Militia guy kills two. Justified?

[Rucker61]

He was kitted up wiht a medical gloves, first aid pouch.. and a semi automatic rifle during a curfew. Hey... but its not like any other mass shooter has looked like that....

I don't recall any mass shooter who showed up kitted out and armed like a few hundred other people hanging out in the same place.

 

[ASHES]

He was kitted up wiht a medical gloves, first aid pouch.. and a semi automatic rifle during a curfew. Hey... but its not like any other mass shooter has looked like that....

First aid kit and medical gloves aren't standard issue militia/mass shooter gear. I have seen nothing showing he had any criminal intent. Just a lot of speculation based on the colour of his skin, what political candidate he supports, and his support for the police. None of those things show intent to do harm. Neither does carrying a gun. If everybody is breaking curfew, and police aren't enforcing it, is there a curfew? Funny he wasn't charged with that. Whether or not he legally possessed the gun is up for debate. Time will tell. If he went there with intent to do harm, then he should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. I have not seen evidence of a crime by him besides breaking curfew though. If evidence comes to light showing I'll intent, then I will change my position to fit what the evidence actually shows.

 

[jaeger19]

I don't recall any mass shooter who showed up kitted out and armed like a few hundred other people hanging out in the same place.

Right.. so he was around a few hundred other people who were bearing arms.. and these protestors just singled this one kid out..to beat on a guy with a rifle.???

Ummmmm

 

[jaeger19]

First aid kit and medical gloves aren't standard issue militia/mass shooter gear. I have seen nothing showing he had any criminal intent. Just a lot of speculation based on the colour of his skin, what political candidate he supports, and his support for the police. None of those things show intent to do harm. Neither does carrying a gun. If everybody is breaking curfew, and police aren't enforcing it, is there a curfew? Funny he wasn't charged with that. Whether or not he legally possessed the gun is up for debate. Time will tell. If he went there with intent to do harm, then he should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. I have not seen evidence of a crime by him besides breaking curfew though. If evidence comes to light showing I'll intent, then I will change my position to fit what the evidence actually shows.

It doesn;t matter his intent. What matters is if someone could legitimately believe that he represented a deadly threat. And seeing him running carrying a firearm the way he was and obviously kitted up like a militia.. he looked like a threat to me. Based on the video.. I would assume that a reasonable person would view him as a threat.

Tell me.. if you were in the neighborhood.. and you saw a stranger running toward you carrying a baseball bat... would you assume that he was there because he wanted to hit some pop flies?

by the way.. you say its "not standard militia gear"...

What was the fellow doing there? Where was he from?. Was he defending his home and property?

 

[Rucker61]

Right.. so he was around a few hundred other people who were bearing arms.. and these protestors just singled this one kid out..to beat on a guy with a rifle.???

Ummmmm

I think it's when he put their fire out. Evidently some arsonists have tempers.

 

[ASHES]

It doesn;t matter his intent. What matters is if someone could legitimately believe that he represented a deadly threat. And seeing him running carrying a firearm the way he was and obviously kitted up like a militia.. he looked like a threat to me. Based on the video.. I would assume that a reasonable person would view him as a threat.

Tell me.. if you were in the neighborhood.. and you saw a stranger running toward you carrying a baseball bat... would you assume that he was there because he wanted to hit some pop flies?

by the way.. you say its "not standard militia gear"...

What was the fellow doing there? Where was he from?. Was he defending his home and property?

Totality of the circumstances. It isn't illegal, or a provocation under the law, to run while possessing a gun. The scenario you describe is backwards. Rittenhouse was chased before both events, by a crowd whose own war cries showed their intent. Nobody shouted "disarm that man" or "citizen's arrest that man!" Also, you do see all the protestors walking around with pistols in hand at the gas station right? That seems much more provocative than simply carrying a rifle Sling to the front. If you had him at a low ready, or openly pointing at any time before he was being chased, then we can talk. And I mean video, which if it happened there will be a bunch of.

