• 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!

Militia guy kills two. Justified?

I have noticed a pattern with him and many on this part of the forum.

Gun owners or people who use guns against protestors, or people that support black lives matter are somehow justified in their actions.

Protestors or people who use guns in self-defense against dirty cops or out-of-control vigilantes are automatically guilty and do not deserve the benefit of the doubt.

"Protestors or people who use guns in self-defense against dirty cops or out-of-control vigilantes are automatically guilty and do not deserve the benefit of the doubt."

Can you link to threads where these incidents were discussed?
 
"protestors or people who use guns in self-defense against dirty cops or out-of-control vigilantes are automatically guilty and do not deserve the benefit of the doubt."

can you link to threads where these incidents were discussed?

this thread!!!
 
=Bucky;1072528883]He was definitely emboldened by Trump supporters and the police.

Ooh those Trump supporters and police. Yeah a real influence, come on wake up. Or what's your saying, GET WOKE or some such thing?

He's a murderer that deserves life in prison. He's a small player though. We need to dramatically change how our police operate. All racist cops need to go and need to be charged with murder like the cop that killed George Floyd.

Behold Bucky the Judge and jury. Why not be executioner as well? Oh that's right no balls.
Enough of this immunity police have. Cut their damn funding until our demands our met.

I wonder how many white cops have shot white people in just the span of the Floyd case you never hear about?
And what makes you think police have immunity? If a cops weapon ACCIDENTALLY fires he'll have the IAs up his ass. Sure you got your bad ones, but you have way more good ones.

OK de-fund them and have fun with it. Hope you need to call 911 and have an expected wait time of 20 minutes. God forbid own a gun.
 
I wonder how many white cops have shot white people in just the span of the Floyd case you never hear about?

The media would tell us immediately if this ever actually happened, silly.
 
We'll have to see, but it doesn't seem that the protesters were burning down property or anything. From what we see here, it doesn't seem very justifiable.

Plus, this is only going to exacerbate this situation. We might start seeing more shootouts in WI before this is all over.
What if it was what they mistakenly thought it was, would that of been a justification to burn down property? Reasonable people can disagree about what is an abuse of power but it does not justify looting, rioting, arson, assault, pulling down monuments, and all the other crimes being committed in the name of social justice. That is where the fisconnects lies for me.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
 
32404028-8665383-image-a-41_1598436917832.jpg



32405900-0-image-a-51_1598439877437.jpg



32405874-0-image-a-50_1598439787999.jpg




Jacob Blake shooting: Two shot dead at Kenosha BLM protests | Daily Mail Online


Video at link.

Guy shoots protesters, maybe rioters, but they look kind of peaceful for rioters. Kills 2. Is this justified? Would things have been better if he left his gun at home?



(I know I posted this thread earlier, but somehow I put it in the wrong sub forum. This is the right sub forum.)

You would think (common sense) the protesters would not be missing around with a guy holding an AR - 15?
 
32404028-8665383-image-a-41_1598436917832.jpg



32405900-0-image-a-51_1598439877437.jpg



32405874-0-image-a-50_1598439787999.jpg




Jacob Blake shooting: Two shot dead at Kenosha BLM protests | Daily Mail Online


Video at link.

Guy shoots protesters, maybe rioters, but they look kind of peaceful for rioters. Kills 2. Is this justified? Would things have been better if he left his gun at home?



(I know I posted this thread earlier, but somehow I put it in the wrong sub forum. This is the right sub forum.)

Would things have been better if he left his gun at home?

Things would be better if protesters didn't attack a guy with an AR-15(hint)
 
We'll have to see, but it doesn't seem that the protesters were burning down property or anything. From what we see here, it doesn't seem very justifiable.

Plus, this is only going to exacerbate this situation. We might start seeing more shootouts in WI before this is all over.

but it doesn't seem that the protesters were burning down property or anything

Nah... just protesters attacking a man with an AR-15 is all
 
You would think (common sense) the protesters would not be missing around with a guy holding an AR - 15?

Meh, for all they knew, they were stopping the next mass shooter.

Kid clearly fit the description of a mass shooter. I'd call the protestors who pursued him god-dammed American Heroes, honestly.
 
Why are these militiamen allowed to have loaded semi-automatic rifles on a city street?

Were they deputized by the Mayor of Kenosha? I'll wager they're not even from Wisconsin.

Same guy^ never asked why leftists are being allowed to burn town down across America but ponders this.
 
Lefties rampage and its trumps fault. Priceless.

well, considering that Trump feeds off of chaos you guys need to get use to even more chaos.
 
Well with him there were people chasing him and hitting him he probably has a very clear case of self-defense. if I was in his position I would have shot them too.

is to what possessed someone to go chase down a guy with a gun my guess is stupidity coupled with rage.

Well my question is why did he travel to a riot hot zone, arm himself with an AR15 and start patrolling the streets?

Seems to me he went there looking for trouble and found it.

I believe those actions will hurt his self defense claim.

If he gets away with this then the streets will be filled with all those want-to-be Rambo's

Interesting times
 
lol...No...we absolutely don't. Don't forget your skateboards!

do you guys ever get embarrassed that you're falling for the same cons that Trump used in the 1980s?
 
do you guys ever get embarrassed that you're falling for the same cons that Trump used in the 1980s?

Do you guys get good gas mileage on those skateboards? and how do you get fat leftist pig women home on those?
 
Do you guys get good gas mileage on those skateboards? and how do you get fat leftist pig women home on those?

violence is normally not justified.


now, do you guys ever get embarrassed that you're falling for the same cons that Trump used in the 1980s?
 
violence is normally not justified.


now, do you guys ever get embarrassed that you're falling for the same cons that Trump used in the 1980s?

