Eyewitness Account Shows Kyle Rittenhouse's First Shots Were In Self-Defense (enemies, legal)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
This is NOT an open and shut case. The only survivor of encounters with Rittenhouse that night, believes that Rittenhouse was an "active shooter". With reasonable cause to think that.
This is incredibly complicated. Rittenhouse was witnessed to have shot another individual shortly before, and as his own attorney says, "hadn't shot anyone in two blocks since running". So damned by faint praise. He's not an active shooter, he's run a couple blocks since he shot anyone. Um.
This is very, very difficult. Our men are encouraged to engage and disarm active shooters. This is what this man attempted.
How should a court rule, when everyone is completely confused in the bedlam?
Literally, more people are murdered by fists and feet than by AR-15 "assault weapons"
True, but when was the last time someone committed a mass murder using their feet? I mean, besides Bruce Lee.
Serial killers?
Want to know who dies in mass murders? Disarmed populations when tyranny or neighboring countries roll in. That’s a pretty big ****ing mass murder you have to look forward to.
Don’t forget those good ol cartels waiting just a few miles on the other side of the open border. In safe disarmed Mexico.
This is NOT an open and shut case. The only survivor of encounters with Rittenhouse that night, believes that Rittenhouse was an "active shooter". With reasonable cause to think that.
This is incredibly complicated. Rittenhouse was witnessed to have shot another individual shortly before, and as his own attorney says, "hadn't shot anyone in two blocks since running". So damned by faint praise. He's not an active shooter, he's run a couple blocks since he shot anyone. Um.
This is very, very difficult. Our men are encouraged to engage and disarm active shooters. This is what this man attempted.
How should a court rule, when everyone is completely confused in the bedlam?
Rittenhouse was witnessed to have shot another individual shortly before, and as his own attorney says, "hadn't shot anyone in two blocks since running". So damned by faint praise. He's not an active shooter, he's run a couple blocks since he shot anyone. Um.
This is very, very difficult. Our men are encouraged to engage and disarm active shooters. This is what this man attempted.
"Our" men?
GG asked KR what happened. KR said he shot someone, he is going to police. It's on video. In Fact, it's on GG's own cell phone video. So GG knows he is going to the police. He is running along side him filming him. He is obviously not afraid of this 'active' shooter.
Why doesn't GG escort him safely to the police, the direction they are running anyway?
No,...he joins in on the mob now filled with bloodlust as KR is hit in the head, then kicked in the head when on the ground by Jumpkick guy, then bashed by skateboard guy...then next thing he knows GG is standing over him with a handgun lunging at him.
This is not speculation. It's a play by play of what everyone can see when watching the videos.
and what does he do after all that.,..he still goes to the police.
Didn't you say you hadn't watched the trial that closely?
This isn't a complicated case. Especially since there is video corroboration.
I watched that man's testimony.
This is an EXTREMELY complicated case. And probably will be a teaching curriculum for law schools to come. There is nothing, whatsoever, simple about this, from the testimony, to the judge's instructions to the jury, to the community pressure.
This is an EXTREMELY complicated case. And probably will be a teaching curriculum for law schools to come. There is nothing, whatsoever, simple about this, from the testimony, to the judge's instructions to the jury, to the community pressure.
What is so complicated about it? He was at a place he could legally be, carrying a firearm he was legally able to carry. He was then attacked and defended himself. Seems pretty uncomplicated.
This is an EXTREMELY complicated case. And probably will be a teaching curriculum for law schools to come. There is nothing, whatsoever, simple about this, from the testimony, to the judge's instructions to the jury, to the community pressure.
This is an EXTREMELY complicated case. And probably will be a teaching curriculum for law schools to come. There is nothing, whatsoever, simple about this, from the testimony, to the judge's instructions to the jury, to the community pressure.
No it's not.
You didn't watch it closely. You didn't watch it hardly.
It was Self-Defense.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.