Kyle Rittenhouse: Vigilante White Men

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And especially his white trash mother, who drives a 17 year old with an AK-47 across state lines.

This is false. Many in the media made the same mistake, though I think in their case it was deliberate.

Repeatedly deliberate, just like the other 9 lies they kept repeating, over and over:

https://nypost.com/2021/11/17/10-debunked-heinous-lies-about-kyle-rittenhouse-devine/

Anybody that trusts what they read in the media is a fool. Despicable.

[Anonymous]

There were police around, militia were unnecessary.

I wish this statement was true. The police should have prevented the property damage. That’s their job. Yet, due to all kind of reasons, that job didn’t happen. Check out the videos from that night. Damage galore. When the police don’t do their job, their is a power vacuum that needs to be filled. If medical staff stop working, other people would have to do their jobs. Same thing. You can’t just let a city burn.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
One should not be allowed "self defense" claims when one is the person who provoked the fight in the first place. That is then just an excuse to murder.

He provoked the fight by not allowing them to destroy property, smashing cars and setting them on fire.
This would have been prevented if the mayor and governor had allowed the police to do their job and stop the rioting.

[Anonymous]

Was Kyle in his home at the time? Private Property? Did the "mob" kill anyone?

Where do you draw the line? It’s called a slippery slope. Ideally, the situation gets under control before businesses are burned. If you can burn down a business without consequence, you can burn down a house. Wake up or admit you don’t care about private property/life.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's a good day for Justice. We don't have many of those, I'll take it! So happy those judges were not pressured by mob left loon politics.

The entire situation is a tragic commentary on the state of our country. There is no outcome I would consider a "victory for justice" absent the entire situation not occurring in the first place.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

There were police around, militia were unnecessary.

I wish this statement was true. The police should have prevented the property damage. That’s their job. Yet, due to all kind of reasons, that job didn’t happen. Check out the videos from that night. Damage galore. When the police don’t do their job, their is a power vacuum that needs to be filled. If medical staff stop working, other people would have to do their jobs. Same thing. You can’t just let a city burn.

Kyle Rittenhouse certainly didn't stop any looting or burning or violence. He precipitated violence.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The moral of this story is to shoot first. If, as the jury determined, Rittenhouse had a right to shoot Huber and Grosskreutz, those two similarly had the right to shoot Rittenhouse dead. Once Rittenhouse fired those first shots, both sides had the right to shoot the other.

Rittenhouse had a better weapon and a quicker trigger finger. So, he wins.

+1 If Grosskreutz had shot him he would have got off similarly. Right?

[Anonymous]

Between the insurrection, Rittenhouse, and Gosar’s tweet, the right has become extremely threatening to the Left.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Was Kyle in his home at the time? Private Property? Did the "mob" kill anyone?

Where do you draw the line? It’s called a slippery slope. Ideally, the situation gets under control before businesses are burned. If you can burn down a business without consequence, you can burn down a house. Wake up or admit you don’t care about private property/life.

DP
You are wrong. Burning down a building is not shooting or killing anyone.

Slippery slope? Really? You're defending gun violence by saying that someone setting a dumpster on fire might set a person on fire next?

[Anonymous]

Kyle Rittenhouse certainly didn't stop any looting or burning or violence. He precipitated violence.

Okay wise guy, so incentives don’t work. I’ll take the bait.

What would you suggest? The police aren’t doing their jobs and the city is burning? Sit back and enjoy the view? Move to a red city? Tell your grandfather his business you inherited needs to be rebuilt anyways?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Was Kyle in his home at the time? Private Property? Did the "mob" kill anyone?

Where do you draw the line? It’s called a slippery slope. Ideally, the situation gets under control before businesses are burned. If you can burn down a business without consequence, you can burn down a house. Wake up or admit you don’t care about private property/life.

DP
You are wrong. Burning down a building is not shooting or killing anyone.

Slippery slope? Really? You're defending gun violence by saying that someone setting a dumpster on fire might set a person on fire next?

PP is dumb and doesn’t understand logic. You can’t argue with a crazy person.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Kyle Rittenhouse certainly didn't stop any looting or burning or violence. He precipitated violence.

Okay wise guy, so incentives don’t work. I’ll take the bait.

What would you suggest? The police aren’t doing their jobs and the city is burning? Sit back and enjoy the view? Move to a red city? Tell your grandfather his business you inherited needs to be rebuilt anyways?

Let it burn and go home. That’s why we have insurance. Police had to deal with Rittenhouse instead of stop other violence. You see, Rittenhouse became a problem.

[Anonymous]

Burning down a building is not shooting or killing anyone.

Slippery slope? Really? You're defending gun violence by saying that someone setting a dumpster on fire might set a person on fire next?

What if someone happens to be residing in that burning building or get too much smoke inhalation?

Yet, we’re making progress. You don’t believe in private property. That’s the real argument. Property doesn’t matter to you. Some anyone’s investment in their property is trivial. It doesn’t matter if someone burns it down. Thank you for your honesty. Please move elsewhere. Don’t make all of us suffer because you don’t want to invest in anything.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Kyle was in the wrong. He had no business being in the middle of that riot. He provoked people, waved his gun at them, escalated and it resulted in him shooting two people and injuring another.

One should not be allowed "self defense" claims when one is the person who provoked the fight in the first place. That is then just an excuse to murder.

I literally don’t understand people like you. I hope you don’t own private property. I hope that if a armed person comes to your house you have no problem being killed. Your like a Quaker. You think other people should do your dirty work while getting to virtue signal.

Sure, if it was my son, I wouldn’t want him there for HIS SAFETY. Yet, I also understand that someone needed to stand up to the mob and the mob attacked him.

Why are women so against Kyle? We are more vulnerable then men. Why does my sex seem to think it’s okay to let a mob burn down a town and potentially hurt innocent bystanders. Do you think America in 2021 is so awful that everything needs to be burned down to the ground.

I don’t get the reasoning. It strikes me as naive.

Was Kyle in his home at the time? Private Property? Did the "mob" kill anyone?

The mob killed at least 19 people we know of, and did more than 1 billion dollars in damage during BLM protests over a single summer, but it took them more than one night.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Kyle Rittenhouse certainly didn't stop any looting or burning or violence. He precipitated violence.

Okay wise guy, so incentives don’t work. I’ll take the bait.

What would you suggest? The police aren’t doing their jobs and the city is burning? Sit back and enjoy the view? Move to a red city? Tell your grandfather his business you inherited needs to be rebuilt anyways?

Let it burn and go home. That’s why we have insurance. Police had to deal with Rittenhouse instead of stop other violence. You see, Rittenhouse became a problem.

OMG. Seriously? Let it burn and go home?

Have read what some of the Kenosha business owners had to do in the aftermath? How much they owed, even after insurance?

From the WaPo

“the only visible law enforcement presence was around the Kenosha County Courthouse, where an 8-foot-high fence was erected around the building, with about 1,000 protesters gathered outside the barrier.”