Verdict: Kyle Rittenhouse Found Not Guilty on All Charges

[curtism1234]

I have a strong suspicion that our buddy curtism1234 is a professional troll and has been for a while. What are the odds that a guy who hunts, owns guns, and I assume supports the 2nd Amendment is also a fanatical liberal?

What the Right on gun/hunting forums repeatedly fails to understand or admit is this is not a 99/1 political affiliation in the US; it's 60/40. The vast majority of the liberal and moderate members here including nearly all the europeans whose far right is still left of center in American politics) choose to keep their politics silent because they get called a lying disgusting human being as one member called me. I am not responding to that.

At worst Rittenhouse is an anarchist looking for trouble and found it. At best he is a youth who made a terrible decision to hang out with the wrong people and he got his life ruined for it (and lucky to be a free man today). The most troubling part of this is the amount of people dubbing him a hero and champion of the 2nd amendment. Rittenhouse is a classic example of what not to do

 

[WAB]

What the Right on gun/hunting forums repeatedly fails to understand or admit is this is not a 99/1 political affiliation in the US; it's 60/40. The vast majority of the liberal and moderate members here including nearly all the europeans whose far right is still left of center in American politics) choose to keep their politics silent because they get called a lying disgusting human being as one member called me. I am not responding to that.

At worst Rittenhouse is an anarchist looking for trouble and found it. At best he is a youth who made a terrible decision to hang out with the wrong people and he got his life ruined for it (and lucky to be a free man today). The most troubling part of this is the amount of people dubbing him a hero and champion of the 2nd amendment. Rittenhouse is a classic example of what not to do

I think what folks are most annoyed with is not your political views, but your total disregard of the facts. As Mike Pence said, “you are entitled to your own opinion, but not your own facts”.

 

[curtism1234]

I think what folks are most annoyed with is not your political views, but your total disregard of the facts. As Mike Pence said, “you are entitled to your own opinion, but not your own facts”.

I can flip that around and say the same thing though. The moment of self defense does not negate the fact of why he was there in the first place. As I said, I respect the decision of the jury (jurists take their job very serouisly) but this sets a bad precedent that says a group/ind (right or left) can take a rifle into a mob, shoot their way out when things enviable go wrong, and walk away scot free. There are too many extremist groups on the right and left just itching to do that such thing.

 

[Red Leg]

What the Right on gun/hunting forums repeatedly fails to understand or admit is this is not a 99/1 political affiliation in the US; it's 60/40. The vast majority of the liberal and moderate members here including nearly all the europeans whose far right is still left of center in American politics) choose to keep their politics silent because they get called a lying disgusting human being as one member called me. I am not responding to that.

At worst Rittenhouse is an anarchist looking for trouble and found it. At best he is a youth who made a terrible decision to hang out with the wrong people and he got his life ruined for it (and lucky to be a free man today). The most troubling part of this is the amount of people dubbing him a hero and champion of the 2nd amendment. Rittenhouse is a classic example of what not to do

The amazing thing to me is that the liberal group think mind uncritically accepts Rittenhouse is an anarchist or a white supremacist. They have now been fed another twenty-four hour barrage of the same politically driven nonsense - politically driven by one party. At the same time, they are seemingly oblivious to the facts that ANTIFA and BLM rioters were actually creating the conditions of anarchy by burning and looting a relatively small American town because police did their job confronting an armed man.

The mayor and governor of the town and state abetted that chaos by not letting the police or National Guard then do their job to prevent that anarchy. Private citizens were then forced to step in to try and protect property.

I was frankly astounded that the rule of law was able to prevail in the atmosphere that accompanied this trial. Those jurors somehow had the civic courage to overcome the lynch mob atmosphere of fear and intimidation abetted by an angry left uninterested in critical thought or the "wrong" verdict.

I agree to the extent that neither he nor any other private citizen should have had to defend their property or town from a mob. But politically driven decisions made that mob possible and fueled its behavior. The left is the one releasing this particular genie from the bottle.

 

[Arthur Dillon]

Good for Rittenhouse and good for America. Rittenhouse is far more brave than many on this page. He did what was right. Yeah, you others can stay home, where you belong.

 

[John Wasmuth]

It would be nice if the communists on the left would just stop the BS lies and see the actual facts of the case. So far all that’s been put out by the left are lies that never happened and are the farthest thing from the truth. Another fact that escapes the communists is that Rittenhouse had every legal right to be there the same as the peaceful protesters. Notice that the only people that got shot were the people that attacked him. But spew your crap on the left. It’s getting real old real fast.

 

[baxterb]

I can flip that around and say the same thing though. The moment of self defense does not negate the fact of why he was there in the first place. As I said, I respect the decision of the jury (jurists take their job very serouisly) but this sets a bad precedent that says a group/ind (right or left) can take a rifle into a mob, shoot their way out when things enviable go wrong, and walk away scot free. There are too many extremist groups on the right and left just itching to do that such thing.

A person's rights are not dependent on the potential reactions of others.

Fact: You have no idea why he was there in the first place. If the video evidence is any indication, it was not to be an antagonist. KR had as much right to be there as anyone else. It was others who came from farther away, who acted unlawfully, and who paid the price.

As yourself the question: had KR not been attacked, who would have been shot? The answer is "no one." Before you try to turn that around, read my first statement again.

The 'moment of self defence' would not have even happened had the other three people been acting as KR did. IF you want to talk about precedent, my guess is that the behaviour of the people shot was FAR MORE influenced by the fact that thousands of people had been rioting across the country and were being lauded as social justice advocates while they destroyed communities and lives. Talk about getting away scot free.

 

[shootist~]

As Sargeant Joe Friday would say: The facts, ma'am, just the facts.
Do that instead of listening the scum on MSNBC or CNN, et al, and it's a no brainer.

Kyle Rittenhouse shooting a clear case of self-defense: Devine

Kyle Rittenhouse is innocent of any murder charges after going through an emotional trial and proving his obvious case of self-defense against the violent Antifa-BLM mob, Miranda Devine writes.

nypost.com

 

[Bullthrower338]

At worst Rittenhouse is an anarchist looking for trouble and found it.

First how is it anarchy to protect the livelihood of your friends from being looted and burned to the ground during these “peaceful protests”? The anarcist are the ones not following the rule of law and using any excuse to destroy things and steal! Do you think anyone gave two shits about that hoodlum junkie George Floyd? Maybe his family($$$$). He was a menace to society, just like the turds that KR smoked as they attacked him.
The blinders that are worn by the left are unbelievable! How can one condone the actions of these animals as free speech? They should have had national guard gunships running missions on them. The problem isnt that KR went to help a bad situation out, it is that the mob rule and terrorism of these people were allowed to manifest into such a destructive situation to begin with. Only those that have rays of sunshine and unicorns flying out of their ass can possibly think that these people honestly gave a damn about the punk who instead of complying with the police decided to make a decision that got him shot. All these “protesters”, many of whom were bussed in from out of state to cause destruction, had no skin in the game, they just came there to burn things down. So who was actually looking for trouble, the guy trying to protect the hard earned businesses or the ones that want to burn it down?

 

[TXhunter65]

I can flip that around and say the same thing though. The moment of self defense does not negate the fact of why he was there in the first place. As I said, I respect the decision of the jury (jurists take their job very serouisly) but this sets a bad precedent that says a group/ind (right or left) can take a rifle into a mob, shoot their way out when things enviable go wrong, and walk away scot free. There are too many extremist groups on the right and left just itching to do that such thing.

When a human breaking no laws is chased down assaulted and advanced on with a weapon him using a weapon to save his life is the only fact that matters.

What you're admitting is you and those like you do not have the ability to control your emotions or your actions...as you stated or at least I believe you meant to state "when things inevitably go wrong" it's only inevitable if you and those like you have no control over your emotions/actions. Any American should be able to walk into a protest with a differing view while carrying any form of weapon it is legal to carry and the opposing side be able to control themselves. In this case that didn't happen and those who couldn't do that won the grand prize.

I agree it does set a precedent, as it should, just because you have a different view and chose to carry a weapon as a shield does NOT mean you can't use that weapon when someone with an opposing view can no longer reasonably vocalize, defend, or support their position and choose to resort to violence.

 

[Hogpatrol]

WARNING! MEME STORM APPROACHING!

 

[KMG Hunting Safaris]

Too soon?

 

[Hogpatrol]

 

[Hogpatrol]

 

[Hogpatrol]

 

[Hogpatrol]

 

[Hogpatrol]

 

[Hogpatrol]

 

[Hogpatrol]

 

[Backyardsniper]

View attachment 437316

Bwahahahah. Oddly enough then only way to get thier attention IS to punch them squarely in the wallet!