Do you guys ever get embarrassed riding around on your skateboard?
 
Last edited:
Well my question is why did he travel to a riot hot zone, arm himself with an AR15 and start patrolling the streets?

Seems to me he went there looking for trouble and found it.

I believe those actions will hurt his self defense claim.

If he gets away with this then the streets will be filled with all those want-to-be Rambo's

Interesting times

None of that is legally relevant to his self-defense claim. It might bias the jury a bit, but it might actually bias them in his favor. He went there to help scrub graffiti off a school and protect what was left of a business that had been practically destroyed by rioters the night before. He was offering assistance to people who were injured. That is, before a rioter fired a gun toward him and another chased him across a parking lot and tried to take his rifle away for no apparent reason, other than, you know, he was a belligerent felon.

What was the belligerent registered sex-offender who attacked him doing there? What about the guy with the handgun? Why is nobody asking that?
 
Last edited:
Meh, for all they knew, they were stopping the next mass shooter.

Kid clearly fit the description of a mass shooter. I'd call the protestors who pursued him god-dammed American Heroes, honestly.

Except that he wasn't shooting anyone. From what I've seen, mass shooters when presented with a plethora of targets shoot those targets rather than running down the road.
 
Except that he wasn't shooting anyone. From what I've seen, mass shooters when presented with a plethora of targets shoot those targets rather than running down the road.

Except, he did shoot at four people (that we know of).

Most mass shooters aren't presented with active threats, or people attempting to subdue them prior to starting the shooting. Again, for all we know, these three individuals attempted to stop further damage.
 
Except, he did shoot at four people (that we know of).[
When he was retreating towards the police with a mob in hot pursuit, he had only shot one person, and wasn't shooting at anyone else until he was attacked. There was no reason for anyone at that point to believe he was an active shooter, as he wasn't actively shooting.

Most mass shooters aren't presented with active threats, or people attempting to subdue them prior to starting the shooting. Again, for all we know, these three individuals attempted to stop further damage.

That's your theory, I suppose. Mine is that the were attempting to stop some who they knew had shot one person, as that's what the crowd was saying. They could have just been trying to take revenge on him. At least one guy learned a lesson about attacking someone with a rifle: if you've got a pistol, don't advance to point black range to use it.
 
When he was retreating towards the police with a mob in hot pursuit, he had only shot one person, and wasn't shooting at anyone else until he was attacked. There was no reason for anyone at that point to believe he was an active shooter, as he wasn't actively shooting.

The area in question is pretty small, and the protestors, from what I've seen, all seemed to be communicating, as well as can be expected. After the first shots were fired, and Rittenhouse was seen on the move and still armed, I'd assume he was an active shooter if I saw him.

That's your theory, I suppose. Mine is that the were attempting to stop some who they knew had shot one person, as that's what the crowd was saying. They could have just been trying to take revenge on him. At least one guy learned a lesson about attacking someone with a rifle: if you've got a pistol, don't advance to point black range to use it.


Honestly, I don't have a theory yet.

Just acknowledging all of the possibilities.

In the end the truth probably lies somewhere in between. My full, and honest take on the situation-

Shooting engagement #1: The first victim (Rosenbaum ) was being belligerent, and overtly aggressive towards the now isolated Rittenhouse. Nervous, and unprepared for such a set of circumstances, Rittenhouse allowed himself to get cornered near the parked cars at the scene of the first shooting. There's no known video [at least at this time] of the interaction between Rosenbaum and Rittenhouse prior to the short foot chase towards the parked cars, so it's impossible to know the unarmed Rosenbaum's intentions in pursuing the armed Rittenhouse.

Shooting engagement #2: Following the initial shooting, and clearly seeing that Rittenhouse was not only the perpetrator, but also still armed, the three primary subjects of the next engagement pursued Rittenhouse (perceiving him as a threat to other protestors). From what I've seen, Rittenhouse clearly left himself very vulnerable to the crowd providing at least three people the opening to approach him directly.

In the end Rittenhouse was clearly not mature/ experienced enough to handle the responsibility of the firearm, and ended up putting himself into a situation where he was compelled to use it against Rosenbaum. Rittenhouse probably felt brave enough (and to an extent useless, next to the other clearly more experienced armed 'militia' types actually guarding the business) to wander off by himself. That is based off of his earlier statement that he'd 'go into harm's way.' And I'm going to go out on a limb and say that Rosembaum took advantage of the situation.

If I'm being generous, I'd lay the responsibility for the first shooting 50% - 50% on both parties (Rosenbaum and Rittenhouse). But, Rittenhouse ultimately made the decisions that created the scenario (wandering off on his own, getting cornered between parked cars, bringing the Rifle to the situation in the first place).

For the second shooting, all I can say is that if confronted with the same situation, I can only hope that I'd have the same courage as the three men we've seen engage and attempt to disarm Rittenhouse. Maybe some better tactics, based of previous training, but still with the same level of courage to approach an imminent and well armed threat.

In the end though, even once Rittenhouse wandered off on his own, the two subsequent murders could've likely been avoided if he had properly used the rifle in the first place. If he had, once initially approached brought the rifle up to a shooting position and kept Rosenbaum in his sights, Rosenbaum likely would've backed down.

Similarly, when he was being pursued, if he had stood his ground, rather than turned his back to the people approaching him, he could've used the threat of the rifle to pause the situation until the police arrived. Also, and this is important, he failed to use his "medic kit" on Rosenbaum after his ability to threaten Rittenhouse was clearly neutralized. If Rittenhouse, after shooting Rosenbaum, had instantly shouldered his rifle and started first aid, the whole situation would've been different and he likely could've justified the self defense claim.

Bit lengthly, I know, but it's a complex situation.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom