Another "I can't breath" death: Police Reform & Protests in the USA

[Xyonai]

Seriously, y'all get the results you want and you're still finding fictional things to be angry about.

Gotta keep that perpetual victimhood machine rolling. Choo choo!

[Machismo]

thankfully the law disagrees with you in every way. kyle was nothing but a victim of criminal activity during a violent riot.

Not at all, the law agrees that a person could have fired upon Rittenhouse out of fear for their life.

Do we need to discuss self defense?

[Zeth Hawkins]

thankfully the law disagrees with you in every way. kyle was nothing but a victim of criminal activity during a violent riot.

His posts are becoming more and more nonsensical. Kyle was practicing his freedom of movement, and freedom of bodily integrity. Wild how much people are against those in this case.

[Machismo]

His posts are becoming more and more nonsensical. Kyle was practicing his freedom of movement, and freedom of bodily integrity. Wild how much people are against those in this case.

And someone else practicing their freedom of movement and bodily autonomy could have seen Rittenhouse shooting people, and decided to protect himself.

Or, does that not compute?

After all, he is a violent white supremacist.

[Blur4stuff]

What he did was reckless. Showing up to an area of potential unrest with weapons doesn't help. It harms. It makes things worse. We know this because two people are now dead that wouldn't have been otherwise. His presence didn't make things better. Now that this kind of behavior is getting the green light, I fully expect more right wing soldier wannabes to commit more acts of violence.

We're going to be having this exact same discussion over different people over the next few years.

[Xyonai]

Not at all, the law agrees that a person could have fired upon Rittenhouse out of fear for their life.

Do we need to discuss self defense?

Considering the general kerfuffle I could very well have seen that last guy having been justified in shooting him with what he knew at the time the same way Rittenhouse was let off the hook for shooting them first.

Again, people don't have fuckin' mind reading powers to just-so-happen to know the intent and criminal backgrounds of the people in their immediate area. For all anyone knew, at that time, Rittenhouse was a credible threat who just started shooting people.

[The Oblivion]

What he did was reckless. Showing up to an area of potential unrest with weapons doesn't help. It harms. It makes things worse. We know this because two people are now dead that wouldn't have been otherwise. His presence didn't make things better. Now that this kind of behavior is getting the green light, I fully expect more right wing soldier wannabes to commit more acts of violence.

**acts of self defense against violent criminals in a public area unprovoked. what he did was show up 10m from his own house to a public area, legally carrying a weapon. he was then violently attacked by rabid rioters attempting to take his life. he tried to flee, over and over, until as a last resort, he was forced to defend himself. luckily, a person does not lose the right to defend themselves just because an area is dangerous and overran with criminals.

[Machismo]

Considering the general kerfuffle I could very well have seen that last guy having been justified in shooting him with what he knew at the time the same way Rittenhouse was let off the hook for shooting them first.

Again, people don't have fuckin' mind reading powers to just-so-happen to know the intent and criminal backgrounds of the people in their immediate area. For all anyone knew, at that time, Rittenhouse was a credible threat who just started shooting people.

Exactly, it was utter chaos, and if we are going to say that one person gets to defend himself, then so do others.

[GreenJesus]

What he did was reckless. Showing up to an area of potential unrest with weapons doesn't help. It harms. It makes things worse. We know this because two people are now dead that wouldn't have been otherwise. His presence didn't make things better. Now that this kind of behavior is getting the green light, I fully expect more right wing soldier wannabes to commit more acts of violence.

We're going to be having this exact same discussion over different people over the next few years.

One of the people Kyle shot was a felon with a concealed pistol and aimed it at Kyle. Why did a "peaceful protestor" bring a gun they weren't legally allowed to have as a felon and also yell the N-word at Kyle that night?

[Xyonai]

What he did was reckless. Showing up to an area of potential unrest with weapons doesn't help. It harms. It makes things worse. We know this because two people are now dead that wouldn't have been otherwise. His presence didn't make things better. Now that this kind of behavior is getting the green light, I fully expect more right wing soldier wannabes to commit more acts of violence.

We're going to be having this exact same discussion over different people over the next few years.

This whole shitshow's just going to encourage more people to arm themselves during future mass protests.

Either right wing goons cosplaying as vigilantes itching for someone to start shit so they can have an excuse to shoot someone, or left-wing folks worried (justifiebly or otherwise) about said random vigilantes or gun-toting shitheads showing up with the -very wrong- impression that this verdict means that just gunning people down is A-okay if they're rioter adjacent.

[The Oblivion]

One of the people Kyle shot was a felon with a concealed pistol and aimed it at Kyle. Why did a "peaceful protestor" bring a gun they weren't legally allowed to have as a felon and also yell the N-word at Kyle that night?

for the peaceful protest, duh dude.

[Machismo]

One of the people Kyle shot was a felon with a concealed pistol and aimed it at Kyle. Why did a "peaceful protestor" bring a gun they weren't legally allowed to have as a felon and also yell the N-word at Kyle that night?

The same reason Kyle Rittenhouse did... to shoot people.

[GreenJesus]

for the peaceful protest, duh dude.

The felon with an illegal gun just shows why Kyle was right to bring his AR. If he didn't, Kyle would have died that day trying to put out a fire started by antifa.

[The Oblivion]

This whole shitshow's just going to encourage more people to arm themselves during future mass protests.

