Kyle Rittenhouse

[JimmyJames 12271]

Just now, Sawbonz said:

Was he running around or was he being chased? 

Video to me looked like running around but watch it yourself and tell me what you think. Only chasing was trying to disarm an active shooter. 

[Sawbonz 28218]

Just now, JimmyJames said:

Video to me looked like running around but watch it yourself and tell me what you think. Only chasing was trying to disarm an active shooter. 

So your take is he shot the first person, then decided to run around with his gun in the ready position; then the 2nd and 3rd people were simply trying to disarm an active shooter?

[David Dennison 19530]

5 minutes ago, Sawbonz said:

Was he running around or was he being chased? 

Video says running around, Kyle says chased. Even if he was being chased, he was being chased as an active shooter.

[JimmyJames 12271]

Just now, Sawbonz said:

So your take is he shot the first person, then decided to run around with his gun in the ready position; then the 2nd and 3rd people were simply trying to disarm an active shooter?

That’s what the video shows. He’ shot a guy and instead of calling 911 calls his buddy to inform his buddy he’s shot someone. Then starts jogging around with an AR in ready position. Watch the video. 

[Johnny Sack 8397]

16 minutes ago, JimmyJames said:

Well he had shot and killed a guy already and was running around carrying his assault riffle in a ready position. 

Good thing he was low ready.  Was wise.  Otherwise he might have been killed.  He was by himself with a mob trying to kill him.  He couldn’t afford to lose one encounter.  Luckily after three dirtbags took the L, the mob finally got the point.   Attacking KR wasn’t good for your health.  

[washparkhorn 9973]

1 hour ago, Johnny Sack said:

They made really poor choices in attacking Kyle. 

Perhaps they were acting in what they reasonably saw as self-defense or defense of others?

[Sawbonz 28218]

7 minutes ago, JimmyJames said:

That’s what the video shows. He’ shot a guy and instead of calling 911 calls his buddy to inform his buddy he’s shot someone. Then starts jogging around with an AR in ready position. Watch the video. 

I’m not going to watch a video of people getting shot. Did the first guy he shot physically attack him first or not? If no, everything that follows would be on KR IMO. If yes, was the physical attack provoked by KR? Is that backed up by video evidence or eyewitness testimony? If yes then again KR is at fault. If no, I would have a hard time convicting him. 

[Johnny Sack 8397]

11 minutes ago, JimmyJames said:

That’s what the video shows. He’ shot a guy and instead of calling 911 calls his buddy to inform his buddy he’s shot someone. Then starts jogging around with an AR in ready position. Watch the video. 

What should he have done after killing the serial kid rapist with a mob chasing him?  Ask for a timeout and request a parlay?  He damn well better be ready.  A crazed mob was chasing him.  

[JimmyJames 12271]

Just now, Johnny Sack said:

Good thing he was low ready.  Was wise.  Otherwise he might have been killed.  He was by himself with a mob trying to kill him.  He couldn’t afford to lose one encounter.  Luckily after three dirtbags took the L, the mob finally got the point.   Attacking KR wasn’t good for your health.  

We all know you’re happy he killed people. You’ve said it many times. How did the sermon go on Sunday? We’re they happy about the killing as well? 

[Johnny Sack 8397]

2 minutes ago, washparkhorn said:

Perhaps they were acting in what they reasonably saw as self-defense or defense of others?

The guy who threatened to kill KR, chased him, cornered him, and tried to grab his gun because KR was putting out fires?

or the other two that didn’t witness KR shoot the pedo but joined up with a violent mob?

[JimmyJames 12271]

Just now, Johnny Sack said:

What should he have done after killing the serial kid rapist with a mob chasing him?  Ask for a timeout and request a parlay?  He damn well better be ready.  A crazed mob was chasing him.  

He should have called 911 like the daily caller guy that he almost killed did. This imaginary mob of yours is pure bullshit. 

[Johnny Sack 8397]

1 minute ago, JimmyJames said:

We all know you’re happy he killed people. You’ve said it many times. How did the sermon go on Sunday? We’re they happy about the killing as well? 

I’m happy those people who attacked and attempted to kill KR died or were maimed. Instead of him being dead or maimed.  

