Kyle Rittenhouse - The Truth in 11 Minutes

[Ernest T. Vol]

The people he shot were intervening; hell the prosecutor described them as vigilantes trying to stop what they believed was an active shooter (who for some reason was running away and not shooting anyone but I digress).

The people he shot were not reacting to an imminent threat on their homes.

He can never apply the 'shoe on the other foot' test.

 

[DynaLo]

Lefties around Twitter are melting down saying they’re now afraid of rioters getting shot and I’m sitting here thinking... duh, don’t riot

 

[McDad]

Cops have no record of his phone call.

Kyle Rittenhouse: Self Defense? | YIP Institute

Here's Kyles problem...

"Kyle's self defense claim is not supported by Wisconsin law. In fact, Wisconsin is one of twenty-two U.S. states that does not have the “Stand your Ground” law. Even in the states where “Stand your Ground” is law, the right applies to self-defense inside one's home, vehicle, or business. In those states, one can generally use lethal force without having a duty to retreat. In any event, the self-defense argument would not have applied to Rittenhouse who had already overstepped his legal framework by using excessive retaliatory force. He was an active shooter who had not complied with Wisconsin State Law, and was posing an immediate threat. After killing Rosenbaum, Rittenhouse had become an “active shooter” and all those who tried to neutralize or attack him were, therefore, legally justified in doing so. The laws sanction bystanders’ efforts at disarming or neutralizing an active shooter, especially since in so many violent instances--i.e. Sandy Hook Elementary School in Connecticut or in Parkland, Florida--attackers have inflicted great harm on innocent citizens."

In other words, what you see depends on where you sit - and the law is def not on his side.

The jury disagrees.

 

[lawgator1]

Are you unaware that people are allowed to walk around open carrying? Or do you just ignore that part of the law?

Honestly, this doesn't seem like the best case for advocates of open carry to point to, do you?

 

[C-south]

Honestly, this doesn't seem like the best case for advocates of open carry to point to, do you?

Pretty textbook

 

[825VOL]

No, in this context the only thing that would justify his waking around armed would be an imminent threat on people in his home.

Once we start having people making their own judgments about when they are justified in intervening like this, well, just think about that door and how widely you really want it opened.

What do you think has been happening with these protests? People don’t know the facts or ignore them and take to the streets. They then proceed to burn down business, loot, smash property, and injure people. Maybe you should have a talk with those idiots first.

 

[volinbham]

Lefties around Twitter are melting down saying they’re now afraid of rioters getting shot and I’m sitting here thinking... duh, don’t riot

these vigilantes just won't let me be me!

 

[Vol423]

Lefties around Twitter are melting down saying they’re now afraid of rioters getting shot and I’m sitting here thinking... duh, don’t riot

Rioters should fear being shot.

 

[FLVOL_79]

 

[McDad]

Yeah, he was looking for trouble, and found it. Murdering two fellow Americans in the process.

Does this mean he's like OJ since he was acquitted?

 

[volfanhill]

Honestly, this doesn't seem like the best case for advocates of open carry to point to, do you?

Honestly, it seems like you don't know the basic rightsthat are afforded to us.

 

[W.TN.Orange Blood]

Biden calls for calm but says Rittenhouse 'not guilty' verdict leaves him 'angry and concerned'

That's what his handlers wrote down on paper for him to say. He has no clue about anything.

 

[FLVOL_79]

 

[dovervolz]

And there it is

So, Biden s Gestapo is gonna step in and overturn the verdict?

 

[Vol423]

To the Shock of Nobody, Biden Shows Zero Leadership in Criticizing the Verdict

Biden calls for calm but says Rittenhouse 'not guilty' verdict leaves him 'angry and concerned'

Remember that the Summer of 2020 was just a number of mostly peaceful protests according to the lunatic left.

 

[Weezer]

I still don't understand people who have a problem with KR "being there" yet have no problem with the protesters "being there". Seems extremely hypocritical to pretend one side was somehow justified in being there, and one side was not. No one "needed" to be there. Both sides had the freedom to be there.

 

[McDad]

Rioters should fear being shot.

I disagree.

Violent rioters, rioters who limit rights of others should fear retribution.

 

[DC_Vol]

Honestly, it seems like you don't know the basic rights that are afforded to us.

It just seems like he doesn’t like them when they get in the way of a narrative he subscribes to. Which is usually that of the Democrat Party.

 

[TNVOLNAVY]

Biden calls for calm but says Rittenhouse 'not guilty' verdict leaves him 'angry and concerned'

I volunteer to be locked in a room alone with Slo Jo to help him express his anger.

 

[85SugarVol]

51-49 is their level of certainty that Rittenhouse was at fault. They just have to believe Rittenhouse was most likely the person at fault.

But the issue is there’s zero evidence to support that

I know this is nit picky, but I think it’s an important distinction.

It’s not “who was most likely at fault”.
It is “who is more at fault”.

Not one or the other at fault, but who among the two is more at fault.

 

[hndog609]

Honestly, this doesn't seem like the best case for advocates of open carry to point to, do you?

At least in this case the person in question had basically no other choice. (not eligible to carry and handgun) Only long guns were legal for him to carry.

 

[deezvols]

No, in this context the only thing that would justify his waking around armed would be an imminent threat on people in his home.

Once we start having people making their own judgments about when they are justified in intervening like this, well, just think about that door and how widely you really want it opened.

We can’t protect the reasons we have a home?

 

[FLVOL_79]

 

[Vol8188]

And there it is

Jesus Christ. I don’t believe in any of the covid, vaccine, or stolen election conspiracies. But I 100% get it.

How can you not see that the institutions as a whole have been captured?

 

[Vol8188]

I know this is nit picky, but I think it’s an important distinction.

It’s not “who was most likely at fault”.
It is “who is more at fault”.

Not one or the other at fault, but who among the two is more at fault.

I don’t actually believe that’s correct but even if so, what evidence is there that suggests any of the encounters were the fault of Rittenhouse?