The Rittenhouse Verdict

[Jarlaxle]

Sadly, given what he has been put through, he likely won’t be able to get a job in either of those professions. He’ll probably have to move far from Kenosha as well. Exonerated, but his life won’t ever be “normal” again.

If he's smart, he is already planning on changing his name (to something like Smith) and getting cosmetic surgery and colored contacts.

 

[Jarlaxle]

I know this kid is going to be getting a lot of money from interviews, articles, and possible book publications...........I just hope he does something smart and invests in his future instead of blowing it all on weapons.

I hope he has the sense to invest in cosmetic surgery, a name change, and move out of the area.

 

[frigidweirdo]

That’s not when he was shot. He was shot when he tried to take Rittenhouse’s gun from him.


Conflation. Neither Rittenhouse nor anyone else “knew” there was going to be violence.


If Rosenbaum, Huber and Grosskreutz had not wanted to get involved in vandalism and arson, they would have stayed home.

And the fact that Rittenhouse was from out of state is a moot point. Many of the rioters there and in other riots around the country over the last two years did not live in the cities or states where the riots took place.


Again, conflation. There’s no reason to assume that if one sees self defense in this case then he would see self defense in any and every case.

You think Rittenhouse didn't know there'd be violence? Why did they take guns with them then? There had been plenty of rioting and violence leading up to this specific situation.

He went to that particular place to stop a car dealership from getting vandalized. So, clearly they knew there'd be violence.

I don't think it's a moot point. Why did Rittenhouse go there?

This is what he said: "So, people are getting injured, and our job is to protect this business. Part of my job is also to help people. If there is somebody hurt, I'm running into harm's way. That's why I have my rifle, because I have to protect myself, obviously. I also have my med kit."

This was BEFORE the shooting happened. He knew he'd be going into a dangerous situation, he said it. He also thinks that going into a dangerous situation, when he's not the police, not the National Guard, not anybody who should be going into such a situation, knowing that he'll use his weapon if he gets into problems.

And he did just that. And he equates this to "self defense". For him "self defense" is dealing with the problems that real "self defense" would have been staying the hell away from that area.

I'm not going to justify any of those who Rittenhouse shot. Those people were probably there for similar reasons as Rittenhouse.

It's like boxers, if two boxers want to beat each other up, fine. If they start killing people, not fine.

In the UK there was a famous "self defense" case of Tony Martin who shot a burglar as he was climbing out of the window. A lot of people, the sort that would defend Rittenhouse, would say that Martin was defending himself. However a lot of people believe Martin used his gun to kill, when he didn't need to defend himself.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Sure but the people that got killed by This little turd should have been carrying also. That would have stopped the killing spree real quick. Doe that work for you. The gun Bubbas world has been celebrated,

They couldn't carry...all were prohibited from owning guns due to criminal records.

 

[BackAgain]

Saw this. Hadda share it.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Pimple boy couldn't legally have a the gun he had.

Out and out lie.

 

[Jarlaxle]

What’s the point of this?

Deflection and distraction from the fact he has no argument.

 

[SweetSue92]

Against all odds, the jury reached the correct verdict.

The Left loses. Again.

 

[OhPleaseJustQuit]

What is a "clear case of self defense"?

Rosenbaum, for example, threw a bag at Rittenhouse.

A bag. Was Rittenhouse in danger from a dude throwing a bag?

But the thing here is on what scale do you describe "self defense"?

If you go to a place where you know there's going to be a fight, are you defending yourself? Or is your confrontation in itself a lack of self defense? Had Rittenhouse not wanted to have been hurt, he could have stayed in his own state.

I think for people who see self defense as justifiable in almost any circumstance, then they'll see self defense here. For those who see self defense as requiring it to be justifiable and a last resort, they won't see it as self defense.

What a wonderful collection of snowflake logic! You don't want to get hurt? Hide under your bed. Kyle must take responsibility for being there, begging to be bashed in the head with a skateboard. Kyle just needed to take responsibility for safeguarding his own well-being.

