Kyle Rittenhouse

[Serryah]

Humm 2nd Amendment.

Humm - still against WI law for a 17 year old to have that kind of gun, which is, of course, a state right.

I bet you he gets off.. because you are allowed to defend yourself in WI it's called the “Castle Doctrine”

Sadly he will likely get off, but not because of the Castle Doctrine. Likely it'll be because a jury can't convict; I figure either a hung jury or they're look at his age and like you be biased that what he did earlier in the day makes him such a sweet, honest kid and we can't ruin his life... (nevermind the lives he's ruined by his actions to others)

BTW, while people were burning the city down, Kyle was running around with a fire extinguisher trying to put out the fires.. that is when he was attacked.

That's right the arsonist attacked Kyle with a brick and then tried to take his gun away while putting out a fire..

Funny, the video doesn't show him being attacked by a brick, and I read a bag was thrown at Kyle. And you know what? Does not effin' matter. He could be the best 17 year old in the whole goddamn world, except he was illegally carrying a weapon he was not allowed to have, across a state line he had no business being to and murdered two people.


I should note that I also don't give a fuk what HIS history is either. I don't care if he's a Trump or Biden supporter, if he's a Militia wanna be, cop wanna be, or a fukin' tree hugger hippie. None of that matters to me. What matters is what he did in the moments before and after he murdered those people.

Excuse me for not giving a fukk about the people he killed.

Who he killed doesn't matter.

Also, we know you're a fukin piece of garbage and don't give a shyte about anything, no need to keep proving it.

What is funny, is you seem to be defending 1) victim with a long history of abuse against women, and 2) the other victim who was a pedophile and felon and had a gun (he was not supposed to have) and was trying to shoot Kyle.

1. I'm not defending a man with a history of abuse against women, I'm saying that it doesn't matter what his history is. In the eyes of the law, no matter how much of a fuking scumbag he was, he had as much right to life as anyone else (seeing as he was not in jail/prison)

2. see above. Though I will admit this second being a felon himself and having a gun does change things slightly. He shouldn't have been there either with a gun. And if guy two was shooting at Kyle after he murdered guy one, does that make him a good guy with a gun considering he just saw someone murdered???

Also, according to the indictments, it was the third victim who was shot and his arm grazed that had the gun, who pointed it at Kyle but wasn't trying to shoot him at all.

So you have already convicted him of a crime he didn't commit. Without a trial. Or does the trial come after the execution? I'm told it is easier to convict a person that is not permitted to defend himself.

I'm saying this kid broke the law in having a gun underage that he used in a potential crime, and while it might be a misdemeanor in WI for him to have it and carry it, what he DID with it should factor into it. As well as he left the scene of a crime. Even if he turned himself in the next day, that also should work against him.

At least he will go to trial to be determined if he does go to jail/prison or not. If it ends up he's not guilty, that's how it works, but based on what I've read about the incident, it's certainly pointing to guilt.

The cops who have killed people like Breanna Taylor haven't seen a goddamn second of jail time for that and she did SFA except for sleep in her own goddamn bed.

She probably has a bad case of "Stockholm syndrome" from watching to much CNN and CBC. :lol:

Brainwashed from being a captive of Fake News CBC/CNN :lol:

If I watched either of those, you might have something. As it is, I don't. Tryharder though.

It's called karma.

He did what all the beaten women were to afraid of doing.

Did you see a happy ending for these people in their future. How many more women would have suffered before one did them in anyway?

For the record, I'm GLAD the abuser azzhole is dead. He should'a been in jail for the rest of his life. Same with the sex offender.

However the law allowed them to be out on the streets and as much as it's a fukin' disgrace, that's how the law works.

WE only know their history because of what Kyle did that night. Kyle himself had no idea who it was he was murdering at the time. Which is WHY it doesn't matter who they were beforehand.

If they had no criminal histories at all, would you be more inclined to be less forgiving to Kyle? Somehow I doubt it.


https://www.jsonline.com/story/news...ng-killing-jacob-blake-protesters/5651016002/

 

[Walter]

Rittenhouse did not kill any innocents.

 

[Serryah]

Rittenhouse did not kill any innocents.

Neither did Jacob Blake, did he deserved to be shot?

 

[B00Mer]

Yes 7 time in the back is a bit excessive..

I think the officer needs to go back to the range..

Once in the head you have been suffice.

 

[Twin_Moose]

‘He probably would’ve been killed,’ Trump says of Kenosha shooting suspect

U.S. President Donald Trump says Kyle Rittenhouse — a man who has been charged in connection with the shooting deaths of two protesters in Kenosha, Wis., — was "very violently attacked" and "probably would've been killed."

