Kyle Rittenhouse - teen who shot three people in Kenosha

[dowie]

Maybe I haven't got my finger on the pulse, but I can't imagine mass riots if Rittenhouse is found not guilty.

Yeah the two people he killed were white and both of them are pretty scummy people too - one anally raped several young boys and the other was into kidnapping women. Might be some protests/outrage but can't see much in the way of mass rioting over the verdict.

The whole situation is stupid. Allowing a child to take a weapon of war on to the streets during a riot is stupid, no way he is emotionally mature enough to deal with what might happen. The police not doing their jobs and instead allowing members of the public to act as vigilantes is stupid. Members of the public burning their own city is about as stupid as it gets.

In which case they should pass laws in relation to taking weapons to protests etc... though I guess that doesn't prevent say a business owner (or people they invite) having firearms on their property - such a law might have simply meant Rittenhouse and chums were restricted to remaining on the properties if carrying firearms.

 

[dowie]

The 1st degree intentional homicide charge is stupid. Not sure why they even went for that considering they have no evidence for it AND the only possible bit of evidence showing a sniff of premeditation, hasn't been allowed anyway.

The reckless homicide and reckless endangerment are more realistic for some of the instances

For the reckless endangerment charge, they have a reasonable argument and reasonable evidence(I suspect part of this was the prosecutions questioning yesterday re the ammunition used)

That seemed like a reach - they were trying to question him re: full metal jacket vs hollow point etc.. and he didn't get drawn into it. IIRC it was in relation to the journalist who was present at the first instance or is there another incident the reckless endangerment charge covers?

 

[deuse]

The whole situation is stupid. Allowing a child to take a weapon of war on to the streets during a riot is stupid, no way he is emotionally mature enough to deal with what might happen. The police not doing their jobs and instead allowing members of the public to act as vigilantes is stupid. Members of the public burning their own city is about as stupid as it gets.

You do know that 17 year olds was in the Vietnam war(USA side)?
I think about 12 of them died.
And there was 16 year olds as well.
So calling them a "CHILD" is silly.

 

[Chuk_Chuk]

The whole situation is stupid. Allowing a child to take a weapon of war on to the streets during a riot is stupid, no way he is emotionally mature enough to deal with what might happen. The police not doing their jobs and instead allowing members of the public to act as vigilantes is stupid. Members of the public burning their own city is about as stupid as it gets.

FYI, You forgot elected official intentionally delaying the deployment of the national guard to allow for more chaos and scoring political points being a stupid thing.

 

[Energize]

I'm sure you will be able to cite one case where the right of a court to draw an inference from an explanation given in court that wasn't given beforehand resulted in a wrongful convictions where the law around inferences had been properly applied then?

Defendant's absolutely should not be able to remain silent until trial and them come out with a pack of answers that can't properly be tested when they were asked about thoose matters before and reasonably could have answered.

They can of course remain silent and leave it to the prosecution to make their case independently.

It clearly should not be acceptable for a defendant to wait until being examined in court to give an explanation without an inference being drawn.

They can say nothing if they like but if they do speak the court should know when that account was first provided and not allow the defendant to act as if they have consistely given whatever defence they suddenly spring on the court after all the prosecution witnesses have given their evidence.

That's not how the UK law operates, see John Murray v United Kingdom where a person was convicted after inferences were drawn from absolute silence and without even having access to a lawyer.

It should definitely not be acceptable for people to feel pressured into giving a statement to police which could be wrongly contradicted by another witness and then used to charge them.

There are so many legal and common sense reasons for why the 5th amendment is excellent and I certainly side with the US supreme court on this one.

 

[Jono8]

For me, this whole case highlights why letting the general public carry rifles and guns around (especially people young, inexperienced and emotionally immature) is a bad idea.

I imagine that in countless night clubs /bars across this country (and the US) fights break out between people where attempts to punch/kick and grab are made. Im also sure the phrase "I'll kill you" is used quite commonly in some of these situations.

Thankfully not every one of them results in multiple people being killed. When you add a 17 year old with an AR15 into that mix....Well.

This isn't a comment on not allowing self defense, but more on how introducing guns into the mix serves to give any parties involved the ability to use lethal force at the drop of the hat, when it may not be warranted.

Does everyone really want to live in a society where any possible fight that breaks out results in the supposed victim being able to simply shoot the other person in public/in a potentially crowded area?

 

[deuse]

Does everyone really want to live in a society where any possible fight that breaks out results in the supposed victim being able to simply shoot the other person in public/in a potentially crowded area?

