In which case how do you maintain the self defence claim if you don’t think those beliefs were reasonable.
You’re again keeping it vague here too, you’ve been asked which incidents and why but you don’t clarify, you just repeat the assertion but do so, again, devoid of any supporting argument or explanation.
Well that's false too and has already been pointed out to you, in the first incident he was (he claims) threatened with a firearm and he didn't fire, he retreated, he was chased and he looked back and pointed his rifle but didn't use it, it's only when someone grabbed his gun.
Likewise, re: the skateboarder attacker, he attacked him first with the skateboard without being shot, it's only after a second attack and an attempt to grab the rifle that he's shot.
And again with the third instance, he aims but doesn't fire at the guy with the pistol, in fact, he then lowers his rifle it is only after the guy points his pistol at Kyle that he fires.
Further to that, in all those cases Kyle first retreats/tries to flee before he's attacked (or threatened with a gun) and eventually opens fire.
So to say he showed no restraint is bunk - he's fled/retreated in all cases and in the first and last case he's initially pointed and not fired, only firing when the threat to him increases.
As for no one else fired a firearm at him, one guy arguably almost did and Kyle was quick enough to prevent that another guy fired behind him (after allegedly threatening him) and for all he knew he had been fired at
Yes, the last incident, pretty clear falsification of the claim being made above - Kyle lowers his rifle and doesn't immediately shoot that guy, it is only when the pistol is raised and pointed at him that he fires. In fact they had an earlier confrontation further back along the road in which Kyle obviously didn't shoot him either.
The only people who were shot that night were people who chased after Kyle and then attacked him & apparently tried to take his rifle off him or directly threatened him with a gun!
Last edited:
