Kyle Rittenhouse trial

[Fireballer 2,642]

Holy fuk this guys an idiot.  You lose the right to self-defense if you brought the gun?  Is he even a real lawyer?

 

[Gladiators 1,992]

1 minute ago, Fireballer said:

Holy fuk this guys an idiot.  You lose the right to self-defense if you brought the gun?  Is he even a real lawyer?

 

Worms?

[lod001 1,344]

3 minutes ago, Fireballer said:

Holy fuk this guys an idiot.  You lose the right to self-defense if you brought the gun?  Is he even a real lawyer?

 

Maybe he's just being a complete idiot, knowing that by doing so, CNN will hire him on at 10x what he's currently making.

[Voltaire 5,317]

Moar Free Stuff available how soon?

[edjr 6,599]

2 minutes ago, Voltaire said:

Moar Free Stuff available how soon?

before end of week. Get your AR 15s ready

[Voltaire 5,317]

Just now, edjr said:

before end of week. Get your AR 15s ready

[listen2me 23 1,873]

Ed's precious video games did this!

Ban video games

[wiffleball 4,790]

This week's looting has been scaled down due to supply chain issues.

[MDC 7,447]

34 minutes ago, Strike said:

He's not a hero.  But what he did is understandable when the people paid to do it either aren't allowed to do it or choose not to.

What your brother did or considered doing to defend his own business is understandable. A teenager illegally buying a gun to defend someone else’s car dealership isn’t, even if weirdos like Kyle Rittenhouse are the consequence of unchecked rioting. 

[Sean Mooney 1,984]

A bunch of people were looting where they shouldn't have been. 

A kid showed up at a car lot at 2am with an assault rifle to protect a dealership he had no ties to. 

Lots of people in this made bad decisions that led to the deaths of people but Rittenhouse finished it off by killing 2 people. He should serve time

[TimmySmith 2,782]

1 minute ago, Sean Mooney said:

Lots of people in this made bad decisions that led to the deaths of people but Rittenhouse finished it off by killing 2 people. He should serve time

What's the charge, Matlock? 

[edjr 6,599]

Just now, TimmySmith said:

What's the charge, Matlock? 

Murder was the case 

 

 

[nobody 2,685]

After looking at the video, this looks like obvious self-defense.  The vigilantes we're confronted by the first victim who was being quite belligerent and threatening.

Given that context, if Rittenhouse somehow got separated from the group, I have no doubt the agitator would've continued to act aggressively and likely would've been emboldened to escalate the situation given that Rittenhouse would've been more vulnerable without his group.

The second victim swung a skate board at his head.  That is very clear on video.  Obvious self-defense.

The 3rd victim admitted that he pointed a gun at him right after he shot the second victim.  Obvious self defense.

All this while he was running toward police trying to turn himself in for shooting the first victim.

I'd have a hard time not seeing this as self-defense.  

Now if you want to get him for reckless endangerment or something like that, I'm open to it.

 

[Sean Mooney 1,984]

3 minutes ago, TimmySmith said:

What's the charge, Matlock? 

I would find him guilty on at least 1 of the counts of recklessly endangering safety, use of a dangerous weapon. Not on intentional homicide though. 

[jerryskids 6,805]

I expect that the riots will be squashed quite quickly.  The liberal elites in charge (nationally, not podunk Kenosha) are likely aware that riots would be very toxic to the left, like “defund the police” was.  James Carville is probably having an aneurism trying to tell them as much.  They had their run in the summer of love, but as many on the left here have pointed out, it is a small group on the extreme left who not only encourage but coordinate the destruction.  Most folks realize it is bad and wrong but until recently, most less-extreme liberals closed their eyes and took an “animals gonna animal” approach, hoping that the rioters would eventually punch themselves into exhaustion and just leave, so they wouldn’t have to make them leave and look like they objected to the cause.  Appearances are important for “luxury beliefs” after all.

Anyway, I think the tide has turned and riots will be no bueno all of a sudden.  At least I hope so.

[edjr 6,599]

It is funny how republicans turn into liberals when guns are involved and all of a sudden don't give a sh1t about personal responsibility. 

[Strike 5,562]

6 minutes ago, Sean Mooney said:

I would find him guilty on at least 1 of the counts of recklessly endangering safety, use of a dangerous weapon. Not on intentional homicide though. 

We know you would.  Because you want him convicted of SOMETHING, ANYTHING!!!!  Not because it meets the legal definition of the charge though.

[edjr 6,599]

30 minutes ago, listen2me 23 said:

Ed's precious video games did this!

Ban video games

I saw that the prosecutor asked a 17 year old on the stand,. under oath if he played call of duty

[TBayXXXVII 2,550]

2 hours ago, MTSkiBum said:

2nd time

 

I just do not care about this at all. I know very little about the case and I feel that is enough. 

Innocent, guilty, I am fine either way.

I find it unlikely that someone who posted in a random white girl getting killed thread, which holds absolutely no importance of any kind in society, only visited a thread about a topic that could set a national precedent in self defense, only once.

[nobody 2,685]

1 minute ago, edjr said:

It is funny how republicans turn into liberals when guns are involved and all of a sudden don't give a sh1t about personal responsibility. 

The guy he killed was an absolute shìtbag.  Shìtbag was shìtbagging and got shot.  If we're counting up bad decisions that night, he has more than Rittenhouse.

[edjr 6,599]

Just now, nobody said:

The guy he killed was an absolute shìtbag.  Shìtbag was shìtbagging and got shot.  If we're counting up bad decisions that night, he has more than Rittenhouse.

He forgot his gun at home, weird?  Imagine if he were as smart and tough. 

If I had my way, I would have liked to see everyone at the riot be shot and killed. Every last person, white or black.

 

[Hardcore troubadour 15,457]

42 minutes ago, Voltaire said:

Moar Free Stuff available how soon?

 Nike and Adidas make bread now. They just put it in sneaker boxes. Don’t be so Racist. 

[Sean Mooney 1,984]

4 minutes ago, Strike said:

We know you would.  Because you want him convicted of SOMETHING, ANYTHING!!!!  Not because it meets the legal definition of the charge though.

It does fit the definition of the charge. He wasn't intending to kill someone- I'll give Rittenhouse the benefit of the doubt on that. But I do think that there was a disregard for human life- most notably in the firing of the gun with the reporter nearby and firing at Huber

[Fireballer 2,642]

"He blocks the skateboard with with arm"  

"Jumpkick man was unarmed"

He talks so non chalant about these elements like blows to the head aren't elements of lethal force

[nobody 2,685]

1 minute ago, edjr said:

He forgot his gun at home, weird?  Imagine if he were as smart and tough. 

If I had my way, I would have liked to see everyone at the riot be shot and killed. Every last person, white or black.

 

Agreed.  Just napalm the streets.

He forgot his gun.  He showed up to a riot.  He stood in front of a bunch of guys with guns and actively picked a fight.  He demanded they, "shoot me, n-------!" He chased a guy with a gun and threw stuff at him.  

The guy was a pedophile that likely hated himself.  This was suicide by vigilante.  Not homicide by dumb kid.

 

[jerryskids 6,805]

2 minutes ago, edjr said:

It is funny how republicans turn into liberals when guns are involved and all of a sudden don't give a sh1t about personal responsibility. 

You and a lot of folks here are using an extreme definition of the “but for” argument.

Quote

Legal Definition of but-for

: of or relating to the necessary cause (as a negligent act) without which a particular result (as damage) would not have occurred a but-for test of causation — compare substantial factor.

For instance, if somebody intentionally lights a building on fire, and that fire spreads and kills somebody, that person could/would be charged with the death because “but for” his starting the fire, the person would not have died, even though they didn’t set out to kill them.

Here, the argument seems to be “but for” Rittenhouse being in Kenosha with a gun, the rioters wouldn’t have chased him and tried to kill him.  I mean, I guess that is technically true, but it doesn’t strike me as a terribly sound argument.  It’s hard to believe that somebody could read that argument sentence out loud and think it is the right thing to do.  Perhaps we are back to “animals gonna animal” — we apparently can’t expect rioters to control themselves in any way.   

