Kyle Rittenhouse

Discussion in 'General Politics' started by JoeyBoy718, Aug 27, 2020.

  1. Robbie

    Robbie Well-Known Member

    150 Messages
    204 Likes Received
    I’ve watched every video available out there.

    All 3 shootings were in self defense. The first guy (a convicted child molester) threw a molotov cocktail at him first and shots were fired at or around him first as well.

    Then the mob chases him. The second guy (a convicted burglar) attacked him with a skateboard to his head.

    The third guy, while Rittenhouse is calmly sitting on the ground, pulls a handgun on him and is about to shoot him.

    All 3 shootings were in self defense. That will be an easy defense.

    Now....should Kyle have been there? Probably not, but someone needed to defend those areas since police are not doing their jobs. I question why a 17 year old is doing what 1000s of grown men in that area should have been doing.
     
    RoboQB, cml750 and JoeKing like this.
  2. JoeKing

    JoeKing Well-Known Member

    4,900 Messages
    2,685 Likes Received
    Thanks. Let's hope Kyle gets the best legal defense money can provide.
     
    cml750 likes this.
  3. Kevinicus

    Kevinicus Well-Known Member

    728 Messages
    739 Likes Received
    The only thing I am not clear on (and it doesn't really alter my opinion) is the molotov cocktail bit. I see the platic bag, and I am sure there was something in it, but I don't know what it was, and I haven't seen anything that really indicates a molotov.
     
    JoeKing, cml750 and JoeyBoy718 like this.
  4. Robbie

    Robbie Well-Known Member

    150 Messages
    204 Likes Received
    You could be right on that. Even if it was a bag, we don’t know what was in it. Could have been a brick or something else. Doesn’t matter though for the self defense aspect.

    Kyle was being chased, gun shots were fired in his immediate vicinity, and the child molester threw something at him. In the moment, Kyle had to assume his life was being threatened, so he had the right to respond and defend himself.
     
    JoeKing and cml750 like this.
  5. JoeyBoy718

    JoeyBoy718 Well-Known Member

    522 Messages
    357 Likes Received
    I’m not really surprised. Patriots never do anything. Rights have been getting stripped away for decades, now streets are getting burned and people are getting harassed while minding their own business, and only this 17 year old kid did anything while every tough guy on the internet praised him. I doubt that even the military or police force would stand up against tyranny. We’ve already seen them fail to do so during the pandemic and riots by taking their orders from the higher ups and watching everything around them get destroyed. I think we’ve been conditioned to be far too polite to stand up for ourselves until it’s too late. I’ve seen no evidence that this country has a collective spine.
     
    JoeKing, cml750 and tabascocat like this.
  6. JoeKing

    JoeKing Well-Known Member

    4,900 Messages
    2,685 Likes Received
    I've been researching what kind of kid Kyle Rittenhouse was prior to showing up armed in Kenosha WI. By all accounts I can find, he is a pretty good kid that aspired to be a law enforcement officer someday. He supported law enforcement organizations. As a gun enthusiast myself, I can commend Kyle for his trigger finger discipline which indicates to me he has some degree of training on the proper use of firearms. He did not come to Kenosha to cause problems. He was there to protect property and render aid to those that needed it, he even brought his med kit with him. He had been protecting a car dealership earlier that day and was even interviewed prior to the shooting and asked why he was there armed. He stated that he was there by request online to help assist people caught up in the middle of the violence. He claimed he could take care of himself and was only interested in helping other innocent people.

    What appears to have gone wrong was he put himself in a position where he was forced to defend himself. I commend him for taking the initiative to help others, however putting himself in the line of fire where he was forced to defend himself was not wise. Defending a car dealership is one thing but making himself a target, getting chased down the street, and then being forced to react to that situation was unwise. As unwise as it was, it does appear every shot fired by him appears to me to have been in self-defense. This incident was actually chronicled fairly well by numerous video angles being pieced together to tell the whole story as it actually happened. He will be given an excellent legal defense that, IMO, should exonerate him. I'm sure they will be able to do a better job than I have to show what exactly happened that evening in detail. The charge he may not be able to escape is fleeing across state lines to escape prosecution of a homicide. The trick here will be proving his claim of self-defense. A proven self-defense killing is not homicide... and if there is no homicide, there is no fleeing across state lines to escape prosecution of homicide.

    I wish him the best of luck.
     
    Last edited: Sep 2, 2020
    cml750, tabascocat and Robbie like this.
  7. tabascocat

    tabascocat Well-Known Member

    1,455 Messages
    1,617 Likes Received
    It does appear to all be self defense but his problem will be his age....can’t open carry or own a gun there at 17. His parent would have to be the owner of the gun but he still can’t open carry it. He shouldn’t face any jail time when all said and done, probably just a misdemeanor or two.
     
    Robbie, cml750 and JoeKing like this.
  8. Kevinicus

    Kevinicus Well-Known Member

    728 Messages
    739 Likes Received
    The statute I read suggests if it's a rifle, he can possess it.
     
    cml750, tabascocat and JoeKing like this.
  9. tabascocat

    tabascocat Well-Known Member

    1,455 Messages
    1,617 Likes Received
    Ok, there are conflicting reports on that everywhere.
     
  10. JoeKing

    JoeKing Well-Known Member

    4,900 Messages
    2,685 Likes Received
    This a quote from Kyle Rittenhouse's lawyer...

    “It was a legal weapon… It did not cross state lines. That charge is incorrect as a matter of law in Wisconsin. Actually, that weapon can be possessed by anyone 16 years or older.”

    Who do you believe? I've heard conflicting reports as well. A defense lawyer or the left-leaning media, who's correct?
     
    tabascocat likes this.
  11. Kevinicus

    Kevinicus Well-Known Member

    728 Messages
    739 Likes Received
    I just keep going back to this:

    948.60.3.c:

    (c) This section applies only to a person under 18 years of age who possesses or is armed with a rifle or a shotgun if the person is in violation of s. 941.28 or is not in compliance with ss. 29.304 and 29.593. This section applies only to an adult who transfers a firearm to a person under 18 years of age if the person under 18 years of age is not in compliance with ss. 29.304 and 29.593 or to an adult who is in violation of s. 941.28.
     
  12. JoeKing

    JoeKing Well-Known Member

    4,900 Messages
    2,685 Likes Received
    This thread is getting out of hand when you need to be a lawyer to keep up. I didn't get close to knowing what any of the above means. Too many references to numbers that I don't know. It was written for lawyers by lawyers to understand. The lawyers are who will sort this out.
     
    JoeyBoy718 likes this.
  13. Kevinicus

    Kevinicus Well-Known Member

    728 Messages
    739 Likes Received
    I went and looked at the referenced numbers. None of them apply in this case.

    One applies to those under 16. One is for short barrels. The last is for hunting.
     
    JoeKing likes this.
  14. JoeKing

    JoeKing Well-Known Member

    4,900 Messages
    2,685 Likes Received
    Robbie likes this.

Share This Page