 

[RaleBulgarian]

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.)

Rittenhouse is not part of any organization.

The legal justification of Rittenhouse’s actions will be argued in court. The complete lack of moral/societal justification is obvious though.

 

[jaeger19]

I think it's when he put their fire out. Evidently some arsonists have tempers.

So where were the few hundred people that he was with again? the ones that let him get singled out for a beating.. while he was holding a rifle?

 

[jaeger19]

Totality of the circumstances. It isn't illegal, or a provocation under the law, to run while possessing a gun. .

neither is it illegal to run with a knife either.. but it certainly is considered a threat if you are running at me with a knife in your hand or a firearm in your hand.

Rittenhouse was chased before both events

While also running amidst other people. Its certainly conceivable that the folks that were "chasing him".., felt they were protecting other people from him shooting others.

Take the bias out for a minute.. and see if as someone in the crowd would. Here is a guy.. armed.. shots have been fired. You hear people yelling about a fellow shooting people. And this guy.. armed is running into the crowd as the crowd scatters. that's a classic active shooter situation.

That's what it looked like on video and that the people around were trying to stop him from shooting people.

OR.. I guess you can believe that these individuals.. simply decided it was a good idea to go up against a man armed with a rifle.. while they had.. a skateboard.

Interesting you brought up the protestors with pistols in hand. Hmmm.. why wasn;t Rittenhouse shot then? Please explain why the crowd.. armed with firearms.. decided to take on a man with kicks, punches and a skateboard?

 

[Rucker61]

So where were the few hundred people that he was with again? the ones that let him get singled out for a beating.. while he was holding a rifle?

I'm not sure what your point is here. Was he with a few hundred people? Were they all gathered in one location? What was the elapsed time between the initiation of the first chase and the discharge of the first firearm?

 

[jaeger19]

I'm not sure what your point is here. Was he with a few hundred people? Were they all gathered in one location? What was the elapsed time between the initiation of the first chase and the discharge of the first firearm?

well.. first its argued that he was with a few hundred people protecting buildings and property.. then it was argued that he was alone and being chased. Just trying to get your story straight for you.

The upshot was.. Rittenhouses actions could CERTAINLY by any reasonable person.. be seen as constituting a deadly threat. His actions and the situation looked exactly like an active shooter situation. Any of those bystanders.. would have been justified in shooting and killing Rittenhouse based on his actions and the context. Anyone of those bystanders would have been justified in using deadly force to protect themselves and others.

I get that you only want to see it from the perspective of the white fellow. BUT again.. if you look at it from the eyes of the people in the street.. Rittenhouse is the one that appears to be the deadly threat... oh.. and was. He killed two people and injured a third.

 

[RaleBulgarian]

He will most likely walk on the serious charges

Column: Here’s why Kyle Rittenhouse, the teen shooting suspect in Kenosha killings, is likely to get off - Chicago Tribune

the article notes that his misdemeanor offense doesn't erase his right of self defense and he had a reasonable belief of suffering severe bodily harm. The anti gun writer predicts he will walk

Acknowledging Rittenhouse’s misdemeanor offense of open carrying under age is the first step in coming to grips with the reality that Rittenhouse had no business being in Kenosha in the first place. :applaud

 

[TurtleDude]

Acknowledging Rittenhouse’s misdemeanor offense of open carrying under age is the first step in coming to grips with the reality that Rittenhouse had no business being in Kenosha in the first place. :applaud

totally irrelevant. What bothers you more-that he supports Trump or that he wasted a couple of Trump hating losers?

 

[RaleBulgarian]

totally irrelevant. What bothers you more-that he supports Trump or that he wasted a couple of Trump hating losers?

^^ Irrelevant horse **** assertion.