Either right wing goons cosplaying as vigilantes itching for someone to start shit so they can have an excuse to shoot someone, or left-wing folks worried (justifiebly or otherwise) about said random vigilantes or gun-toting shitheads showing up with the -very wrong- impression that this verdict means that just gunning people down is A-okay if they're rioter adjacent.

dont attack random people and try to kill them and there wont really be a problem? as that is what transpired in this case.

- - - Updated - - -

The felon with an illegal gun just shows why Kyle was right to bring his AR. If he didn't, Kyle would have died that day trying to put out a fire started by antifa.

thankfully kyle had his weapon, otherwise, he likely would have lost his life to these criminals.

[Endus]

One of the people Kyle shot was a felon with a concealed pistol and aimed it at Kyle. Why did a "peaceful protestor" bring a gun they weren't legally allowed to have as a felon and also yell the N-word at Kyle that night?

Grosskreutz was the only person confronting Rittenhouse who had a handgun. And Grosskreutz was not a felon.

Why make shit up at this stage of things?

[Blur4stuff]

**acts of self defense against violent criminals in a public area unprovoked. what he did was show up 10m from his own house to a public area, legally carrying a weapon. he was then violently attacked by rabid rioters attempting to take his life. he tried to flee, over and over, until as a last resort, he was forced to defend himself. luckily, a person does not lose the right to defend themselves just because an area is dangerous and overran with criminals.

This is like a sibling sticking his finger half an inch from their brother/sister's face and claiming they aren't touching them. It's not about what's legal. His choices weren't meant to make things better and they didn't. It made things worse. He was reckless and made decisions that he knew would likely end in someone getting hurt.

Your comments and others like it keep trying to pass right wing extremist behavior as being completely innocent. It's not. They want confrontation. They want to hurt and even murder people on the left. If that weren't true and they genuinely wanted to lower the temperature of an already volatile situation then they wouldn't show up armored and armed. They wouldn't be there at all.

People on the right aren't backing Rittenhouse because they believe in following the law. Their support of Trump and the Jan 6th rioters prove that. They support him because they want more violence against people on the left. If they woke up to headlines of more right wingers killing protesters (or anyone) that's part of a left movement they would smile and laugh.

[Coniferous]

And someone else practicing their freedom of movement and bodily autonomy could have seen Rittenhouse shooting people, and decided to protect himself.

Or, does that not compute?

After all, he is a violent white supremacist.

Lots of labelling by the liberals... slap a label on someone and then you don't actually have to make an argument. "He's a violent white supremacist" as a reason for the crime. It's such a pointless argument. You're saying he's guilty of a crime because he's violent, and your evidence that he's violent is... the act you're saying he's guilty off. It's totally circular.

I tend to think it's less likely that he's a supremacist and more likely that he was just excited people wanted to hang out with him, but frankly, I don't care about the supremacist part of it, especially because it's a catch all label that people here are using way too freely. Law doesn't distinguish.

I imagine the next move is to call me a white supremacist, which will, once again, add nothing to the conversation.

[The Oblivion]

This is like a sibling sticking his finger half an inch from their brother/sister's face and claiming they aren't touching them. It's not about what's legal. His choices weren't meant to make things better and they didn't. It made things worse. He was reckless and made decisions that he knew would likely end in someone getting hurt.

Your comments and others like it keep trying to pass right wing extremist behavior as being completely innocent. It's not. They want confrontation. They want to hurt and even murder people on the left. If that weren't true and they genuinely wanted to lower the temperature of an already volatile situation then they wouldn't show up armored and armed. They wouldn't be there at all.

People on the right aren't backing Rittenhouse because they believe in following the law. They're support of Trump and the Jan 6th rioters prove that. They support him because they want more violence against people on the left.

no. this is like an innocent person going 10m down from their house and someone trying to murder them. its like that, because that IS what happened. criminals dont get to say, "well he should have stayed home so we dont murder him in cold blood", or "he shouldnt be here, we dont want to be judged for the crimes we are committing" . kyle was 100% innocent and the only victim in this case. had they not unprovoked attacked kyle, pursued him while he tried to flee, attempted to murder him, they would likely still be alive committing arson and violence to this day.

[Egomaniac]

The felon with an illegal gun just shows why Kyle was right to bring his AR. If he didn't, Kyle would have died that day trying to put out a fire started by antifa.

That much is decidely not true...as the delon with the gun elected not to shoot Kyle when he could have done so.

[Xyonai]

dont attack random people and try to kill them and there wont really be a problem? as that is what transpired in this case.

I mean if you want to entirely filter out any and all nuance of the situation, sure, that can be a take.

I'm not going to be like the people here who assume they 100% Understood Rittenhouse's motives going in there. For me he felt like some wanna-be tough guy who thought he'd be super cool bringing (not) his gun to a Dangerous Situation and shot the first guy who got twitchy. Then shot more people when they assumed he was just some guy who just showed up to shoot people.

Like is the takeaway here that we should all acquire the omniscient ability to know the motives and character of everyone who surrounds us so when we see a guy shoot another guy we can immediately register that 'Yes, that shooting was/was not justified'? Or is the takeaway to just let random people shoot eachother in the streets and hope the cops - who did not do anything about it, until after the fact, by the way - do something about it?