• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Get it right, Rittenhouse was chased first and wasn’t even the first to fire a gun.

X Factor

Anti-Socialist
Dungeon Master
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 1, 2010
Messages
61,606
Reaction score
32,215
Location
El Paso Strong
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Conservative
[h=2]
First shooting[/h]While Mr. Rittenhouse is being pursued by the group, an unknown gunman fires into the air, though it’s unclear why. The weapon’s muzzle flash appears in footage filmed at the scene.
Mr. Rittenhouse turns toward the sound of gunfire as another pursuer lunges toward him from the same direction. Mr. Rittenhouse then fires four times, and appears to shoot the man in the head.

Tracking Kyle Rittenhouse in the Fatal Kenosha Shootings - The New York Times

There’s, it’s even helpfully labeled the “first shooting”.


Don’t tell me, the New York Times is the tank for righties.
 
Still a poor excuse to shoot people.
 
You don't know any of that and neither do I. Get it through your THICK HEADS. This is going to a Jury. So we should just SHUT UP with the absolutism and definitive statements and wait for the result.
 
Did that muzzle flash come from the same place the molotov cocktail did?
 
And? So it's okay to shoot people in the head if someone else shoots a gun somewhere else. Good to know.

No, it’s just too many are getting that wrong either by mistake or very intentionally.
 
Maybe it will come out that there was some self-defense justification. The trial will determine that; presumably law enforcement considered that before charging him. I hope it does.

But even if there were, a 17 year old who couldn't legally even carry that gun, putting himself into that situation, unprepared to deal with the situation and creating danger, will be some crime I expect.
 
No, it’s just too many are getting that wrong either by mistake or very intentionally.

You didn't answer my question.

Someone else shot a gun somewhere else. So that makes it okay for a 17 year old to shoot someone else in the head?
 
You didn't answer my question.

Someone else shot a gun somewhere else. So that makes it okay for a 17 year old to shoot someone else in the head?

If I never made any such claim I’m not sure why you think I owe you an answer.
 
If I never made any such claim I’m not sure why you think I owe you an answer.

Then state what your point is. Someone else shot a gun somewhere else. What does that have to do with anything, and why did you say something about the Times being in the tank for righties. They report the story and you shared it on here. So what does the story say?

I realize you Trump devotees will do anything to make this teenager a hero but what does this have to do with him murdering two people? Did someone shoot at him? No.
 
On the one hand, NYT is a good source for talking to moderates.

OTOH, they don't deserve all the praise conservatives are giving them just for choosing to not lie on one occassion.

It’s just a way to avoid try to avoid the usual lefty tactic of claiming FOX manufactured it even if video shows them to be absolutely correct.
 
did he have the gun illegally?
 
Then state what your point is. Someone else shot a gun somewhere else. What does that have to do with anything, and why did you say something about the Times being in the tank for righties. They report the story and you shared it on here. So what does the story say?

I realize you Trump devotees will do anything to make this teenager a hero but what does this have to do with him murdering two people? Did someone shoot at him? No.

I already stated my purpose. I don’t expect you to understand why it’s not right to misrepresent the facts.
 
And? So it's okay to shoot people in the head if someone else shoots a gun somewhere else. Good to know.

In the specific circumstance Rittenhouse found himself in the shooting was absolutely justified. I've been critical of this kid since the whole thing went down and I still firmly believe that he managed to get himself into a situation WAY over his head. That being said, unless he was being chased (prior to the initial shooting) due to some kind of assault or something he committed down the street then it's self-defense. That gunshot as he's being chased changes the whole dynamic and gives him a rock solid justification to fear that he was at imminent risk of death or great bodily harm.
 
And? So it's okay to shoot people in the head if someone else shoots a gun somewhere else. Good to know.

No, it’s just too many are getting that wrong either by mistake or very intentionally.

Then why post it like you're running some kind of victory lap?

If it's not relevant to whether or not the shooter was justified, then it is......well.... not relevant. It doesn't matter.



It's like a defense lawyer saying "the prosecutor said the video you saw of my client murdering the victim was shot on Betamax. But I showed the murder was recorded on VHS!"

Great catch . . .
 
If I never made any such claim I’m not sure why you think I owe you an answer.

What's the point of your thread, if not to say that the first gun shot you mentioned provided some exoneration for the killer? Is it like you making a thread saying "On that night, someone had a ham sandwich before the killer shot"? Just an unrelated comment?
 
You didn't answer my question.

Someone else shot a gun somewhere else. So that makes it okay for a 17 year old to shoot someone else in the head?

In this specific circumstance it absolutely does.
 
Was he carrying within 1000 feet of Reuther Central High School in violation of the Federal Gun Free School Zones Act?

I didn't even think of those type violations.
 
In the specific circumstance Rittenhouse found himself in the shooting was absolutely justified. I've been critical of this kid since the whole thing went down and I still firmly believe that he managed to get himself into a situation WAY over his head. That being said, unless he was being chased (prior to the initial shooting) due to some kind of assault or something he committed down the street then it's self-defense. That gunshot as he's being chased changes the whole dynamic and gives him a rock solid justification to fear that he was at imminent risk of death or great bodily harm.

The gunshot in the air does not provide that justification IMO. It might help EXPLAIN it - un untrained kid hears it and panics, but does not justify it.

What I'm more interested in is the possibility that his being 'chased by a mob' created a self-defense justification.
 
In the specific circumstance Rittenhouse found himself in the shooting was absolutely justified. I've been critical of this kid since the whole thing went down and I still firmly believe that he managed to get himself into a situation WAY over his head. That being said, unless he was being chased (prior to the initial shooting) due to some kind of assault or something he committed down the street then it's self-defense. That gunshot as he's being chased changes the whole dynamic and gives him a rock solid justification to fear that he was at imminent risk of death or great bodily harm.

Sorry, I disagree. Hearing a gun shot somewhere isn't justification for shooting someone in the head who didn't fire at him.

Should i shoot at someone running at me just because I hear a gun shot? is that okay?
 
Then why post it like you're running some kind of victory lap?

If it's not relevant to whether or not the shooter was justified, then it is......well.... not relevant. It doesn't matter.

It's like a defense lawyer saying "the prosecutor said the video you saw of my client murdering the victim was shot on Betamax. But I showed the murder was recorded on VHS!"

Great catch . . .

I’m trying to get your ilk to stop spreading lies. It’s a maddening experience.
 
It’s just a way to avoid try to avoid the usual lefty tactic of claiming FOX manufactured it even if video shows them to be absolutely correct.

I can't think of a single case where Fox has been criticized and a video showed them correct about the criticism. Nice straw man/fantasy.
 
Back
Top Bottom