Why is the far left so upset that a 17 year old Patriot shoot arsonists and looters?

[progressive hunter]

Two nights ago, the Great Patriot, Defender of Kenosha, and Guardian of the Republic, Kyle Rittenhouse, suppressed an unlawful riot in Kenosha where countless businesses have been burnt down, looted and forced out of business.

The police were no where to be found, unable to act and carry out their function of maintaining Law and Order.

So the citizens of the area took up arms, exercising their Second Amendment right to suppress violent riot, arson and looting and to suppress a communist insurrection.

It's almost as if the far left wants to take our Second Amendment rights so they can abolish the police and then rain chaos upon our communities (problem, reaction...solution?), and then institute their new police force under the flag of communism to restore civilization.

So what he did was legal?

Absolutely. He should also be awarded the Medal of Freedom.

If it turns out that what he did was illegal, would you support appropriate jail time?

I think he should have is gun ownership rights taken away....because it's clear he didn't handle himself well.
If it was me...I wouldn't be there in the first place.
But if I had to be there, I guarantee that there would be alot more bodies to clean up.

He handled himself fine.

The Great Patriot, Defender of Kenosha and Guardian of Republic, Kyle Rittenhouse, will be acquitted by a Jury of his Peers, the townsfolk of Kenosha who have suffered immense harm by the hands of Rioters, Rapists, Arsonists, Looters and Thugs.

No, he will not be acquitted and will be in your old cell in prison.

He'll likely be acquitted of unlawful killing...but convicted of carrying a firearm while under the legal age to do so. In fact I suspect he'll be allowed to plead to that and it will be settled.

And don't forget interstate flight to avoid prosecution.

I think the prosecuting attorney would be very happy to allow him to plead to any felony...but he likely won't, IMO.

I wouldn't either after reading this.

Does Kyle Rittenhouse Have a Self-Defense Claim?

If it is true...he is going to walk away from this a free person.

Since he was able to go home...I'm sure his parents went straight to the internet...and the first thing it on every site is "MAKE NO STATEMENT UNTIL YOU SPEAK TO AN ATTORNEY".

So...like I said...he walks. The video show him attempting to disengage not once but twice. There are gunshots that don't come from Rittenhouse. He's going to say he was in fear for his life...and that's that. The prosecutor will be forced to prove that fear was unreasonable...and that's impossible.

Good article...but there is one point not addressed...how does that work given he was illegally carrying a firearm? And frankly, if he walks away free, having killed two people that were not breaking the law, that is way wrong.

I think too...it's important ... article says, at the beginning and then at the end, like parenthesis:

There can be no question that Rittenhouse and whatever adults were in charge of him made idiotic decisions. Minors should not stand guard at riots play-acting at being cops.

Where the f*** were this kid’s parents?

Those idiotic decisions cost lives.

they were breaking the law when they attacked him,,,not to mention the rioting and looting they were doing,,,

you really need to stop lying,,,

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Watching terrorist logic is fascinating. The terrorists have the right ro descend on Kenosha from out of town. The boy has no right to come there at all.the terrorists have the right to loot businesses and burn then down Anybody who attempts to prevent this is a criminal vigilante.

The terrorists have the right to try to kill a 17 year old trying to protect a business from the terrorists.the boy is called a mass murderer for trying to protect himself.

I cry for this country seeing the depth to which the left has fallen since I was a kid. It used to be "ask not what your country can do for you" , now its "lets just tear this shit down and who cares who we hurt."

You miscreants should be ashamed of yourselves.

 

[iceberg]

Two nights ago, the Great Patriot, Defender of Kenosha, and Guardian of the Republic, Kyle Rittenhouse, suppressed an unlawful riot in Kenosha where countless businesses have been burnt down, looted and forced out of business.

The police were no where to be found, unable to act and carry out their function of maintaining Law and Order.

So the citizens of the area took up arms, exercising their Second Amendment right to suppress violent riot, arson and looting and to suppress a communist insurrection.

It's almost as if the far left wants to take our Second Amendment rights so they can abolish the police and then rain chaos upon our communities (problem, reaction...solution?), and then institute their new police force under the flag of communism to restore civilization.

So what he did was legal?

When you start to support vigilantism like this, you are no different than the looters and rioters. This all is coming together in a really bad way and dangerous way for our country.

the one difference here is, you didn't start it. but if you allow looters and rioters to tear shit up - you're a fool if you expect people to sit back and let it happen night after night after night.

It's starting to look like you are following me around from thread to thread.

Can't understand how you can on the one hand condemn rioting (which I agree with that condemnation) and yet support this. It's internally inconsistent.

Vigilantism is lawlessness. No different than rioting. A 17 year old in no way should be out there in a hyper volatile protest with a high powered rifle. IF the facts so far are correct - and the situation if evolving - he shot and KILLED two people and badly injured a third. Self defense is one thing, but in the initial killing, that does NOT appear to be the case.

The picture of him coming out is also disturbing. Funny how a protestor, standing across the street holding up speakers gets shot in the face by a rubber bullet, is vilified as a jobless bum (despite no evidence of actual participation in rioting) but this guy, illegally carrying a high powered rifle (he's 17) is a "hero". MURDER IS NOT HEROIC.

Something is messed up is very messed up right now if this is a "hero". Police are heroes. Undisciplined private paramilitaries are not. They are as dangerous as mobs of rioters. And they are ANTI-LAW. Anyone who believes in taking the law into their own hands and meting out justice is NOT LAWFUL.

What do we know about this kid?

Who is Kyle Rittenhouse? Here's what we know about the 17-year-old charged in the Kenosha protest shooting.

Before he took his rifle to confront the unrest in Kenosha, Wis., on Tuesday, allegedly killing two people and injuring another, Kyle Rittenhouse seemingly idolized one thing: the police. Growing […]

www.boston.com

But brief accounts from neighbors and local institutions paint the picture of a high school dropout who viewed law enforcement officers as his personal heroes.​

​

So much so that, when massive protests, looting and fires broke out in Kenosha following the police shooting of Jacob Blake on Sunday, he crossed state lines to offer his support to local policemen – at times, speaking as if their duties were his, too.​

Police are heavily trained, and they know the law. These guys don't. They have no business acting like police.

There are WAY TOO MANY armed people at these protests and that includes "the left" - you once said once you bring firearms to a protest it is no longer peaceful. Still believe that?

There are WAY TOO MANY OUTSIDERS at these events - both "protestors" and "counter protestors" - they need to be thrown out of town.

Here is what one person said - is she right?

“Maybe he thought he was doing the right thing, but you don’t kill somebody,” she said. “That’s not your business to kill someone for messing with someone else’s business. That’s for the cops to deal with.”​

Hmmm, one of the thugs he killed was a pedo who served 12 years, and the other raped and tortured his girlfriend. Fine upstanding citizens those two were.

The last guy was armed with a pistol and the leader of a communist group who wants to destroy the USA.

I should care about violent felons why?

Just out of morbid curiosity; one of our more prominent posters here did time in prison. If he were shot dead by some guy who just wanted to kill someone, would you care?

First off the dead felons were trying to attack the kid. At that point I simply don't give a shit what happens to them.

They already have shown they don't care about the Rights of others, and they were trying to kill this kid, so no, good riddance to bad rubbish.

Great way to promote senseless killing on top of senseless rioting.

I'm beyond disgusted by what's happening on all sides.

Everyone seems to listen to the same echo chamber here. The so-called claims of "violent rape and assault" and "pedophilia" were deliberately made up to slander them. How low can you go West short of killing someone? Here's an idea for a start - go to the WI Sex Offender Registry and type in his name. Anything pop up? That is a start at trying untangle this complete mess of layered fakery, bogus claims, and incitements for more violence on both sides.

Second. If you claim these three men (2 dead and 1 injured) were rioters, please show it. Acts of rioting, looting and arson are illegal, we all agree on that. Show us that is what THOSE THREE PEOPLE were doing. Are you claiming EVERYONE at the protest was engaged in arson and looting? Then that must include the kid and the armed private militia people right? Or - wait - are you going to make some distinctions? hmmm....how about Right = lawful, Left = unlawful = legitimate....cause that's where you guys are going with this. That's a good starting point for killing people huh? No need to mess around trying to figure out who is engaged in unlawful activity and who is not. Now, if only there is some way to identify them before we kill them and have to make up crap to justify it.

So what happened here?

Here's one news account with no speculation:

Social media footage surfaced surrounding the late-night fatal shooting during unrest. Witness accounts and video indicate the gunman first shot someone at a car lot just before midnight, but details on what sparked that shooting weren't immediately clear. ​

​

The alleged gunman then jogged away, fell in the street, and opened fire again as members of the crowd closed in on him, some appearing to kick and grab at his weapon. According to witness accounts and video footage, police apparently let the gunman walk past them and leave the scene with a rifle over his shoulder and his hands in the air as members of the crowd were yelling for him to be arrested because he had shot people.​

​

When asked why the gunman was not arrested in the moment, Kenosha County Sheriff David Beth said he couldn't say for certain, but noted the chaos surrounding officers that night.​

Since it's all caught on video, it's pretty damn hard to JUSTIFY but easier to UNDERSTAND the shootings - the fact he was there and (illegally) armed to begin with and the fact he was allowed to simply walk away and return to another state and the fact that in that video there was NO criminal behavior being conducted by any of the dead or injured victims speak for themselves. The rest is speculation, differing accounts, deliberate disinformation, witness statements and armchair quarterbacks directing a brief video.

So here are the questions:

WHY WAS A 17 YEAR OLD THERE????? WITH THAT KIND OF WEAPON???? Regardless of what was going on....no one else got shot. Regardless of how I personally feel about private militias (which, as you know, is pretty negative) - THEY didn't shoot anyone either. The police refused to deputize these citizens...for good reason, but they were and imo it's fine to do so - allowed to guard private property. That is FINE. That is what this kid was supposed to be doing, but he LEFT his spot. If he had stayed there nothing would have happened! He was in over his head and he panicked, understandably, when people in the crowd tried to restrain him and get rid of his weapon. As far as anyone could see - the kid was another mass shooter...like Parkland, or any number of events. How could anyone know otherwise when they witness a man shot in the head and another man trotting away with a rifle? He wasn't law enforcement. No badge. No ID. WE FAILED HIM BY ALLOWING HIM TO BE THERE! He is not a hero. He is not a thug. He's a mixed up kid, who badly wanted to be a policeman, who idolized law enforcement, who carried a MEDIC bag in case any protestors needed help, and damn, I just end up crying for HIM, for this one ruined life, someone who really did not seem to have any malice. The dead are dead, but he will have to live with this. It's so wrong.

WHO SHOULD WE BLAME for the riots? Oh, I know the answer that will come from some - commie lefties. Democrats. Sheesh. Get a new playbook. Responsibility ultimately comes down on the mayor. He, along with the city council are responsible for ensuring the safety of his citizens, and their livelyhoods and their homes. Just like if you are the president - it doesn't really matter what you do or don't do - the buck stops here.

But there is a bit more than that because nothing is really simple unless you are a business that got burned out, or the fiancé, with a 2 yr old daughter, of a man who is now dead and slandered, or a 17 year old kid who will now be facing a life he never envisioned, or the family of a man brutally shot in the back at close range, and you just want justice.

What could have been done differently?

