Kyle Rittenhouse: Vigilante White Men

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can’t believe anyone wants to defend an underage, unemployed high school dropout who routinely drove without a license, broke a curfew to be present during a riot, illegally carried a firearm to the riot because he anticipated confrontations, told a reporter his “job” was to protect people, habitually stretches the truth, and killed two people. He had no training or experience in providing security. He was just a kid with a history of being bullied and belittled, who liked guns and cops, and fantasized about having authority and a being a hero. He shouldn’t have been in illegal possession of a gun. He shouldn’t have been on the streets with rioters. Had he obeyed the law, there wouldn’t have been any shootings.

It’s no surprise that the people he shot were not denizens of Kenosha; they were violating the curfew too by being out there on the streets during looting, destruction of property, and clashes between different groups. Law abiding citizens were off the streets at that point. People don’t have to mourn the passing of two predators, but their criminal histories were unknown by Rittenhouse and didn’t factor into his shooting them.

Years ago, a woman snuck into the zoo when it was closed and somehow got into the lion enclosure. She was killed by the animals. Had she brought an AR15 with her and gunned the lions down when they started to attack her, would you call that self defense and say she shouldn’t be convicted of any crimes? That’s essentially what Rittenhouse did. Being out on the streets past curfew was illegal. Skirmishes with other people who didn’t respect the law and were out rioting was obviously predictable, which is why Rittenhouse brought a firearm, even though it was illegal for him to do so. He got the confrontation he sought out, and killed people as a result.

Your analogy is terrible. You're comparing people to wild animals and a zoo enclosure which nobody should be in to a community in which people live in. There is certainly an expectation of safety in the streets unlike in a zoo enclosure. Do you consider the rioters to be equivalent to wild animals that can't control themselves?

No, but Rittenhouse did consider them wild animals who couldn't control themselves, and that is why he brought a big scary gun to the protests, and if he felt that way then he shouldn't have been there, because no sane person would willingly put themselves in that situation to protect someone else's property.

Property crimes are just that property crimes, you don't kill people because they might commit a property crime, most normal people know that insurance takes care of property crimes, and if not insurance then some government entity is bound to make a proprietor whole once the dust settles.

He was out trying to be a vigilante and roaming the streets with the other troglodytes, the difference is that he was carrying a lethal weapon along with a disregard for the rules and a very small brain.

The kid is an antisocial idiot, he deserves to spend a long time in prison, he will never be smart enough to control even the tiniest bit of testosterone coursing through his veins.

The prisons are full of meatheads just like him, nothing special to see here folks, I bet not a single one of you would let this asshat cross your thresholds, and since he's already killed two people and attempted to murder a 3rd and all before the age of 18, then I say good riddance, and lock him up, whatever just get him off the streets.

Sadly his genes have conferred upon him the inability to fit into and to find a useful role in this modern-day society in which we must all make a good showing of the ability to play nice, and to get along with each other, sending this neanderthal to a cage where he is free to mix with others just like him, he will find his place in the prison hierarchy and with time he may even rise to control the in prison white power party or whatever it's calling itself these days.

Yes, he might actually find prison life an upgrade. Yes, prison is the least punitive, and best option for this halfwit.

Society has no use for him at all, stop him now before he kills someone else, this guy is no different than a school shooter, he just found a more PC playground, do you really want this kind of behavior rewarded? Today he shot up some miscreants at a protest, but he's laid the blueprint, so tomorrow, he or someone just like him maybe the guy who takes a gun to your Trump rally and shoots a few Trumpy grandmas in the back in the name of self-defense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bottom line: some of you haven’t watched the trial or seen the video evidence. And it shows. Get educated or shut up.

The trial has been rigged for Rittenhouse.

The trial has been rigged for Rittenhouse.

The trial has been rigged for Rittenhouse.

The judge was appointed by a democrat and the prosecutor got reamed because he was an idiot.

The elected judge just wants to get elected again, so he's held his licked finger up to the wind to see which way it's blowing, he's taking his free publicity, and hoping it works out for him, it's the Republican playbook right now, go figure.