"You saw the same tape I saw, and he was trying to get away from them I guess — it looks like — and he fell and then they very violently attacked him and it was something that we’re looking at right now," Trump said.

"I guess he was in very big trouble, he probably would've been killed."

The president made the comments during a press conference at the White House Monday evening, after a reporter asked whether Rittenhouse should be condemned for his alleged actions.

Trump said the incident is "under investigation," adding that it is an "interesting situation."

Rittenhouse, 17, has been charged with six criminal counts, including first-degree homicide, in connection with a shooting incident in Kenosha earlier this week.

The incident took place as demonstrators protesting the police shooting of Jacob Blake, a 29-year-old Black man, clashed with armed militia members.

Tuesday's shooting left a 26-year-old from Silver Lake, Wis., and a 36-year-old from Kenosha dead, while a 36-year-old from West Allis, Wis., is expected to survive his injuries.

Trump is scheduled to travel to Kenosha on Tuesday.

However, the city's mayor John Antaramian, has requested Trump not visit over concerns it could "agitate things."

Read more: Kyle Rittenhouse charged with murder in shooting deaths of protesters in Kenosha

But speaking to reporters on Monday, Trump said his presence could "also increase enthusiasm," and "love and respect for our country."

He said he has "tremendous support" in Wisconsin.

"I promised them when it all gets taken care of we’ll go," he said.

Trump said he is not planning on meeting with Blake's family while in Kenosha.

“They wanted me to speak but they wanted lawyers involved, and I thought that was inappropriate so I didn’t do that,” he said.”

But, Trump claimed he has spoken with the family’s pastor, who he called a “fine man, a wonderful man.”

“I think we had a great talk,” he said.

Blake was shot seven times by Kenosha police. He survived, however, his father said he is now paralyzed from the waist down.

Good on him to go to Kenosha, he should go to Portland as well

 

[Twin_Moose]

Trump heads to politically crucial Wisconsin amid violence, racial unrest

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Despite entreaties to stay away, President Donald Trump heads to Kenosha, Wisconsin on Tuesday to highlight his "law and order" campaign theme in a city upended by protests after the shooting of a Black man by a white police officer.

The Republican president, who is running for re-election against Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden, has seen his polling gap with the former vice president narrow amid ongoing protests over racial injustice and resulting violence.

Last week's Republican National Convention portrayed Biden as a leader whose policies would create further chaos in the streets. Biden and fellow Democrats have made clear that the violence is happening under Trump's watch and accuse him of fomenting it with divisive rhetoric.

Trump's trip to Wisconsin, a political battleground state that he won narrowly in 2016, gives him a chance to emphasize his police-friendly pitch in a state he hopes to keep in his column in the Nov. 3 election.

Trump has lauded the National Guard for helping to quell violence in Kenosha and has offered to send federal assistance to other cities such as Portland, Oregon, which has experienced three months of protests. The president has not made a recent visit to Oregon, a state that traditionally supports Democrats in presidential elections.

Biden, who is ahead in national polls but has seen that advantage slip, leads Trump in Wisconsin, according to an average of polls by RealClearPolitics.

On Monday he called for rioters and looters to be prosecuted while slamming Trump for a lack of moral leadership.

Protesters have destroyed businesses in Kenosha, the latest city where demonstrations against racism and excessive use of force by police have led to violence that both political parties have condemned but that Republicans have sought to blame on Democrats.

While in Kenosha Trump intends to survey the damage from the protests and meet with law enforcement officials and business owners, but he is not scheduled to meet with the family of Jacob Blake, who was paralyzed from the waist down after the shooting.

The state's governor and the city's mayor both urged Trump not to come to Kenosha to avoid inflaming tensions and allow its citizens to heal, but the president dismissed that request......More

 

[B00Mer]

Trump 2020!!!

I'm guessing he will get a landslide and turn California red in the process..

 

[Dixie Cup]

Well, maybe the charges will be dropped to weapons charges if the Prosecutor can't prove intent & if he claims self-defense. But i'm not going to jump to conclusions. As it stands now, he's charged with murder and we'll see what happens.

 

[B00Mer]

Neither did Jacob Blake, did he deserved to be shot?

Um yes, he had a knife and was reaching for a gun or something in is car.. would you rather the police officer wait and get shot..

The guy has a criminal conviction, he is not following commands, and is reaching under his car seat for who knows what and has already threatened the police with a knife..

Police are not mind readers, and they have to protect each others life..

 

[Serryah]

Um yes, he had a knife and was reaching for a gun or something in is car.. would you rather the police officer wait and get shot..

He had a knife in the car, the cops did not know about it. "Reaching for a gun or something" - so you don't know; neither did the cops, no justification to shoot in that case. Hell, despite the taser deployment, they did SFA to really stop him from going to his car. What's wrong with tackling his ass to the ground if he was disobeying commands?