Let's start at the beginning. What sparked the demonstrations that then turned into rioting?

A video. A video showing police come up to a man, leaning into his car, grabbing him by the shirt, pulling him back and pumping multiple rounds into his back at close range. It was brutal and against the backdrop of so many videos showing (justifiable and unjustifiable) police violence - there should be no surprise at public reaction. I don't care who the man was, there is no way to watch that (if you are a normal person) and not be horrified. This is our new reality - videos. Of EVERYTHING. Harder to sweep things under the rug, easier to spin, misconstrue, take out of context. Easier to inflame "the masses". Easier to see wrong doing.

What preceded that? Attempts at police reform by the Wisconsin governor, stalled by the legislature. Maybe, just maybe, if people see that something is happening and something is being done, and there is transparency the potential for violence is less. The governor is attempting, AGAIN, to pass it

Yet, the mayor himself appears to be tone deaf to his constituency. If he doesn't listen to the other half, and he fails to provide law and order, he's going to deservedly lose re-election. One example - curfews. A good way to tamp down the potential for violence which always seems to escalate at night. There are demonstrations ongoing described as "mostly peaceful". There is supposed to be a curfew. It's NOT BEING ENFORCED. What the hell?

What is your solution? Blame "commies"? Get real. We have a perfect storm with bitter political divisions at EVERY LEVEL, widespread public anger and unrest, a lot of restrictions and confusion with a pandemic, widespread distrust of our leadership, huge unemployment, Congress incapable of doing their job, a hugely divisive and incompetent president, and the worst recession in ages and more internet disinformation than ever before. Take your pick - it all feeds into the unrest.

But I will say this, I was wrong on one thing, I am now agreeing with you that we need law and order more than ever - we need to stop the violence and that means addressing ALL the participants, not politicizing who to go after. But that can't be with private militias, because they become PART of the problem, fed by the same disinformation as the rest of us. Private entities can guard private property but they have no business roaming the streets or public areas and if they kill someone, they face the law on that. The police and our national guard are the ones who need to be doing this. It's their job, it's what they are trained for. Crowd control. Arresting looters and arsonists. Enforcing curfews.

This kid is not a hero. He's a victim. And we are all to blame.

Amazing how each end has 20/20 vision on the misdeeds of the other end, and are completely blind to their own.

The adults in the room had better take control pretty fucking soon. Wherever they are.

Honest to god Mac, my heart goes out to this 17 yr old, who's life is now ruined. The other's are dead. He even carried a medic kit for heaven's sakes. WE FAILED HIM. . They are not charging him him with murder, but reckless homicide and intentional homicide. That is more appropriate. I don't know if he is being charged as an adult...

"We"? Seriously?

From NPR:

"Another social media account that appeared to belong to Rittenhouse suggests he was also a supporter of President Trump. The TikTok account, with just 25 followers, read "Trump 2020" with a U.S. flag next to it, and, "Bruh I'm just tryna be famous."

If "we" failed this guy, "we" then failed every rampage killer in the history of our nation.

Does society have an influence on these guys who just snap and try to solve their problems with a gun? Yes. But there are literally millions of these guys who are under this influence who do not solve their problems that way.

He doesn't seem like that kind of person. (Ya, he supports Trump, there is that) - but look at what is said about him. He's not an extremist...not affiliated with any extreme groups. Isn't out to start a race war like some of the rightwing nut jobs. It doesn't SEEM as if he "snapped" - it seems more like he chose to participate in a situation he had no business being in, law enforcement allowed it (a real wtf moment) he was ill equip to handle it. He's all lawyered up now and the darling of the right for having murdered leftists so we will never know what he really thinks.

If anything, he is a product of our gun cult vigilante culture.

But maybe I'm wrong, certainly have been a lot.

I see youre back to telling lies,,,
figures,,,

he didnt murder anyone,,,
and who are you to say he had no business being there???

In this type of discussion, there's no difference in choice of words anymore.

As for no business being there: a gun carrying 17 yr old in Wisconsin is ILLEGAL. I would say that means he had no business being there.

if there is no business being there with a gun, then i hope you're just as mad at the people he shot cause they had 'em too.

yet...

Do you seriously TRY to miss the point in your haste to whine about "both sides"?

Were those others 18 and over?

How old is Kyle?

What is Wisconsin law?

there ya go - making sure every hair splits your way.

 

[ThisIsMe]

The Great Patriot, Defender of Kenosha and Guardian of Republic, Kyle Rittenhouse, will be acquitted by a Jury of his Peers, the townsfolk of Kenosha who have suffered immense harm by the hands of Rioters, Rapists, Arsonists, Looters and Thugs.

Two nights ago, the Great Patriot, Defender of Kenosha, and Guardian of the Republic, Kyle Rittenhouse, suppressed an unlawful riot in Kenosha where countless businesses have been burnt down, looted and forced out of business.

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

The police were no where to be found, unable to act and carry out their function of maintaining Law and Order.

So the citizens of the area took up arms, exercising their Second Amendment right to suppress violent riot, arson and looting and to suppress a communist insurrection.

It's almost as if the far left wants to take our Second Amendment rights so they can abolish the police and then rain chaos upon our communities (problem, reaction...solution?), and then institute their new police force under the flag of communism to restore civilization.

The little puke used an assault rifle to murder two unarmed white guys. There was no indication that they were arsonists and/or looters.

View attachment 381044

These Are The Victims Of The Kenosha Protest Shooting

Perfect angels, one tried to bash his head in with a brick, the other with a board. Good riddance to bad rubbish.

The guy was an active shooter. People were trying to subdue him.

He was trying to escape the crime scene.

No he wasnt...at least twice he tried to turn himself in. That doesn't sound like someone trying to run

Two nights ago, the Great Patriot, Defender of Kenosha, and Guardian of the Republic, Kyle Rittenhouse, suppressed an unlawful riot in Kenosha where countless businesses have been burnt down, looted and forced out of business.

The police were no where to be found, unable to act and carry out their function of maintaining Law and Order.

So the citizens of the area took up arms, exercising their Second Amendment right to suppress violent riot, arson and looting and to suppress a communist insurrection.

It's almost as if the far left wants to take our Second Amendment rights so they can abolish the police and then rain chaos upon our communities (problem, reaction...solution?), and then institute their new police force under the flag of communism to restore civilization.

So what he did was legal?

Absolutely. He should also be awarded the Medal of Freedom.

If it turns out that what he did was illegal, would you support appropriate jail time?

I think he should have is gun ownership rights taken away....because it's clear he didn't handle himself well.
If it was me...I wouldn't be there in the first place.
But if I had to be there, I guarantee that there would be alot more bodies to clean up.

He handled himself fine.

The Great Patriot, Defender of Kenosha and Guardian of Republic, Kyle Rittenhouse, will be acquitted by a Jury of his Peers, the townsfolk of Kenosha who have suffered immense harm by the hands of Rioters, Rapists, Arsonists, Looters and Thugs.

No, he will not be acquitted and will be in your old cell in prison.

He'll likely be acquitted of unlawful killing...but convicted of carrying a firearm while under the legal age to do so. In fact I suspect he'll be allowed to plead to that and it will be settled.

And don't forget interstate flight to avoid prosecution.

I think the prosecuting attorney would be very happy to allow him to plead to any felony...but he likely won't, IMO.

I wouldn't either after reading this.

Does Kyle Rittenhouse Have a Self-Defense Claim?

If it is true...he is going to walk away from this a free person.

Since he was able to go home...I'm sure his parents went straight to the internet...and the first thing it on every site is "MAKE NO STATEMENT UNTIL YOU SPEAK TO AN ATTORNEY".

So...like I said...he walks. The video show him attempting to disengage not once but twice. There are gunshots that don't come from Rittenhouse. He's going to say he was in fear for his life...and that's that. The prosecutor will be forced to prove that fear was unreasonable...and that's impossible.

Good article...but there is one point not addressed...how does that work given he was illegally carrying a firearm? And frankly, if he walks away free, having killed two people that were not breaking the law, that is way wrong.

I think too...it's important ... article says, at the beginning and then at the end, like parenthesis:

There can be no question that Rittenhouse and whatever adults were in charge of him made idiotic decisions. Minors should not stand guard at riots play-acting at being cops.

Where the f*** were this kid’s parents?

Those idiotic decisions cost lives.

I agree what he did was wrong, but to say the victims were innocent was wrong. The first one was chasing him likely with intent to do body harm. The second hit him with a skatebaord, and third was approaching him with a pistol in his hand.

Rittenhouse shouldnt have been there, but he was, in no way, randomly firing into a crowd. He was targeting those who were trying to attack him.

 

[iceberg]

Two nights ago, the Great Patriot, Defender of Kenosha, and Guardian of the Republic, Kyle Rittenhouse, suppressed an unlawful riot in Kenosha where countless businesses have been burnt down, looted and forced out of business.

The police were no where to be found, unable to act and carry out their function of maintaining Law and Order.

So the citizens of the area took up arms, exercising their Second Amendment right to suppress violent riot, arson and looting and to suppress a communist insurrection.

It's almost as if the far left wants to take our Second Amendment rights so they can abolish the police and then rain chaos upon our communities (problem, reaction...solution?), and then institute their new police force under the flag of communism to restore civilization.

So what he did was legal?

Absolutely. He should also be awarded the Medal of Freedom.

If it turns out that what he did was illegal, would you support appropriate jail time?

I think he should have is gun ownership rights taken away....because it's clear he didn't handle himself well.
If it was me...I wouldn't be there in the first place.
But if I had to be there, I guarantee that there would be alot more bodies to clean up.

He handled himself fine.

The Great Patriot, Defender of Kenosha and Guardian of Republic, Kyle Rittenhouse, will be acquitted by a Jury of his Peers, the townsfolk of Kenosha who have suffered immense harm by the hands of Rioters, Rapists, Arsonists, Looters and Thugs.

No, he will not be acquitted and will be in your old cell in prison.

He'll likely be acquitted of unlawful killing...but convicted of carrying a firearm while under the legal age to do so. In fact I suspect he'll be allowed to plead to that and it will be settled.

And don't forget interstate flight to avoid prosecution.

I think the prosecuting attorney would be very happy to allow him to plead to any felony...but he likely won't, IMO.

I wouldn't either after reading this.

Does Kyle Rittenhouse Have a Self-Defense Claim?

If it is true...he is going to walk away from this a free person.

Since he was able to go home...I'm sure his parents went straight to the internet...and the first thing it on every site is "MAKE NO STATEMENT UNTIL YOU SPEAK TO AN ATTORNEY".

So...like I said...he walks. The video show him attempting to disengage not once but twice. There are gunshots that don't come from Rittenhouse. He's going to say he was in fear for his life...and that's that. The prosecutor will be forced to prove that fear was unreasonable...and that's impossible.

Good article...but there is one point not addressed...how does that work given he was illegally carrying a firearm? And frankly, if he walks away free, having killed two people that were not breaking the law, that is way wrong.

I think too...it's important ... article says, at the beginning and then at the end, like parenthesis:

There can be no question that Rittenhouse and whatever adults were in charge of him made idiotic decisions. Minors should not stand guard at riots play-acting at being cops.

Where the f*** were this kid’s parents?

Those idiotic decisions cost lives.

they were breaking the law when they attacked him,,,not to mention the rioting and looting they were doing,,,

you really need to stop lying,,,

well that would really make the conversations a lot shorter.

