Rittenhouse/Kenosha Shooting Split

[Trausti]

Copied from a post on FB:

So, as a person who enjoys shooting and guns, I'm going to point out a few things about this kid in wisconsin that are basically going to wreck him in court and nullify any self defense argument he has.

Just remember I like guns, I think they are super awesome and everyone should at bare minimum know how to use one. So let's move on to the Play Stupid Games, Win Stupid Prizes section of this post.

1. He was 17. It was illegal for him to posses that rifle. In his home state you have to be 21, in wisconsin you have to be 18.
This was crime 1.

2. Crossing the state line with an illegally possessed weapon is a pretty big deal and a big fat number 2 on the crime list.

3. Wisconsin totally allows for the use of deadly force in self defense, but the caveat is that you cant be committing a crime while that use of force happens. Which we addressed above he was actively committing a crime by possessing that rifle.

4. Wisconsin has a Castle Doctrine. But you can only use deadly force if the perpetrators are in your dwelling or your place of business. For a place of business you have to own this, or be in charge of operations of the business. You can not just post up to protect a random business, also you can not chase people if they decide to retreat like This 17yo did. Wisconsin V. Charles L Chew is the case law. If you want to have a look.

5. Its not self defense when you get in your car with a rifle, drive 15mi to another town, and walk the streets with a rifle.

He had every option to stay home but he chose to get involved in this situation with the plan to be involved in confrontation(hence the rifle) also in Wisconsin self defense law you cant be the instigator and then claim self defense.

He became the instigator the second he pursued.

I get it. The kid thought he was gonna be a hero and help out. But, reality is he made a large number of bad mistakes because he's 17 and has his face buried what essentially amounts to propaganda everyday and he can't tell the difference.

Now 2 people are dead and hes headed to jail.

This is what all those "shoot the protestors" comments create.

The criminal complaint is written in a way that pretty much hands the kid his self-defense. He is never alleged to be the provocateur. The first guy he killed tried to grab his gun. The second guy he killed tried to grab his gun. And the guy he wounded ran at him with a gun (and we know wanted to kill him). Other than the charge of being too young to own the firearm, not much there.

 

[J842P]

Copied from a post on FB:

So, as a person who enjoys shooting and guns, I'm going to point out a few things about this kid in wisconsin that are basically going to wreck him in court and nullify any self defense argument he has.

Just remember I like guns, I think they are super awesome and everyone should at bare minimum know how to use one. So let's move on to the Play Stupid Games, Win Stupid Prizes section of this post.

1. He was 17. It was illegal for him to posses that rifle. In his home state you have to be 21, in wisconsin you have to be 18.
This was crime 1.

2. Crossing the state line with an illegally possessed weapon is a pretty big deal and a big fat number 2 on the crime list.

3. Wisconsin totally allows for the use of deadly force in self defense, but the caveat is that you cant be committing a crime while that use of force happens. Which we addressed above he was actively committing a crime by possessing that rifle.

4. Wisconsin has a Castle Doctrine. But you can only use deadly force if the perpetrators are in your dwelling or your place of business. For a place of business you have to own this, or be in charge of operations of the business. You can not just post up to protect a random business, also you can not chase people if they decide to retreat like This 17yo did. Wisconsin V. Charles L Chew is the case law. If you want to have a look.

5. Its not self defense when you get in your car with a rifle, drive 15mi to another town, and walk the streets with a rifle.

He had every option to stay home but he chose to get involved in this situation with the plan to be involved in confrontation(hence the rifle) also in Wisconsin self defense law you cant be the instigator and then claim self defense.

He became the instigator the second he pursued.

I get it. The kid thought he was gonna be a hero and help out. But, reality is he made a large number of bad mistakes because he's 17 and has his face buried what essentially amounts to propaganda everyday and he can't tell the difference.

Now 2 people are dead and hes headed to jail.

This is what all those "shoot the protestors" comments create.

He wasn't the instigator, as far as any of the footage shows, indeed, he is show running away from the people he ends up shooting the entire time. Note, at least two of those people also had guns.

I think he still has a strong self-defense case, the illegal possession charge notwithstanding.