The guy has a criminal conviction, he is not following commands, and is reaching under his car seat for who knows what and has already threatened the police with a knife..

No, he didn't threaten police with a knife.


Criminal conviction doesn't justify being shot seven times at point blank endangering the lives of his kids.


See above about reaching into the car for something and what cops SHOULD have done.

Police are not mind readers, and they have to protect each others life..

No, they aren't, which is why they SHOULDN'T be shooting first to ask questions - or not ask questions - later.

And since it was only one cop who fired, obviously the other guy didn't think he was in danger that bad.

Should Blake have been arrested? I don't know. Should he have been in custody at least? Probably considering the plethora of stuff about this.

Did he deserve to be shot? No.

Oh and for the "he had a warrant out" - yeah, he did. He should have been arrested. And IMO, the cops didn't do ENOUGH in this case to actually do that. Considering that we see cops tackle people to the ground all the time if they're walking away even if they've been tased, why didn't that happen here?

Also - and I haven't seen anything about this - will the cops be charged with child endangerment considering how close they were to the shooting?

 

[B00Mer]

He had a knife in the car, the cops did not know about it. "Reaching for a gun or something" - so you don't know; neither did the cops, no justification to shoot in that case. Hell, despite the taser deployment, they did SFA to really stop him from going to his car. What's wrong with tackling his ass to the ground if he was disobeying commands?

You are aware a knife can do more damage than a gun at close range right??

https://www.quora.com/Knife-or-bull... close quarters, knives,easier to use as well.

 

[Cliffy]

 

[Cliffy]

 

[Walter]

Yes 7 time in the back is a bit excessive..
I think the officer needs to go back to the range..
Once in the head you have been suffice.

Police are trained to shoot at body mass. Only Dirty Harry could pull off a head shot.

 

[Walter]

Um yes, he had a knife and was reaching for a gun or something in is car.. would you rather the police officer wait and get shot..
The guy has a criminal conviction, he is not following commands, and is reaching under his car seat for who knows what and has already threatened the police with a knife..
Police are not mind readers, and they have to protect each others life..

He could have done harm to his children who were in the car, held them hostage or something similar had the officer not opened fire.

 

[Walter]

Total bullshit.

 

[B00Mer]

Police are trained to shoot at body mass. Only Dirty Harry could pull off a head shot.

Well aware of that...

 

[taxslave]

He had a knife in the car, the cops did not know about it. "Reaching for a gun or something" - so you don't know; neither did the cops, no justification to shoot in that case. Hell, despite the taser deployment, they did SFA to really stop him from going to his car. What's wrong with tackling his ass to the ground if he was disobeying commands?
No, he didn't threaten police with a knife.
Criminal conviction doesn't justify being shot seven times at point blank endangering the lives of his kids.
See above about reaching into the car for something and what cops SHOULD have done.
No, they aren't, which is why they SHOULDN'T be shooting first to ask questions - or not ask questions - later.
And since it was only one cop who fired, obviously the other guy didn't think he was in danger that bad.
Should Blake have been arrested? I don't know. Should he have been in custody at least? Probably considering the plethora of stuff about this.
Did he deserve to be shot? No.
Oh and for the "he had a warrant out" - yeah, he did. He should have been arrested. And IMO, the cops didn't do ENOUGH in this case to actually do that. Considering that we see cops tackle people to the ground all the time if they're walking away even if they've been tased, why didn't that happen here?
Also - and I haven't seen anything about this - will the cops be charged with child endangerment considering how close they were to the shooting?

Perfect justification for shooting. Or do you like seeing cops get maimed/ killed trying to protect honest taxpayers? When a cop tells you to stand still or lay down and don't move it is best you do exactly that. ANything else will and should be viewed as hostile.

 

[taxslave]

Trust you to find a meme that is completely backwards to reality.

 

[Serryah]

I managed to come across the court record of one of the victims- Joseph Rosenbaum.

Rosenbaum was kicked out of his mothers house in March 2002. An acquaintance and his wife took him in. They had three children. An 11 year old, and twin boys aged 9. After staying with the family for a month, the mother noticed some bruises on one of the boys. The 9 year old mentioned that he and his twin brother had been anally raped by Rosenbaum.

Rosenbaum also masturbated in front of all three, and made all three children perform fellatio on him. The Police were called and he was charged with sexual assault on a child, and later convicted.

I will let you know if I find information on the other shooting victims.

What has this got to do with Kyle?

ETA: if we're gonna throw out the history of people involved... seems Kyle isn't such a sweet heart after all:

https://journaltimes.com/news/local...cle_983dab1f-c1de-5ac2-b125-fe732befc1ff.html

I suppose that's all still okay, right?