 

[HereinVirginia]

This boy has the right to self-defense.

Period.

So do the guys he's shooting.

not when they are attempting to murder him.

You mean after he attempted to murder them? Oh wait. He did. No attempt about it. The two he killed weren't even armed....(and yes I'm using "murder" loosely because nuance means nothing here).

You are factually wrong. The kid was RUNNING away from the first guy he shot. He was then RUNNING AWAY from the next two guys he shot. What part of RUNNING away is not making it through your head?

What part of he shouldn't have shot them or, IN FACT - let's be FACTUAL - what part of he had no business being there? You know how I feel about vigilantism, and private militias accountable to no one, so I won't go there. But at least the ADULTS who were there protecting private property, managed NOT to kill anyone, NOT to "lose it", NOT to get into a situation like that. Only HE DID. And you can't blame the guys chasing him - he KILLED someone already. And he was armed ILLEGALLY. It should never have happened.

Unfortunately, the intangibles you’ve mentioned are conjecture. It’s more emotion that reality.

This boy has the right to self-defense.

Period.

So do the guys he's shooting.

not when they are attempting to murder him.

You mean after he attempted to murder them? Oh wait. He did. No attempt about it. The two he killed weren't even armed....(and yes I'm using "murder" loosely because nuance means nothing here).

You are factually wrong. The kid was RUNNING away from the first guy he shot. He was then RUNNING AWAY from the next two guys he shot. What part of RUNNING away is not making it through your head?

What part of he shouldn't have shot them or, IN FACT - let's be FACTUAL - what part of he had no business being there? You know how I feel about vigilantism, and private militias accountable to no one, so I won't go there. But at least the ADULTS who were there protecting private property, managed NOT to kill anyone, NOT to "lose it", NOT to get into a situation like that. Only HE DID. And you can't blame the guys chasing him - he KILLED someone already. And he was armed ILLEGALLY. It should never have happened.

You’re argument doesn’t hold water simply because it is an opinion. Now, should he have been there? He had every right. It is irrelevant that he was younger, underage, or had a gun illegally. He was attacked by grown adults in a mob as far as I know a this point, without provocation.

I counter with this, the convicted felon with a gun drawn as Kyle was sitting on the ground should not have been there either. Had the savages never advanced at Kyle, nothing would have happened.

A similar case in terms of illegally using or possessing a firearm is happening in Virginia.

An employee used a gun against three people as they broke into his place of employment. He was sleeping there that night and used the gun to defend himself and the property. He cant posses or use a firearm. The firearm was not his, it was his boss who owned it. So, is he justified or does he simply get killed? It’s tough but, I would think the circumstances would allow for defense of ones self. Different but similar to Kenosha.

 

[IM2]

The Great Patriot, Defender of Kenosha and Guardian of Republic, Kyle Rittenhouse, will be acquitted by a Jury of his Peers, the townsfolk of Kenosha who have suffered immense harm by the hands of Rioters, Rapists, Arsonists, Looters and Thugs.

Two nights ago, the Great Patriot, Defender of Kenosha, and Guardian of the Republic, Kyle Rittenhouse, suppressed an unlawful riot in Kenosha where countless businesses have been burnt down, looted and forced out of business.

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

The police were no where to be found, unable to act and carry out their function of maintaining Law and Order.

So the citizens of the area took up arms, exercising their Second Amendment right to suppress violent riot, arson and looting and to suppress a communist insurrection.

It's almost as if the far left wants to take our Second Amendment rights so they can abolish the police and then rain chaos upon our communities (problem, reaction...solution?), and then institute their new police force under the flag of communism to restore civilization.

This punk was no patriot. He wasn't even from the area. So I guess the next time some blacks randomly beat the shit out of a white person we can use the excuse of how they were protecting themselves from a possible act of "patriotsm."

The second amendment does not grant the rights you have claimed.

 

[Coyote]

Two nights ago, the Great Patriot, Defender of Kenosha, and Guardian of the Republic, Kyle Rittenhouse, suppressed an unlawful riot in Kenosha where countless businesses have been burnt down, looted and forced out of business.

The police were no where to be found, unable to act and carry out their function of maintaining Law and Order.

So the citizens of the area took up arms, exercising their Second Amendment right to suppress violent riot, arson and looting and to suppress a communist insurrection.

It's almost as if the far left wants to take our Second Amendment rights so they can abolish the police and then rain chaos upon our communities (problem, reaction...solution?), and then institute their new police force under the flag of communism to restore civilization.

So what he did was legal?

When you start to support vigilantism like this, you are no different than the looters and rioters. This all is coming together in a really bad way and dangerous way for our country.

the one difference here is, you didn't start it. but if you allow looters and rioters to tear shit up - you're a fool if you expect people to sit back and let it happen night after night after night.

It's starting to look like you are following me around from thread to thread.

Can't understand how you can on the one hand condemn rioting (which I agree with that condemnation) and yet support this. It's internally inconsistent.

Vigilantism is lawlessness. No different than rioting. A 17 year old in no way should be out there in a hyper volatile protest with a high powered rifle. IF the facts so far are correct - and the situation if evolving - he shot and KILLED two people and badly injured a third. Self defense is one thing, but in the initial killing, that does NOT appear to be the case.

The picture of him coming out is also disturbing. Funny how a protestor, standing across the street holding up speakers gets shot in the face by a rubber bullet, is vilified as a jobless bum (despite no evidence of actual participation in rioting) but this guy, illegally carrying a high powered rifle (he's 17) is a "hero". MURDER IS NOT HEROIC.

Something is messed up is very messed up right now if this is a "hero". Police are heroes. Undisciplined private paramilitaries are not. They are as dangerous as mobs of rioters. And they are ANTI-LAW. Anyone who believes in taking the law into their own hands and meting out justice is NOT LAWFUL.

What do we know about this kid?

Who is Kyle Rittenhouse? Here's what we know about the 17-year-old charged in the Kenosha protest shooting.

Before he took his rifle to confront the unrest in Kenosha, Wis., on Tuesday, allegedly killing two people and injuring another, Kyle Rittenhouse seemingly idolized one thing: the police. Growing […]

www.boston.com

But brief accounts from neighbors and local institutions paint the picture of a high school dropout who viewed law enforcement officers as his personal heroes.​

​

So much so that, when massive protests, looting and fires broke out in Kenosha following the police shooting of Jacob Blake on Sunday, he crossed state lines to offer his support to local policemen – at times, speaking as if their duties were his, too.​

Police are heavily trained, and they know the law. These guys don't. They have no business acting like police.

There are WAY TOO MANY armed people at these protests and that includes "the left" - you once said once you bring firearms to a protest it is no longer peaceful. Still believe that?

There are WAY TOO MANY OUTSIDERS at these events - both "protestors" and "counter protestors" - they need to be thrown out of town.

Here is what one person said - is she right?

“Maybe he thought he was doing the right thing, but you don’t kill somebody,” she said. “That’s not your business to kill someone for messing with someone else’s business. That’s for the cops to deal with.”​

Hmmm, one of the thugs he killed was a pedo who served 12 years, and the other raped and tortured his girlfriend. Fine upstanding citizens those two were.

The last guy was armed with a pistol and the leader of a communist group who wants to destroy the USA.

I should care about violent felons why?

Just out of morbid curiosity; one of our more prominent posters here did time in prison. If he were shot dead by some guy who just wanted to kill someone, would you care?

First off the dead felons were trying to attack the kid. At that point I simply don't give a shit what happens to them.

They already have shown they don't care about the Rights of others, and they were trying to kill this kid, so no, good riddance to bad rubbish.

Great way to promote senseless killing on top of senseless rioting.

I'm beyond disgusted by what's happening on all sides.

Everyone seems to listen to the same echo chamber here. The so-called claims of "violent rape and assault" and "pedophilia" were deliberately made up to slander them. How low can you go West short of killing someone? Here's an idea for a start - go to the WI Sex Offender Registry and type in his name. Anything pop up? That is a start at trying untangle this complete mess of layered fakery, bogus claims, and incitements for more violence on both sides.

Second. If you claim these three men (2 dead and 1 injured) were rioters, please show it. Acts of rioting, looting and arson are illegal, we all agree on that. Show us that is what THOSE THREE PEOPLE were doing. Are you claiming EVERYONE at the protest was engaged in arson and looting? Then that must include the kid and the armed private militia people right? Or - wait - are you going to make some distinctions? hmmm....how about Right = lawful, Left = unlawful = legitimate....cause that's where you guys are going with this. That's a good starting point for killing people huh? No need to mess around trying to figure out who is engaged in unlawful activity and who is not. Now, if only there is some way to identify them before we kill them and have to make up crap to justify it.

So what happened here?

Here's one news account with no speculation:

Social media footage surfaced surrounding the late-night fatal shooting during unrest. Witness accounts and video indicate the gunman first shot someone at a car lot just before midnight, but details on what sparked that shooting weren't immediately clear. ​

​

The alleged gunman then jogged away, fell in the street, and opened fire again as members of the crowd closed in on him, some appearing to kick and grab at his weapon. According to witness accounts and video footage, police apparently let the gunman walk past them and leave the scene with a rifle over his shoulder and his hands in the air as members of the crowd were yelling for him to be arrested because he had shot people.​

​

When asked why the gunman was not arrested in the moment, Kenosha County Sheriff David Beth said he couldn't say for certain, but noted the chaos surrounding officers that night.​

Since it's all caught on video, it's pretty damn hard to JUSTIFY but easier to UNDERSTAND the shootings - the fact he was there and (illegally) armed to begin with and the fact he was allowed to simply walk away and return to another state and the fact that in that video there was NO criminal behavior being conducted by any of the dead or injured victims speak for themselves. The rest is speculation, differing accounts, deliberate disinformation, witness statements and armchair quarterbacks directing a brief video.

So here are the questions:

WHY WAS A 17 YEAR OLD THERE????? WITH THAT KIND OF WEAPON???? Regardless of what was going on....no one else got shot. Regardless of how I personally feel about private militias (which, as you know, is pretty negative) - THEY didn't shoot anyone either. The police refused to deputize these citizens...for good reason, but they were and imo it's fine to do so - allowed to guard private property. That is FINE. That is what this kid was supposed to be doing, but he LEFT his spot. If he had stayed there nothing would have happened! He was in over his head and he panicked, understandably, when people in the crowd tried to restrain him and get rid of his weapon. As far as anyone could see - the kid was another mass shooter...like Parkland, or any number of events. How could anyone know otherwise when they witness a man shot in the head and another man trotting away with a rifle? He wasn't law enforcement. No badge. No ID. WE FAILED HIM BY ALLOWING HIM TO BE THERE! He is not a hero. He is not a thug. He's a mixed up kid, who badly wanted to be a policeman, who idolized law enforcement, who carried a MEDIC bag in case any protestors needed help, and damn, I just end up crying for HIM, for this one ruined life, someone who really did not seem to have any malice. The dead are dead, but he will have to live with this. It's so wrong.

WHO SHOULD WE BLAME for the riots? Oh, I know the answer that will come from some - commie lefties. Democrats. Sheesh. Get a new playbook. Responsibility ultimately comes down on the mayor. He, along with the city council are responsible for ensuring the safety of his citizens, and their livelyhoods and their homes. Just like if you are the president - it doesn't really matter what you do or don't do - the buck stops here.

