Rittenhouse case

Creekwood said:
I take your point. It was not a protest, it was a riot. Not disagreeing. It actually makes my point. A untrained kid has no business heading down to a riot with an AR15. And any adult that condoned it or supported it at the time has a degree of responsibility for what happened. I feel really bad for Rittenhouse and for the families of who he killed. No winners in any of this.
Click to expand...
Interesting....a year ago many black folks were playing with fire, smashing windows and jumping through to shop. The dangers were plentiful with much jagged glass, falls from stomped squad car roofs, and exploding molotov cocktails. Did you feel bad for those kids?.... outraged that adults supported their chillun's attendance at such riotous events?

You feel bad for the white kid but not the black, that's racist.;)
 
Blueone said:
I think the media screaming racism and white supremacy has zero to do with the AR… it’s all the dems do to separate this country and use any event to push it…. Look how they are trying to spin the VP by saying we are being sexist and racist… it’s unbelievable but not surprising
Click to expand...


Bingo! They would also love to tie this into Trump if they haven't attempted that already.
 
Creekwood said:
I take your point. It was not a protest, it was a riot. Not disagreeing. It actually makes my point. A untrained kid has no business heading down to a riot with an AR15. And any adult that condoned it or supported it at the time has a degree of responsibility for what happened. I feel really bad for Rittenhouse and for the families of who he killed. No winners in any of this.
Click to expand...
You are right that it may not have been a good decision but he had a legal right to be there, which makes your point moot.
 
Stee6043 said:
Maybe this has been said already...

But I can't help but think that some of the publicity of this case has been driven by the fact that he chose to bring along an AR. Had he had a Sig 9mm with him that day, very same outcome, I think this entire thing would have a very different feeling...and maybe a very different representation in the media.
Click to expand...
As I implied earlier, makes no difference if he was carrying an AR or a .22 handgun but to the media it makes him a monster.
 
Stee6043 said:
Maybe this has been said already...

But I can't help but think that some of the publicity of this case has been driven by the fact that he chose to bring along an AR. Had he had a Sig 9mm with him that day, very same outcome, I think this entire thing would have a very different feeling...and maybe a very different representation in the media.
Click to expand...
I'm amazed the number of folks who are saying he was "stupid" to bring the gun to the riot, but yet I haven't heard ANYONE say the same about Grosskreutz, who brought a Glock, or Ziminski, who also had a handgun and even fired it into the air (isn't that illegal within city limits??). Probably a few other rioters were also armed and no one seemed to be concerned about that.
 
Stee6043 said:
Maybe this has been said already...

But I can't help but think that some of the publicity of this case has been driven by the fact that he chose to bring along an AR. Had he had a Sig 9mm with him that day, very same outcome, I think this entire thing would have a very different feeling...and maybe a very different representation in the media.
Click to expand...

One thing people forget is that he was actually following the law by carrying the AR instead of the Sig. He was not old enough to possess a handgun but was for a rifle or shotgun. People are hung up on the whole "Evil black rifle" because the media does a good job whipping up their base to be overcome with fear at the mere mention of one, ignoring entirely that those "Assault rifles" account for less than 5% of all gun deaths in the US. It's a knee-jerk reaction that the media has created like the Pavlov's dogs effect. And as such the prosecution (and media) are trying to use the AR as some sort of "proof" that he had intended to perform a mass shooting there despite the fact that he ACTUALLY would have been more likely to have killed the 3rd assailant had he been using a handgun because a handgun would have been easier to control while on on his butt on the ground.

But facts don't sell ads on social media and "assault rifles" are better clickbait than "9mm handguns"........
 
km1125 said:
I'm amazed the number of folks who are saying he was "stupid" to bring the gun to the riot, but yet I haven't heard ANYONE say the same about Grosskreutz, who brought a Glock, or Ziminski, who also had a handgun and even fired it into the air (isn't that illegal within city limits??). Probably a few other rioters were also armed and no one seemed to be concerned about that.
Click to expand...

