flying around.
When someone guns down a person what does a crowd usually do? Run and scream, go after the shooter, attempt to subdue the shooter (and it's noteworthy that the police appeared to be doing NOTHING other than letting him walk away).
If someone has any sort of criminal record, does that in and of itself make them a legitimate target in your eyes? Does political ideology in and of itself make them a legitimate target? (lots of accusations flying around calling them commies yada yada as if that means it's ok to kill).
back to twisting the facts I see,,,
Which "facts"?
he didnt gun someone down for starters,,,he killed a guy that was chasing him trying to take his gun and when he got cornered he fired in self defense,,,
same goes for the other two,,
now stop lying,,,
Stop lying. He wasn't cornered. He was running between parked cars.
You mean till he tripoed and one of them ran up and hit him in the head with a skakeboard and another tried to pull a gun as he was trapped on the ground----he didn't look like he was between cars to me. And don't even get me started on the first---the child didn't fire the first shots----who did is the question is who did. Was it the pedo midget who was the first killed, was it his buddy the skateboard dude, or was it the one armed bandit who was trying to hide the gun in his wasteband.......maybe dippy didn't realize how to aim gun which is likely since he couldn't even get the kid as he laid on the ground.
Try harder to pay attention -- we were talking about his first murder.
I've seen the video dozens of times. You're lying.
Slobbers the USMB fucking moron.
It all on video ... Rosenbaum chased across the front of a boarded up auto shop. The teen murderer ran in between 2 cars where Rosenbaum followed and got shot as he got near the teen murderer. It was then the teen murderer shot Rosenbaum and then continued walking between those same two cars, emerging past them and then circling around the car on the left. That shows he was not cornered. He just stopped running.
He was def cornered.. it’s a figure of speech .. don’t get hung up on speech .. it was self
Defense
Lying Russian troll, "cornered" means no other means of escape. He clearly had another means of escape as he continued walking between the cars, emerging on the back side of them, just as I said and just as you were too retarded to understand.
You also claimed Kyle shot Rosenbaum when there's no way you can see that in the video.
Fucking moron, the teen murderer says he killed him. Are you so deranged you think you know better than him??
Kyle didn't murder anyone. He may believe he killed Rosenbaum, but I've seen some analysis that another shooter may have been the source of those shots. There were a number of people with firearms in the crowd, like one of the other assailants. A shot was fired just before the action in near the car dealership.
The bottom line is that Rosenbaum was chasing Kyle, so he got what he deserved.
Fucking moron, the first shot was fired into the air. Of course, I'm saying that to a fucking moron who denied what he saw with his own eyes on video; so there's that.
You can't see it, moron. It's 200 yards away and in the dark. Even the police admitted they didn't see what happened in that moment.
Fucking moron, I showed you how the scene was described in the charging document which matches the video. Anyone with a functioning brain and eyes can see it.
@ 0:35
Try posting words.
It was this guy View attachment 382024
Who knew you were green?
At the 1:22 mark on the video...Colin Noir is a lawyer...
He doesn't sound very optimistic about it.
I expect him to be in violation of this law.
Could be, and they may hang him on that since they are likely going to fail on the murder charges.
Seems pretty clear to me that he was in violation of that law. Not much wiggle room there. "Any person under 18 years of age who possesses or goes armed with a dangerous weapon is guilty of a Class A misdemeanor."
They're going to try to get him on the pre-meditated thing, which I believe is likely true, but will be extremely difficult for the prosecutors to actually prove. Personally, I don't see the murder charges sticking.
I don't see how they get Pre-meditated since in each case he was the one being attacked by the mob.....the reporter was an eye witness to the first provocation, and we have video of the mob attacking him while he was on the ground.
Well he went out of his way to defend a car dealership that he had no connection with. And it can at least be debated how much of a threat the first guy was. Initial claims were that he threw a Molotov cocktail, but I don't think that was the case.
I would argue that he was looking for a fight. He wanted an excuse to use deadly force in self-defense. Kind of like the Florida shooter at the convenient store.
But, even though I believe that may very well be true, I don't think it can be proven. So I think they'll try that, but I don't expect it to stick.
You think he was the one looking for a fight? Not the guy who kept coming at him on multiple videos, the guy who kept aggressing towards armed people? And then chased him?
You think the kid was the one who was there looking to start trouble?
Seriously...… wtf is wrong with you?
It's not an either/or.
The ones who got shot were definitely looking for a fight. No question about that.
I've done security work for a large part of my life, nearly all of it if you count the military...… is a bouncer in a nighclub "looking for a fight"? Yes.
Is he ready willing and able to deal with one? Yes.
Is he there to "instigate" one? No.
There is a fundamental difference here between the rioters who showed up intending to do damage and cause carnage, and the folks who showed up ready and willing to prevent them from doing so.
Does the bouncer of the night club travel across state lines to defend a club he has no connection with just for fun?
How does that distinction make a difference?
He shows up heavily armed in a different state to defend a car lot he has no connection to. Looks like an excuse to me. That's my opinion.
You're entitled to your opinion, no matter how wrong-headed it is.
Carry on, and please avoid jury duty...… don't need you sending some innocent to gaol.
Your entitled to your opinions as well.
I was on a jury not long ago, just some minor case. If I were on this jury, I don't think there would be enough evidence to convict him on murder, so I wouldn't. What I think and what I can prove are different, at least for now unless more evidence rolls in.
I expect him just to get 9 months misdemeanor charge.
I disagree. I believe there's enough evidence to convict him. At least for the first killing. You are legally allowed to use lethal force to prevent an imminent attack you reasonably believe will result in death or great bodily harm.
He did that with the first shot he took, which took Rosenbaum down. Rosenbaum was no longer a threat at that point. The next 3 shots were intended to kill him. Including a shot to the back.
People with your flawed understanding of the uses of force have sent a lot of innocent people to gaol.
You should be ashamed of that.
Are you always this dramatic as you clutch your pearl necklace, Karen? I have sent no one to prison.
LOL....Weak tactic my left wing friend....Trying to catagorize the case as open and shut before any investigation, let alone a trial is the folly of a loser.