But there is a bit more than that because nothing is really simple unless you are a business that got burned out, or the fiancé, with a 2 yr old daughter, of a man who is now dead and slandered, or a 17 year old kid who will now be facing a life he never envisioned, or the family of a man brutally shot in the back at close range, and you just want justice.

What could have been done differently?

Let's start at the beginning. What sparked the demonstrations that then turned into rioting?

A video. A video showing police come up to a man, leaning into his car, grabbing him by the shirt, pulling him back and pumping multiple rounds into his back at close range. It was brutal and against the backdrop of so many videos showing (justifiable and unjustifiable) police violence - there should be no surprise at public reaction. I don't care who the man was, there is no way to watch that (if you are a normal person) and not be horrified. This is our new reality - videos. Of EVERYTHING. Harder to sweep things under the rug, easier to spin, misconstrue, take out of context. Easier to inflame "the masses". Easier to see wrong doing.

What preceded that? Attempts at police reform by the Wisconsin governor, stalled by the legislature. Maybe, just maybe, if people see that something is happening and something is being done, and there is transparency the potential for violence is less. The governor is attempting, AGAIN, to pass it

Yet, the mayor himself appears to be tone deaf to his constituency. If he doesn't listen to the other half, and he fails to provide law and order, he's going to deservedly lose re-election. One example - curfews. A good way to tamp down the potential for violence which always seems to escalate at night. There are demonstrations ongoing described as "mostly peaceful". There is supposed to be a curfew. It's NOT BEING ENFORCED. What the hell?

What is your solution? Blame "commies"? Get real. We have a perfect storm with bitter political divisions at EVERY LEVEL, widespread public anger and unrest, a lot of restrictions and confusion with a pandemic, widespread distrust of our leadership, huge unemployment, Congress incapable of doing their job, a hugely divisive and incompetent president, and the worst recession in ages and more internet disinformation than ever before. Take your pick - it all feeds into the unrest.

But I will say this, I was wrong on one thing, I am now agreeing with you that we need law and order more than ever - we need to stop the violence and that means addressing ALL the participants, not politicizing who to go after. But that can't be with private militias, because they become PART of the problem, fed by the same disinformation as the rest of us. Private entities can guard private property but they have no business roaming the streets or public areas and if they kill someone, they face the law on that. The police and our national guard are the ones who need to be doing this. It's their job, it's what they are trained for. Crowd control. Arresting looters and arsonists. Enforcing curfews.

This kid is not a hero. He's a victim. And we are all to blame.

Amazing how each end has 20/20 vision on the misdeeds of the other end, and are completely blind to their own.

The adults in the room had better take control pretty fucking soon. Wherever they are.

Honest to god Mac, my heart goes out to this 17 yr old, who's life is now ruined. The other's are dead. He even carried a medic kit for heaven's sakes. WE FAILED HIM. . They are not charging him him with murder, but reckless homicide and intentional homicide. That is more appropriate. I don't know if he is being charged as an adult...

"We"? Seriously?

From NPR:

"Another social media account that appeared to belong to Rittenhouse suggests he was also a supporter of President Trump. The TikTok account, with just 25 followers, read "Trump 2020" with a U.S. flag next to it, and, "Bruh I'm just tryna be famous."

If "we" failed this guy, "we" then failed every rampage killer in the history of our nation.

Does society have an influence on these guys who just snap and try to solve their problems with a gun? Yes. But there are literally millions of these guys who are under this influence who do not solve their problems that way.

He doesn't seem like that kind of person. (Ya, he supports Trump, there is that) - but look at what is said about him. He's not an extremist...not affiliated with any extreme groups. Isn't out to start a race war like some of the rightwing nut jobs. It doesn't SEEM as if he "snapped" - it seems more like he chose to participate in a situation he had no business being in, law enforcement allowed it (a real wtf moment) he was ill equip to handle it. He's all lawyered up now and the darling of the right for having murdered leftists so we will never know what he really thinks.

If anything, he is a product of our gun cult vigilante culture.

But maybe I'm wrong, certainly have been a lot.

I see youre back to telling lies,,,
figures,,,

he didnt murder anyone,,,
and who are you to say he had no business being there???

In this type of discussion, there's no difference in choice of words anymore.

As for no business being there: a gun carrying 17 yr old in Wisconsin is ILLEGAL. I would say that means he had no business being there.

if there is no business being there with a gun, then i hope you're just as mad at the people he shot cause they had 'em too.

yet...

Do you seriously TRY to miss the point in your haste to whine about "both sides"?

Were those others 18 and over?

How old is Kyle?

What is Wisconsin law?

there ya go - making sure every hair splits your way.

Amazing. Truly. You are. Although I think the correct is flaming hypocrite.

You yell and scream about lawbreakers...until...well...it is suddenly inconvenient, so you label splitting hairs. There a reason fire arms are age restricted. A damn good one.

I’ll leave you to ponder that, assuming you are capable of doing so.

Good bye.

 

[IM2]

This boy has the right to self-defense.

Period.

So do the guys he's shooting.

not when they are attempting to murder him.

You mean after he attempted to murder them? Oh wait. He did. No attempt about it. The two he killed weren't even armed....(and yes I'm using "murder" loosely because nuance means nothing here).

You are factually wrong. The kid was RUNNING away from the first guy he shot. He was then RUNNING AWAY from the next two guys he shot. What part of RUNNING away is not making it through your head?

What part of he shouldn't have shot them or, IN FACT - let's be FACTUAL - what part of he had no business being there? You know how I feel about vigilantism, and private militias accountable to no one, so I won't go there. But at least the ADULTS who were there protecting private property, managed NOT to kill anyone, NOT to "lose it", NOT to get into a situation like that. Only HE DID. And you can't blame the guys chasing him - he KILLED someone already. And he was armed ILLEGALLY. It should never have happened.

Unfortunately, the intangibles you’ve mentioned are conjecture. It’s more emotion that reality.

This boy has the right to self-defense.

Period.

So do the guys he's shooting.

not when they are attempting to murder him.

You mean after he attempted to murder them? Oh wait. He did. No attempt about it. The two he killed weren't even armed....(and yes I'm using "murder" loosely because nuance means nothing here).

You are factually wrong. The kid was RUNNING away from the first guy he shot. He was then RUNNING AWAY from the next two guys he shot. What part of RUNNING away is not making it through your head?

What part of he shouldn't have shot them or, IN FACT - let's be FACTUAL - what part of he had no business being there? You know how I feel about vigilantism, and private militias accountable to no one, so I won't go there. But at least the ADULTS who were there protecting private property, managed NOT to kill anyone, NOT to "lose it", NOT to get into a situation like that. Only HE DID. And you can't blame the guys chasing him - he KILLED someone already. And he was armed ILLEGALLY. It should never have happened.

You’re argument doesn’t hold water simply because it is an opinion. Now, should he have been there? He had every right. It is irrelevant that he was younger, underage, or had a gun illegally. He was attacked by grown adults in a mob as far as I know a this point, without provocation.

I counter with this, the convicted felon with a gun drawn as Kyle was sitting on the ground should not have been there either. Had the savages never advanced at Kyle, nothing would have happened.

A similar case in terms of illegally using or possessing a firearm is happening in Virginia.

An employee used a gun against three people as they broke into his place of employment. He was sleeping there that night and used the gun to defend himself and the property. He cant posses or use a firearm. The firearm was not his, it was his boss who owned it. So, is he justified or does he simply get killed? It’s tough but, I would think the circumstances would allow for defense of ones self. Different but similar to Kenosha.

He was not attacked by anyone. And Coyote was right when she said he should not have been there. He drove up from Illinois to shoot people.

 

[badger2]

#542: You did not see the graffiti in Wisconsin? It read, "fuck 12." We are dealing with arrogance coupled to stupidity.

 

[iceberg]

Two nights ago, the Great Patriot, Defender of Kenosha, and Guardian of the Republic, Kyle Rittenhouse, suppressed an unlawful riot in Kenosha where countless businesses have been burnt down, looted and forced out of business.

The police were no where to be found, unable to act and carry out their function of maintaining Law and Order.

So the citizens of the area took up arms, exercising their Second Amendment right to suppress violent riot, arson and looting and to suppress a communist insurrection.

It's almost as if the far left wants to take our Second Amendment rights so they can abolish the police and then rain chaos upon our communities (problem, reaction...solution?), and then institute their new police force under the flag of communism to restore civilization.

So what he did was legal?

When you start to support vigilantism like this, you are no different than the looters and rioters. This all is coming together in a really bad way and dangerous way for our country.

the one difference here is, you didn't start it. but if you allow looters and rioters to tear shit up - you're a fool if you expect people to sit back and let it happen night after night after night.

It's starting to look like you are following me around from thread to thread.

Can't understand how you can on the one hand condemn rioting (which I agree with that condemnation) and yet support this. It's internally inconsistent.

Vigilantism is lawlessness. No different than rioting. A 17 year old in no way should be out there in a hyper volatile protest with a high powered rifle. IF the facts so far are correct - and the situation if evolving - he shot and KILLED two people and badly injured a third. Self defense is one thing, but in the initial killing, that does NOT appear to be the case.

The picture of him coming out is also disturbing. Funny how a protestor, standing across the street holding up speakers gets shot in the face by a rubber bullet, is vilified as a jobless bum (despite no evidence of actual participation in rioting) but this guy, illegally carrying a high powered rifle (he's 17) is a "hero". MURDER IS NOT HEROIC.

Something is messed up is very messed up right now if this is a "hero". Police are heroes. Undisciplined private paramilitaries are not. They are as dangerous as mobs of rioters. And they are ANTI-LAW. Anyone who believes in taking the law into their own hands and meting out justice is NOT LAWFUL.

What do we know about this kid?

Who is Kyle Rittenhouse? Here's what we know about the 17-year-old charged in the Kenosha protest shooting.

Before he took his rifle to confront the unrest in Kenosha, Wis., on Tuesday, allegedly killing two people and injuring another, Kyle Rittenhouse seemingly idolized one thing: the police. Growing […]

www.boston.com

But brief accounts from neighbors and local institutions paint the picture of a high school dropout who viewed law enforcement officers as his personal heroes.​

​

So much so that, when massive protests, looting and fires broke out in Kenosha following the police shooting of Jacob Blake on Sunday, he crossed state lines to offer his support to local policemen – at times, speaking as if their duties were his, too.​

Police are heavily trained, and they know the law. These guys don't. They have no business acting like police.

There are WAY TOO MANY armed people at these protests and that includes "the left" - you once said once you bring firearms to a protest it is no longer peaceful. Still believe that?

There are WAY TOO MANY OUTSIDERS at these events - both "protestors" and "counter protestors" - they need to be thrown out of town.

Here is what one person said - is she right?

“Maybe he thought he was doing the right thing, but you don’t kill somebody,” she said. “That’s not your business to kill someone for messing with someone else’s business. That’s for the cops to deal with.”​

Hmmm, one of the thugs he killed was a pedo who served 12 years, and the other raped and tortured his girlfriend. Fine upstanding citizens those two were.

The last guy was armed with a pistol and the leader of a communist group who wants to destroy the USA.

I should care about violent felons why?

Just out of morbid curiosity; one of our more prominent posters here did time in prison. If he were shot dead by some guy who just wanted to kill someone, would you care?