 

[J842P]

And here's an article on the Daily Caller from people who shot the video:

https://dailycaller.com/2020/08/27/we-witnessed-the-kenosha-shootings-heres-what-really-happened/


Mods, can we maybe separate the Rittenhouse posts out to its own thread?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

He wasn't the instigator, as far as any of the footage shows, indeed, he is show running away from the people he ends up shooting the entire time. Note, at least two of those people also had guns.

I think he still has a strong self-defense case, the illegal possession charge notwithstanding.

I suppose in America he does. Shoot someone, get chased because you shot someone, shot a couple more people after you trip and fall.

We also have the issue of, right to self-defense... he killed people. Was his life in peril? Recklessly wander into an area open carrying a rifle, 'because it is your RIGHT', and then shit happens. I wonder if he regrets having killed people, or if he is just a sociopath who was exercising his Constitutional Rights.

I read the Dailycaller article. This is why we have police... or supposed to have police... so that people that don't have training in this sort of field don't go out there fucking up and getting people killed.

 

[J842P]

He wasn't the instigator, as far as any of the footage shows, indeed, he is show running away from the people he ends up shooting the entire time. Note, at least two of those people also had guns.

I think he still has a strong self-defense case, the illegal possession charge notwithstanding.

I suppose in America he does. Shoot someone, get chased because you shot someone, shot a couple more people after you trip and fall.

We also have the issue of, right to self-defense... he killed people. Was his life in peril? Recklessly wander into an area open carrying a rifle, 'because it is your RIGHT', and then shit happens. I wonder if he regrets having killed people, or if he is just a sociopath who was exercising his Constitutional Rights.

I read the Dailycaller article. This is why we have police... or supposed to have police... so that people that don't have training in this sort of field don't go out there fucking up and getting people killed.

Um, he "Shoot someone, get chased because you shot someone, shot a couple more people after you trip and fall. " is really not a fair assessment of what occurred. More like, run away from people, get shot at, have someone lunge at you to try to take your gun, shoot that person, call police, get chased by even more people, shoot at person trying to shoot you with gun...

But I agree, this is what you can expect when looting/rioting and the burning of businesses occurs with impunity.

And really, at least the first guy he shot totally deserved it. He didn't "get people killed", an idiot got himself killed.

I find it funny, the guy is surrounded by armed people, at least one of which almost shot him (the guy who got shot in the arm). And everyone keeps harping on "WHY IS THAT GUY ARMED?"

Everyone out there is an idiot, but I find the people not burning shit down, rather, trying to stop the fires, less distasteful.

 

[laughing dog]

And really, at least the first guy he shot totally deserved it. He didn't "get people killed", an idiot got himself killed.

If he shot someone, then he got that person killed. There is no other honest way to describe the outcome. The "idiot" may have contributed - although grabbing someone's firearm, in and of itself, is not an unavoidable natural cause of death.
This teenager had no business being in the middle of a riot or a protest in another town in another state. He
drove himself to Kenosha with a firearm, looking for trouble in order to "help the police".

Everyone out there is an idiot, but I find the people not burning shit down, rather, trying to stop the fires, less distasteful.

Is there any evidence that this teenager's victims were burning shit down? Is there any evidence the victims were rioters or arsonists? If not, perhaps their "idiocy" in protesting or trying to stop violence is less distasteful than some Dirty Harry wannabe's actions.

 

[ruby sparks]

He was being chased by two guys and running away. One of the guys was shooting a gun in the air......

Do we know anything about this man? Do we even know if he was white, or black, for instance?

Here is the video, AFAIKT he's the guy who takes his shirt off: https://youtu.be/n_7QHRNFOKE?t=239

Ok.

Am I right in saying that all the shots that we know of on the night of the disturbances, from the videos, were fired by 2 white males, and that the 3rd person we know of drawing a gun (on a white male) was also a white male? And in addition the controversial 'shoot me nigger' invitation was made by a white male, to a white male? And only white males were injured or killed by bullets?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Check local law on that. You need to be 18+ to buy a rifle/shotgun and 21+ to buy a handgun but that doesn't say you have to be of those ages to possess one.

Suspected Kenosha shooter may have been illegally carrying gun

Wisconsin is an open carry state, meaning anyone who gets a gun legally can carry it in most public places without a license or permit.

But that's not the case for minors like 17-year-old Kyle Rittenhouse, who is accused of shooting three protesters in Kenosha Tuesday night, killing
two of them.

Kenosha Police Chief Daniel Miskinis confirmed to reporters Wednesday that you have to be 18 to open carry in the state of Wisconsin.

As I said, "check"--I didn't know the law there, it varies from state to state exactly what the rules are on minors with firearms.

 

[TV and credit cards]

He can protect himself. He can protect his property. He cannot protect someone else's property and to be judge, jury, and executioner. The Supreme Court decided to disregard that "well regulated" part of the second amendment and now all we're left with is vigilantism.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

there is a video where the shorter bald guy who got shot in the head is revved up and the shooter is on the other side. Someone with the shooter strongly pushed him back to get with away from the protestors and maybe the bald guy in particular.

Yeah, it looks like that's where/when it started. But what started it isn't clear.

Rittenhouse may have felt threatened and shot that first guy in self defense, or he may have instigated the conflict by threatening others. We need a lot more information before we can assign blame, but I definitely want to have a word with his parents.

I'm pretty sure he thinks he was acting in self defense--what we see is consistent with self defense except possibly an overreaction. However, something happened off camera and I doubt that was self defense.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

The only thing we don't know is why he was being chased by the two guys in the first place, but given he was running away and one of the guys was shooting a gun, I think he has a pretty good self-defence case.

Here I disagree--something happened to set the crowd on him and I strongly suspect it was him stepping way over the line. We don't see the crowd going after any of the other armed goons, what was different about him?

 

[ruby sparks]

However, something happened off camera and I doubt that was self defense.

Who knows? Hopefully we will find out. But the way the protesters were talking to Rittenhouse previously, at the building perimeter, they seemed very angry (particularly the guy who said 'shoot me nigger', to Rittenhouse, I think). So, for whatever reason Rittenhouse left the building perimeter (to patrol, as he saw it, or help someone), I think he could then easily, when he was on his own away from his group, have been chased and threatened (particularly by the angry guy who said 'shoot me nigger' if that is the guy Rittenhouse shot in the head after the guy jumped him from behind) without him having instigated anything. In other words, I'd say some were angry enough with him already, before he left the building perimeter.

 

[J842P]

And really, at least the first guy he shot totally deserved it. He didn't "get people killed", an idiot got himself killed.

If he shot someone, then he got that person killed. There is no other honest way to describe the outcome. The "idiot" may have contributed - although grabbing someone's firearm, in and of itself, is not an unavoidable natural cause of death.

Well sure, if you want to be obtusely literal, no one got anyone killed. The bullet killed him. But see, those sorts of semantic games that you are fond of playing are a pointless waste of time. But I'll indulge you:

To say that you "got someone killed" is to imply that you bear moral culpability, and indeed, doesn't even imply that you killed someone. Let's say I'm a mountain climber, and I encourage a novice to come along with me to a dangerous climb, and that novice trips and falls, and dies. Then someone might say to me, "you got that kid killed". And what they are implying is that I bear the responsibility for the death, notwithstanding that I didn't actually directly kill them, because I encouraged someone to do something that was irresponsible, and it's something that I should have known.


In the case we are discussing now, Rosenbaum chased a guy who was putting out fires, although the motive remains unclear, along with another person, who had a gun and discharged that gun. At multiple points, Rosenbaum tries to take his gun away from him, and immediately following the other person (who as of now remains unidentified) discharging what seems to be a pistol, Rosenbaum lunges at Rittenhouse. At this point, Rosenbaum has more than earned getting shot. It would be better if no one had guns, but that isn't the reality, so given that reality, Rosenbaum acted like an idiot and a hothead, and got himself killed. Indeed, there is video (immediately?) preceding this showing Rosenbaum being very aggressive:

https://twitter.com/AnonOpsSE/status/1298490065723760641

It's hard not to state the obvious, and I hesitate to, but this is classic small man syndrome.

 

[J842P]

there is a video where the shorter bald guy who got shot in the head is revved up and the shooter is on the other side. Someone with the shooter strongly pushed him back to get with away from the protestors and maybe the bald guy in particular.

Yeah, it looks like that's where/when it started. But what started it isn't clear.

Rittenhouse may have felt threatened and shot that first guy in self defense, or he may have instigated the conflict by threatening others. We need a lot more information before we can assign blame, but I definitely want to have a word with his parents.

I'm pretty sure he thinks he was acting in self defense--what we see is consistent with self defense except possibly an overreaction. However, something happened off camera and I doubt that was self defense.

I don't know, regardless of what happened off-camera, Rittenhouse is obviously retreating. It's going to be hard to argue that he didn't act in self-defense.

In any case, Rittenhouse was apparently putting out fires with a fire-extinguisher, and indeed, close to there an employee in his 70s was beaten unconscious by looters/rioters when he tried to put out the fire. So there's that, if we are going to be speculating.

 

[J842P]

Suspected Kenosha shooter may have been illegally carrying gun

As I said, "check"--I didn't know the law there, it varies from state to state exactly what the rules are on minors with firearms.

It's apparently a class A misdemeanor in Wisconsin for someone under 17 to open carry.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

He wasn't the instigator, as far as any of the footage shows, indeed, he is show running away from the people he ends up shooting the entire time. Note, at least two of those people also had guns.

I think he still has a strong self-defense case, the illegal possession charge notwithstanding.

I suppose in America he does. Shoot someone, get chased because you shot someone, shot a couple more people after you trip and fall.

We also have the issue of, right to self-defense... he killed people. Was his life in peril? Recklessly wander into an area open carrying a rifle, 'because it is your RIGHT', and then shit happens. I wonder if he regrets having killed people, or if he is just a sociopath who was exercising his Constitutional Rights.

I read the Dailycaller article. This is why we have police... or supposed to have police... so that people that don't have training in this sort of field don't go out there fucking up and getting people killed.

The chasing started before he shot anyone. If this were out of the blue he has a good self defense argument.

 

[J842P]

Here is the video, AFAIKT he's the guy who takes his shirt off: https://youtu.be/n_7QHRNFOKE?t=239

Ok.

Am I right in saying that all the shots that we know of on the night of the disturbances, from the videos, were fired by 2 white males, and that the 3rd person we know of drawing a gun (on a white male) was also a white male? And in addition the controversial 'shoot me nigger' invitation was made by a white male, to a white male? And only white males were injured or killed by bullets?

Yes, why is this relevant?

Is this to address the claim that Rittenhouse is some white nationalist? Because there is no evidence of that.

 

[ruby sparks]

Here is the video, AFAIKT he's the guy who takes his shirt off: https://youtu.be/n_7QHRNFOKE?t=239

Ok.

Am I right in saying that all the shots that we know of on the night of the disturbances, from the videos, were fired by 2 white males, and that the 3rd person we know of drawing a gun (on a white male) was also a white male? And in addition the controversial 'shoot me nigger' invitation was made by a white male, to a white male? And only white males were injured or killed by bullets?

Yes, why is this relevant?

Is this to address the claim that Rittenhouse is some white nationalist? Because there is no evidence of that.

No, nothing like that. Just an observation. In a BLM protest about a black man being shot, it seems odd that all the shooters/gunmen and victims we know of were white males, in this case. My first observation is that no women were involved in such ways, and second....what's with white people shooting up at BLM protests?

 

[J842P]

Here is the video, AFAIKT he's the guy who takes his shirt off: https://youtu.be/n_7QHRNFOKE?t=239

Ok.

Am I right in saying that all the shots that we know of on the night of the disturbances, from the videos, were fired by 2 white males, and that the 3rd person we know of drawing a gun (on a white male) was also a white male? And in addition the controversial 'shoot me nigger' invitation was made by a white male, to a white male? And only white males were injured or killed by bullets?

Actually, the guy who takes his shirt off seems to have been the Daily Caller guy, Richie, from this article (the collegue of the author): https://dailycaller.com/2020/08/27/we-witnessed-the-kenosha-shootings-heres-what-really-happened/

 

[J842P]

Yes, why is this relevant?

Is this to address the claim that Rittenhouse is some white nationalist? Because there is no evidence of that.

No, nothing like that. Just an observation. In a BLM protest about a black man being shot, it seems odd that all the shooters/gunmen and victims we know of were white males, in this case. My first observation is that no women were involved in such ways, and second....what's with white people shooting each other at BLM protests?

What do you mean? This is hardly atypical. Most homicides are intraracial, and the vast majority involve young males, but in any case, protestors/counter-protestors don't neatly fall across racial lines.