[Anonymous]

Because the truth matters: His old self wants to go out with a bit of fame under his belt.

"Schroeder knows how this looks. He was appointed to his seat in 1983, officially elected for the first time in 1984, and has won all of his elections in the intervening 37 years. At age 75, he’s been a judge in Kenosha County for most of his professional life, and understands that when the media spotlight is on during one of his trials, rulings like the one he made on Monday could be — for better or worse — the closest thing voters get to a campaign ad."

https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2021/10/the-kyle-rittenhouse-judge-gave-voters-a-gift.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can’t believe anyone wants to defend an underage, unemployed high school dropout who routinely drove without a license, broke a curfew to be present during a riot, illegally carried a firearm to the riot because he anticipated confrontations, told a reporter his “job” was to protect people, habitually stretches the truth, and killed two people. He had no training or experience in providing security. He was just a kid with a history of being bullied and belittled, who liked guns and cops, and fantasized about having authority and a being a hero. He shouldn’t have been in illegal possession of a gun. He shouldn’t have been on the streets with rioters. Had he obeyed the law, there wouldn’t have been any shootings.

It’s no surprise that the people he shot were not denizens of Kenosha; they were violating the curfew too by being out there on the streets during looting, destruction of property, and clashes between different groups. Law abiding citizens were off the streets at that point. People don’t have to mourn the passing of two predators, but their criminal histories were unknown by Rittenhouse and didn’t factor into his shooting them.

Years ago, a woman snuck into the zoo when it was closed and somehow got into the lion enclosure. She was killed by the animals. Had she brought an AR15 with her and gunned the lions down when they started to attack her, would you call that self defense and say she shouldn’t be convicted of any crimes? That’s essentially what Rittenhouse did. Being out on the streets past curfew was illegal. Skirmishes with other people who didn’t respect the law and were out rioting was obviously predictable, which is why Rittenhouse brought a firearm, even though it was illegal for him to do so. He got the confrontation he sought out, and killed people as a result.

The real problem is that you don’t want to defend him. The law is supposed to apply to everyone with equal force. Whether youre Mother Theresa herself or the worst dregs of our society. KR did a lot of things wrong that night, but they have little or no bearing on his self defense claim. Just like the police don’t get to choke you to death just because you allegedly passed out counterfeit money, other people don’t get to violate your personal safety just because you are somewhere you shouldn’t be doing something that you shouldn’t be doing. Whether you’re an underage kid drinking in a bar on a fake ID, or unreasonably speeding done the highway, or a 17 year old idiot who showed up armed to a riot after curfew, you still have rights.

This whole criminal case has been a travesty and embarrassment. And we haven’t even talked about the fact that websites like Facebook and gofundme prohibited him from fund raising for his defense.

Whether you do it formally or informally, reserving society’s sympathies and/or legal protections for politically favored individuals is a very dangerous precedent to set because some day others will be in power.

This thread is very illuminating to me and it makes me reconsider the sincerity of the criminal justice reform movement. The very same people who would tell us we live in a systematically oppressive carceral state under a militarized police force all of a sudden have no problem locking up and throwing away the key in this case. Hell, I haven’t even heard that favored talking point about how at 17 his brain wasn’t fully developed yet.

Bravo!!!

The last paragraph is so true. And, given the tweet yesterday by Hakeem Jeffries, it is absolutely spot on.

Both of you seem confused.

1. I am in very much in favor of police reform. I don't think it is reasonable for police to do things like violently throw non-violent offenders to the ground, suffocate them with a knee to the neck, dislocate shoulders and break arms like the granny with alzheimers who was picking flowers. Or any of the interactions with the mentally ill that police unnecessarily turned violent. Or to shoot and kill people like Philandro Castile, who was legally carrying a gun. There are a lot of things in policing that MUST CHANGE.

2. I ALSO believe that anyone who engages in murder, violent crime, gun crime, needs to be arrested, prosecuted, convicted with sentencing that removes them from society and put in prison.

