Kyle Rittenhouse goes to trial

[Kubra]

Guns should be more of a home defense thing and maybe carrying a handgun for protection in public. I don't blame the kid for bringing the AR, still shouldn't be a norm for protesters or just civilians to be walkin around with AR's. Guns are important and needed, just with some discipline.

Yeah, they discussed this during the trial. The reason for having a rifle is that he wasn't legally allowed to have a handgun.

Handguns are regulated a lot more tightly than rifles, for good reason (almost nobody gets killed by people with rifles, it's even rarer being killed unlawfully by the user of a rifle, and almost fucking unheard of being killed unlawfully by a minor using a rifle). There's no particular reason to be afraid of people having rifles, given rifles are used so rarely in such things.


Also, no one else is covering it, but with the sudden widespread understanding regarding the gun laws, a father and daughter are now protecting anti-rittenhouse protestors while armed with AR-15s. A family that patrols together stays together.

And, it's important to note, multiple handguns got pulled during the event and they helped the situation exactly none. Rittenhouses rifle was ironically the least problematic of firearms present.

[Dreria]

Guns should be more of a home defense thing and maybe carrying a handgun for protection in public. I don't blame the kid for bringing the AR, still shouldn't be a norm for protesters or just civilians to be walkin around with AR's. Guns are important and needed, just with some discipline.

Yeah, they discussed this during the trial. The reason for having a rifle is that he wasn't legally allowed to have a handgun.

Handguns are regulated a lot more tightly than rifles, for good reason (almost nobody gets killed by people with rifles, it's even rarer being killed unlawfully by the user of a rifle, and almost fucking unheard of being killed unlawfully by a minor using a rifle). There's no particular reason to be afraid of people having rifles, given rifles are used so rarely in such things.


Also, no one else is covering it, but with the sudden widespread understanding regarding the gun laws, a father and daughter are now protecting anti-rittenhouse protestors while armed with AR-15s. A family that patrols together stays together.

they do not appear to have learned very much from this whole incident then

[Galloism]

Yeah, they discussed this during the trial. The reason for having a rifle is that he wasn't legally allowed to have a handgun.

Handguns are regulated a lot more tightly than rifles, for good reason (almost nobody gets killed by people with rifles, it's even rarer being killed unlawfully by the user of a rifle, and almost fucking unheard of being killed unlawfully by a minor using a rifle). There's no particular reason to be afraid of people having rifles, given rifles are used so rarely in such things.


Also, no one else is covering it, but with the sudden widespread understanding regarding the gun laws, a father and daughter are now protecting anti-rittenhouse protestors while armed with AR-15s. A family that patrols together stays together.

they do not appear to have learned very much from this whole incident then

Hopefully he won't let her get separated like Rittenhouse got separated.

[Polomon Islands]

Collapsing in court... weird.

[Galloism]

Collapsing in court... weird.

Well, it was revealed during one of the days that he is suffering from PTSD. It came up because the judge questioned him if he was making this risky decision in full faculties.

Collapsing after you get the rest of your life back - when that was in doubt - isn't that weird really.

[Big Jim P]

I think the main takeaway from the case was that at no point did having a gun make anything better for anyone, they're probably going to be brought in even greater numbers to ritual protest.
That is of course everyone's fault, not just Rittenhouse.

Made it better for Rittenhouse.

[Ifreann]

I think the main takeaway from the case was that at no point did having a gun make anything better for anyone, they're probably going to be brought in even greater numbers to ritual protest.
That is of course everyone's fault, not just Rittenhouse.

Made it better for Rittenhouse.

Not really.

[Salus Maior]

Made it better for Rittenhouse.

Not really.

He wasn’t attacked because he had a gun. He was attacked because Rosembaum was a violent pos who wanted to murder him.

[Big Jim P]

Made it better for Rittenhouse.

Not really.

He defended himself from attack. Better than letting the scumbags beat or kill him.

[Ifreann]

Not really.

He wasn’t attacked because he had a gun. He was attacked because Rosembaum was a violent pos who wanted to murder him.

Uh-huh, and but for the gun Rittenhouse would have been beaten to death in the street. Sounds plausible.

[Thermodolia]

He wasn’t attacked because he had a gun. He was attacked because Rosembaum was a violent pos who wanted to murder him.

Uh-huh, and but for the gun Rittenhouse would have been beaten to death in the street. Sounds plausible.

Yes it’s highly likely that would have happened. Rosenbaum literally stated that he wanted to gut Rittenhouse like a fish

[Salus Maior]

He wasn’t attacked because he had a gun. He was attacked because Rosembaum was a violent pos who wanted to murder him.