First off the dead felons were trying to attack the kid. At that point I simply don't give a shit what happens to them.

They already have shown they don't care about the Rights of others, and they were trying to kill this kid, so no, good riddance to bad rubbish.

Great way to promote senseless killing on top of senseless rioting.

I'm beyond disgusted by what's happening on all sides.

Everyone seems to listen to the same echo chamber here. The so-called claims of "violent rape and assault" and "pedophilia" were deliberately made up to slander them. How low can you go West short of killing someone? Here's an idea for a start - go to the WI Sex Offender Registry and type in his name. Anything pop up? That is a start at trying untangle this complete mess of layered fakery, bogus claims, and incitements for more violence on both sides.

Second. If you claim these three men (2 dead and 1 injured) were rioters, please show it. Acts of rioting, looting and arson are illegal, we all agree on that. Show us that is what THOSE THREE PEOPLE were doing. Are you claiming EVERYONE at the protest was engaged in arson and looting? Then that must include the kid and the armed private militia people right? Or - wait - are you going to make some distinctions? hmmm....how about Right = lawful, Left = unlawful = legitimate....cause that's where you guys are going with this. That's a good starting point for killing people huh? No need to mess around trying to figure out who is engaged in unlawful activity and who is not. Now, if only there is some way to identify them before we kill them and have to make up crap to justify it.

So what happened here?

Here's one news account with no speculation:

Social media footage surfaced surrounding the late-night fatal shooting during unrest. Witness accounts and video indicate the gunman first shot someone at a car lot just before midnight, but details on what sparked that shooting weren't immediately clear. ​

​

The alleged gunman then jogged away, fell in the street, and opened fire again as members of the crowd closed in on him, some appearing to kick and grab at his weapon. According to witness accounts and video footage, police apparently let the gunman walk past them and leave the scene with a rifle over his shoulder and his hands in the air as members of the crowd were yelling for him to be arrested because he had shot people.​

​

When asked why the gunman was not arrested in the moment, Kenosha County Sheriff David Beth said he couldn't say for certain, but noted the chaos surrounding officers that night.​

Since it's all caught on video, it's pretty damn hard to JUSTIFY but easier to UNDERSTAND the shootings - the fact he was there and (illegally) armed to begin with and the fact he was allowed to simply walk away and return to another state and the fact that in that video there was NO criminal behavior being conducted by any of the dead or injured victims speak for themselves. The rest is speculation, differing accounts, deliberate disinformation, witness statements and armchair quarterbacks directing a brief video.

So here are the questions:

WHY WAS A 17 YEAR OLD THERE????? WITH THAT KIND OF WEAPON???? Regardless of what was going on....no one else got shot. Regardless of how I personally feel about private militias (which, as you know, is pretty negative) - THEY didn't shoot anyone either. The police refused to deputize these citizens...for good reason, but they were and imo it's fine to do so - allowed to guard private property. That is FINE. That is what this kid was supposed to be doing, but he LEFT his spot. If he had stayed there nothing would have happened! He was in over his head and he panicked, understandably, when people in the crowd tried to restrain him and get rid of his weapon. As far as anyone could see - the kid was another mass shooter...like Parkland, or any number of events. How could anyone know otherwise when they witness a man shot in the head and another man trotting away with a rifle? He wasn't law enforcement. No badge. No ID. WE FAILED HIM BY ALLOWING HIM TO BE THERE! He is not a hero. He is not a thug. He's a mixed up kid, who badly wanted to be a policeman, who idolized law enforcement, who carried a MEDIC bag in case any protestors needed help, and damn, I just end up crying for HIM, for this one ruined life, someone who really did not seem to have any malice. The dead are dead, but he will have to live with this. It's so wrong.

WHO SHOULD WE BLAME for the riots? Oh, I know the answer that will come from some - commie lefties. Democrats. Sheesh. Get a new playbook. Responsibility ultimately comes down on the mayor. He, along with the city council are responsible for ensuring the safety of his citizens, and their livelyhoods and their homes. Just like if you are the president - it doesn't really matter what you do or don't do - the buck stops here.

But there is a bit more than that because nothing is really simple unless you are a business that got burned out, or the fiancé, with a 2 yr old daughter, of a man who is now dead and slandered, or a 17 year old kid who will now be facing a life he never envisioned, or the family of a man brutally shot in the back at close range, and you just want justice.

What could have been done differently?

Let's start at the beginning. What sparked the demonstrations that then turned into rioting?

A video. A video showing police come up to a man, leaning into his car, grabbing him by the shirt, pulling him back and pumping multiple rounds into his back at close range. It was brutal and against the backdrop of so many videos showing (justifiable and unjustifiable) police violence - there should be no surprise at public reaction. I don't care who the man was, there is no way to watch that (if you are a normal person) and not be horrified. This is our new reality - videos. Of EVERYTHING. Harder to sweep things under the rug, easier to spin, misconstrue, take out of context. Easier to inflame "the masses". Easier to see wrong doing.

What preceded that? Attempts at police reform by the Wisconsin governor, stalled by the legislature. Maybe, just maybe, if people see that something is happening and something is being done, and there is transparency the potential for violence is less. The governor is attempting, AGAIN, to pass it

Yet, the mayor himself appears to be tone deaf to his constituency. If he doesn't listen to the other half, and he fails to provide law and order, he's going to deservedly lose re-election. One example - curfews. A good way to tamp down the potential for violence which always seems to escalate at night. There are demonstrations ongoing described as "mostly peaceful". There is supposed to be a curfew. It's NOT BEING ENFORCED. What the hell?

What is your solution? Blame "commies"? Get real. We have a perfect storm with bitter political divisions at EVERY LEVEL, widespread public anger and unrest, a lot of restrictions and confusion with a pandemic, widespread distrust of our leadership, huge unemployment, Congress incapable of doing their job, a hugely divisive and incompetent president, and the worst recession in ages and more internet disinformation than ever before. Take your pick - it all feeds into the unrest.

But I will say this, I was wrong on one thing, I am now agreeing with you that we need law and order more than ever - we need to stop the violence and that means addressing ALL the participants, not politicizing who to go after. But that can't be with private militias, because they become PART of the problem, fed by the same disinformation as the rest of us. Private entities can guard private property but they have no business roaming the streets or public areas and if they kill someone, they face the law on that. The police and our national guard are the ones who need to be doing this. It's their job, it's what they are trained for. Crowd control. Arresting looters and arsonists. Enforcing curfews.

This kid is not a hero. He's a victim. And we are all to blame.

Amazing how each end has 20/20 vision on the misdeeds of the other end, and are completely blind to their own.

The adults in the room had better take control pretty fucking soon. Wherever they are.

Honest to god Mac, my heart goes out to this 17 yr old, who's life is now ruined. The other's are dead. He even carried a medic kit for heaven's sakes. WE FAILED HIM. . They are not charging him him with murder, but reckless homicide and intentional homicide. That is more appropriate. I don't know if he is being charged as an adult...

"We"? Seriously?

From NPR:

"Another social media account that appeared to belong to Rittenhouse suggests he was also a supporter of President Trump. The TikTok account, with just 25 followers, read "Trump 2020" with a U.S. flag next to it, and, "Bruh I'm just tryna be famous."

If "we" failed this guy, "we" then failed every rampage killer in the history of our nation.

Does society have an influence on these guys who just snap and try to solve their problems with a gun? Yes. But there are literally millions of these guys who are under this influence who do not solve their problems that way.

He doesn't seem like that kind of person. (Ya, he supports Trump, there is that) - but look at what is said about him. He's not an extremist...not affiliated with any extreme groups. Isn't out to start a race war like some of the rightwing nut jobs. It doesn't SEEM as if he "snapped" - it seems more like he chose to participate in a situation he had no business being in, law enforcement allowed it (a real wtf moment) he was ill equip to handle it. He's all lawyered up now and the darling of the right for having murdered leftists so we will never know what he really thinks.

If anything, he is a product of our gun cult vigilante culture.

But maybe I'm wrong, certainly have been a lot.

I see youre back to telling lies,,,
figures,,,

he didnt murder anyone,,,
and who are you to say he had no business being there???

In this type of discussion, there's no difference in choice of words anymore.

As for no business being there: a gun carrying 17 yr old in Wisconsin is ILLEGAL. I would say that means he had no business being there.

if there is no business being there with a gun, then i hope you're just as mad at the people he shot cause they had 'em too.

yet...

Do you seriously TRY to miss the point in your haste to whine about "both sides"?

Were those others 18 and over?

How old is Kyle?

What is Wisconsin law?

there ya go - making sure every hair splits your way.

Amazing. Truly. You are. Although I think the correct is flaming hypocrite.

You yell and scream about lawbreakers...until...well...it is suddenly inconvenient, so you label splitting hairs. There a reason fire arms are age restricted. A damn good one.

I’ll leave you to ponder that, assuming you are capable of doing so.

Good bye.

ok bye bye.

 

[L.K.Eder]

This boy has the right to self-defense.

Period.

So do the guys he's shooting.

not when they are attempting to murder him.

You mean after he attempted to murder them? Oh wait. He did. No attempt about it. The two he killed weren't even armed....(and yes I'm using "murder" loosely because nuance means nothing here).

You are factually wrong. The kid was RUNNING away from the first guy he shot. He was then RUNNING AWAY from the next two guys he shot. What part of RUNNING away is not making it through your head?

What part of he shouldn't have shot them or, IN FACT - let's be FACTUAL - what part of he had no business being there? You know how I feel about vigilantism, and private militias accountable to no one, so I won't go there. But at least the ADULTS who were there protecting private property, managed NOT to kill anyone, NOT to "lose it", NOT to get into a situation like that. Only HE DID. And you can't blame the guys chasing him - he KILLED someone already. And he was armed ILLEGALLY. It should never have happened.

Unfortunately, the intangibles you’ve mentioned are conjecture. It’s more emotion that reality.

This boy has the right to self-defense.

Period.

So do the guys he's shooting.

not when they are attempting to murder him.

You mean after he attempted to murder them? Oh wait. He did. No attempt about it. The two he killed weren't even armed....(and yes I'm using "murder" loosely because nuance means nothing here).

You are factually wrong. The kid was RUNNING away from the first guy he shot. He was then RUNNING AWAY from the next two guys he shot. What part of RUNNING away is not making it through your head?

What part of he shouldn't have shot them or, IN FACT - let's be FACTUAL - what part of he had no business being there? You know how I feel about vigilantism, and private militias accountable to no one, so I won't go there. But at least the ADULTS who were there protecting private property, managed NOT to kill anyone, NOT to "lose it", NOT to get into a situation like that. Only HE DID. And you can't blame the guys chasing him - he KILLED someone already. And he was armed ILLEGALLY. It should never have happened.

You’re argument doesn’t hold water simply because it is an opinion. Now, should he have been there? He had every right. It is irrelevant that he was younger, underage, or had a gun illegally. He was attacked by grown adults in a mob as far as I know a this point, without provocation.

I counter with this, the convicted felon with a gun drawn as Kyle was sitting on the ground should not have been there either. Had the savages never advanced at Kyle, nothing would have happened.

A similar case in terms of illegally using or possessing a firearm is happening in Virginia.

