MovieChat Forums > Politics > Do you think Kyle Rittenhouse's defense ...

Do you think Kyle Rittenhouse's defense shooting was justified?

posted 4 years ago by Rorikon (18391)
17 replies | jump to latest

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eLlUVxVLiLU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=diT5i_84kKg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hO5gAhzFjJc

https://youtu.be/rdMTghlrFiw (someone pieced together the events)
https://heavy.com/news/2020/08/kyle-rittenhouse/

http://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=581113739251513&extid=f3m2Dawx3O2ZIpD4 (3:40:39 after few shots rang out from a unknown location)

Backstory:
-He's from Antioch, Illinois and went to Kenosha, Wisconsin (about an hour drive) to protect life and property
-He's pro-police as well as being a Trump supporter and was seen cleaning up graffiti off some walls before the shooting later on in the day.
-1st guy that jumped and attacked him with a skateboard over the head/shoulder after he tripped and fell (correction: was kicked to the ground) was shot in the chest (most likely the heart) and died shortly after.
-2nd guy was paused a bit when the gun was aimed at him before taking out a pistol then being disarmed by him via a shot in the arm.
-3rd (actual 1st) guy with a red shirt wrapped around his neck that was prior to this incident is dead. Apparently ran at him and got shot in the head. Was looting a car shop.
-Original shooter supposedly was someone in a helmet and bulletproof vest.
-He ran/drove back home later on and was later on arrested and being charged with multiple murders pending investigation.
-Longer video shows a amateur press guy stating that he wasn't the shooter (few others said it as well before filmer repeated it) but the angry mob chased him anyway before shots rang out. Later on they say he is the shooter. [Facebook link above]
-Near expert marksman from the looks of it with precise shots.

I guess one could take a look at it at a different perspective in the sense that the ones going after him thought he was the crazed shooter and tried to take him out or incapacitate him. One can then understand they were trying to be heroes trying to nullify a terrorist of sort. Given the situation though it doesn't seem to be the case else the shooter would just continue firing indescriminately at everyone in general.

[–] elcamino (15540) 4 years ago

https://www.the-sun.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/6/2020/08/NINTCHDBPICT000604203977-1.jpg?w=620
A pistol in his hand.

[–] Rorikon (18391) 4 years ago

First video link already points that out.

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

I don’t have enough info to say. I do think he was an idiot for crossing state lines with guns to look for trouble. Whether justified or not, he’s got himself in a boatload of trouble. If the government has shut down the police, it’s not the job of a 17 y.o. kid to police.

[–] ItsGood2BeRight (3879) 4 years ago

Correct me if I'm wrong but, isn't that what Democrats are asking for, self-policing and defunding of police? The actions of Kyle Rittenhouse and the other concerned citizen were exactly that. The official police and other authoritative figures could not protect the livelihoods of the small businesses so they took it upon themselves to police the area.

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

That is an interesting point. However, they are dishonest. What they really want is rioting in the street and anarchy. I do not buy the nonsense they are peddling. For an under age person to go out with a gun to patrol the streets is just looking for trouble.

[–] Rorikon (18391) 4 years ago

The cops didn't think so. It's getting to the point where people are getting on the other spectrum are getting tired of their shit getting torched when they weren't the ones that shot Jake or any of the other stuff the police were accountable for.

Now it's forming groups of protecting what little they have for small businesses. There is a debate on if property is more valuable than life, I say it is if the person is poor because that's all they have. You cherish your things like it's a part of you, a part of your life than if you were a rich person who can easily replace lost property. It's literally their whole livelihood. There are also remarks about these places being insured. With the COVID stuff going on, I don't really think that's the case to get the funds to rebuild when everything is more or less shuttered and people are still filing for unemployment. Heck, many of these small businesses I hear are going to be shut forever because of this pandemic.

[–] joej2923 (3147) 4 years ago

It looks to me like justified self-defense. I wasn't sure if Rittenhouse killed the first rioter or not but the first rioter was chasing Rittenhouse and throwing stuff at him as he ran to the gas station. The mob started chasing Rittenhouse after the first guy was shot at the gas station and that's when Rittenhouse started running. He shot the two rioters who attacked him and I'm confident most would consider that self-defense.

He probably should have turned himself in right away but he was probably stressed out after his harrowing ordeal. He seems like a good kid in the Daily Mail videos BUT do his parents know he is walking around with an AR-15 during a RIOT?

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8668207/Kyle-Rittenhouse-bragged-vigilante-inteview-shooting-Kenosha.html

[–] dteam6 (5073) 4 years ago

Thing is, I don't feel sorry for anyone in this situation. If the guy shot peaceful protesters, that's one thing--but rioters? That's another story.

On that same token, I hope they nail this shooter to the fucking wall. He came there on his volition, armed and armored to the teeth. He knew what he was going there for. I'm sure he was just itching to use that gun.

We'll see more of this in the coming months.