It's the same reason that no one EVER blames the gun when a cop shoots someone- selective outrage.
 
boatman37 said:
You are right that it may not have been a good decision but he had a legal right to be there, which makes your point moot.
Click to expand...
My point is not moot. I was not saying that he did not have a legal right to be there. (Although I thought there was a legal issue that got dismissed as to whether he was legally allowed to be there with a gun - but that is now moot). I am saying he should not have been there with an AR15. Not in the legal sense. In the common sense - his and any adult that was involved in supporting him being there.
 
km1125 said:
I'm amazed the number of folks who are saying he was "stupid" to bring the gun to the riot, but yet I haven't heard ANYONE say the same about Grosskreutz, who brought a Glock, or Ziminski, who also had a handgun and even fired it into the air (isn't that illegal within city limits??). Probably a few other rioters were also armed and no one seemed to be concerned about that.
Click to expand...
Here I will say it for you. Every single one of them was stupid to carry a weapon down to a riot. I think waving a handgun around kid carrying an AR15 is pretty stupid too. A bunch of stupid decisions leading to two dead and a kid whose life will be altered for a long time, and not for the better.
 
Stee6043 said:
I agree except that we have not yet made it illegal to make bad decisions in the USA. Breaking laws vs making horrible decisions are very different debates.
Click to expand...
Well the courts will decide that I guess.
 
There seem to be a few unanswered questions I have with those that think Kyle should not have had an AR with him:

Did Kyle not have the right to be at that location helping with the injured and assisting the community instead of sitting back and watching innocent people caught in the rioting?

While at the location, given the situation going on around him, did Kyle have the right (and foresight) to possess the means to defend himself should he be threatened?

Regardless of the type of weapon used, did Kyle have the right to use whatever weapon he had to defend his life while being attacked?

Would it have made any difference if he had carried/used a handgun to protect himself instead of the rifle?

Do you think he should have carried a handgun (illegal because he's not 21) instead of the rifle (legal for his age), thereby ACTUALLY breaking the law?
 
Call me crazy for making a bad decision, however if my family called and asked me to help protect their property from rioters, I would. It wouldn't be with a peace sign either.
 
km1125 said:
Just because you are carrying doesn't mean you have to use it. In your scenario you could still just hand over the keys, provided they are going to let you walk away (which is assumed in your post if you're later at the Ford dealership).

However, what if they're dragging your wife out of the car and intent on raping her? Would you want to be carrying in that case?

Kyle was there in the community helping them by putting out fires and assisting folks who needed medical help. He was also cleaning graffiti off buildings. That's undisputed. He brought a weapon to protect himself, as did others. It was good he did because he did end up needing it. Folks should not be diminishing the rioting that was going on. ANYONE helping to minimize the damage and destruction should be praised, especially since the official law enforcement orgs were told to 'stand down' or not quell the riots.
Click to expand...

IF I’m carrying I’m using. Period.
I don’t carry because of that.
60 days after 911 I took a hard look at myself. I had to fly weekly back then. In fact was on the first flights post 911.

Since then I’ve earned my level 4 Krav certification. Ain’t nobody dragging nobody outta my truck.

Period. End of story.
 
El Capitan said:
IF I’m carrying I’m using. Period.
I don’t carry because of that.
60 days after 911 I took a hard look at myself. I had to fly weekly back then. In fact was on the first flights post 911.

Since then I’ve earned my level 4 Krav certification. Ain’t nobody dragging nobody outta my truck.

Period. End of story.
Click to expand...

Yeah, didn't work out too well for Reginald Denny during the Rodney King riots to NOT use a firearm to defend himself.......
 
TheDudeAbides said:
Do you think he should have carried a handgun (illegal because he's not 21) instead of the rifle (legal for his age), thereby ACTUALLY breaking the law?
Click to expand...
Your correct that he wasn't old enough to carry a handgun, but it was because he wasn't 18. If he was 18 he could legally open carry.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
113,177
Messages
1,427,988
Members
61,086
Latest member
MrWebster
Back
Top