There is absolutely no conflict there whatsoever.

Even when that person was acting in self defense?????

Being threatened with a shopping bag with socks and deodorant isn't credible as self defense, IMHO.

What about being verbally threatened (I’m going to kill you), and then being chased? Does that count as self defense?

If it were that easy, I wager we will see a big uptick in wife-on-husband-and-husband-on-wife homicides. Can you just imagine my wife really lost it this time, next thing I knew she was chasing me out of the house with a frying pan, bag of cookies, or packet of soap, all the while saying she was going to kill me, so I had to turn around and shoot her, I mean self-defense and all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bottom line: some of you haven’t watched the trial or seen the video evidence. And it shows. Get educated or shut up.

The trial has been rigged for Rittenhouse.

The trial has been rigged for Rittenhouse.

The trial has been rigged for Rittenhouse.

The judge was appointed by a democrat and the prosecutor got reamed because he was an idiot.

The elected judge just wants to get elected again, so he's held his licked finger up to the wind to see which way it's blowing, he's taking his free publicity, and hoping it works out for him, it's the Republican playbook right now, go figure.

He is not running again. He has said that. He will be 80 when the next election comes up. Please get your facts straight. I am a former prosecutor. This guy has crossed the line into possible mistrial; sanctions against him and he is one the way to ethics issues with the state bar. He is not good.

This was on the wall of my office:

The prosecutor is "the representative not of an ordinary party to a controversy, but of a sovereignty whose obligation to govern impartially is as compelling as its obligation to govern at all; and whose interest, therefore, in a criminal prosecution is not that it shall win a case, but that justice shall be done. As such, he is in a peculiar and very definite sense the servant of the law, the twofold aim of which is that guilt shall not escape or innocence suffer. He may prosecute with earnestness and vigor-- indeed, he should do so. But, while he may strike hard blows, he is not at liberty to strike foul ones. It is as much his duty to refrain from improper methods calculated to produce a wrongful conviction as it is to use every legitimate means to bring about a just one." [i]Berger v. US

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I can’t believe anyone wants to defend an underage, unemployed high school dropout who routinely drove without a license, broke a curfew to be present during a riot, illegally carried a firearm to the riot because he anticipated confrontations, told a reporter his “job” was to protect people, habitually stretches the truth, and killed two people. He had no training or experience in providing security. He was just a kid with a history of being bullied and belittled, who liked guns and cops, and fantasized about having authority and a being a hero. He shouldn’t have been in illegal possession of a gun. He shouldn’t have been on the streets with rioters. Had he obeyed the law, there wouldn’t have been any shootings.

It’s no surprise that the people he shot were not denizens of Kenosha; they were violating the curfew too by being out there on the streets during looting, destruction of property, and clashes between different groups. Law abiding citizens were off the streets at that point. People don’t have to mourn the passing of two predators, but their criminal histories were unknown by Rittenhouse and didn’t factor into his shooting them.

Years ago, a woman snuck into the zoo when it was closed and somehow got into the lion enclosure. She was killed by the animals. Had she brought an AR15 with her and gunned the lions down when they started to attack her, would you call that self defense and say she shouldn’t be convicted of any crimes? That’s essentially what Rittenhouse did. Being out on the streets past curfew was illegal. Skirmishes with other people who didn’t respect the law and were out rioting was obviously predictable, which is why Rittenhouse brought a firearm, even though it was illegal for him to do so. He got the confrontation he sought out, and killed people as a result.

Finally, in a rat’s nest of white supremacists comes the common sense! Jeff could just sticky your quote and close the thread because this is the entire crux of Kyle Rittenhouse having murdered those people. None of it had to happen.

[Anonymous]

I didn't see any ANTIFA wielding automatic weapons. Just the underage right wing supremicist.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bottom line: some of you haven’t watched the trial or seen the video evidence. And it shows. Get educated or shut up.

The trial has been rigged for Rittenhouse.

The trial has been rigged for Rittenhouse.

The trial has been rigged for Rittenhouse.