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

It is hard to know what is true from all the conflicting news reports early on. My understanding is that a looter was shot in the head. Someone accused this guy of being the shooter, and he was chased by a mob. He then shot those guys who were after him.
The big question is whether he was the original shooter or not. If he shot a looter who was not threatening him, then he is in trouble. If he did not fire that shot, then he was justified in defending himself from a mob. If the bullet is in the wound, ballistics should be able to establish whether he fired that first shot.

[–] Rorikon (18391) 4 years ago

The link I gave for the one where the guy pieced together the timeline of events shows him being shot in the head and later dying. Reports were he was looting a car shop then came at Kyle before being shot as shown in the recording. He started to run when people were yelling "GET HIM" but was seen moments before on his smartphone calling someone, possibly an ambulance after shooting the guy in the head. As Kyle ran, someone was chasing him and throw stuff at him.

He tried to turn himself in from the later vids I linked where bearcats had their lights trained on him as he put his hands up. Cops just drove past him where he later sauntered off and I guess drove back home with his mom where he was eventually arrested. There is debate about should he have been there? I would argue the same for everyone there as well. I am not aware if there was a curfew in place during or after the events that took place. If there was, none of them should've been there. Curfews are there for a reason to stem violent unrest during the night where everything is harder to see and control. Actual peaceful protestors would've gone home then came back out the following morning where they can protest for 12-14 hours a day if they wanted.

[–] dteam6 (5073) 4 years ago

I don't feel sorry for EITHER side getting knowingly involved in this riot. Protests are one thing--rioting is another.

If you go to a large riot that has constant news coverage while armed to the teeth expect to either wind up in a body back or in a jail cell.

No one told this guy to go to a well-documented ongoing chaotic situation armed like some thug ready for a war. That was his choice--just like it was the choice of the rioters to, well, riot. Rioters give the peaceful protesters a bad name and this is the sort of stuff that winds up as a result. On that same token, some people are deliberately instigating some of the riot activity to bolster their own political gains such as some of the far right knuckle draggers who were pretending to be part of the protest.

There's guilt on both sides here.

And, you know what? If everyone wants to start killing each other over there then let them. I feel sorry only for the innocents who were caught in the crossfire and weren't engaging in the riot.

[–] HarlemEagle42 (18433) 4 years ago

Fry him.

[–] User548 (2068) 4 years ago

But not the pillagers, right? They were innocent and "peaceful" in kicking him in the head and trying bash him with a skateboard, right pal? Hell, they were "peaceful" in the prior days burning racist furniture and racist cars, right? Tell me. How does assaulting a person equate to "peacefully" protesting? How does committing arson equate to "peacefully" protesting?

[–] joej2923 (3147) 4 years ago

This new video shows that the first rioter threw a molotov cocktail at Rittenhouse so I would argue that self-defense would be justified. I believe a person could catch fire if they are hit by a molotov cocktail so I would consider a molotov cocktail a deadly attack.

*** EDIT: THE THROWN OBJECT WAS PROBABLY NOT A MOLOTOV COCKTAIL ***

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8670717/Disturbing-new-footage-shows-gunman-17-shooting-dead-victim-Kenosha.html

[–] Rorikon (18391) 4 years ago

Interesting. Thanks for the info. SO THEY ALL WERE BREAKING CURFEW. That means people looking for trouble, more so on those protesting since if they stayed, those guys with guns would as well.

Two men that were once fathers... Way to set an example for the kids. 2 of the 3 were out of towners as well. In the end they played stupid games by engaging with a person holding a long arm thinking the person wouldn't dare use it.

I don't get people calling him a white supremacist when he literally shot only white people during this encounter.

I was checking what you said, I don't see no mention of a molotov being thrown. It also doesn't look to be a molotov as it appears more like a white plastic bag. After the guy threw it, it flew backwards a bit (like an arch) before hitting the ground if you re-watch it numerous times. Clearly some resistance against being thrown forward was going on.

[–] joej2923 (3147) 4 years ago

You have a good eye. It probably wasn't a molotov cocktail. This makes me wonder why Rosenbaum was chasing an armed man with a plastic bag. It could have been a plastic bag of feces but one shouldn't chase a guy with an AR-15 unless they have a weapon or a numbers advantage. I still think it would be self-defense since he did run away from Rosenbaum for a while.

I see no evidence that he was a white supremacist. I see him as a good kid who is a bit overzealous about law enforcement. Alternatively, he could be one of those guys who ends up impersonating a cop or doctor.

[–] whynotwriteme (7817) 4 years ago

Kyle did not fire first. He is a community-minded young man who participated in many positive youth organizations. The men he shot were a child molester, a woman abuser and another felon carrying a firearm who had come to the area in order to commit acts of terror and arson. The deceased and wounded all assaulted Kyle first. If he had not used his rifle to defend himself he likely would have been killed. This kid was fighting to defend civilized American society from barbarians while the elected leadership stood idle. He is like a modern-day version of one of those boy-heroes of the American Revolution or Civil War era.