Kyle Rittenhouse -- innocent by self-defense?

[_Jersey Girl]

delete

[_Jersey Girl]

delete

[_subgenius]

That's because there is no systemic threat...

I must have missed the post where you explained that there is actually a systemic racism in the US today...especially specific to African-Americans; because your racism against white people, while not systemic, is apparent. You're like a white Clayton Bixby.

But I can dumb down my expectations if you can just prove that the Blake case proves the current existence of systemic racism.

we can wait.
rube.

[_Res Ipsa]

The points you bring up, true though they are, are nevertheless entirely irrelevant to the applicability of the above sentence. . . and the focus of this thread.

This is the kind of thinking that allows a burglar to sue a house owner because he fell through the skylight and landed on a knife on the kitchen counter.

This fu-cking kid was in the middle of committing a crime. People saw that, and tried to prevent it. His crime is entirely relevant.

You should stop watching idiotic right wing propaganda, Shades.

You’ve lost me, Schmo. How would bystanders know he was breaking the law? And even if he was, that would not automatically give bystanders the right to assault him and steal his rifle.

[_Res Ipsa]

Dr Exiled: "I also have a problem with a 17 year old kid openly carrying an AR 15 in the middle of an Antifa demonstration. What was he thinking? "

Didn't he at some point say he was there to protect the stores? Suppose I go there with the intent to loot. If he's there to protect the stores with an AR-15, then I can rightfully infer that he plans to use deadly force to stop me, which puts my life at risk, and is illegal.

Intent to use deadly force under hypothetical conditions is not illegal.

[_Dr Exiled]

Does anyone know what led to the crowd chasing this kid?

I don't "know," but I strongly believe that the reason is this: Wolves of North America take down their targeted prey by first isolating it from its herd. Cheetahs, lions, and other predators of the African savanna instinctively chase anything that runs away from it; it doesn't matter if the particular animal is on "the menu" or not. In this case, the mob saw that Rittenhouse had A) separated himself from the other armed individuals as he went to put out the fire, and that B) he was running away from them, so like the aforementioned mindless beasts they acted on pure instinct.

I also have a problem with a 17 year old kid openly carrying an AR 15 in the middle of an Antifa demonstration. What was he thinking?

He was probably thinking that he didn't have a concealed carry permit, so he could only open carry.

What possible good could have happened here?

The "good" is that he could've defended himself from death or serious bodily injury if he was attacked as he attempted to render medical aid or douse fires--which is precisely what happened.

Has the media interviewed the parents to get their views? Are they proud of their boy? I'd probably want to kick his ass if I were his parent.

You wouldn't be happy that he wasn't dead or in a coma?

He is 17. How about let the professionals render first aid, policing? I know I'd like someone a little older, with training, working on me if I were injured, not a 17 year old novice. Also, if he were in my house and wanted to be a vigilante, he'd have to wait until he were a little older. Sure, I'd be happy that my son survived but I'd take the position that his being there as a 17 year old probably incited the mob more than helped. He's just too young.

[_Dr Exiled]

Dr Exiled: "I also have a problem with a 17 year old kid openly carrying an AR 15 in the middle of an Antifa demonstration. What was he thinking? "

Didn't he at some point say he was there to protect the stores? Suppose I go there with the intent to loot. If he's there to protect the stores with an AR-15, then I can rightfully infer that he plans to use deadly force to stop me, which puts my life at risk, and is illegal.

Intent to use deadly force under hypothetical conditions is not illegal.

I think more needs to be fleshed out in this case to see what the child's intent was. He was openly carrying an AR 15 into a dangerous zone. In a close case, that has to figure into what the kid's intent was. However, if he was retreating and threatened, self-defense certainly could and should apply. Even so, what happened outside of the video and is it relevant? Can a self-defense theory work or merely an imperfect self defense theory? Is he being tried as an adult? I don't have much experience in juvenile cases but the standards are different.

[_Res Ipsa]

Good point, Dr. E. You have much more relevant experience than I in criminal law. I’m just reading the statute.

I read the statute on gun possession today, and it’s not a stellar example of clear drafting. There’sa pretty good argument that his possession of the rifle was legal based on an exception in the statute.

I think that anything he said or did while at the site could be relevant to intent. But unless there is evidence that he intended to provoke an attack for the purpose of using deadly force with self defense as an excuse, I don’t think his general intent in being there has an effect on his claim of self defense privilege under the statute.


I don’t think I’ve seen anything about whether they will charge him as a juvenile or an adult. I hope someone is smart enough to make sure he is getting some therapy.

[_ajax18]

Nolte: Do the Woke Actually Want to Ban Self-Defense Against Certain Races?

So what are we learning out of the overnight riots in the Democrat-run city of Lancaster, Pennsylvania?

Two things,

The first is that this whole idea of telling police to shoot to wound is absurd. Watch the body cam footage. You can’t aim for someone’s legs when they’re charging you like that with a knife. Cop even tried to run away. Had to shoot. Had to shoot to kill.

Second thing is that when it comes to America’s woke, none of that matters. The domestic terrorists in Black Lives Matter and Antifa are going to riot no matter how justified the shooting is, which delivers a pretty clear message that unless we want our cities and neighborhoods looted and burned, no one’s allowed to defend themselves against certain people of certain races.

And it is not just police being blackmailed to let people of certain races kill them. As I’ll explain below, everyday citizens are also being blackmailed.

The way the woke see it — i.e., Democrats and the media — that Lancaster cop screwed up. He didn’t allow himself to be killed by killed by a “person of color.” Had he just allowed himself to be stabbed to death by a POC, to be gutted by Ricardo Munoz, there would be no riots.

Isn’t that the message being sent?

Not the first time we’ve been warned not to defend ourselves against people of certain races.

Even though the media’s Hands Up, Don’t Shoot Hoax was debunked years ago, even though eyewitness and forensic evidence proved the shooting of Michael Brown by a Ferguson police officer was more than justified, Brown is still a martyr on the left. The martyr who robbed a store, charged a cop, and tried to take his gun. Joe Biden’s martyr.

Same with Trayvon Martin. All the evidence, eyewitness testimony, and a jury tell us George Zimmerman was justified when he killed Martin in self-defense. We still gotta listen to this crap about Trayvon the Martyr. The martyr beating another man’s head into a sidewalk.

Don’t matter.
Mob of some 100 thugs break into your property and start yelling about how they’re going to rape and kill you… Don’t you dare brandish a gun. Don’t you dare defend yourself. Even though it’s all on video, Democrat are still going to charge YOU with a crime. CNNLOL is going to accuse YOU of racism.

Whether you’re a police officer or an everyday citizen sitting at home minding your own business, the message is the same: if a person or persons of a certain race wants to murder you, let them.

Defending your own life is racist.

Defending your own life is a crime.

Defending your property is racist.

Defending your property is a crime.

Reparations means rolling over and taking a slug or a knife or standing still as your property is looted and burnt to the ground.

Stop being racist and roll over.

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020 ... ain-races/

[_Temp. Admin.]

The points you bring up, true though they are, are nevertheless entirely irrelevant to the applicability of the above sentence. . . and the focus of this thread.

This is the kind of thinking that allows a burglar to sue a house owner because he fell through the skylight and landed on a knife on the kitchen counter.

I don't see how that's in any way analogous to the Rittenhouse situation.

This [deleted] kid was in the middle of committing a crime. People saw that, and tried to prevent it.

No they didn't. They had no idea he was only 17, which means they had no idea he was committing a crime.

You should stop watching idiotic right wing propaganda, Shades.

Cell phone footage does not equal "idiotic right wing propaganda." Why do you steadfastly insist on not watching the actual footage??