Kyle Rittenhouse trial
- Thread starter The Joker
- Start date
I think that's the nut of it. We don't have any way of dealing with "Self defense" when it's because you're armed.
If Kyle had been wandering through the crowd, no issue.
Instead, he was there with a weapon and perceived as a threat by the crowd. And there ain't no intelligence in a crowd that's bordering on a riot.
We don't have any laws to deal with this situation except that because he showed up armed, people are dead. Now, politics aside, that sounds a lot like manslaughter.
Defined:
: the unlawful killing of a human being without express or implied malice.
The best thing to do when a Nazi thug is shooting at an AR 15 is to close the gap because a weapon of war like that is tough to survive if the Nazi achieves stand off distance. The heroic skateboarder almost neutralized the threat. The jury needs to finish the job so no more die at his hands.
I’d like to point out that there a non zero # of Nazis among the ranks of the police. Some of them for example stood aside when the treason isn’t attacked the Capitol. Others obstructed justice after the fact. So the fact that a Nazi cop would thank a Nazi doesn’t carry much weight with me.
Last edited by a moderator:
So, in this case, the skateboarder was exercising the right of self-defense
Defined again:
Sometimes self-defense is justified even if the perceived aggressor didn’t actually mean the perceived victim any harm. What matters in these situations is whether a “reasonable person” in the same situation would have perceived an immediate threat of physical harm. The concept of the “reasonable person” is a legal conceit that is subject to differing interpretations in practice, but it is the legal system’s best tool to determine whether a person’s perception of imminent danger justified the use of protective force.
And in the act of exercising the right of self defense, gave Kyle the right to self-defense.
What a mess.
Defined again:
Sometimes self-defense is justified even if the perceived aggressor didn’t actually mean the perceived victim any harm. What matters in these situations is whether a “reasonable person” in the same situation would have perceived an immediate threat of physical harm. The concept of the “reasonable person” is a legal conceit that is subject to differing interpretations in practice, but it is the legal system’s best tool to determine whether a person’s perception of imminent danger justified the use of protective force.
And in the act of exercising the right of self defense, gave Kyle the right to self-defense.
What a mess.
Gouvernail
Lottsa people don’t know I’m famous
Other than our constitutional obligation to provide council, there is zero reason to defend the behavior of a nut who brings a weapon to a crowd.
The asshole with the machine gun should have been exterminated a long time ago.
The asshole with the machine gun should have been exterminated a long time ago.
Swimsailor
Super Anarchist
It’s almost as if America’s gun culture and having more guns than people in the country is contributing to the nation’s downfall. What’s next, mass shootings at elementary schools?
The Joker
Super Anarchist
- Thread starter
- #29
The defense attorney comes across as more informed than the prosecutor. Just got the police witness to say you never let someone take away your weapon because it can be used against you. Plus that getting hit In the head is always a concern. More for the self defense case.
Autonomous
Turgid Member
Be careful! Facts send ripples through the narrative.
Gouvernail
Lottsa people don’t know I’m famous
Well, local DA versus finest money can buy. Wouldn’t expect it to go well for the DA
jzk
Super Anarchist
- 11,704
- 325
jerseyguy
Super Anarchist
One of the defense attorneys is a local guy. Used to own a J/35 back in the 1980s. Back when my son was in high school the guy gave my son, and his friend who was racing with him, his business card. Told the kids it was their get out of jail free card. Single use only. He has since become the preferred defense attorney among the druggies, gangbangers and other felonious creatures.
phillysailor
Super Anarchist
- 7,977
- 2,860
WTF? This trial isn't alleging that Kyle wore a white hood and hunted black men, persecuted jews, threw firebombs into churches. I don't have a clue if Kyle would support an authoritarian right wing government.
Just stop.
Please tell us why Kyle shooting people who were charging him while expressing malice with words and actions, bearing & using weapons is "unlawful." When did Kyle give up his right to self defense?
I think his self centered actions instigated a disaster, but the problem isn't with his actions while being attacked by folks who were out despite a curfew, it is with the blasé and supportive reaction of police to his presence there with a gun. The problem is that Kyle was able to open carry a long gun during a curfew during a riot because he was white. The problem is that leftists are setting themselves up for failure trying to paint this kid as the problem.
This kid is as much the victim of racism, lax gun laws and social myopia as the misguided idiots who went to a gunfight with a plastic baggie, a skateboard and a farcical attitude about the proper time and place for using a handgun, and how to use their gun. These idiots charged a long gun with a sense of entitlement and moral righteousness which fools are echoing here in a vain attempt to prove to themselves that right makes might.
You're neither if you keep arguing this was murder. You're just another idiot charging a long gun.
Last edited by a moderator:
Mike G
Super Anarchist
Start with the basics?
Did he have the legal right to carry that gun in that location?
Did he have the legal right to carry that gun in that location?
The idiots who charged may have been in fear due to the fact that someone is carrying a gun. In a stand-your-ground state (wisconsin is not) that would be enough to shoot the guy. In this case, one could make an argument that the skateboard dude was afraid and exercising self defense, which made Kyle afraid and he exercised HIS self defense, ending up with a dead guy. All because Kyle chose to bring a gun.
You said it yourself above. No Kyle in a crowd with a gun after curfew, no one dies. Kyle's decision led to a death(s). That's homocide, but maybe justified.
I don't think we have laws to deal with this since we're in love with guns. Would be pretty simple anywhere else.
(Note, no where have I brought up politics of Kyle or the dead, or race)