Kyle Rittenhouse - The Truth in 11 Minutes

[KB5252]

I don’t think the instances given are similar.
Had I already killed a man? I wouldn’t run away from that in the 1st place. I’d like to say ultimately that I’m putting the gun on my back and I’m standing up to fight. Or I’d shoot in the air. I’d definitely realize the power of my actions and what I had already done.

If this is how you would handle an assumed situation I suggest for your own safety your never go armed. You've watched too many movies.

Rosenbaum was a lunatic and had been acting like one for some time. He was a predator in every sense of the word. He attempted to get in behind Ritt and sneak him even though Ritt was attempting to retreat and put distance between him and Rosenbaum, given the propensity for violence Rosenbaum had already shown doing any of the things you listed above are likely to end in series bodily harm to yourself.

You can do as you wish, but in that instance if it had been you, I think it very likely you would have been their victim.

 

[BayVol7]

Yet he attacked none of these people. So by put himself there, you mean, like these people, he was somewhere he shouldn’t have been?

So there’s countless issues with that argument. But the main one is, none of that justified any attacks on him. So once he’s being attacked, how should he respond? Should he have just been man enough to fight the entire mob Bruce Lee style, or can we agree this was a justifiable time to use your gun?

People do different things in the heat of the moment. I can argue Huber’s intent was purely to disarm a threat.
I kinda answered the question already but if I were specifically him, I’d like to think I’d get up and continue to run to the police. Taking a life is the last thing I’d want to do. Again.

 

[C-south]

People do different things in the heat of the moment. I can argue Huber’s intent was purely to disarm a threat.
I kinda answered the question already but if I were specifically him, I’d like to think I’d get up and continue to run to the police. Taking a life is the last thing I’d want to do. Again.

A threat? Trying to disable a law abiding legally carrying citizen makes you the threat. Luckily the threat was terminated.

 

[BayVol7]

Lmao how so

Because there is grey area in the Huber instance. I also think it would have been an interesting legal argument in a different jurisdiction with a better attorney.

 

[Vol8188]

People do different things in the heat of the moment. I can argue Huber’s intent was purely to disarm a threat.
I kinda answered the question already but if I were specifically him, I’d like to think I’d get up and continue to run to the police. Taking a life is the last thing I’d want to do. Again.

Hard to get up and run while the guy has his hand on your gun. But after he shot him, and then shot the guy who was coming at him with a gun pointed at him, he then ran to the police.

It’s amazing you’ll bend over backwards to excuse a violent mob who attacked a kid, but the kid who was clearly defending himself, you take issue with that?

Seems like you haven’t put a lot of thought into this.

 

[Sea Ray]

His lawyer said on CNN Monday that all he and Rittenhouse want is to fade into obscurity.

So he goes on TC and goes for photo op with Trump within 72 hours. Rittenhouse's deer caught in headlights shtick was a lie to begin with.

That may or may not be, but one thing's for sure: he's not guilty of all charges

 

[Vol8188]

Because there is grey area in the Huber instance. I also think it would have been an interesting legal argument in a different jurisdiction with a better attorney.

There’s 0 legal argument to make. What grey area? He attacked a man who was trying to run away from him, hit the man with his skateboard, and got killed in an act of self defense.

Where’s the grey? Where’s the legal case you believe a better attorney could’ve made?

 

[Vol8188]

His lawyer said on CNN Monday that all he and Rittenhouse want is to fade into obscurity.

So he goes on TC and goes for photo op with Trump within 72 hours. Rittenhouse's deer caught in headlights shtick was a lie to begin with.

Why do you hate a 17 year old for defending himself from violence criminals? I don’t think you’ve ever answered that. Do you just generally hate anyone you consider to the right of center, is that his crime in your eyes?

Gaige has been on tv numerous times. I’ve never seen you express such sentiment towards him.

 

[KB5252]

People do different things in the heat of the moment. I can argue Huber’s intent was purely to disarm a threat.
I kinda answered the question already but if I were specifically him, I’d like to think I’d get up and continue to run to the police. Taking a life is the last thing I’d want to do. Again.

It would be very unwise tactically to turn your back on a group that was assaulting you.

And being disarmed is a worst case scenario, 1) you give your assailants the means to kill you 2) you lose your means to defend yourself against a hostile mob who has already committed violence against you.

 

[C-south]

Why do you hate a 17 year old for defending himself from violence criminals? I don’t think you’ve ever answered that. Do you just generally hate anyone you consider to the right of center, is that his crime in your eyes?

They do and they also hate guns. Every argument they try to make is pure ignorance. Well it’s not ignornace but that’s the nice way to put it.

 

[Vol8188]

They do and they also hate guns. Every argument they try to make is pure ignorance. Well it’s not ignornace but that’s the nice way to put it.

Yeah. There’s their real problem here. They hate him because he’s on the right side of the isle, and then hate him because he used a gun.

You will hear nothing from them condemning Gaige who was the only person involved carrying his weapon illegally, condemning any of the people who attacked Rittenhouse. I can only assume they consider it acceptable to attack republicans in the street.