An employee used a gun against three people as they broke into his place of employment. He was sleeping there that night and used the gun to defend himself and the property. He cant posses or use a firearm. The firearm was not his, it was his boss who owned it. So, is he justified or does he simply get killed? It’s tough but, I would think the circumstances would allow for defense of ones self. Different but similar to Kenosha.

He was not attacked by anyone. And Coyote was right when she said he should not have been there. He drove up from Illinois to shoot people.

or just tryna be famous. bruh.

 

[IM2]

So violence is OK now in order to retaliate against people protesting getting murdered. But violence was wrong for blacks to use after consistently watching innocent blacks getting killed by police.

I believe it's time you motherfuckers stopped telling yourselves that blacks should just take it and be grateful that we are allowed in America.

 

[IM2]

This boy has the right to self-defense.

Period.

So do the guys he's shooting.

not when they are attempting to murder him.

You mean after he attempted to murder them? Oh wait. He did. No attempt about it. The two he killed weren't even armed....(and yes I'm using "murder" loosely because nuance means nothing here).

You are factually wrong. The kid was RUNNING away from the first guy he shot. He was then RUNNING AWAY from the next two guys he shot. What part of RUNNING away is not making it through your head?

What part of he shouldn't have shot them or, IN FACT - let's be FACTUAL - what part of he had no business being there? You know how I feel about vigilantism, and private militias accountable to no one, so I won't go there. But at least the ADULTS who were there protecting private property, managed NOT to kill anyone, NOT to "lose it", NOT to get into a situation like that. Only HE DID. And you can't blame the guys chasing him - he KILLED someone already. And he was armed ILLEGALLY. It should never have happened.

Unfortunately, the intangibles you’ve mentioned are conjecture. It’s more emotion that reality.

This boy has the right to self-defense.

Period.

So do the guys he's shooting.

not when they are attempting to murder him.

You mean after he attempted to murder them? Oh wait. He did. No attempt about it. The two he killed weren't even armed....(and yes I'm using "murder" loosely because nuance means nothing here).

You are factually wrong. The kid was RUNNING away from the first guy he shot. He was then RUNNING AWAY from the next two guys he shot. What part of RUNNING away is not making it through your head?

What part of he shouldn't have shot them or, IN FACT - let's be FACTUAL - what part of he had no business being there? You know how I feel about vigilantism, and private militias accountable to no one, so I won't go there. But at least the ADULTS who were there protecting private property, managed NOT to kill anyone, NOT to "lose it", NOT to get into a situation like that. Only HE DID. And you can't blame the guys chasing him - he KILLED someone already. And he was armed ILLEGALLY. It should never have happened.

You’re argument doesn’t hold water simply because it is an opinion. Now, should he have been there? He had every right. It is irrelevant that he was younger, underage, or had a gun illegally. He was attacked by grown adults in a mob as far as I know a this point, without provocation.

I counter with this, the convicted felon with a gun drawn as Kyle was sitting on the ground should not have been there either. Had the savages never advanced at Kyle, nothing would have happened.

A similar case in terms of illegally using or possessing a firearm is happening in Virginia.

An employee used a gun against three people as they broke into his place of employment. He was sleeping there that night and used the gun to defend himself and the property. He cant posses or use a firearm. The firearm was not his, it was his boss who owned it. So, is he justified or does he simply get killed? It’s tough but, I would think the circumstances would allow for defense of ones self. Different but similar to Kenosha.

He was not attacked by anyone. And Coyote was right when she said he should not have been there. He drove up from Illinois to shoot people.

or just tryna be famous. bruh.

View attachment 381452

Good point LK.

 

[HereinVirginia]

This boy has the right to self-defense.

Period.

So do the guys he's shooting.

not when they are attempting to murder him.

You mean after he attempted to murder them? Oh wait. He did. No attempt about it. The two he killed weren't even armed....(and yes I'm using "murder" loosely because nuance means nothing here).

You are factually wrong. The kid was RUNNING away from the first guy he shot. He was then RUNNING AWAY from the next two guys he shot. What part of RUNNING away is not making it through your head?

What part of he shouldn't have shot them or, IN FACT - let's be FACTUAL - what part of he had no business being there? You know how I feel about vigilantism, and private militias accountable to no one, so I won't go there. But at least the ADULTS who were there protecting private property, managed NOT to kill anyone, NOT to "lose it", NOT to get into a situation like that. Only HE DID. And you can't blame the guys chasing him - he KILLED someone already. And he was armed ILLEGALLY. It should never have happened.

Unfortunately, the intangibles you’ve mentioned are conjecture. It’s more emotion that reality.

This boy has the right to self-defense.

Period.

So do the guys he's shooting.

not when they are attempting to murder him.

You mean after he attempted to murder them? Oh wait. He did. No attempt about it. The two he killed weren't even armed....(and yes I'm using "murder" loosely because nuance means nothing here).

You are factually wrong. The kid was RUNNING away from the first guy he shot. He was then RUNNING AWAY from the next two guys he shot. What part of RUNNING away is not making it through your head?

What part of he shouldn't have shot them or, IN FACT - let's be FACTUAL - what part of he had no business being there? You know how I feel about vigilantism, and private militias accountable to no one, so I won't go there. But at least the ADULTS who were there protecting private property, managed NOT to kill anyone, NOT to "lose it", NOT to get into a situation like that. Only HE DID. And you can't blame the guys chasing him - he KILLED someone already. And he was armed ILLEGALLY. It should never have happened.

You’re argument doesn’t hold water simply because it is an opinion. Now, should he have been there? He had every right. It is irrelevant that he was younger, underage, or had a gun illegally. He was attacked by grown adults in a mob as far as I know a this point, without provocation.

I counter with this, the convicted felon with a gun drawn as Kyle was sitting on the ground should not have been there either. Had the savages never advanced at Kyle, nothing would have happened.

A similar case in terms of illegally using or possessing a firearm is happening in Virginia.

An employee used a gun against three people as they broke into his place of employment. He was sleeping there that night and used the gun to defend himself and the property. He cant posses or use a firearm. The firearm was not his, it was his boss who owned it. So, is he justified or does he simply get killed? It’s tough but, I would think the circumstances would allow for defense of ones self. Different but similar to Kenosha.

He was not attacked by anyone. And Coyote was right when she said he should not have been there. He drove up from Illinois to shoot people.

or just tryna be famous. bruh.

View attachment 381452

Kyle wasn’t attacked? At all? You mean never happened at all?

Should I call the authorities on people who want to be famous? Easy to assume he wanted to kill people.

 

[HereinVirginia]

This boy has the right to self-defense.

Period.

So do the guys he's shooting.

not when they are attempting to murder him.

You mean after he attempted to murder them? Oh wait. He did. No attempt about it. The two he killed weren't even armed....(and yes I'm using "murder" loosely because nuance means nothing here).

You are factually wrong. The kid was RUNNING away from the first guy he shot. He was then RUNNING AWAY from the next two guys he shot. What part of RUNNING away is not making it through your head?

What part of he shouldn't have shot them or, IN FACT - let's be FACTUAL - what part of he had no business being there? You know how I feel about vigilantism, and private militias accountable to no one, so I won't go there. But at least the ADULTS who were there protecting private property, managed NOT to kill anyone, NOT to "lose it", NOT to get into a situation like that. Only HE DID. And you can't blame the guys chasing him - he KILLED someone already. And he was armed ILLEGALLY. It should never have happened.

Unfortunately, the intangibles you’ve mentioned are conjecture. It’s more emotion that reality.

This boy has the right to self-defense.

Period.

So do the guys he's shooting.

not when they are attempting to murder him.

You mean after he attempted to murder them? Oh wait. He did. No attempt about it. The two he killed weren't even armed....(and yes I'm using "murder" loosely because nuance means nothing here).

You are factually wrong. The kid was RUNNING away from the first guy he shot. He was then RUNNING AWAY from the next two guys he shot. What part of RUNNING away is not making it through your head?

What part of he shouldn't have shot them or, IN FACT - let's be FACTUAL - what part of he had no business being there? You know how I feel about vigilantism, and private militias accountable to no one, so I won't go there. But at least the ADULTS who were there protecting private property, managed NOT to kill anyone, NOT to "lose it", NOT to get into a situation like that. Only HE DID. And you can't blame the guys chasing him - he KILLED someone already. And he was armed ILLEGALLY. It should never have happened.

You’re argument doesn’t hold water simply because it is an opinion. Now, should he have been there? He had every right. It is irrelevant that he was younger, underage, or had a gun illegally. He was attacked by grown adults in a mob as far as I know a this point, without provocation.

I counter with this, the convicted felon with a gun drawn as Kyle was sitting on the ground should not have been there either. Had the savages never advanced at Kyle, nothing would have happened.

A similar case in terms of illegally using or possessing a firearm is happening in Virginia.

An employee used a gun against three people as they broke into his place of employment. He was sleeping there that night and used the gun to defend himself and the property. He cant posses or use a firearm. The firearm was not his, it was his boss who owned it. So, is he justified or does he simply get killed? It’s tough but, I would think the circumstances would allow for defense of ones self. Different but similar to Kenosha.

He was not attacked by anyone. And Coyote was right when she said he should not have been there. He drove up from Illinois to shoot people.

or just tryna be famous. bruh.

View attachment 381452

Good point LK.

Neither should a felon with a gun. Well, he had his arm blown off. Lol

 

[progressive hunter]

LOOK: BLM in D.C. blocking roads THREATENING drivers, as violence, terror continue NOW across America

In Washington, D.C. BLM terrorists are assaulting people. They are forcing their cars to a stop and threatening their lives. In cities across the country, there have been dozens of incidents of vio…

therightscoop.com

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Two nights ago, the Great Patriot, Defender of Kenosha, and Guardian of the Republic, Kyle Rittenhouse, suppressed an unlawful riot in Kenosha where countless businesses have been burnt down, looted and forced out of business.

The police were no where to be found, unable to act and carry out their function of maintaining Law and Order.

So the citizens of the area took up arms, exercising their Second Amendment right to suppress violent riot, arson and looting and to suppress a communist insurrection.

It's almost as if the far left wants to take our Second Amendment rights so they can abolish the police and then rain chaos upon our communities (problem, reaction...solution?), and then institute their new police force under the flag of communism to restore civilization.

So what he did was legal?

When you start to support vigilantism like this, you are no different than the looters and rioters. This all is coming together in a really bad way and dangerous way for our country.

the one difference here is, you didn't start it. but if you allow looters and rioters to tear shit up - you're a fool if you expect people to sit back and let it happen night after night after night.

It's starting to look like you are following me around from thread to thread.

Can't understand how you can on the one hand condemn rioting (which I agree with that condemnation) and yet support this. It's internally inconsistent.

Vigilantism is lawlessness. No different than rioting. A 17 year old in no way should be out there in a hyper volatile protest with a high powered rifle. IF the facts so far are correct - and the situation if evolving - he shot and KILLED two people and badly injured a third. Self defense is one thing, but in the initial killing, that does NOT appear to be the case.

The picture of him coming out is also disturbing. Funny how a protestor, standing across the street holding up speakers gets shot in the face by a rubber bullet, is vilified as a jobless bum (despite no evidence of actual participation in rioting) but this guy, illegally carrying a high powered rifle (he's 17) is a "hero". MURDER IS NOT HEROIC.

