Kyle Rittenhouse: Vigilante White Men

[Anonymous]

[Anonymous]

Thug vilante fighting in the street.

https://nypost.com/2020/09/01/video-shows-kenosha-shooter-kyle-rittenhouse-punching-a-girl-report/amp/

Kyle is prone to violent behavior.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For those who are saying “but Rosenbaum was convicted of a sex crime when he was 18 so it doesn’t matter.” This is sick.

Absolutely. The victim was a sick and twisted individual. But Rittenhouse didn't know that at the time he assaulted him. This man could have been Mahatma Ghandi and Rittenhouse would have treated him the same.

The point is that Rittenhouse didn't look into the background of his victims, but he indiscriminately shot his rifle at a random person he saw. He inserted himself into a violent situation, hunted down an individual who he assumed was a looter, and shot the person. Then instead of leaving, he continued to proceed further into the crime area and when people who saw him shoot the first person tried to take his gun away from him, he shot at them. In armed shooter situations, the people who try to disarm the shooters are called heroes.

The lower age limit to carry deadly weapons is 18 in both IL and WI. He was illegally carrying and using a gun. He should not have been in that situation and had he not, 2 people would not be dead and a third injured.

Wow. This couldn’t be even more wrong. Please stop posting because you’re not educated on the matter. You watch too much CNN.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For those who are saying “but Rosenbaum was convicted of a sex crime when he was 18 so it doesn’t matter.” This is sick.

Absolutely. The victim was a sick and twisted individual. But Rittenhouse didn't know that at the time he assaulted him. This man could have been Mahatma Ghandi and Rittenhouse would have treated him the same.

The point is that Rittenhouse didn't look into the background of his victims, but he indiscriminately shot his rifle at a random person he saw. He inserted himself into a violent situation, hunted down an individual who he assumed was a looter, and shot the person. Then instead of leaving, he continued to proceed further into the crime area and when people who saw him shoot the first person tried to take his gun away from him, he shot at them. In armed shooter situations, the people who try to disarm the shooters are called heroes.

The lower age limit to carry deadly weapons is 18 in both IL and WI. He was illegally carrying and using a gun. He should not have been in that situation and had he not, 2 people would not be dead and a third injured.

Rittenhouse shot his rifle at a random person?

Yes, Rittenhouse claims that he was there to protect and defend his friend's business. And yet, instead, he went wandering around the neighborhood and ended up in the parking lot of a different business which was not near "his friend's" business. Rittenhouse encountered Rosenbaum in a parking lot and shot him in the back, groin and hand. There has been no contention yet that Rittenhouse had any particular reason for singling Rosenbaum out or leaving his post defending his friend's business. So, if he was protecting the business, why did he abandon his post and end up in the parking lot of another business that he had no affiliation with or cause to protect?

Wrong. Stop with the fake news. Facts don’t care about your liberal feelings.

Kyle was not in illegal possession of a gun because it was a state registered WI gun and it’s legal to open carry a long gun in WI. He went to another state that was literally 30 minutes away. Many of the rioters traveled much farther than that.

Kyle and his friends were confronted by the guy and other rioters. A little later rioters were setting a garbage can on fire to push into a police car. Kyle our the fire out. The guy who died started chasing Kyle, then threw something at him, and then continued to chase him until he was cornered. He tried to grab his gun and then shot him 4 times.

That’s self-defense. The guy who got shot was the aggressor. No matter Kyle’s intent or if he was the initial aggressor, does that mean Kyle does not have the right to defend himself if he fears he is in danger or great bodily harm or death.

Kyle started running when they started yelling at him. He was running towards police. The other people started to hit him and he shot them. He did not fire on anyone and everyone. He even hesitated to shoot the third guy, and only did when the guy lunged at him again. There was another guy close to him that had his hands up and Kyle did not shoot.

Self-defense.

I don’t get what you people can’t understand. You have the right to protect yourself. Even if Kyle was the initial aggressor, he was no longer the aggressor when he was running away both times.