If that logic that works so well, then why aren't all of the leftist mob just hiding under their beds from the dreaded scamdemic? Don't they have the responsibility for protecting themselves?

You morons are so entertaining.

 

[OhPleaseJustQuit]

They couldn't carry...all were prohibited from owning guns due to criminal records.

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

You think Rittenhouse didn't know there'd be violence? Why did they take guns with them then? There had been plenty of rioting and violence leading up to this specific situation.

He went to that particular place to stop a car dealership from getting vandalized. So, clearly they knew there'd be violence.

Why are you asking why Rittenhouse went where he knew there’d be violence but not asking why the rioters committed the violence?

I don't think it's a moot point. Why did Rittenhouse go there?

Unless you’re going to ask why other people came from out of town and out of state to Kenosha (some to commit violence) then the question as to why Rittenhouse did is moot.

Sorry, but you can’t have it both ways. If coming from out of town is a point worth pursuing then you have to ask the question of everyone who did, not just Rittenhouse.

This is what he said: "So, people are getting injured, and our job is to protect this business. Part of my job is also to help people. If there is somebody hurt, I'm running into harm's way. That's why I have my rifle, because I have to protect myself, obviously. I also have my med kit."

This was BEFORE the shooting happened. He knew he'd be going into a dangerous situation, he said it. He also thinks that going into a dangerous situation, when he's not the police, not the National Guard, not anybody who should be going into such a situation, knowing that he'll use his weapon if he gets into problems.

You do know that Grosskreutz was armed, yes? For that matter, so was the dipshit who fired his gun in the air when Rosenbaum was chasing Rittenhouse.
So, why are you not criticizing Grosskreutz and the other guy for bringing firearms to a volatile situation?

And he did just that. And he equates this to "self defense". For him "self defense" is dealing with the problems that real "self defense" would have been staying the hell away from that area.

If so then they ALL should have stayed away.

I'm not going to justify any of those who Rittenhouse shot. Those people were probably there for similar reasons as Rittenhouse.

Then why does Rittenhouse, more than the others, warrant your contempt?

It's like boxers, if two boxers want to beat each other up, fine. If they start killing people, not fine.

Um, Grosskreutz was armed - meaning that both of them were armed. Beyond that, Rosenbaum chased Rittenhouse and attempted to take his gun from him.

Now, I don’t know about you but, if I am armed and someone is chasing me and I’m trying to get away but the guy catches up to me and tries to take my gun, I’m fucking shooting and his ass is going down.

Rosenbaum is dead today precisely because of his own reckless actions.

In the UK there was a famous "self defense" case of Tony Martin who shot a burglar as he was climbing out of the window. A lot of people, the sort that would defend Rittenhouse, would say that Martin was defending himself. However a lot of people believe Martin used his gun to kill, when he didn't need to defend himself.

You’re equating a guy who was actively and demonstrably chased and assaulted to a guy who shot a burgler as he was leaving?

 

[Wild Bill Kelsoe]

That kind of thinking is what caused this whole crisis. Now at least half the country is thinking there is no justice in our justice system anymore.

Rioting is illegal. Don't want to get an ass whipping for rioting? Then, don't riot. Without the riot, the Rittenhouse trial would have never happened.

 

[Wild Bill Kelsoe]

It has nothing to do with the victims.

It has to do with someone who went out and killed some people, who went looking for trouble.

Had he been black, had he been black and killed black people, or while people, or anyone else, he'd have been put away for a long, long time.

No, not everything is connected with race. But most things have something to do with IMAGE. And certain people have a good image and others a bad image

Rosenblum, Huber and Grosskeutz weren't looking for trouble?

 

[gipper]

You think Rittenhouse didn't know there'd be violence? Why did they take guns with them then? There had been plenty of rioting and violence leading up to this specific situation.

He went to that particular place to stop a car dealership from getting vandalized. So, clearly they knew there'd be violence.

I don't think it's a moot point. Why did Rittenhouse go there?