On the chance that you’re not just trying to divert attention away from the real issue; Rittenhouse’s actions, by bringing politics into the discussion, I’ll answer. Who Rittenhouse supports for president is meaningless to me. The political beliefs of those he killed and injured is also meaningless to me.

Believe me or don’t. I really don’t care.

 

[jaeger19]

totally irrelevant. What bothers you more-that he supports Trump or that he wasted a couple of Trump hating losers?

What seems to matter to you.. is not the actions.. but WHO Rittenhouse supports..

And who those he murdered supports.

You see your disconnect here right?

 

[TurtleDude]

What seems to matter to you.. is not the actions.. but WHO Rittenhouse supports..

And who those he murdered supports.

You see your disconnect here right?

your understanding of what constitutes the crime of "murder" needs some work. Lots of work

 

[jaeger19]

your understanding of what constitutes the crime of "murder" needs some work. Lots of work

Well.. then please inform me as to why this is wrong.

Second degree murder is generally defined as intentional murder that lacks premeditation, is intended to only cause bodily harm, and demonstrates an extreme indifference to human life.

 

[ASHES]

Well.. then please inform me as to why this is wrong.

He isn't charged with 2nd degree murder, as no such law exists in WI. He is charged with first degree intentional homicide though. The prosecution has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he intentionally killed someone, with malice aforethought. Going to be tricky with all the videos showing him trying to run away from the confrontations.

 

[dave8383]

I don't recall any mass shooter who showed up kitted out and armed like a few hundred other people hanging out in the same place.

So if you wear medical gloves and a first aid pouch you can't be charged with murder?

 

[Maidenrules29]

What seems to matter to you.. is not the actions.. but WHO Rittenhouse supports..

And who those he murdered supports.

You see your disconnect here right?

There is no disconnect. Rittenhouse was supporting the business owner who had asked for help to save his business from being torched by a bunch of pieces of shit.

 

[jaeger19]

He isn't charged with 2nd degree murder, as no such law exists in WI. He is charged with first degree intentional homicide though. The prosecution has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he intentionally killed someone, with malice aforethought. Going to be tricky with all the videos showing him trying to run away from the confrontations.

He ran away after shooting the first person apparently .

 

[jaeger19]

There is no disconnect. Rittenhouse was supporting the business owner who had asked for help to save his business from being torched by a bunch of pieces of shit.

Hmmmm... not according to the business owner

Rittenhouse attorneys won't say who invited teen to protect property; Kenosha dealership owner says it wasn't him

 

[ASHES]

He ran away after shooting the first person apparently .

Yes, as the crowd gathered and started shouting about getting him. Who wouldn't run from that towards the police?

 

[jaeger19]

Yes, as the crowd gathered and started shouting about getting him. Who wouldn't run from that towards the police?

After he shot the first guy. And he didn;t run "toward police". only later did he walk by the police.. who had responded to the fellow that Rittenhouse shot in the arm.

 

[ASHES]

After he shot the first guy. And he didn;t run "toward police". only later did he walk by the police.. who had responded to the fellow that Rittenhouse shot in the arm.

He was chased before he shot Rosenbaum. He hung around for a little bit after, probably unsure of what to do in that circumstance, before the crowd started forming up and shouting about getting him. That was stupid. He wasn't shooting anyone else. He only shot the guy who chased him and attempted to assault him and take his gun. He didn't shoot into the crowd, he ran from them, probably because he didn't want to get beat to death or have them take his gun and shoot him. What they did after he tripped shows he wasn't wrong. He did run in the direction of the police in both instances, and he told Grosskreutz before the second shooting that he was going to the police. So Grosskreutz knew the following before he heard the crowd say he shot someone, get him:
1) someone was shot
2) Kyle could have been the shooter, but he wasn't currently shooting anyone or acting aggressively
3) Kyle was running in the direction of the police line
4) Kyle told him he was going to the police

He stopped running and walked to the police after the crowd stopped attacking him because they saw he was only shooting people that attacked him.