Kyle Rittenhouse - teen who shot three people in Kenosha

dowie

dowie

dowie

Caporegime
Joined
29 Jan 2008
Posts
59,112
Following on from the self defence thread what does GD think of this incident? This has been discussed in the Trump thread in SC as the polarisation of issues like this are perhaps relevant to the upcoming election but a comment was made that the discussion was kind of taking over the thread (which was fair) might as well throw the question open to a larger number of forum members.

Please don't actually discuss Trump or the election in this thread - just this incident itself - whch is between a white/latino teen and mostly white protestors/rioters - so no need for the usual stuff about race or accusations of racism being thrown around etc..etc..

Trump supporter mode said:
The weak Democrat Governor of Wisconsin refused a request for 2000 national Guard troops to assist the vastly outnumbered Kenosia police department after 2 days of violence from dangerous insurrectionists (BLM/Antifa), instead sending only a mere 250, just enough to protect the local court house and leaving the community defenceless.

A brave local militia called instead for volunteers to help defend local businesses, heroic Latino Police supporter Kyle, aged only 17, joined this ad hoc citizens militia. they spent the day helping clear up from the previous night's violence and then got ready to keep watch over the property of hard working business owners. The local police provided some water and thanked these local heroes.

Pic of our hero here as a police cadet in the town he wanted to protect:
OxMlwAB.jpg

Later that night an angry mob intent on arson and destruction arrived, a particularly angry 5ft 3inch paedophile started pushing and shoving militia members and shouting the n-word, the paedophile took a particular interest in young Kyle, he was later seen chasing and eventually cornered young Kyle, another protestor at this moment fired a handgun and Kyle had no chance but to shoot the paedophile.

Kyle then ran for his life, he was caught up by members of the angry mob and fell to the floor after one insurrectionist punched him in the back of the head, another insurrectionist tried to brutally stamp on his head, then another (also a convicted felon, violence, domestic violence etc..) tried to attack with a skateboard - Kyle managed to shoot him to, lastly an insurrectionist made the cowardly move of pretending to surrender then pointed a handgun at Kyle's head - Kyle also shot this guy, showing him mercy by only taking aim at his arm (this guy is also a former convict and member of a couple of far left extremist groups).

Our hero then put his hands up and walked towards the outnumbered but brave police officers of Kenosha, they had no time for our hero as they have to deal with the mob and the injured... he's since been charged by an obviously dubious assistant DA.

It's disgusting that the Governor didn't send enough national guard troops to begin with, we should vote him out at the next election.
Click to expand...

Woke mode said:
The racist-ass police in Kenosha need to answer for what they've done - white silence is white violence - the largely peaceful but fiery (see CNN) protests have left some property damage, but that is nothing compared to the damage done every day to the lives of people of colour by the police - we need to defund these pigs!!!!

A bunch of blue lives matter loving, domestic terrorists decided to congregate in Kenosha in order to intimidate the peaceful protestors. One peaceful protestor, a reformed convict who is trying to change his ways, tried to have a discussion with a young blue lives matter terrorist, we do try and keep him away from the kids but he was viciously shot dead by this monster!

Pic of the domestic terroist here:
D0Fd5DC.jpg

Some brave peaceful protestors gave chase, decided this was an "active shooter" situation, it doesn't matter that he wasn't actively shooting anyone - that's at least vaguely similar enough to what right wing people always argue so we're running with it. One brave person tried to grab the back of his head, another brave protestor nearly collided with him but managed to jump free - the terrorist almost shot this person. Another brave peacefully protestor tried to pull his rifle away and accidentally dropped a skateboard on him - this heroic peaceful protestor was shot dead. Lastly a good guy with a gun tried to intervene and was shot in the arm.

the domestic terrorist is now being charged with 1st degree homicide as he should be.

It's disgusting that our Governor has now sent more national guard troops in to deal with the peaceful protestors, we should vote him out next election.
Click to expand...

For a more balanced take - see the NY Times analysis of the video evidence:

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/27/us/kyle-rittenhouse-kenosha-shooting-video.html

an updated story from a local (to Illinois - the state the kid lives in) station:
https://abc7chicago.com/antioch-tee...tal-shooting-to-remain-in-il-custody/6393073/

Also take a look at the wiki re: the Kenosha protests:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kenosha_protests#Fatal_shooting_of_protesters

This was posted (by @Johno please? )in the Trump thread - shows the the sort of take a pro 2nd ammendment (but not complete loony) American might have of the incident:

(fair warning - contains some footage etc..)

Details of the actual complaint/charges and descriptions of the events relating to these charges:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1m9sDjYr1Nj_fpFr9bTycWPG8tS2aPDeL/view

Legal review posted (by @garnett) the Trump thread:

https://eu.jsonline.com/story/news/...osha-protest-shooting-17-year-old/3444231001/

So what are your views GD?