You're living in one now.

A person in Surrey got shot last week.

 

[Skunkworks]

Maybe I haven't got my finger on the pulse, but I can't imagine mass riots if Rittenhouse is found not guilty.

If they know that rioting could mean eating a bullet they might start behaving like humans. The only reason this chaos persists is lack of consequences.

 

[Jono8]

You're living in one now.

A person in Surrey got shot last week.

So in every fight or scuffle that broke out in Surrey, someone got shot?

 

[Roar87]

FYI, You forgot elected official intentionally delaying the deployment of the national guard to allow for more chaos and scoring political points being a stupid thing.

It was an election year so I guess it's justified right?

 

[deuse]

So in every fight or scuffle that broke out in Surrey, someone got shot?

I never said every. You did.
The poor guy was at a house party. It's to early for the fine details.

And laughing at the dead is not funny.

 

[Roar87]

Does everyone really want to live in a society where any possible fight that breaks out results in the supposed victim being able to simply shoot the other person in public/in a potentially crowded area?

This is a completely ridiculous point though, it wasn't a fight breaking out, it was people trying to do serious harm where deadly force was absolutely warranted. I mean we've seen pictures of Kyle on the floor about to be hit over the head with a skateboard, and another picture where clearly a man has a handgun. This isn't a scuffle between 2 people who agreed to to unarmed combat, except then one decides to escalate to deadly force and you presenting it as that is creating a false narrative. If you are on floor and about to be hit over the head with a blunt object I would suggest you take that seriously as your life is in real danger.

 

[StriderX]

If they know that rioting could mean eating a bullet they might start behaving like humans. The only reason this chaos persists is lack of consequences.

If they know rioting could mean eating a bullet, they'll just go out with the intention of firing first.

 

[C Kent]

If they know rioting could mean eating a bullet, they'll just go out with the intention of firing first.

So they are incapable of not rioting then?

 

[Skunkworks]

If they know rioting could mean eating a bullet, they'll just go out with the intention of firing first.

Good. The sooner this culture war goes hot, the sooner we get to remove the chaos and return to an orderly, functional, healthy society.

 

[Colonel_Klinck]

You do know that 17 year olds was in the Vietnam war(USA side)?
I think about 12 of them died.
And there was 16 year olds as well.
So calling them a "CHILD" is silly.

You think a country sending children to war, a completely pointless war on the other side of the word is something to be celebrated? The US should hang its head in shame over such action. they were children ffs.

And so no children should not be roaming the streets with weapons of war at any time, let alone in a riot where the chances of getting in a situation where maturity will be needed is likely. He was an idiot to do what he did but he is a child and children do stupid ****, its down to adults to stop them and certainly not encourage them.

 

[OspreyO]

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.

Theres lot of video, I assume you'll be linking to what you're talking about.

 

[Jono8]

This is a completely ridiculous point though, it wasn't a fight breaking out, it was people trying to do serious harm where deadly force was absolutely warranted. I mean we've seen pictures of Kyle on the floor about to be hit over the head with a skateboard, and another picture where clearly a man has a handgun. This isn't a scuffle between 2 people who agreed to to unarmed combat, except then one decides to escalate to deadly force and you presenting it as that is creating a false narrative. If you are on floor and about to be hit over the head with a blunt object I would suggest you take that seriously as your life is in real danger.

That was after the first shooting, where they may have thought he was the aggressor/active shooter.

The first one, Kyle wasn't even touched and the one where he amazingly missed i don't believe they had a weapon. He was chased and a man made a lunge at him - pretty akin to a fight breaking out. My point is that, that sort of thing happens multiple times every night, everywhere (ie people kicking off, chasing each other, getting into fights etc), but 99.999% of the time doesn't end up with people dying. People died, because Kyle took a rifle with him to an already volatile situation, where he knew it would be filled with volatile people causing trouble (and that isn't saying it is all , or even mostly on Kyle, but his decisions, immaturity and poor judgement contributed).

 

[Jono8]

I never said every. You did.

Correct, which was my point. Which you seemed to have missed.

One person getting shot recently in Surrey has nothing to do with what i was saying.

 

[Vulcan]

The first one, Kyle wasn't even touched and the one where he amazingly missed i don't believe they had a weapon. He was chased and a man made a lunge at him - pretty akin to a fight breaking out.

By lunge at him, you mean Rausenbaum grabbed Rittenhouse's rifle.