Kyle Rittenhouse won’t be charged for gun offense in Illinois: prosecutors

It was like pulling teeth, but we finally dragged you to sanity.

Welcome to reality, friendo.

 

A cookie?
Sugar or chocolate chip?

I am glad we are both waiting on the courts and not rushing to judgement then.

 

Ok sure, I edited a bit more after if you wish to address. Genuine questions despite how it may appear.

Also, I would love to hear exactly what he would have to have done to "provoke the situation" in your opinion? Some examples? Or is it simply pointing his weapon, or direct threats?

There are some who believe by simply carrying the weapon he is now culpable for having to use it. Thats clearly absurd in my opinion but do you believe that or anything similar?

 

I actually said basically the same thing in post #78... but ok...

 

Can we have the same 'ardor' for the innumerable BLM / Antifa scum that have been scooped up... ? Or does the paradigm shift... ?

 

Pointing a weapon at someone is grounds for them to act in self defense, as is a vocal threat while acting in a threatening manner.

I am torn on the open carry issue, would I ever enter a situation like that with an exposed long rifle? No
I would have probably been carrying however.

I believe, personally — just opinion and nothing more — that it was done to cause a reaction in others. I don’t know the kid but the people I do know, that would have done something similar, would have done so as a provocation. But this goes into knowing someone’s intent which I do not...

Now if the DA can show the intent, such as a facebook post or whatever platform he was organized on, then I do not think his self defense claims should hold.

 

If by “BLM / AntiFa scum” you mean the people rioting then no, they should be arrested and charged to the maximum extent of the law.

If by “BLM / AntiFa scum” you mean the people peacefully protesting then yes, I do not believe they should be charged unless evidence produced shows they did something wrong.

I don’t count curfew laws in either the protestors or Kyle’s case as I feel they are unconstitutional

 

Stop 'begging the issue'... it's posters like you that I go full bore bitch upon, unleashing a full repertoire of expletives...

 

Kyle Rittenhouse is living proof that you should never bring a skateboard to a gunfight.

 

I disagree, even if his intent in simply carrying was to cause a reaction, does not justify the attack. Nor does it mean he can no longer defend himself.

But atleast it seems fair to say assuming no more evidence resurfaces, his actions were justified in your opinon?

 

Yes and no, like I have said — I am torn on this issue.
I believe he was acting in bad faith

I have no issues with guns, I own several and go to the shooting range occasionally. I have friends that sell guns. I do not feel they are given the respect required and are too frequently used as props.

I am redneck white — the whitest white you can get, sun reflecting white outside of an occasional farmers tan, nothing against white people.

Nope, I have biases like everyone

How so? Because I am socially liberal?
Can you give me an example?

 

Justified would be a stretch, legal would be the word I would use.
At minimum he should be given a weapons charge.

 

Yes, how dare people think that something doesn’t add up and look at possible scenarios.

If a random person — on the internet — introducing a hypothetical causes you to “go full bore bitch upon, unleashing a full repertoire of expletives” then you should probably block me now.
I am here for discussion not an echo chamber. Our objectives clearly divide.

 

Time served is all I care to see on him.

I believe he has a sheepdog mentality, and it isn't one that should be discouraged. But regardless of good faith or bad faith, those terrorists chose to launch an attack on him. He didnt chase them, he didnt engage them, they chased and engaged him and he showed far more restraint than I would given the same capability and situation. That fake surrender was disgusting, taking advantage of someone like that who is giving you the opportunity to live despite having you dead to rights...boils my blood.

Although, him allowing that guy to live might just be what he needs to get people on his side. The court of public opinion is already skewed against him based on false narratives of white supremacy.

Also, is there any situation where "jsutified" would be a proper word? Or him being there removes that from your consideration period?

 

I agree... carry on ~ !

 

Did you have a point you were trying to make?

 

Self defense isnt a crime.

...much to the consternation of the would-be criminals trying to make it one.

 

Thus far, this is the best analysis of the event I have seen



So it looks like two charges unless something new is released.

This is another good breakdown



With the first exchange of shots, have they determined who fired first? Could the people that chased him down down so because they believe he just killed someone and was running away from the scene?

 

SCOOP: Man Who Fired First Shots Behind Kyle Rittenhouse in Kenosha Has Been Charged
By Cassandra Fairbanks
Published October 13, 2020 at 6:27pm
222 Comments

I'm rooting for Kyle... the 2A tenets seem to precipitously held in the balance here...

 

Its possible they thought he did, although there is no evidence of that currently. And if thats the case that still wouldn't make him the bad guy for defending himself.

Even if they thought he was a murderer who just shot or killed someone, that doesn't make it so and doesn't mean he has to allow them to hurt/kill him because they believe they are in the right.

And again, he should not be charged at all for any of the killings. None. There is no reason for it whatsoever, he clearly was defending himself. Again, based on all the available evidence. At no point did he fire his weapon at someone who wasn't actively attacking him.

Whatever else he gets outside of the killings, should be time served.

 

Instead, he’s the latest right wing folk hero for murdering unarmed people. The guy who ran over the protester in Charlottesville must be jealous.

 

The skateboard was a weapon. The guy kicking Rittenhouse was using his shoe as a weapon. The third guy had a gun, which is also a weapon. Good Kyle!

 

Perhaps, another one that may stick is the reckless endangerment charge for McGinnis, that alone coupled with the misdemeanor of not legally being allowed to carry a weapon is a maximum five year charge in itself. And I am not certain, but in most states the public has the right to attempt to detain someone if they feel they committed a crime, so it becomes whose self defense claims come out on top.

 

While I think we can be reasonably confident that the child molester didn't have a weapon on him, the second person Kyle shot in self defense had just hit him in the head with a skateboard. That's a weapon, and an assault. And the third person he shot (who survived) literally had a gun in his hand when he was shot.

 

You people are a hoot.
The second and third people he shot were trying to disarm him after he had murdered the first one in cold blood.
But thanks for proving my point.