Uh-huh, and but for the gun Rittenhouse would have been beaten to death in the street. Sounds plausible.

Still trying to victim blame Rittenhouse after all this, huh?

And yes that is completely plausible. People get killed/severely injured in beatings all the time, not to mention that Rosembaum was a rapist.

[Ifreann]

Not really.

He defended himself from attack. Better than letting the scumbags beat or kill him.

He'd probably have been fine.

[Washington Resistance Army]

He wasn’t attacked because he had a gun. He was attacked because Rosembaum was a violent pos who wanted to murder him.

Uh-huh, and but for the gun Rittenhouse would have been beaten to death in the street. Sounds plausible.

I mean, that is what Rosenbaum had been walking around threatening to do to people, yeah. The fact that he was willing to pursue and try to attack someone with a rifle once they were separated from a group seems to indicate he was willing to follow through with said threats.

[Just-An-Illusion]

He defended himself from attack. Better than letting the scumbags beat or kill him.

He'd probably have been fine.

Considering he was getting beaten up with a skateboard.... He probably wouldn't be fine at all.

[Ifreann]

Uh-huh, and but for the gun Rittenhouse would have been beaten to death in the street. Sounds plausible.

Still trying to victim blame Rittenhouse after all this, huh?

I'm not ascribing blame at all, just speculating that Rittenhouse probably would have been fine without a gun.

And yes that is completely plausible. People get killed/severely injured in beatings all the time, not to mention that Rosembaum was a rapist.

But Rosenbaum wasn't a cop, so it's not particularly likely that any of the other people present would have just stood by and let him beat some little dweeb kid to death. Or at all. If a violent confrontation had broken out then most likely a load of people would have intervened to protect Rittenhouse and subdue Rosenbaum. Probably no one gets shot, everyone goes home alive.

[Genivaria]

He defended himself from attack. Better than letting the scumbags beat or kill him.

He'd probably have been fine.

Jfc apparently when someone attacks you with a weapon we're supposed to just let it happen according to you.

[Salus Maior]

He defended himself from attack. Better than letting the scumbags beat or kill him.

He'd probably have been fine.

Yeah that’s not reassuring. Or a real analysis of his situation.

[Ifreann]

He'd probably have been fine.

Jfc apparently when someone attacks you with a weapon we're supposed to just let it happen according to you.

I didn't say that anyone is supposed to do anything.

[Salus Maior]

Still trying to victim blame Rittenhouse after all this, huh?

I'm not ascribing blame at all, just speculating that Rittenhouse probably would have been fine without a gun.

And yes that is completely plausible. People get killed/severely injured in beatings all the time, not to mention that Rosembaum was a rapist.

But Rosenbaum wasn't a cop, so it's not particularly likely that any of the other people present would have just stood by and let him beat some little dweeb kid to death. Or at all. If a violent confrontation had broken out then most likely a load of people would have intervened to protect Rittenhouse and subdue Rosenbaum. Probably no one gets shot, everyone goes home alive.

You are assigning responsibility for the attacks to Rittenhouse by saying him having a gun is what triggered it. Which isn’t evident and frankly is shitty victim blaming.

A bunch of meaningless assumptions. You don’t know what kind of damage could have suffered in any amount of time at being at Rosembaum’s mercy. I get that you’re salty that he was acquired and you’ve been on the wrong side of the issue the whole time, but it’s over. Rittenhouse isn’t at fault for being attacked, he had a right to defend himself, no one had a right to attack him. Case closed.

[American Legionaries]

He defended himself from attack. Better than letting the scumbags beat or kill him.

He'd probably have been fine.

It's probably reasonable to use lethal force to prevent becoming your definition of "fine".

[Ifreann]

I'm not ascribing blame at all, just speculating that Rittenhouse probably would have been fine without a gun.


But Rosenbaum wasn't a cop, so it's not particularly likely that any of the other people present would have just stood by and let him beat some little dweeb kid to death. Or at all. If a violent confrontation had broken out then most likely a load of people would have intervened to protect Rittenhouse and subdue Rosenbaum. Probably no one gets shot, everyone goes home alive.

You are assigning responsibility for the attacks to Rittenhouse by saying him having a gun is what triggered it. Which isn’t evident and frankly is shitty victim blaming.

I'm not saying that him having a gun is what triggered anything.

A bunch of meaningless assumptions. You don’t know what kind of damage could have suffered in any amount of time at being at Rosembaum’s mercy.

Of course I don't. Like I said, I'm speculating. None of us know what would have happened if the circumstances were different in some way.