[conVINCEd 21477]

1 minute ago, Sawbonz said:

I’m not going to watch a video of people getting shot. Did the first guy he shot physically attack him first or not? If no, everything that follows would be on KR IMO. If yes, was the physical attack provoked by KR? Is that backed up by video evidence or eyewitness testimony? If yes then again KR is at fault. If no, I would have a hard time convicting him. 

He had his mom drop him off at a riot with a long gun so he could kill some people, after he posted on social media about his desire to kill people.  This isn’t that complicated.

[Johnny Sack 8397]

Just now, conVINCEd said:

He had his mom drop him off at a riot with a long gun so he could kill some people, after he posted on social media about his desire to kill people.  This isn’t that complicated.

Yet he only killed people who tried to kill him first. 

[JimmyJames 12271]

1 minute ago, Johnny Sack said:

I’m happy those people who attacked and attempted to kill KR died or were maimed. Instead of him being dead or maimed.  

You’re just happy he killed “leftists.” You are warped and fucked in the head. Get therapy. 

[conVINCEd 21477]

1 minute ago, Johnny Sack said:

Yet he only killed people who tried to kill him first. 

He was looking for action.  Those were the first three customers.

[Johnny Sack 8397]

Just now, conVINCEd said:

He was looking for action.  Those were the first three customers.

He really wasn’t.  You should watch the trial.  

[Johnny Sack 8397]

1 minute ago, JimmyJames said:

You’re just happy he killed “leftists.” You are warped and fucked in the head. Get therapy. 

I am very glad a serial child rapist is dead.  I think the world is better.  
 

As to Huber, I’d prefer he be dead than KR since he tried to kill KR.  
 

As to lefty, I am glad that KR managed to stop him from killing him by disarming him instead of KR being dead.  I am glad he survived, despite him being a commie.  He doesn’t deserve death like the serial child rapist.  I’d like to see him charged for illegally carrying and aggravated assault.  He’s earned both of those charges. 

[conVINCEd 21477]

1 minute ago, Johnny Sack said:

He really wasn’t.  You should watch the trial.  

I’ve got better shit to do with my day, but when somebody publicly announces their desire to kill people, and then they kill them, I’m gonna take them at their word.  He’ll walk because of a lunatic judge, but he’s a sick fuck who needs to be taken out of circulation.

[Johnny Sack 8397]

Just now, conVINCEd said:

I’ve got better shit to do with my day, but when somebody publicly announces their desire to kill people, and then they kill them, I’m gonna take them at their word.  He’ll walk because of a lunatic judge, but he’s a sick fuck who needs to be taken out of circulation.

You should review the actual evidence instead of relying on corrupt media.  He was the best of the 4 principals there that night.  By far.  

[conVINCEd 21477]

1 minute ago, Johnny Sack said:

You should review the actual evidence instead of relying on corrupt media.  He was the best of the 4 principals there that night.  By far.  

Where do you get your news from?  OAN?  Newsmax?

[JimmyJames 12271]

5 minutes ago, Johnny Sack said:

I am very glad a serial child rapist is dead.  I think the world is better.  
 

As to Huber, I’d prefer he be dead than KR since he tried to kill KR.  
 

As to lefty, I am glad that KR managed to stop him from killing him by disarming him instead of KR being dead.  I am glad he survived, despite him being a commie.  He doesn’t deserve death like the serial child rapist.  I’d like to see him charged for illegally carrying and aggravated assault.  He’s earned both of those charges. 

Like I said. Seek therapy. Seriously. You need to get past this and many other issues. 

[Johnny Sack 8397]

6 minutes ago, conVINCEd said:

Where do you get your news from?  OAN?  Newsmax?

The trial.  

[Johnny Sack 8397]

12 minutes ago, JimmyJames said:

Like I said. Seek therapy. Seriously. You need to get past this and many other issues. 

Nah. I’m good. Perfectly willing to stand by opinions on this one.  The evidence is overwhelming.  

[hornmpa96 2667]

16 minutes ago, Johnny Sack said:

You should review the actual evidence instead of relying on corrupt media.  He was the best of the 4 principals there that night.  By far.  

The best of 4 shitty people is still shitty. There are no good guys involved in this. KR shouldn’t have been there as well as the others. KR probably walks on this. However this case demonstrates the lunacy of our gun laws allowing open carry and no training/licensing requirement to carry. We have a ton of fucking morons walking around with guns.

