The question is not about other cases , all cases are individual , it’s about somebody who has had serious threats to their life then being chased and how they would exhaust all other means before using deadly force as per your statement , so I ask How would you do that?
Kyle Rittenhouse - teen who shot three people in Kenosha
- Thread starter dowie
- Start date
The question is not about other cases , all cases are individual , it’s about somebody who has had serious threats to their life then being chased and how they would exhaust all other means before using deadly force as per your statement , so I ask How would you do that?
he should have let the people chasing him take the gun off him and give him some good old mob justice.
or something
Soldato
When someone is chasing you down the road WITH A GUN drawn. THAT is reasonable.
When the other guy was hitting him. That is reasonable.
Kyle was in fear of his life.
We are talking about the Rosenbaum killing at the moment.
Soldato
Basically @Jono8 Roar is rolling out his favourite "you aren't enough of a man" line. The guy is obsessed with masculinity to the point that I do wonder if there is something he's trying to suppress.
fine.
99.9999999999999% of the time, people walk around with open carry and people wont try to fight them and it doesn't end up in bloodshed. I'd expect you've a far greater chance of being injured/dying in a fight on a typical Friday/Saturday from a fight in a club/bar.
Sorry I don't respect people who find the idea of defending their community incredulous and shocking
I dont understand the logic behind that statement. Seems circular.
Soldato
Reports now that MSNBC or someone working on their behalf tried to follow a bus carrying jurors, ran a red light in the process and was stopped & ticketed by police. Judge not too happy again so has banned MSNBC from the courtroom:
This is just more stuff for the defence to use in a potential appeal/petition for a mistrial etc..
I thought your argument was just about him not fleeing enough?
Do you not get that if you're armed things are a bit different, he's tried to flee, he's pointed his rifle (which he's legally allowed to carry)... if someone then goes for him in spite of that and/or is able to get at his rifle then it's potentially game over for him ergo it's self-defence.
That a fistfight won't end in someone being killed normally is missing the point completely, most fistfights don't involve people carrying firearms... if you attack someone who has a firearm they might well resort to using it. It would be reasonable for them to try and extract themselves (as he did in this instance) it would be reasonable for them to give a warning (as he also did in this instance via pointing and not shooting) but if you catch up with them and shout **** you and dive for them/grab their rifle then...
This is just more stuff for the defence to use in a potential appeal/petition for a mistrial etc..
I thought your argument was just about him not fleeing enough?
Do you not get that if you're armed things are a bit different, he's tried to flee, he's pointed his rifle (which he's legally allowed to carry)... if someone then goes for him in spite of that and/or is able to get at his rifle then it's potentially game over for him ergo it's self-defence.
That a fistfight won't end in someone being killed normally is missing the point completely, most fistfights don't involve people carrying firearms... if you attack someone who has a firearm they might well resort to using it. It would be reasonable for them to try and extract themselves (as he did in this instance) it would be reasonable for them to give a warning (as he also did in this instance via pointing and not shooting) but if you catch up with them and shout **** you and dive for them/grab their rifle then...
LOL wat?? Do these fights in clubs often involve firearms?
So trying to toe the non-bias line; you can see from the drone footage that Rittenhouse is clearly trying to distance himself from Rosenbaum as quick as possible.
Rosenbaum gives chase (and throws something). Rittenhouse at this point stops turns and shoulders his weapon as a form of threat / intimidation (delete as appropriate to your bias) and de-escalate. This causes Rosenbaum to momentarily slow down. Rittenhouse then proceeds to turn back to the direction he was travelling and again tries to put distance between himself and his perceived assailant. Consider the "us" and "them" scenario he is faced with - he isn't part of the "mob" - he can only go where they aren't, in this instance it's the back of parking lot where unfortunately several vehicles are parked. Now I don't know about you, but trying to run with a rifle, at speed, and navigate through tightly parked trucks is not an easy task.
Unfortunately the result of that means Rosenbaum was easily able to close the distance, at which point Kyle has ended up stopping his perceived threat through the discharge of his firearm, four times, at very close quarters.
In my opinion he has pretty much exhausted all options available to him. His sole drove at that point was to put distance between himself and a very aggressive man that had prior threatened to kill him. He's attempted de-escalation to no effect and when, essentially, cornered has defended himself. Did he panic? Probably. Was it excessive? You could definitely argue it was in hindsight. But in the moment, in a hostile environment, with your escape routes blocked and someone who wants to harm you within arm's distance, I can perfectly understand why he shot.
Rosenbaum gives chase (and throws something). Rittenhouse at this point stops turns and shoulders his weapon as a form of threat / intimidation (delete as appropriate to your bias) and de-escalate. This causes Rosenbaum to momentarily slow down. Rittenhouse then proceeds to turn back to the direction he was travelling and again tries to put distance between himself and his perceived assailant. Consider the "us" and "them" scenario he is faced with - he isn't part of the "mob" - he can only go where they aren't, in this instance it's the back of parking lot where unfortunately several vehicles are parked. Now I don't know about you, but trying to run with a rifle, at speed, and navigate through tightly parked trucks is not an easy task.
Unfortunately the result of that means Rosenbaum was easily able to close the distance, at which point Kyle has ended up stopping his perceived threat through the discharge of his firearm, four times, at very close quarters.
In my opinion he has pretty much exhausted all options available to him. His sole drove at that point was to put distance between himself and a very aggressive man that had prior threatened to kill him. He's attempted de-escalation to no effect and when, essentially, cornered has defended himself. Did he panic? Probably. Was it excessive? You could definitely argue it was in hindsight. But in the moment, in a hostile environment, with your escape routes blocked and someone who wants to harm you within arm's distance, I can perfectly understand why he shot.
I'm reminded on dLockers usual nonsence when they earlier apparently sought go ridicule the notion that the jury may be concerned about doxing and recriminations and that this may affect their decision making.
The response of the media and some leading politicians and public figures has been absolutey reprehensible in this case.
Soldato
I would imaginer the reason is because they think that person isn't right in the head. Who walks around in public with a firearm on display? Damn right you'd stay well clear, I'd think they were a ****** loon! People should also maybe be able to go about their daily business without feeling intimidated by people walking around with firearms.
Imagine the UK on a Friday and Saturday night if everyone that felt physically threatened killed the person they felt was threatening them. It would be absolute carnage. That child wasn't remotely emotionally mature enough to be walking around with that gun. But then he was a child and there is a reason why we treat people under a certain age as children.
Sorry, I must have missed the part where attempting to extinguish a fire is interpreted as a threatening behaviour.
It's not the UK and open carry is legal, you can't attack someone who isn't being threatening simply because they are legally carrying a firearm
Yes, my argument is still that he didn't flee enough.
Once AGAIN, you have weighed in and totally not understood what I've said or why i responded in that way.
FYI (and the reason so many have a problem with how you debate on here) your issue, is that you take something someone says out of context to the point they are replying to, and then try to frame it as though they are making a new argument, when in fact the comment or argument was to articulate a response to something else. you also then continually claim no one has made a point or argument, when they have (countless times)
This is why you often end up ensnaring people into totally tedious and long winded nonsense (or "dowie hole" as its called around these parts).