This is what he said: "So, people are getting injured, and our job is to protect this business. Part of my job is also to help people. If there is somebody hurt, I'm running into harm's way. That's why I have my rifle, because I have to protect myself, obviously. I also have my med kit."

This was BEFORE the shooting happened. He knew he'd be going into a dangerous situation, he said it. He also thinks that going into a dangerous situation, when he's not the police, not the National Guard, not anybody who should be going into such a situation, knowing that he'll use his weapon if he gets into problems.

And he did just that. And he equates this to "self defense". For him "self defense" is dealing with the problems that real "self defense" would have been staying the hell away from that area.

I'm not going to justify any of those who Rittenhouse shot. Those people were probably there for similar reasons as Rittenhouse.

It's like boxers, if two boxers want to beat each other up, fine. If they start killing people, not fine.

In the UK there was a famous "self defense" case of Tony Martin who shot a burglar as he was climbing out of the window. A lot of people, the sort that would defend Rittenhouse, would say that Martin was defending himself. However a lot of people believe Martin used his gun to kill, when he didn't need to defend himself.

Americans who consume exclusively corporate media news must be scratching their head and balls, wondering how on earth could this white supremacist terrorist insurrectionist be found not guilty.

 

[braalian]

In the UK there was a famous "self defense" case of Tony Martin who shot a burglar as he was climbing out of the window. A lot of people, the sort that would defend Rittenhouse, would say that Martin was defending himself. However a lot of people believe Martin used his gun to kill, when he didn't need to defend himself.

He was defending his property against a lowlife burglar. If you don’t want to get shot, I guess you shouldn’t break in and rob peoples houses.

 

[braalian]

White supremacists understands that being on code starts at home.

So they have to make examples of white people. "Get in line or we will treat you like the n*ggas"

His goal was to ambush black people



But Shittenhouse tried doing it in a cowardly by asking people "Hey do you want some medical help" and that's what led him to the altercation with the two dead white people.

This case is important to teach the next generation of white supremacists by saying "Look if you go out there and kill black people we will have your back. But you have to be on the code of white supremacy !!! You can't be out here helping negroes !!!"

Those whites who died were seen as helping black people.

White supremacists want 2 take the George Zimmerman- Trayvon Martin to another level.

They want a system were they can kill any black man, women or child, at any time and say "I feared for my life" and the system will have his back

That's the goal

That why Kyle could walk up to police fully armed and them not be bothered by him one bit because he was deputized by the police to do their dirty work. And lets be clear black people were the first people to put his name out there because they stalled on releasing his name so could they delete all his social media

This is the precedent that they want to set but that precedent can go both ways, meaning if they want to kill black people, then we have the right to respond with maxium retaliation too.

Remember Elliot Rodger ? He shot a bunch of white girls because he was angry the white females were not sexually on code.

Did you forget about Anders Brevik ? He shot 100 white people in Norway and killed most of em. Why ? He shot and killed them because to him they are not on code.

This is part of white pathology. "If you do not assist us in oppressing these n*ggas...you can be next"

What the heck does “on code” mean?

 

[Paul Essien]

What the heck does “on code” mean?

On code simply means "You have to be on our team. You can't be out there helping the negroes. You have to assist in oppressing these negroes"

That's why they (Those whites who shittenhouse shot) were shot because they was not "on code"

 

[gipper]

On code simply means "You have to be on our team. You can't be out there helping the negroes. You have to assist in oppressing these negroes"

That's why they (Those whites who shittenhouse shot) were shot because they was not "on code"

One of the guys Rittenhouse killed was screaming the N word. I’d thought you’d be happy he’s dead.

 

[braalian]

On code simply means "You have to be on our team. You can't be out there helping the negroes. You have to assist in oppressing these negroes"

That's why they (Those whites who shittenhouse shot) were shot because they was not "on code"

Whatever. Were they’re being “not on code” involve attacking Rittenhouse?

 

[Paul Essien]

One of the guys Rittenhouse killed was screaming the N word. I’d thought you’d be happy he’s dead.

Proof ?