[workswithseed 2204]

1 hour ago, Johnny Sack said:

It doesn’t.  Carrying a weapon illegally has zero to do with the viability of a self defense claim.  
 

If a woman in Madison, Wisconsin has a Glock 9mm with a twenty round Mag in her purse and shoots and kills someone attempting to rape her, she doesn’t lose her right to self defense because she was illegally carrying without a permit.  It isn’t relevant at all to the self  defense claim and this jury will be instructed on that.  

What about a woman in NYC who illegally has a 9 mil because she wasn't able to get one legally since cops said they don't think she needs it? 

[workswithseed 2204]

21 minutes ago, conVINCEd said:

Where do you get your news from?  OAN?  Newsmax?

This is dumb, and you should feel bad

1 hour ago, David Dennison said:

I mean, Kyle was at a riot with an AR-15. That seems pretty threatening.

Edited November 12, 2021 by workswithseed

[conVINCEd 21477]

1 minute ago, Johnny Sack said:

The trial.  

Congratulations.  I see a kid with a hard dick who wanted to get his gun on.  You apparently approve of that .  Go fuck yourself.

[conVINCEd 21477]

2 minutes ago, workswithseed said:

This dumb, and you should feel bad

I should feel bad for being anti-propaganda?

[workswithseed 2204]

1 minute ago, conVINCEd said:

I should feel bad for being anti-propaganda?

Why would people watch those sources when the trail is being streamed?

[conVINCEd 21477]

Just now, workswithseed said:

Why would people watch those sources when the trail is being streamed?

You’re a disingenuous fuck, but it’s where they watch the highlights. 

[Sawbonz 28218]

6 hours ago, conVINCEd said:

He had his mom drop him off at a riot with a long gun so he could kill some people, after he posted on social media about his desire to kill people.  This isn’t that complicated.

So why did he stop at three? And why only the three that physically attacked him? 

[Fudge Nuggets 19453]

7 hours ago, Johnny Sack said:

Otherwise he might have been killed.

And what a shame that would have been 🙄

[South Austin 53222]

As a lawyer, taking my left-of-center politics and emotion out of it, I can agree with a lot of Johnny Sack’s assertions about the state of the evidence and outcome. Neg me for it. This kid should probably get acquitted. Not given a merit badge. Just acquitted. It’s the unfortunate reality that many self-defense laws apply when trouble finds you just as equally as when you go looking for it.

What is indefensible is any claim that this dipshit should’ve been in Kenosha in the first place. I don’t give any fucks over whether he legally had the right to be in a public place that evening. He had no business going into another town with an automatic rifle where his property or his family were not in danger. Same goes with the knuckleheads he shot – they should’ve stayed home, drank beer, and watched this on their TVs. If Johnny or anyone else tries to mitigate KR’s behavior with justification for him going to Kenosha that night, that’s where we diverge.

[Johnny Sack 8397]

5 minutes ago, South Austin said:

As a lawyer, taking my left-of-center politics and emotion out of it, I can agree with a lot of Johnny Sack’s assertions about the state of the evidence and outcome. Neg me for it. This kid should probably get acquitted. Not given a merit badge. Just acquitted. It’s the unfortunate reality that many self-defense laws apply when trouble finds you just as equally as when you go looking for it.

What is indefensible is any claim that this dipshit should’ve been in Kenosha in the first place. I don’t give any fucks over whether he legally had the right to be in a public place that evening. He had no business going into another town with an automatic rifle where his property or his family were not in danger. Same goes with the knuckleheads he shot – they should’ve stayed home, drank beer, and watched this on their TVs. If Johnny or anyone else tries to mitigate KR’s behavior with justification for him going to Kenosha that night, that’s where we diverge.

Asking your honest opinion given the media coverage and some of the things certain politicians have said about him: what do you think about the merits of his defamation claim?

Stuff like this:

[South Austin 53222]

1 minute ago, Johnny Sack said:

Asking your honest opinion given the media coverage and some of the things certain politicians have said about him: what do you think about the merits of his defamation claim?

Stuff like this:

For better or for worse, the U.S. Supreme Court’s application of the First Amendment to media cloaks them with pretty good protection in defamation claims. And a civil suit will allow for the media’s lawyers to dissect KR for hours in a deposition, so they can have fun with him and his background in a way that a criminal proceeding would not allow. 

[TwiceHorn 32076]

7 minutes ago, South Austin said:

As a lawyer, taking my left-of-center politics and emotion out of it, I can agree with a lot of Johnny Sack’s assertions about the state of the evidence and outcome. Neg me for it. This kid should probably get acquitted. Not given a merit badge. Just acquitted. It’s the unfortunate reality that many self-defense laws apply when trouble finds you just as equally as when you go looking for it.

What is indefensible is any claim that this dipshit should’ve been in Kenosha in the first place. I don’t give any fucks over whether he legally had the right to be in a public place that evening. He had no business going into another town with an automatic rifle where his property or his family were not in danger. Same goes with the knuckleheads he shot – they should’ve stayed home, drank beer, and watched this on their TVs. If Johnny or anyone else tries to mitigate KR’s behavior with justification for him going to Kenosha that night, that’s where we diverge.

Very much this.   He's just as much a rabble-rouser and troublemaker as any of the various shitheads that show up at protests and ruin it for everyone.

I've said a couple of times that it seems incongruent to mix a volatile situation, open carry, and self defense, and I think it is, but I can't quite figure out what the legal response should be.  Modification of self defense laws?  It is eluding me.

 

[Nice Guy Eddie 13729]

This thread moves too fast for someone not keeping up to the minute but I was impressed that the judge referred to his lunch as Asian and not Oriental. There is hope in the world.  that is all.

[Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand 13626]

Could a witness justifiably shot Derek Chauvin while he was killing George Floyd?

[washparkhorn 9973]

46 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

I've said a couple of times that it seems incongruent to mix a volatile situation, open carry, and self defense, and I think it is, but I can't quite figure out what the legal response should be.  Modification of self defense laws?  It is eluding me.

Eluding me as well (other than Constitutional Amendment, of course).

At the very least, the Kenosha Police should have had a chat with the boy rather than giving him water and sending him towards the "rioters." That is poor procedure. The boy was walking bait for a violent encounter (in self-defense, as an attack or both). 

Boy got sucked into the Fox, et. al, media silo. Culty dumb actions ensued. Repeat and rinse.

 

Edited November 12, 2021 by washparkhorn

[South Austin 53222]

1 hour ago, TwiceHorn said:

I've said a couple of times that it seems incongruent to mix a volatile situation, open carry, and self defense, and I think it is, but I can't quite figure out what the legal response should be.  Modification of self defense laws?  It is eluding me.

Yep.  Take two ends of the spectrum.

Guy goes into a Whataburger with a permitted concealed handgun.  Gets into a confrontation with another patron over who was in line first, the other patron escalates the situation into an all-out rage attack and pulls a knife, guy takes out his gun and shoots the other patron dead.  Pretty sure most of us would agree that's justifiable self-defense that should not result in a criminal prosecution.

On the other end, a guy openly carries a rifle into the middle of a riot without any necessity of being there to protect his person or property, and starts indiscriminately firing shots in the air (I'm not saying that KR did anything like this, I'm just pushing the scenario to the extreme).  The angry mob descends upon him and he shoots several dead.  That's going to cause a lot more debate over whether a theory of self-defense should acquit any criminal prosecution.  Depending on the jurisdiction, a strict application of a self-defense statute might require an acquittal.   

Edited November 12, 2021 by South Austin

[hpslugga 4097]

23 minutes ago, Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand said:

Could a witness justifiably shot Derek Chauvin while he was killing George Floyd?

This would be an appropriate question if it was pointed towards an audience interested in single standards and two way communication. But when you’re pointing that kind of question towards an audience interested only in double standards and one way communication, doesn’t really help add to healthy discourse, especially not in light of the recent revelations of Big Bird turning commie.

[Johnny Sack 8397]

3 minutes ago, South Austin said:

Yep.  Take two ends of the spectrum.

Guy goes into a Whataburger with a permitted concealed handgun.  Gets into a confrontation with another patron over who was in line first, the other patron escalates the situation into an all-out rage attack and pulls a knife, guy takes out his gun and shoots the other patron dead.  Pretty sure most of us would agree that's justifiable self-defense that should not result in a criminal prosecution.