Something is messed up is very messed up right now if this is a "hero". Police are heroes. Undisciplined private paramilitaries are not. They are as dangerous as mobs of rioters. And they are ANTI-LAW. Anyone who believes in taking the law into their own hands and meting out justice is NOT LAWFUL.

What do we know about this kid?

Who is Kyle Rittenhouse? Here's what we know about the 17-year-old charged in the Kenosha protest shooting.

Before he took his rifle to confront the unrest in Kenosha, Wis., on Tuesday, allegedly killing two people and injuring another, Kyle Rittenhouse seemingly idolized one thing: the police. Growing […]

www.boston.com

But brief accounts from neighbors and local institutions paint the picture of a high school dropout who viewed law enforcement officers as his personal heroes.​

​

So much so that, when massive protests, looting and fires broke out in Kenosha following the police shooting of Jacob Blake on Sunday, he crossed state lines to offer his support to local policemen – at times, speaking as if their duties were his, too.​

Police are heavily trained, and they know the law. These guys don't. They have no business acting like police.

There are WAY TOO MANY armed people at these protests and that includes "the left" - you once said once you bring firearms to a protest it is no longer peaceful. Still believe that?

There are WAY TOO MANY OUTSIDERS at these events - both "protestors" and "counter protestors" - they need to be thrown out of town.

Here is what one person said - is she right?

“Maybe he thought he was doing the right thing, but you don’t kill somebody,” she said. “That’s not your business to kill someone for messing with someone else’s business. That’s for the cops to deal with.”​

Hmmm, one of the thugs he killed was a pedo who served 12 years, and the other raped and tortured his girlfriend. Fine upstanding citizens those two were.

The last guy was armed with a pistol and the leader of a communist group who wants to destroy the USA.

I should care about violent felons why?

Just out of morbid curiosity; one of our more prominent posters here did time in prison. If he were shot dead by some guy who just wanted to kill someone, would you care?

First off the dead felons were trying to attack the kid. At that point I simply don't give a shit what happens to them.

They already have shown they don't care about the Rights of others, and they were trying to kill this kid, so no, good riddance to bad rubbish.

Great way to promote senseless killing on top of senseless rioting.

I'm beyond disgusted by what's happening on all sides.

Everyone seems to listen to the same echo chamber here. The so-called claims of "violent rape and assault" and "pedophilia" were deliberately made up to slander them. How low can you go West short of killing someone? Here's an idea for a start - go to the WI Sex Offender Registry and type in his name. Anything pop up? That is a start at trying untangle this complete mess of layered fakery, bogus claims, and incitements for more violence on both sides.

Second. If you claim these three men (2 dead and 1 injured) were rioters, please show it. Acts of rioting, looting and arson are illegal, we all agree on that. Show us that is what THOSE THREE PEOPLE were doing. Are you claiming EVERYONE at the protest was engaged in arson and looting? Then that must include the kid and the armed private militia people right? Or - wait - are you going to make some distinctions? hmmm....how about Right = lawful, Left = unlawful = legitimate target....cause that's where you guys are going with this. That's a good starting point for killing people on a political basis huh? No need to mess around trying to figure out who is engaged in unlawful activity and who is not. Now, if only there is some way to identify them before we kill them and have to make up crap to justify it AFTER THE FACT.

So what happened here?

Here's one news account with no speculation:

Social media footage surfaced surrounding the late-night fatal shooting during unrest. Witness accounts and video indicate the gunman first shot someone at a car lot just before midnight, but details on what sparked that shooting weren't immediately clear. ​

​

The alleged gunman then jogged away, fell in the street, and opened fire again as members of the crowd closed in on him, some appearing to kick and grab at his weapon. According to witness accounts and video footage, police apparently let the gunman walk past them and leave the scene with a rifle over his shoulder and his hands in the air as members of the crowd were yelling for him to be arrested because he had shot people.​

​

When asked why the gunman was not arrested in the moment, Kenosha County Sheriff David Beth said he couldn't say for certain, but noted the chaos surrounding officers that night.​

Since it's all caught on video, it's pretty damn hard to JUSTIFY but easier to UNDERSTAND the shootings - the fact he was there and (illegally) armed to begin with and the fact he was allowed to simply walk away and return to another state and the fact that in that video there was NO criminal behavior being conducted by any of the dead or injured victims speak for themselves. The rest is speculation, differing accounts, deliberate disinformation, witness statements and armchair quarterbacks dissecting a brief video.

So here are the questions:

WHY WAS A 17 YEAR OLD THERE????? WITH THAT KIND OF WEAPON???? Regardless of what was going on....no one else got shot. Regardless of how I personally feel about private militias (which, as you know, is pretty negative) - THEY didn't shoot anyone either. The police refused to deputize these citizens...for good reason, but they were and imo it's fine to do so - allowed to guard private property. That is FINE. That is what this kid was supposed to be doing, but he LEFT his spot. If he had stayed there nothing would have happened! He was in over his head and he panicked, understandably, when people in the crowd tried to restrain him and get rid of his weapon. As far as anyone could see - the kid was another mass shooter...like Parkland, or any number of events. How could anyone know otherwise when they witness a man shot in the head and another man trotting away with a rifle? He wasn't law enforcement. No badge. No ID. WE FAILED HIM BY ALLOWING HIM TO BE THERE! He is not a hero. He is not a thug. He's a mixed up kid, who badly wanted to be a policeman, who idolized law enforcement, who carried a MEDIC bag in case any protestors needed help, and damn, I just end up crying for HIM, for this one ruined life, someone who really did not seem to have any malice. The dead are dead, but he will have to live with this. It's so wrong.

WHO SHOULD WE BLAME for the riots? Oh, I know the answer that will come from some - commie lefties. Democrats. Sheesh. Get a new playbook. Responsibility ultimately comes down on the mayor. He, along with the city council are responsible for ensuring the safety of his citizens, and their livelyhoods and their homes. Just like if you are the president - it doesn't really matter what you do or don't do - the buck stops here.

But there is a bit more than that because nothing is really simple unless you are a business that got burned out, or the fiancé, with a 2 yr old daughter, of a man who is now dead and slandered, or a 17 year old kid who will now be facing a life he never envisioned, or the family of a man brutally shot in the back at close range, and you just want justice.

What could have been done differently?

Let's start at the beginning. What sparked the demonstrations that then turned into rioting?

A video. A video showing police come up to a man, leaning into his car, grabbing him by the shirt, pulling him back and pumping multiple rounds into his back at close range. It was brutal and against the backdrop of so many videos showing (justifiable and unjustifiable) police violence - there should be no surprise at public reaction. I don't care who the man was, there is no way to watch that (if you are a normal person) and not be horrified. This is our new reality - videos. Of EVERYTHING. Harder to sweep things under the rug, easier to spin, misconstrue, take out of context. Easier to inflame "the masses". Easier to see wrong doing.

What preceded that? Attempts at police reform by the Wisconsin governor, stalled by the legislature. Maybe, just maybe, if people see that something is happening and something is being done, and there is transparency the potential for violence is less. The governor is attempting, AGAIN, to pass it

Yet, the mayor himself appears to be tone deaf to his constituency. If he doesn't listen to the other half, and he fails to provide law and order, he's going to deservedly lose re-election. One example - curfews. A good way to tamp down the potential for violence which always seems to escalate at night. There are demonstrations ongoing described as "mostly peaceful". There is supposed to be a curfew. It's NOT BEING ENFORCED. What the hell?

What is your solution? Blame "commies"? Get real. We have a perfect storm with bitter political divisions at EVERY LEVEL, widespread public anger and unrest, a lot of restrictions and confusion with a pandemic, widespread distrust of our leadership, huge unemployment, Congress incapable of doing their job, a hugely divisive and incompetent president, and the worst recession in ages and more internet disinformation than ever before. Take your pick - it all feeds into the unrest.

But I will say this, I was wrong on one thing, I am now agreeing with you that we need law and order more than ever - we need to stop the violence and that means addressing ALL the participants, not politicizing who to go after. But that can't be with private militias, because they become PART of the problem, fed by the same disinformation as the rest of us. Private entities can guard private property but they have no business roaming the streets or public areas and if they kill someone, they face the law on that. The police and our national guard are the ones who need to be doing this. It's their job, it's what they are trained for. Crowd control. Arresting looters and arsonists. Enforcing curfews.

This kid is not a hero. He's a victim. And we are all to blame.

Two nights ago, the Great Patriot, Defender of Kenosha, and Guardian of the Republic, Kyle Rittenhouse, suppressed an unlawful riot in Kenosha where countless businesses have been burnt down, looted and forced out of business.

The police were no where to be found, unable to act and carry out their function of maintaining Law and Order.

So the citizens of the area took up arms, exercising their Second Amendment right to suppress violent riot, arson and looting and to suppress a communist insurrection.

It's almost as if the far left wants to take our Second Amendment rights so they can abolish the police and then rain chaos upon our communities (problem, reaction...solution?), and then institute their new police force under the flag of communism to restore civilization.

So what he did was legal?

When you start to support vigilantism like this, you are no different than the looters and rioters. This all is coming together in a really bad way and dangerous way for our country.

the one difference here is, you didn't start it. but if you allow looters and rioters to tear shit up - you're a fool if you expect people to sit back and let it happen night after night after night.

It's starting to look like you are following me around from thread to thread.

Can't understand how you can on the one hand condemn rioting (which I agree with that condemnation) and yet support this. It's internally inconsistent.

Vigilantism is lawlessness. No different than rioting. A 17 year old in no way should be out there in a hyper volatile protest with a high powered rifle. IF the facts so far are correct - and the situation if evolving - he shot and KILLED two people and badly injured a third. Self defense is one thing, but in the initial killing, that does NOT appear to be the case.

The picture of him coming out is also disturbing. Funny how a protestor, standing across the street holding up speakers gets shot in the face by a rubber bullet, is vilified as a jobless bum (despite no evidence of actual participation in rioting) but this guy, illegally carrying a high powered rifle (he's 17) is a "hero". MURDER IS NOT HEROIC.

Something is messed up is very messed up right now if this is a "hero". Police are heroes. Undisciplined private paramilitaries are not. They are as dangerous as mobs of rioters. And they are ANTI-LAW. Anyone who believes in taking the law into their own hands and meting out justice is NOT LAWFUL.

What do we know about this kid?

Who is Kyle Rittenhouse? Here's what we know about the 17-year-old charged in the Kenosha protest shooting.

Before he took his rifle to confront the unrest in Kenosha, Wis., on Tuesday, allegedly killing two people and injuring another, Kyle Rittenhouse seemingly idolized one thing: the police. Growing […]

www.boston.com

But brief accounts from neighbors and local institutions paint the picture of a high school dropout who viewed law enforcement officers as his personal heroes.​

​

So much so that, when massive protests, looting and fires broke out in Kenosha following the police shooting of Jacob Blake on Sunday, he crossed state lines to offer his support to local policemen – at times, speaking as if their duties were his, too.​

Police are heavily trained, and they know the law. These guys don't. They have no business acting like police.

There are WAY TOO MANY armed people at these protests and that includes "the left" - you once said once you bring firearms to a protest it is no longer peaceful. Still believe that?

There are WAY TOO MANY OUTSIDERS at these events - both "protestors" and "counter protestors" - they need to be thrown out of town.

Here is what one person said - is she right?