These twitter-idiots know that the prosecution is losing big time because they have no case. So, it's time to claim the trial is rigged.

If we want to talk rigged......

The Kenosha, Wisconsin mayor, the district attorney, and the lead detective in the Kyle Rittenhouse case are all members of the same family.

John Antaramian was elected in 2020 for his sixth term as mayor and was the city's leader amid the summer of 2020 riots during which Rittenhouse shot three rioters, two of them fatally.

The mayor's cousin, Ed Antaramian, is the Kenosha City Attorney. The mayor's nephew, Benjamin Antaramian, is the lead detective in the case.

[Anonymous]

Very fine people

[Anonymous]

So is it open season on hippies again?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:He’s only 17. What type of parent f#cked up this badly? Who lets their kid travel across state lines and have access to militia equipment?

This is so sick. I’m a white man, but white culture is responsible for this boy.

You are a stupid man to even comment like that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He’s only 17. What type of parent f#cked up this badly? Who lets their kid travel across state lines and have access to militia equipment?

This is so sick. I’m a white man, but white culture is responsible for this boy.

You are a stupid man to even comment like that.

No, they're exactly right. Not sure why you can't admit that and can only attack them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He’s only 17. What type of parent f#cked up this badly? Who lets their kid travel across state lines and have access to militia equipment?

This is so sick. I’m a white man, but white culture is responsible for this boy.

You are a stupid man to even comment like that.

No, they're exactly right. Not sure why you can't admit that and can only attack them.

DP WTF is white culture? So much stupid in this thread.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He’s only 17. What type of parent f#cked up this badly? Who lets their kid travel across state lines and have access to militia equipment?

This is so sick. I’m a white man, but white culture is responsible for this boy.

You are a stupid man to even comment like that.

No, they're exactly right. Not sure why you can't admit that and can only attack them.

DP WTF is white culture? So much stupid in this thread.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bottom line: some of you haven’t watched the trial or seen the video evidence. And it shows. Get educated or shut up.

The trial has been rigged for Rittenhouse.

The trial has been rigged for Rittenhouse.

The trial has been rigged for Rittenhouse.

The judge was appointed by a democrat and the prosecutor got reamed because he was an idiot.

The elected judge just wants to get elected again, so he's held his licked finger up to the wind to see which way it's blowing, he's taking his free publicity, and hoping it works out for him, it's the Republican playbook right now, go figure.

He is not running again. He has said that. He will be 80 when the next election comes up. Please get your facts straight. I am a former prosecutor. This guy has crossed the line into possible mistrial; sanctions against him and he is one the way to ethics issues with the state bar. He is not good.

This was on the wall of my office:

The prosecutor is "the representative not of an ordinary party to a controversy, but of a sovereignty whose obligation to govern impartially is as compelling as its obligation to govern at all; and whose interest, therefore, in a criminal prosecution is not that it shall win a case, but that justice shall be done. As such, he is in a peculiar and very definite sense the servant of the law, the twofold aim of which is that guilt shall not escape or innocence suffer. He may prosecute with earnestness and vigor-- indeed, he should do so. But, while he may strike hard blows, he is not at liberty to strike foul ones. It is as much his duty to refrain from improper methods calculated to produce a wrongful conviction as it is to use every legitimate means to bring about a just one." [i]Berger v. US

Please, it's all very political and if you are a former prosecutor you ought to know that. Crim law is rarely about the truth, right or wrong, or guilty or innocent, it is about getting the jury to buy into your version of the truth. And since the Gov't rarely loses, what is the stat, that the Gov't only loses 10% of the time, then if they do lose this time there is a reason for it that has nothing to do with the facts, or what normally happens.

Prosecutors aren't the most brilliant and they aren't magicians, they win because most people don't think the Gov't would bring charges against an innocent guy. Very few wins have anything to do with anything noble like the truth or the skill of the lawyer. If you are a former prosecutor then you would know that, oh wait...

Signed someone who doesn't feel the need to end an anonymous internet post with but wait "I'm a Lawyer!" Yeah, right Google keyboard warrior!