[Fireballer 2,642]

Gawd this fuker is lying.  I can't believe this.  I literally can't believe an actual lawyer is spewing this garbage in court.

[TimmySmith 2,782]

14 minutes ago, Sean Mooney said:

I would find him guilty on at least 1 of the counts of recklessly endangering safety, use of a dangerous weapon. Not on intentional homicide though. 

Perhaps there is something that would stick for at least some jail time in the Huber instance.  I don't see it for the other 2.  Rittenhouse never fired before provocation in any instance and there is no evidence he would have.  I would rule out anything from the Rosenbaum incident. 

My preference would be some jailtime of some sort as it may stop the looneys from the repeating the anarchy. 

[MTSkiBum 1,620]

3 minutes ago, TBayXXXVII said:

I find it unlikely that someone who posted in a random white girl getting killed thread, which holds absolutely no importance of any kind in society, only visited a thread about a topic that could set a national precedent in self defense, only once.

Why would I lie about this? 

I would like to think I am pretty honest on these forums. I am not trying to impress random strangers. 

[Sean Mooney 1,984]

4 minutes ago, TimmySmith said:

Perhaps there is something that would stick for at least some jail time in the Huber instance.  I don't see it for the other 2.  Rittenhouse never fired before provocation in any instance and there is no evidence he would have.  I would rule out anything from the Rosenbaum incident. 

My preference would be some jailtime of some sort as it may stop the looneys from the repeating the anarchy. 

 

Yeah I wouldn't hit him on all 3 counts of it. But I bet one of it he gets dinged on. 

[Hardcore troubadour 15,457]

36 minutes ago, Sean Mooney said:

I would find him guilty on at least 1 of the counts of recklessly endangering safety, use of a dangerous weapon. Not on intentional homicide though. 

What was reckless about it? He wasn’t indiscriminately firing his weapon not knowing where the rounds would land. He fired at a specific target that posed a threat of serious physical injury. Which is basically the universal threshold for using deadly physical force. Learn your words more better. 

[RaiderHaters Revenge 4,355]

36 minutes ago, Sean Mooney said:

It does fit the definition of the charge. He wasn't intending to kill someone- I'll give Rittenhouse the benefit of the doubt on that. But I do think that there was a disregard for human life- most notably in the firing of the gun with the reporter nearby and firing at Huber

The reporter who supports rittenhouse and did not feel threatened by him at all?

[edjr 6,599]

38 minutes ago, Fireballer said:

Gawd this fuker is lying.  I can't believe this.  I literally can't believe an actual lawyer is spewing this garbage in court.

No repercussions have ever been handed out for DA's lying. It is amazing what they will do to "win"

[RaiderHaters Revenge 4,355]

2 minutes ago, edjr said:

No repercussions have ever been handed out for DA's lying. It is amazing what they will do to "win"

They should be held accountable somehow. But how?

[Utilit99 4,099]

If I hit someone across the head with a skateboard, and I get shot by the guy I hit, I would feel too embarrassed to want to live through it because I would have deserved being shot. 

[Hardcore troubadour 15,457]

If I used a skateboard after the age of 15 I would be embarrassed. He probably liked comic books too. 

[edjr 6,599]

12 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

If I used a skateboard after the age of 15 I would be embarrassed. He probably liked comic books too. 

I bet you'd also be embarrassed to be missing an arm

[Hardcore troubadour 15,457]

24 minutes ago, edjr said:

I bet you'd also be embarrassed to be missing an arm

Especially my left one. I only use it for one thing, but it’s a very important thing. I could learn to wipe lefty. 

[edjr 6,599]

25 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Especially my left one. I only use it for one thing, but it’s a very important thing. I could learn to wipe lefty. 

I got hurt in a little scooter accident. I hurt my right collar bone. I realized how absolutely useless I am with my left. I could do nothing. Not even wipe

[TBayXXXVII 2,550]

1 hour ago, MTSkiBum said:

Why would I lie about this? 

I would like to think I am pretty honest on these forums. I am not trying to impress random strangers. 

I just think you're pulling people's chains.  I should've put a  emoji because I was only messing with you.