I get that you’re salty that he was acquired and you’ve been on the wrong side of the issue the whole time, but it’s over.

I don't think I've ever said that he was likely to be convicted, nor do I think I've ever argued that he should be convicted. I don't see that the legality matters much.

Rittenhouse isn’t at fault for being attacked, he had a right to defend himself, no one had a right to attack him. Case closed.

Who said anything about fault? Not me.

[Kalaron]

Still trying to victim blame Rittenhouse after all this, huh?

I'm not ascribing blame at all, just speculating that Rittenhouse probably would have been fine without a gun.

And yes that is completely plausible. People get killed/severely injured in beatings all the time, not to mention that Rosembaum was a rapist.

But Rosenbaum wasn't a cop, so it's not particularly likely that any of the other people present would have just stood by and let him beat some little dweeb kid to death. Or at all. If a violent confrontation had broken out then most likely a load of people would have intervened to protect Rittenhouse and subdue Rosenbaum. Probably no one gets shot, everyone goes home alive.

Assuming, of course, that people intervene. Also assuming that the person intervening isn't armed with a weapon, or believes that Ritten's life is at risk. Also assuming that, if they tried to stop the mentally unwell man attempting to beat another man black and blue, he wouldn't have made a lunge for their gun if they withdrew it to make him back down.

Actually, hang on, am I misrembering or did you comment on those cops who pushed the old man to ground where his head started bleeding profusely? Because, uh, the streets aren't softer in Kenosha and getting pushed to the ground is pretty much expected if Kyle's getting beaten up.

[Salus Maior]

You are assigning responsibility for the attacks to Rittenhouse by saying him having a gun is what triggered it. Which isn’t evident and frankly is shitty victim blaming.

I'm not saying that him having a gun is what triggered anything.

A bunch of meaningless assumptions. You don’t know what kind of damage could have suffered in any amount of time at being at Rosembaum’s mercy.

Of course I don't. Like I said, I'm speculating. None of us know what would have happened if the circumstances were different in some way.

I get that you’re salty that he was acquired and you’ve been on the wrong side of the issue the whole time, but it’s over.

I don't think I've ever said that he was likely to be convicted, nor do I think I've ever argued that he should be convicted. I don't see that the legality matters much.

Rittenhouse isn’t at fault for being attacked, he had a right to defend himself, no one had a right to attack him. Case closed.

Who said anything about fault? Not me.

Then this is all just meaningless drivel coming from you at this point. You’re not saying anything, just whinging about guns being bad and that Rittenhouse being beaten to some degree by a grown, violent rapist is the good end of this. So, I suppose add toxic on top of meaningless I guess.

[Ifreann]

I'm not ascribing blame at all, just speculating that Rittenhouse probably would have been fine without a gun.


But Rosenbaum wasn't a cop, so it's not particularly likely that any of the other people present would have just stood by and let him beat some little dweeb kid to death. Or at all. If a violent confrontation had broken out then most likely a load of people would have intervened to protect Rittenhouse and subdue Rosenbaum. Probably no one gets shot, everyone goes home alive.

Assuming, of course, that people intervene. Also assuming that the person intervening isn't armed with a weapon, or believes that Ritten's life is at risk. Also assuming that, if they tried to stop the mentally unwell man attenpting to beat another man black and blue, he wouldn't have made a lunge for their gun if they withdrew it to make him back down.

Well I didn't pay as close attention to the details of the trial as some, so correct me if I'm incorrect, but after shooting Rosenbaum, was Rittenhouse not attacked by multiple other people? Seem pretty plausible to me that people who tried to intervene in a shooting would also try to intervene in an assault.

---

I'm not saying that him having a gun is what triggered anything.


Of course I don't. Like I said, I'm speculating. None of us know what would have happened if the circumstances were different in some way.

I don't think I've ever said that he was likely to be convicted, nor do I think I've ever argued that he should be convicted. I don't see that the legality matters much.

Who said anything about fault? Not me.

Then this is all just meaningless drivel coming from you at this point. You’re not saying anything, just whinging about guns being bad

I haven't suggested that guns are bad. You are inventing whole volumes of arguments that I am simply not making, with new invented arguments coming every time I point out that the previous argument bears no resemblance to the content of my posts.

and that Rittenhouse being beaten to some degree by a grown, violent rapist is the good end of this. So, I suppose add toxic on top of meaningless I guess.

Clearly you've decided to be outraged at me and will conjure new reasons to remain so no matter what I say, but even so I'll point out that once again none of this is anything that I have actually said.