“Maybe he thought he was doing the right thing, but you don’t kill somebody,” she said. “That’s not your business to kill someone for messing with someone else’s business. That’s for the cops to deal with.”​

Hmmm, one of the thugs he killed was a pedo who served 12 years, and the other raped and tortured his girlfriend. Fine upstanding citizens those two were.

The last guy was armed with a pistol and the leader of a communist group who wants to destroy the USA.

I should care about violent felons why?

Just out of morbid curiosity; one of our more prominent posters here did time in prison. If he were shot dead by some guy who just wanted to kill someone, would you care?

First off the dead felons were trying to attack the kid. At that point I simply don't give a shit what happens to them.

They already have shown they don't care about the Rights of others, and they were trying to kill this kid, so no, good riddance to bad rubbish.

Great way to promote senseless killing on top of senseless rioting.

I'm beyond disgusted by what's happening on all sides.

Everyone seems to listen to the same echo chamber here. The so-called claims of "violent rape and assault" and "pedophilia" were deliberately made up to slander them. How low can you go West short of killing someone? Here's an idea for a start - go to the WI Sex Offender Registry and type in his name. Anything pop up? That is a start at trying untangle this complete mess of layered fakery, bogus claims, and incitements for more violence on both sides.

Second. If you claim these three men (2 dead and 1 injured) were rioters, please show it. Acts of rioting, looting and arson are illegal, we all agree on that. Show us that is what THOSE THREE PEOPLE were doing. Are you claiming EVERYONE at the protest was engaged in arson and looting? Then that must include the kid and the armed private militia people right? Or - wait - are you going to make some distinctions? hmmm....how about Right = lawful, Left = unlawful = legitimate....cause that's where you guys are going with this. That's a good starting point for killing people huh? No need to mess around trying to figure out who is engaged in unlawful activity and who is not. Now, if only there is some way to identify them before we kill them and have to make up crap to justify it.

So what happened here?

Here's one news account with no speculation:

Social media footage surfaced surrounding the late-night fatal shooting during unrest. Witness accounts and video indicate the gunman first shot someone at a car lot just before midnight, but details on what sparked that shooting weren't immediately clear. ​

​

The alleged gunman then jogged away, fell in the street, and opened fire again as members of the crowd closed in on him, some appearing to kick and grab at his weapon. According to witness accounts and video footage, police apparently let the gunman walk past them and leave the scene with a rifle over his shoulder and his hands in the air as members of the crowd were yelling for him to be arrested because he had shot people.​

​

When asked why the gunman was not arrested in the moment, Kenosha County Sheriff David Beth said he couldn't say for certain, but noted the chaos surrounding officers that night.​

Since it's all caught on video, it's pretty damn hard to JUSTIFY but easier to UNDERSTAND the shootings - the fact he was there and (illegally) armed to begin with and the fact he was allowed to simply walk away and return to another state and the fact that in that video there was NO criminal behavior being conducted by any of the dead or injured victims speak for themselves. The rest is speculation, differing accounts, deliberate disinformation, witness statements and armchair quarterbacks directing a brief video.

So here are the questions:

WHY WAS A 17 YEAR OLD THERE????? WITH THAT KIND OF WEAPON???? Regardless of what was going on....no one else got shot. Regardless of how I personally feel about private militias (which, as you know, is pretty negative) - THEY didn't shoot anyone either. The police refused to deputize these citizens...for good reason, but they were and imo it's fine to do so - allowed to guard private property. That is FINE. That is what this kid was supposed to be doing, but he LEFT his spot. If he had stayed there nothing would have happened! He was in over his head and he panicked, understandably, when people in the crowd tried to restrain him and get rid of his weapon. As far as anyone could see - the kid was another mass shooter...like Parkland, or any number of events. How could anyone know otherwise when they witness a man shot in the head and another man trotting away with a rifle? He wasn't law enforcement. No badge. No ID. WE FAILED HIM BY ALLOWING HIM TO BE THERE! He is not a hero. He is not a thug. He's a mixed up kid, who badly wanted to be a policeman, who idolized law enforcement, who carried a MEDIC bag in case any protestors needed help, and damn, I just end up crying for HIM, for this one ruined life, someone who really did not seem to have any malice. The dead are dead, but he will have to live with this. It's so wrong.

WHO SHOULD WE BLAME for the riots? Oh, I know the answer that will come from some - commie lefties. Democrats. Sheesh. Get a new playbook. Responsibility ultimately comes down on the mayor. He, along with the city council are responsible for ensuring the safety of his citizens, and their livelyhoods and their homes. Just like if you are the president - it doesn't really matter what you do or don't do - the buck stops here.

But there is a bit more than that because nothing is really simple unless you are a business that got burned out, or the fiancé, with a 2 yr old daughter, of a man who is now dead and slandered, or a 17 year old kid who will now be facing a life he never envisioned, or the family of a man brutally shot in the back at close range, and you just want justice.

What could have been done differently?

Let's start at the beginning. What sparked the demonstrations that then turned into rioting?

A video. A video showing police come up to a man, leaning into his car, grabbing him by the shirt, pulling him back and pumping multiple rounds into his back at close range. It was brutal and against the backdrop of so many videos showing (justifiable and unjustifiable) police violence - there should be no surprise at public reaction. I don't care who the man was, there is no way to watch that (if you are a normal person) and not be horrified. This is our new reality - videos. Of EVERYTHING. Harder to sweep things under the rug, easier to spin, misconstrue, take out of context. Easier to inflame "the masses". Easier to see wrong doing.

What preceded that? Attempts at police reform by the Wisconsin governor, stalled by the legislature. Maybe, just maybe, if people see that something is happening and something is being done, and there is transparency the potential for violence is less. The governor is attempting, AGAIN, to pass it

Yet, the mayor himself appears to be tone deaf to his constituency. If he doesn't listen to the other half, and he fails to provide law and order, he's going to deservedly lose re-election. One example - curfews. A good way to tamp down the potential for violence which always seems to escalate at night. There are demonstrations ongoing described as "mostly peaceful". There is supposed to be a curfew. It's NOT BEING ENFORCED. What the hell?

What is your solution? Blame "commies"? Get real. We have a perfect storm with bitter political divisions at EVERY LEVEL, widespread public anger and unrest, a lot of restrictions and confusion with a pandemic, widespread distrust of our leadership, huge unemployment, Congress incapable of doing their job, a hugely divisive and incompetent president, and the worst recession in ages and more internet disinformation than ever before. Take your pick - it all feeds into the unrest.

But I will say this, I was wrong on one thing, I am now agreeing with you that we need law and order more than ever - we need to stop the violence and that means addressing ALL the participants, not politicizing who to go after. But that can't be with private militias, because they become PART of the problem, fed by the same disinformation as the rest of us. Private entities can guard private property but they have no business roaming the streets or public areas and if they kill someone, they face the law on that. The police and our national guard are the ones who need to be doing this. It's their job, it's what they are trained for. Crowd control. Arresting looters and arsonists. Enforcing curfews.

This kid is not a hero. He's a victim. And we are all to blame.

Amazing how each end has 20/20 vision on the misdeeds of the other end, and are completely blind to their own.

The adults in the room had better take control pretty fucking soon. Wherever they are.

It’s far too late to beg for peace now.
You “adults in the room” should have spoke up long ago against the Lefts shameless attemps to “fundamentally change” our once great nation.
Conservatives have finally put down their Bibles, they’ve become retaliatory and fully engaged, that has you adults in room/passive Leftists pissing your little pink panties.
Deal with it...ITS ON!

It's what you and your ilk have always wanted. Another civil war.

No, most just want to be left alone and retain some liberty. The constant bullshit and TAKING liberty is what is causing peaceful people like me to feel bloodthirsty and murderous. The past year has sent me into hate-filled rage like I never thought possible.

Why?

Because agitators who are UNDENIABLY Marxist have been shitty all over our nation and making life nearly intolerable, AND THE FAKE ALLEGED PAEUDO WANNABE "LIBERALS" ARE STANDING BY AND APPLAUDING IT!!!!

 

[IM2]

This boy has the right to self-defense.

Period.

So do the guys he's shooting.

not when they are attempting to murder him.

You mean after he attempted to murder them? Oh wait. He did. No attempt about it. The two he killed weren't even armed....(and yes I'm using "murder" loosely because nuance means nothing here).

You are factually wrong. The kid was RUNNING away from the first guy he shot. He was then RUNNING AWAY from the next two guys he shot. What part of RUNNING away is not making it through your head?

What part of he shouldn't have shot them or, IN FACT - let's be FACTUAL - what part of he had no business being there? You know how I feel about vigilantism, and private militias accountable to no one, so I won't go there. But at least the ADULTS who were there protecting private property, managed NOT to kill anyone, NOT to "lose it", NOT to get into a situation like that. Only HE DID. And you can't blame the guys chasing him - he KILLED someone already. And he was armed ILLEGALLY. It should never have happened.

Unfortunately, the intangibles you’ve mentioned are conjecture. It’s more emotion that reality.

This boy has the right to self-defense.

Period.

So do the guys he's shooting.

not when they are attempting to murder him.

You mean after he attempted to murder them? Oh wait. He did. No attempt about it. The two he killed weren't even armed....(and yes I'm using "murder" loosely because nuance means nothing here).

You are factually wrong. The kid was RUNNING away from the first guy he shot. He was then RUNNING AWAY from the next two guys he shot. What part of RUNNING away is not making it through your head?

What part of he shouldn't have shot them or, IN FACT - let's be FACTUAL - what part of he had no business being there? You know how I feel about vigilantism, and private militias accountable to no one, so I won't go there. But at least the ADULTS who were there protecting private property, managed NOT to kill anyone, NOT to "lose it", NOT to get into a situation like that. Only HE DID. And you can't blame the guys chasing him - he KILLED someone already. And he was armed ILLEGALLY. It should never have happened.

You’re argument doesn’t hold water simply because it is an opinion. Now, should he have been there? He had every right. It is irrelevant that he was younger, underage, or had a gun illegally. He was attacked by grown adults in a mob as far as I know a this point, without provocation.

I counter with this, the convicted felon with a gun drawn as Kyle was sitting on the ground should not have been there either. Had the savages never advanced at Kyle, nothing would have happened.

A similar case in terms of illegally using or possessing a firearm is happening in Virginia.

An employee used a gun against three people as they broke into his place of employment. He was sleeping there that night and used the gun to defend himself and the property. He cant posses or use a firearm. The firearm was not his, it was his boss who owned it. So, is he justified or does he simply get killed? It’s tough but, I would think the circumstances would allow for defense of ones self. Different but similar to Kenosha.

He was not attacked by anyone. And Coyote was right when she said he should not have been there. He drove up from Illinois to shoot people.

or just tryna be famous. bruh.

View attachment 381452

Kyle wasn’t attacked? At all? You mean never happened at all?

Should I call the authorities on people who want to be famous? Easy to assume he wanted to kill people.

There is no evidence he was attacked. And why did he drive up from Illinois?

 

[progressive hunter]

Accused Kenosha shooter's lawyer claims self-defense amid new video

A 17-year-old charged in two shooting deaths amid a chaotic demonstration Kenosha, Wis., earlier this week was in fear for his life after being attacked by rioters who chased him down and beat him while on the ground when he fired in self-defense, his attorney said Friday.

www.foxnews.com