 

[Vol8188]

It would be very unwise tactically to turn your back on a group that was assaulting you.

And being disarmed is a worst case scenario, 1) you give your assailants the means to kill you 2) you lose your means to demand yourself against a hostile mob who has already committed violence against you.

Especially since he’s already tried to run once and it didn’t end well

 

[BayVol7]

That wasn’t an answer it was a dodge.

Disagree, because I’ve had to clarify in the other instance ad nauseam.

Would a woman be justified in shooting and killing a rapist once he attacked her?

My opinion: Past tense? After she had been attacked? No. Before or during the act? If there is no other means to get out of the situation? Probably.

 

[Vol8188]

Disagree, because I’ve had to clarify in the other instance ad nauseam.

My opinion: Past tense? After she had been attacked? No. Before or during the act? If there is no other means to get out of the situation? Probably.

And to be clear his “other means” according to you was the same thing he had already tried and the mob wouldn’t allow him to do, run away.

Is that your actual argument right now? If a violent mob attacks you, you had better be faster than everyone of them? Seems like an unreasonable standard

 

[BayVol7]

Why do you hate a 17 year old for defending himself from violence criminals? I don’t think you’ve ever answered that. Do you just generally hate anyone you consider to the right of center, is that his crime in your eyes?

Gaige has been on tv numerous times. I’ve never seen you express such sentiment towards him.

Rittenhouse was pro-blm so your theory doesn’t hold up.

To your other point, this is only about the Huber instance.

 

[Vol8188]

Rittenhouse was pro-blm so your theory doesn’t hold up.

To your other point, this is only about the Huber instance.

I wasn’t responding to you. So no, LG’s comments are not occurring in a bubble that only involves Huber.

But I’m still waiting for your apply to my above question about what possible case you believe a better attorney could’ve made that Huber was murdered. I’d love to see that

 

[BayVol7]

And to be clear his “other means” according to you was the same thing he had already tried and the mob wouldn’t allow him to do, run away.

Is that your actual argument right now? If a violent mob attacks you, you had better be faster than everyone of them? Seems like an unreasonable standard

No my argument is that there were other options available which makes the use of deadly force as SD questionable to me.

 

[BayVol7]

I wasn’t responding to you. So no, LG’s comments are not occurring in a bubble that only involves Huber.

But I’m still waiting for your apply to my above question about what possible case you believe a better attorney could’ve made that Huber was murdered. I’d love to see that

Oh my apologies. See above.

 

[Vol8188]

No my argument is that there were other options available which makes the use of deadly force as SD questionable to me.

You directly stated he should’ve got up and tried to run away again. But go ahead. What was his other option?

 

[Caculator]

You directly stated he should’ve got up and tried to run away again. But go ahead. What was his other option?

Something like pay for the sins of his father

 

[Vol8188]

There’s 0 legal argument to make. What grey area? He attacked a man who was trying to run away from him, hit the man with his skateboard, and got killed in an act of self defense.

Where’s the grey? Where’s the legal case you believe a better attorney could’ve made?

This is the one I was waiting on your response to.

The idea that there’s somehow a case to be made that if a violent criminal runs at you with a skateboard, hits you in the head with it, and then tries to take your gun….

The idea that to shoot him is in someway unreasonable because he does not present a serious threat to your safety.

If I’m misrepresenting your stance please let me know. If I’m not, please tell me what I’m missing. What reason is there why you shouldn’t shoot people hitting you with skateboards and trying to take your gun?

 

[RikidyBones]

I think it’s morally debatable. Which is why this is an interesting convo despite your earlier comment.

It's not.

 

[BayVol7]

You directly stated he should’ve got up and tried to run away again. But go ahead. What was his other option?

Isn’t one option enough? He could have attempted to stand up and fight with the gun on his back. He could have surrendered the gun, given what had just occurred. Maybe the two individuals who reacted would have acted differently. He could have just allowed himself to get hit. I believe someone would have ultimately come to his rescue.

I can already see the hate responses upcoming but the point is there were other options that could have resulted in no one dying (and imo no serious bodily harm). The one with the gun should bear the most responsibility in a chaotic situation such as this one.

 

[C-south]

Isn’t one option enough? He could have attempted to stand up and fight with the gun on his back. He could have surrendered the gun, given what had just occurred. Maybe the two individuals who reacted would have acted differently. He could have just allowed himself to get hit. I believe someone would have ultimately come to his rescue.

I can already see the hate responses upcoming but the point is there were other options that could have resulted in no one dying (and imo no serious bodily harm). The one with the gun should bear the most responsibility in a chaotic situation such as this one.

Luckily things played out differently and the world is a better place.

 

[lawgator1]

Why do you hate a 17 year old for defending himself from violence criminals? I don’t think you’ve ever answered that. Do you just generally hate anyone you consider to the right of center, is that his crime in your eyes?

Gaige has been on tv numerous times. I’ve never seen you express such sentiment towards him.

Do you think that any citizen of the United States is warranted in driving to wherever they see protests, arming themselves, and walking around waiting for, indeed hoping for, a confrontation?

I just think that's dangerous at a lot of levels.