Here is my view:
He's likely (but not a dead cert, see above link re: legal arguments) going to get done on the weapon's charge
I suspect the 1st degree Homicide charges have a lot of 2nd amendment fans worried, throw in that local people probably dislike the riots/destruction and he's likely going to have good private lawyers defending him... I don't think they will hold up in front of a jury if it gets that far - I'd say he maybe gets a lesser murder or manslaughter charge or he walks completely on these and gets a charge for the weapon alone, either because a jury won't convict him or because of the prosecutors making a mistake with over charging
 
Just another bloodthirsty American gun-ho teenager, who happens to have a few semi-believable excuses for doing what he did which some people will latch onto and defend him.

Lock him up and let the gun nuts shout and cry until their nappies are soaked through.
 
As someone said in the comments on the NY Times..."Don't take guns out on the streets - there's been no British to fend off in over 200 years."
He and everyone else should have left any "protecting of businesses" to the law and stayed at home.
 
As an alien(Brit!...) observing the US way of thinking its easy to condone the actions seen, but put yourself in his and or there shoes, i doubt anyone here would act much differently should you find yourself in that predicament.

Theres no winners here :(

The race bating from the media is scary.
 
We discussed this on discord the other night, then I had lengthy discussions with friends and family. It's been a great topic as to where the wrong doing happened.

It would have been a lot easier if there was no military interaction with the militia before hand. This part really complicates it. Because there was contact, and an actual verbalisation of gratitude towards the militia for being there and helping out, they have condoned these boys' presence. It almost gives some element of justification to what came later.

There is a missing thread of info on how he ended up on the run from people just before the first incident. Why had he left his station, why was he alone, etc.

It complicates it, but not enough for me to change my mind - he should never have been there in the first place, and the very act of being there meant he was ready to use lethal force.

LizardKing said:
put yourself in his and or there shoes, i doubt anyone here would act much differently should you find yourself in that predicament.
Click to expand...
I doubt anyone of sane mind would ever find themselves in that predicament. And that's the genesis of this story - him going there with a gun and the intention to use it if necessary.

He's gonna get locked up but I would not want to be the prosecutor deciding what version of human-killing charge to throw at him.
 
There's a video of him shooting, the police are right next to him in their jeep(bearcat?) they are doing nothing and he's signalling them that he's taken down three people. They totally ignore him as if he's one of them. In other words they know who he is, people think he's a plant. There's always more to the story.
 
D3K said:
There is a missing thread of info on how he ended up on the run from people just before the first incident. Why had he left his station, why was he alone, etc.

It complicates it, but not enough for me to change my mind - he should never have been there in the first place, and the very act of being there meant he was ready to use lethal force.
Click to expand...

Yes - it is completely nuts, where were his parents etc..? But, remember, this is 'merica, land of the 2nd amendment, you can legally open carry military weapons in that part of 'merica, the only issue here is his age - the other gun nuts were legal. Of course someone carrying a gun is ready to use it if necessary - being prepared to use it (in self defence) isn't a crime in itself.

I think the only way to look at this is to remmember it is the US not the UK and to keep in mind that guns are common there, legal to own etc.. and that open carry of them isn't a big deal in the way it would be if someone had a military style rifle on the streets here. It's either perfectly legal or it's a misdemeanor crime because he's 17.

Some more details have come out (albeit - note these seem to be from favourable sources) - there is actually a defence for the weapons charge too - he was (according to a witness) there with his (older) brother, ergo... that was the reason (according to the talk show host/clip below) he could legally carry a rifle (he had someone over the age of 18 with him) - I guess that is yet to be argued in court though. Also the rifle was apparently obtained locally, chat on social medai about illegally crossing state lines with an illegal weapon etc.. seems to be wrong.

Account of the night seems to be that he was a lifeguard working in the town, he was working that day at the local pool, after his shift he volunteered to clean graffiti up at the local school (there are pics of him doing this), he then (with a friend) answered a call to help protect a local business owner's premises that had been targeted that night, business owner welcomed them apparently. Kyle was there to assist with medical help (something he apparently is witnessed doing too - assisting a protestor who had been shot with a rubber bullet etc...) so far this doesn't seem like someone just going there to try and find an excuse kill protestors, quite the opposite (at least if this witness account is true).

The bit where the confrontation happens is apparently (again according to the witness and the lawyer statement) seems to be when he's not able to get back to the mechanic's shop he was originally at as the police have moved forwards and blocked his route - he complies with their orders, he then heads over to assist other armed "militia" types at one of the business owners other properties another mechanic's shop - it is then that he's spotted by some of the aggressive protestors as someone there to protect the business (according to the wtiness he actually tries to stop some car fires) - that's where he's chased by them, that's where one of them fires a weapon (handgun) and another guy closes in on him and tries to attack him, grab his weapon - this is the first guy he shoots/kills. He seems to initially hang around but then needs to run as a group of aggressive protestors is still after him, especialy now he's shot someone too... and then we see the clearer clip we've seen all over the internet where he falls and proceeds to shoot people who are (pick one) attacking/trying to disarm him - (depending on which perspective is being argued)....

He then apparently tries to surrender to the police, who just tell him to get away from their vehicles... he apparently goes back home and hands himself in in his local police station instead.

