17 Year-old Blue Lives Matter Activist with AR 15 Charged With Murder After Two Killed at Protest

GermanSuplex said:
Just saw the story on Rittenhouse… what a tool. His parents and the GQP aren’t doing him any favors in life.

The ironic part? He’s proving Lebron James correct, and if he had a defamation case against him… well, he better hope he gets a judge like the one he had at trial.

That trial was such a joke, but it happens all the time. Judges across this country are sympathetic to young white men, even when the victims are young white girls who were sexually abused, or other young white men.

The verdict may have ended up the same regardless of the judge, but that goofy old sack certainly boosted Rittenhouse’s chances of acquittal.

Much like Zimmerman, this kid will probably dig himself into being a pariah.
Click to expand...

I’m of the opinion this is a very complex case. I believe on the one hand the evidence shows he was attacked, attempted to retreat, had nowhere to go, and legally defended himself- but that doesn’t mean he’s righteous. The fact he was where he was doing what he was doing that night is beyond ridiculous. He should have never been there. The fact his mother drove him there and endorsed this armed security guard LARPING is insane. In my mind the mother holds some liability for allowing her son into such a situation. I suppose the argument is then to what degree, if any KR is responsible based on his actions leading up.

Then there is this conundrum where Rittenhouse shoots the guy who chases and attacks him- I think we can all agree he was not a stable individual. But ostensibly the subsequent attackers attacked Rittenhouse because they believed their lives were in danger. And such attacks prompted Rittenhouse to defend himself. I suppose the argument is that these attackers were in a position to retreat whereas KR was on the ground. But I also understand situational awareness for the average person is going to be roughly 0 in such an environment of chaos (against the already chaotic backdrop of a night full of protests and riots and people stampeding around). And all of this is happening in a blink of the eye.

If I look at the big picture, there was no winner in this case. Everyone lost greatly- some more than others. Rittenhouse may have been acquitted but his life and how he relates to himself will never be the same. The cloud of that night and the trial will follow him forever.

Regardless of what I feel about the circumstances, the prosecution did a pretty dismal job. But I have no desire to re-litigate this case.

Regarding Rittenhouse’s Twitter posts… I suppose everyone handles trauma differently. I can only imagine the psychological torment of killing 3 people and going through a highly publicized murder trial, especially if you believe you did nothing wrong and nothing differently could have been done. I imagine you have to tell yourself that for your own mental preservation after killing 3 people due to a situation your willingly inserted yourself into dispute known dangers of what could happen.

But regardless of how one copes with such a conflict, in this case evidently poorly conceived humor, you have to have some awareness of your audience and how they might interpret it as joking about killing 3 people. Even if he believes his lethal actions were justified, you still have to demonstrate respect.

Working in the psych field, I’ve talked to a number of ex-military servicemen who have killed people. And in every single case they speak of the dead with a sense of respect and dignity because they understand the gravity of what it means to take a life, regardless of who they are and what they did. Even if they killed “the bad guy” they have enough insight to know most humans are not one-dimensional cartoon villains.

If I were in Rittenhouse’s shoes, thank god I am not, I would get as far away from the spotlight as possible and move on in solitude, grateful for a second chance to live a life. I cannot fathom why he keeps inserting himself into the public eye and drawing negative attention to himself.
 
AG_PhamD said:
I’m of the opinion this is a very complex case. I believe on the one hand the evidence shows he was attacked, attempted to retreat, had nowhere to go, and legally defended himself- but that doesn’t mean he’s righteous. The fact he was where he was doing what he was doing that night is beyond ridiculous. He should have never been there. The fact his mother drove him there and endorsed this armed security guard LARPING is insane. In my mind the mother holds some liability for allowing her son into such a situation. I suppose the argument is then to what degree, if any KR is responsible based on his actions leading up.

Then there is this conundrum where Rittenhouse shoots the guy who chases and attacks him- I think we can all agree he was not a stable individual. But ostensibly the subsequent attackers attacked Rittenhouse because they believed their lives were in danger. And such attacks prompted Rittenhouse to defend himself. I suppose the argument is that these attackers were in a position to retreat whereas KR was on the ground. But I also understand situational awareness for the average person is going to be roughly 0 in such an environment of chaos (against the already chaotic backdrop of a night full of protests and riots and people stampeding around). And all of this is happening in a blink of the eye.

If I look at the big picture, there was no winner in this case. Everyone lost greatly- some more than others. Rittenhouse may have been acquitted but his life and how he relates to himself will never be the same. The cloud of that night and the trial will follow him forever.

Regardless of what I feel about the circumstances, the prosecution did a pretty dismal job. But I have no desire to re-litigate this case.

Regarding Rittenhouse’s Twitter posts… I suppose everyone handles trauma differently. I can only imagine the psychological torment of killing 3 people and going through a highly publicized murder trial, especially if you believe you did nothing wrong and nothing differently could have been done. I imagine you have to tell yourself that for your own mental preservation after killing 3 people due to a situation your willingly inserted yourself into dispute known dangers of what could happen.

But regardless of how one copes with such a conflict, in this case evidently poorly conceived humor, you have to have some awareness of your audience and how they might interpret it as joking about killing 3 people. Even if he believes his lethal actions were justified, you still have to demonstrate respect.

Working in the psych field, I’ve talked to a number of ex-military servicemen who have killed people. And in every single case they speak of the dead with a sense of respect and dignity because they understand the gravity of what it means to take a life, regardless of who they are and what they did. Even if they killed “the bad guy” they have enough insight to know most humans are not one-dimensional cartoon villains.

If I were in Rittenhouse’s shoes, thank god I am not, I would get as far away from the spotlight as possible and move on in solitude, grateful for a second chance to live a life. I cannot fathom why he keeps inserting himself into the public eye and drawing negative attention to himself.
Click to expand...
Or, the TLDR version:
You can confront anyone you want and start a fight, even in the most volatile of situations, then shoot the person you started the fight with when you start getting your ass kicked and claim self defense. Worked for Zimmerman and worked for this little crying weasel.

This "law" is wrong on every level.
 
AG_PhamD said:
If I were in Rittenhouse’s shoes, thank god I am not, I would get as far away from the spotlight as possible and move on in solitude, grateful for a second chance to live a life. I cannot fathom why he keeps inserting himself into the public eye and drawing negative attention to himself.
Click to expand...
The only thing worse than being talked about is not being talked about
– Oscar Wilde​
 
Eric said:
Or, the TLDR version:
You can confront anyone you want and start a fight, even in the most volatile of situations, then shoot the person you started the fight with when you start getting your ass kicked and claim self defense. Worked for Zimmerman and worked for this little crying weasel.

This "law" is wrong on every level.
Click to expand...
@AG_PhamD this is the issue with everyone, 2 best friends at a bar are drunk and get into a fight, with fists they most likely live, with 1 or 2 guns, someone maybe both will die. The absolute worst aspect is the I feared for my life after I started a fight so I defended myself.

Both parties could claim this but it’s the guy with a gun who not only lives, but walks without legal consequence because the gun nuts on the jury scratch their chins and say “oh, he was just defending himself after fearing for his life case closed” while missing the forest for the trees as they caress their preciouses under their jackets.

The problem with these gun related laws is that instead of being penalized for bringing the gun, they are rewarded for bringing the gun. Therefore as I’ve been saying since the Wisconsin ruling, you’d better have a gun on you to get the benefit of the doubt or you’ll just be labeled a troublemaker who got what he deserved. :unsure:
 
My problem with the Rittenhouse case is that its an issue of the sum being greater than the parts. It's exemplary of the dichotomy in law enforcement and the justice system. If that had been a black kid who was suspected of gunning down three people - even in self-defense - he likely would have been shot dead on sight and the cops all let off entirely and back on the streets. A slap on the wrist would be a longshot. This kid was acquitted - with a sympathetic judge and half the country cheering him like a hero - and is free to profit off of his "experience".

I could give you a list a mile long of people who did far less who are rotting in prison or not even alive to tell their story, and literally the only difference between them and Rittenhouse is that some of them have darker skin.

In a vacuum, sure... I can see why Rittenhouse was acquitted. But as I've said before, all things being equal except the color of the defendant, it would be a much steeper uphill climb for a person of color to get acquitted. The state, judge and public perception would have been much more indifferent to the defendant if it wasn't a baby-faced white teenager. And I would tell you that there are many black people you could ask for yourselves, except many of them never lived long enough to make it to trial.

I'm not indifferent to the differences in state and county laws and exacerbating circumstances surrounding his case, but most of that stuff doesn't matter if the perp is black or hispanic. In essence, its guilty until proven innocent for some people, and for others its innocent until mountains are moved and the seas evaporate until guilty.
 
Everyone's favorite killed kid is back in the news, after embracing his role as far right fan fic hero.

www.theroot.com

Kyle Rittenhouse is Lying About Going to College

The Kenosha vigilante claims he's going to a school that says he's definitely not
www.theroot.com www.theroot.com
Click to expand...

Since his embrace at CPAC & former presidents, it seems he's learned the grift & victim game.

Rittenhouse said last week on the podcast the Charlie Kirk Show that he was headed to Texas A&M University—major undecided—to study.

But the school says that statement didn’t give what it was supposed to gave.
Click to expand...
From USA Today
The College Station-based school soon debunked his claim.

“He is not a student this summer and has not been admitted as a student this fall,” Texas A&M spokesperson Kelly Brown told USA TODAY.

The deadline to apply for the fall semester was in March.

Citing privacy issues, Brown did not verify whether Rittenhouse applied to the school.
Click to expand...

So what happens you get your ass called out for making shit up pubicly?

https://www.Twitter or X not allowed/i/web/status/1534126503847419905/

Adjust your story & play the victim.

Not a first

NATION

As controversy over his enrollment swirls, ASU says Kyle Rittenhouse is not currently a student​


PHOENIX — Kyle Rittenhouse is not currently an Arizona State University student, the university confirmed Monday.
The 18-year-old, who was recently acquitted by a Wisconsin jury of all charges in his shooting and killing of two men and wounding of a third in the aftermath of Kenosha protests, was taking online classes at ASU, he said during his testimony.
In recent media interviews, he said he wants to study on campus at ASU.
After Rittenhouse said on the witness stand on Nov. 10 that he was a college student at ASU, the university confirmed he enrolled as a non-degree-seeking online student for the session that started in mid-October, although he hadn't gone through the admissions process and wasn't enrolled in the nursing school. But according to the university, he’s not a student anymore.
Click to expand...

People need to grasp, when you embrace that particular bit of celebrity, there comes a price.
 
He’s in the right place. College Station and A&M is conservative redneck heaven.
 
fooferdoggie said:
almost feel sorry for the little fuck.
Click to expand...

Just lost my water reading that! Don’t know why it hit so funny, but it did!

SuperMatt said:
A bit more from this young man, still playing the victim.

https://www.Twitter or X not allowed/i/web/status/1533974284829224960/
Click to expand...

Holy crap, even TFG be like

E7E41DE3-7C37-4BD6-8A68-DB761BF338F5.jpeg
 
Back
Top