All 3 victims had criminal records. One had a guy. Can’t you ask the same question what a felon was doing with a guy at a protest? Was he there to incite violence and hurt somebody?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For those who are saying “but Rosenbaum was convicted of a sex crime when he was 18 so it doesn’t matter.” This is sick.

Absolutely. The victim was a sick and twisted individual. But Rittenhouse didn't know that at the time he assaulted him. This man could have been Mahatma Ghandi and Rittenhouse would have treated him the same.

The point is that Rittenhouse didn't look into the background of his victims, but he indiscriminately shot his rifle at a random person he saw. He inserted himself into a violent situation, hunted down an individual who he assumed was a looter, and shot the person. Then instead of leaving, he continued to proceed further into the crime area and when people who saw him shoot the first person tried to take his gun away from him, he shot at them. In armed shooter situations, the people who try to disarm the shooters are called heroes.

The lower age limit to carry deadly weapons is 18 in both IL and WI. He was illegally carrying and using a gun. He should not have been in that situation and had he not, 2 people would not be dead and a third injured.

Rittenhouse shot his rifle at a random person?

Yes, Rittenhouse claims that he was there to protect and defend his friend's business. And yet, instead, he went wandering around the neighborhood and ended up in the parking lot of a different business which was not near "his friend's" business. Rittenhouse encountered Rosenbaum in a parking lot and shot him in the back, groin and hand. There has been no contention yet that Rittenhouse had any particular reason for singling Rosenbaum out or leaving his post defending his friend's business. So, if he was protecting the business, why did he abandon his post and end up in the parking lot of another business that he had no affiliation with or cause to protect?

Wrong. Stop with the fake news. Facts don’t care about your liberal feelings.

Kyle was not in illegal possession of a gun because it was a state registered WI gun and it’s legal to open carry a long gun in WI. He went to another state that was literally 30 minutes away. Many of the rioters traveled much farther than that.

Kyle and his friends were confronted by the guy and other rioters. A little later rioters were setting a garbage can on fire to push into a police car. Kyle our the fire out. The guy who died started chasing Kyle, then threw something at him, and then continued to chase him until he was cornered. He tried to grab his gun and then shot him 4 times.

That’s self-defense. The guy who got shot was the aggressor. No matter Kyle’s intent or if he was the initial aggressor, does that mean Kyle does not have the right to defend himself if he fears he is in danger or great bodily harm or death.

Kyle started running when they started yelling at him. He was running towards police. The other people started to hit him and he shot them. He did not fire on anyone and everyone. He even hesitated to shoot the third guy, and only did when the guy lunged at him again. There was another guy close to him that had his hands up and Kyle did not shoot.

Self-defense.

I don’t get what you people can’t understand. You have the right to protect yourself. Even if Kyle was the initial aggressor, he was no longer the aggressor when he was running away both times.

All 3 victims had criminal records. One had a guy. Can’t you ask the same question what a felon was doing with a guy at a protest? Was he there to incite violence and hurt somebody?

The cameraman gave this statement to the cops. He said Kyle tried to run way both times and he was followed and attacked. It was self-defense.

[Anonymous]

People lie to cops sometimes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:People lie to cops sometimes.

Have you seen the videos? He literally was on the ground being hit over the head with a skateboard when he shot one of the guys. And the other guy lunged at him with a gun.
I don't think Kyle should have even been there, with a gun no less. But if you are just looking at the shootings themselves, I think he will get off on a self-defense argument.

[Anonymous]

Kyle was right to defend himself. God bless the USA, and the 2d Amendment.

I missed the end of the video—who won the fight, the skateboard or the rifle?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For those who are saying “but Rosenbaum was convicted of a sex crime when he was 18 so it doesn’t matter.” This is sick.

Absolutely. The victim was a sick and twisted individual. But Rittenhouse didn't know that at the time he assaulted him. This man could have been Mahatma Ghandi and Rittenhouse would have treated him the same.

The point is that Rittenhouse didn't look into the background of his victims, but he indiscriminately shot his rifle at a random person he saw. He inserted himself into a violent situation, hunted down an individual who he assumed was a looter, and shot the person. Then instead of leaving, he continued to proceed further into the crime area and when people who saw him shoot the first person tried to take his gun away from him, he shot at them. In armed shooter situations, the people who try to disarm the shooters are called heroes.

The lower age limit to carry deadly weapons is 18 in both IL and WI. He was illegally carrying and using a gun. He should not have been in that situation and had he not, 2 people would not be dead and a third injured.

Rittenhouse shot his rifle at a random person?

Yes, Rittenhouse claims that he was there to protect and defend his friend's business. And yet, instead, he went wandering around the neighborhood and ended up in the parking lot of a different business which was not near "his friend's" business. Rittenhouse encountered Rosenbaum in a parking lot and shot him in the back, groin and hand. There has been no contention yet that Rittenhouse had any particular reason for singling Rosenbaum out or leaving his post defending his friend's business. So, if he was protecting the business, why did he abandon his post and end up in the parking lot of another business that he had no affiliation with or cause to protect?

Wrong. Stop with the fake news. Facts don’t care about your liberal feelings.

Kyle was not in illegal possession of a gun because it was a state registered WI gun and it’s legal to open carry a long gun in WI. He went to another state that was literally 30 minutes away. Many of the rioters traveled much farther than that.

Kyle and his friends were confronted by the guy and other rioters. A little later rioters were setting a garbage can on fire to push into a police car. Kyle our the fire out. The guy who died started chasing Kyle, then threw something at him, and then continued to chase him until he was cornered. He tried to grab his gun and then shot him 4 times.

That’s self-defense. The guy who got shot was the aggressor. No matter Kyle’s intent or if he was the initial aggressor, does that mean Kyle does not have the right to defend himself if he fears he is in danger or great bodily harm or death.

Kyle started running when they started yelling at him. He was running towards police. The other people started to hit him and he shot them. He did not fire on anyone and everyone. He even hesitated to shoot the third guy, and only did when the guy lunged at him again. There was another guy close to him that had his hands up and Kyle did not shoot.

Self-defense.

I don’t get what you people can’t understand. You have the right to protect yourself. Even if Kyle was the initial aggressor, he was no longer the aggressor when he was running away both times.

All 3 victims had criminal records. One had a guy. Can’t you ask the same question what a felon was doing with a guy at a protest? Was he there to incite violence and hurt somebody?

And you need to stop watching Sean Hannity and listening to Rush Limbaugh.

It doesn't matter that the gun was legally registered in WI and borrowed from a friend. Both Rittenhouse and that friend committed felonies. Rittenhouse was 17 years old and the legal age to carry a firearm in WI is 18 years old. So it was not legal for him to carry that gun. The person who gave him the gun committed a felony by giving him the gun to use.

When committing a felony, you cannot claim self defense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People lie to cops sometimes.

Have you seen the videos? He literally was on the ground being hit over the head with a skateboard when he shot one of the guys. And the other guy lunged at him with a gun.
I don't think Kyle should have even been there, with a gun no less. But if you are just looking at the shootings themselves, I think he will get off on a self-defense argument.

The reason he was tackled and being beaten with a skateboard is because the crowd knew him for a danger, knew he had already killed one person, and they were trying to disarm and incapacitate him. They failed and he killed one and injured another.

Jack Reacher is fictional. If he were a real person, he would be a bad guy. Why don't you know this?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People lie to cops sometimes.

Have you seen the videos? He literally was on the ground being hit over the head with a skateboard when he shot one of the guys. And the other guy lunged at him with a gun.
I don't think Kyle should have even been there, with a gun no less. But if you are just looking at the shootings themselves, I think he will get off on a self-defense argument.

You can not just go start shooting people and claim self defense. Terrorists like this guy and his supporters need to be brought to justice.

[Anonymous]

Kyle is a thug with a criminal history. He already had a rap sheet at 17. Why was he fighting girls on that video?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Kyle was right to defend himself. God bless the USA, and the 2d Amendment.

I missed the end of the video—who won the fight, the skateboard or the rifle?

Defend himself?

He crossed state borders with a gun illegally to partake in the activity. he provoked it and killed two people. he should have been at home gaming with friends or some other normal teen activity.

[Anonymous]

Here are some more "Kyle's" who got busted before they too killed people or provoked looting

https://www.wisn.com/article/men-arrested-after-tip-they-were-going-to-kenosha-to-possibly-loot-pick-people-off/33919195#

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For those who are saying “but Rosenbaum was convicted of a sex crime when he was 18 so it doesn’t matter.” This is sick.

Absolutely. The victim was a sick and twisted individual. But Rittenhouse didn't know that at the time he assaulted him. This man could have been Mahatma Ghandi and Rittenhouse would have treated him the same.

The point is that Rittenhouse didn't look into the background of his victims, but he indiscriminately shot his rifle at a random person he saw. He inserted himself into a violent situation, hunted down an individual who he assumed was a looter, and shot the person. Then instead of leaving, he continued to proceed further into the crime area and when people who saw him shoot the first person tried to take his gun away from him, he shot at them. In armed shooter situations, the people who try to disarm the shooters are called heroes.

The lower age limit to carry deadly weapons is 18 in both IL and WI. He was illegally carrying and using a gun. He should not have been in that situation and had he not, 2 people would not be dead and a third injured.

Rittenhouse shot his rifle at a random person?

Yes, Rittenhouse claims that he was there to protect and defend his friend's business. And yet, instead, he went wandering around the neighborhood and ended up in the parking lot of a different business which was not near "his friend's" business. Rittenhouse encountered Rosenbaum in a parking lot and shot him in the back, groin and hand. There has been no contention yet that Rittenhouse had any particular reason for singling Rosenbaum out or leaving his post defending his friend's business. So, if he was protecting the business, why did he abandon his post and end up in the parking lot of another business that he had no affiliation with or cause to protect?

Wrong. Stop with the fake news. Facts don’t care about your liberal feelings.

Kyle was not in illegal possession of a gun because it was a state registered WI gun and it’s legal to open carry a long gun in WI. He went to another state that was literally 30 minutes away. Many of the rioters traveled much farther than that.

Kyle and his friends were confronted by the guy and other rioters. A little later rioters were setting a garbage can on fire to push into a police car. Kyle our the fire out. The guy who died started chasing Kyle, then threw something at him, and then continued to chase him until he was cornered. He tried to grab his gun and then shot him 4 times.

That’s self-defense. The guy who got shot was the aggressor. No matter Kyle’s intent or if he was the initial aggressor, does that mean Kyle does not have the right to defend himself if he fears he is in danger or great bodily harm or death.

Kyle started running when they started yelling at him. He was running towards police. The other people started to hit him and he shot them. He did not fire on anyone and everyone. He even hesitated to shoot the third guy, and only did when the guy lunged at him again. There was another guy close to him that had his hands up and Kyle did not shoot.




Self-defense.

I don’t get what you people can’t understand. You have the right to protect yourself. Even if Kyle was the initial aggressor, he was no longer the aggressor when he was running away both times.

All 3 victims had criminal records. One had a guy. Can’t you ask the same question what a felon was doing with a guy at a protest? Was he there to incite violence and hurt somebody?

Not self defense when you go somewhere looking for a fight with a gun.

This is on him and his horrible parents. That's right this 17 year old man boy had parents who let him take a gun to a highly charged event. This is not "self defense" This is idiots who clearly should not own guns. Gun owner and ex Republican, NO NOT SELF DEFENSE