On the other end, a guy openly carries a rifle into the middle of a riot without any necessity of being there to protect his person or property, and starts indiscriminately firing shots in the air (I'm not saying that KR did anything like this, I'm just pushing the scenario to to the extreme).  The angry mob descends upon him and he shoots several dead.  That's going to cause a lot more debate over whether a theory of self-defense should acquit any criminal prosecution.  Depending on the jurisdiction, a strict application of a self-defense statute might require an acquittal.   

Seemed pretty necessary to me.

[Johnny Sack 8397]

3 minutes ago, hpslugga said:

This would be an appropriate question if it was pointed towards an audience interested in single standards and two way communication. But when you’re pointing that kind of question towards an audience interested only in double standards and one way communication, doesn’t really help add to healthy discourse, especially not in light of the recent revelations of Big Bird turning commie.

The cloak room regulars are definitely in this class.  Totally.

[South Austin 53222]

1 minute ago, Johnny Sack said:

Seemed pretty necessary to me.

What in my hypothetical was necessary about that fictitious person's presence there?  Are you saying that riots should by necessity draw people with guns who don't live in the town, don't have any family or property to protect, and aren't law enforcement? 

Edited November 12, 2021 by South Austin

[PenelopeWitherspoon 19305]

9 hours ago, Johnny Sack said:

Open carrying a long rifle is legal.  Lots of people were open carrying.  Is it your position it should be legal to assault people who are open carrying a rifle?

Not if you are a 17 year old kid.  That is not legal.

[Nice Guy Eddie 13729]

3 minutes ago, South Austin said:

Yep.  Take two ends of the spectrum.

Guy goes into a Whataburger with a permitted concealed handgun.  Gets into a confrontation with another patron over who was in line first, the other patron escalates the situation into an all-out rage attack and pulls a knife, guy takes out his gun and shoots the other patron dead.  Pretty sure most of us would agree that's justifiable self-defense that should not result in a criminal prosecution.

On the other end, a guy openly carries a rifle into the middle of a riot without any necessity of being there to protect his person or property, and starts indiscriminately firing shots in the air (I'm not saying that KR did anything like this, I'm just pushing the scenario to to the extreme).  The angry mob descends upon him and he shoots several dead.  That's going to cause a lot more debate over whether a theory of self-defense should acquit any criminal prosecution.  Depending on the jurisdiction, a strict application of a self-defense statute might require an acquittal.   

Even for the Whataburger scenario, the exact actions of handgun guy would still be of interest of me. It's difficult for one person to escalate a situation without the other person doing so as well. It's not impossible but unlikely. And I don't think that handgun guy can just wait or encourage the situation to escalate and then decide he's in danger and shoot knife guy.

 

[Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand 13626]

What if a wife-beating pedo running for president told his crowd of supporters to " knock the hell" out of peaceful protestors? Can the protestors just start shooting?

[South Austin 53222]

2 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

Even for the Whataburger scenario, the exact actions of handgun guy would still be of interest of me. It's difficult for one person to escalate a situation without the other person doing so as well. It's not impossible but unlikely. And I don't think that handgun guy can just wait or encourage the situation to escalate and then decide he's in danger and shoot knife guy.

 

Sure, I'm not saying that situation is beyond any reasonable debate.  But there are some crazy, volatile and unstable fuckers in this world, so just imagine that one of those goes off. 

[Johnny Sack 8397]

1 hour ago, South Austin said:

For better or for worse, the U.S. Supreme Court’s application of the First Amendment to media cloaks them with pretty good protection in defamation claims. And a civil suit will allow for the media’s lawyers to dissect KR for hours in a deposition, so they can have fun with him and his background in a way that a criminal proceeding would not allow. 

Discovery goes both way.  KR's team gets all the internal communications, emails and texts from all the media personnel and depos of the media personnel and their corporate reps.  That would be pretty fun -- Don Lemon, Rachel Maddow, Van Jones, Jamele Hill, Joe Scarborough, Joy Behar, etc.  And there really would be no basis for a protective order (especially if in federal court), so the public gets a nice little look behind the curtain.  He can also sue a few of the squad for their tweets on the subject.  And the Big Guy once he's out of office.

I think he has a better case than Nick Sandman.  And I suspect he got paid bigly because CNN really did not want to have to produce their people's emails and texts or sit under oath.

Yeah they can drag him around a little bit.  But the public already knows about the looter video, him posing with proud boys, etc.  His reputation has already been trashed and he has nothing to lose.  He can get a pound of flesh from the asshats above