As nuts as this entire situation is (and granted this is coming from a fellow militia witness and his lawyers) he does seem to have a defence for all the charges(assuming the brother/weapons thing is legit), it's just down to a jury I guess. I mean seems there is an argument of at least reasonable doubt re: the first shooting from it seemingly being an unprovoked attack + shots being fired by a protestor from the group who seemed to be after him.

The other two shooting incidents - he's again only shot people who have attacked him - arguably they could be said to be trying to apprehend him, but he was running away from them and wasn't an active threat per se. It's not completely clear if the second person shot didn't actually cause the rifle to firm himself when he pulled it - that's a possible argument for the defence. The third guy was armed with a handgun - that seems like an obvious one, especially since he's not been killed. That guy has, according to social media posts, expressed regret that he didn't kill Kyle! He's probably got an argument that he was trying to stop a shooter - though that doesn't negate that Kyle has a possible argument for self defence there too.

link to interview:
https://wiba.iheart.com/featured/vi...to-talk-about-the-kyle-rittenhouse-situation/

link to statement from lawyer:
 
D3K said:
Link or it didn't happen.
Click to expand...

I think he's referring to the 2nd and 3rd people getting shot (the incidents where we have clear video footage), they weren't really right next to him, the poster seems to be mistaken, he carries on down the street and the police vehicles are driving towards him, he then holds his hands up and tries to approach them only to either be ignored or be told to move away.
 
He might well have been - the lawyer's statement just says "he turned himself in to the police his home town" - perhaps he called them and they picked him up rather than him going to the station?

edit - according to witness - when they called him he was already at the local (home town) police station with his mum.
 
Last edited:
The statements from his classmates indicates he had a Napoleon complex due to his height. He clearly had a sense of entitlement that he could goto a neighbouring state with an illegal gun and 'police' an area. He then felt entitled enough to shoot and kill 2 people. The victims were possibly a threat of sorts to him but not a threat to his life. His lawyer will try to argue some form of self defense. I think it's a hard argument to make. He had no business in this state that he'd come to confront protestors with a gun. That shows a degree of premeditation.
 
jsmoke said:
There's a video of him shooting, the police are right next to him in their jeep(bearcat?) they are doing nothing and he's signalling them that he's taken down three people. They totally ignore him as if he's one of them. In other words they know who he is, people think he's a plant. There's always more to the story.
Click to expand...

You got a link to this vid?
 
LizardKing said:
As an alien(Brit!...) observing the US way of thinking its easy to condone the actions seen, but put yourself in his and or there shoes, i doubt anyone here would act much differently should you find yourself in that predicament.

Theres no winners here :(

The race bating from the media is scary.
Click to expand...

Why are you trying to defend him? Hes literally walking the streets with an assault rifle. He gunned down someone who was running away.
 
Guess it's OK for a gang of adults, one armed with a pistol (the dumb **** who got his arm blown off), to violently attack a child in the street, but it's not OK for that child to defend himself with the rifle he was carrying.
 
ANDREW GREEN said:
The statements from his classmates indicates he had a Napoleon complex due to his height. He clearly had a sense of entitlement that he could goto a neighbouring state with an illegal gun and 'police' an area. He then felt entitled enough to shoot and kill 2 people. The victims were possibly a threat of sorts to him but not a threat to his life. His lawyer will try to argue some form of self defense. I think it's a hard argument to make. He had no business in this state that he'd come to confront protestors with a gun. That shows a degree of premeditation.
Click to expand...
Yeah. It'll be interesting to see how his self-defence plea goes.

I agree with you that he put himself in that situation and I feel that should count against him. The kid seems indoctrinated and radicalised. It's getting flagged that as well as the high-powered assault rifle he also had a little first aid kit and that he went with the intention to do some good, but extremists gonna extreme. All extremists think they're ultimately doing good.

That said once he's in the situation mostly he's defending himself. From what I've read so far (I am not an expert) my interpretation is that he'll be able to plead self-defence.

One of the key crazy points for me is determining who's on the morally right side (& that's a fast-changing situation). At different points is he being chased by aggressors or by people trying to detain him and prevent further criminality? That all just shows how crazy it is for a developed country to allow a situation like this to come about.

His defenders make much of how his 3rd victim was armed. If that chap had been attacking with intent to hurt or kill, then he had time to just shoot the kid. To me it seems to suggest he wasn't trying attack but detain/suppress.

Someone else said he shouldn't have run. I disagree. I doubt he'd have made it out alive if he had.

One other thing to note is that the gun possession charge is a misdemeanor not a felony, so limited sentencing. I can easily see the court case sparking more riots.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Malevolence said:
Guess it's OK for a gang of adults, one armed with a pistol (the dumb **** who got his arm blown off), to violently attack a child in the street, but it's not OK for that child to defend himself with the rifle he was carrying.
Click to expand...

A rifle he was illegally carrying you mean? Its absolutely not ok for him to kill people especially when its quite clear one of them had his hands up He also shot someone running away and people thought, rightly imo, he was an active shooter so tried to take him down.

Hes a murderer.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom