Kyle Rittenhouse gets sideways with MAGA; Reverses Course

[Awinisawin]

I don’t know what the “across state lines” bit has to do with anything. He went like 10 miles from the city that he lived in to the city that he worked in. While it was dumb to do that in the first place, every time he shot it was in self-defense. No one would have been shot that night had the crazy pedophile dude who just got out of prison left Rittenhouse alone.

I don’t know what distance has to do with it. He literally went across a state line. The rest is also obvious. He was itchin to pull a trigger. He was one giant blandishment of arms.

 

[Bigs23]

2 of the 3 guys KR shot were unarmed.

I wonder what the outcome would have been if KR had been gunned down? Would the shooter have been found not guilty?

KR took 2 lives of 2 people who without this reckless actions would otherwise have been alive.

If not criminally responsible KR is morally responsible. He’s a gutless turd like Zimmerman.

 

[2ManyBlueCups]

That last sentence is crazy. He got fixated on a guy carrying an AR-15 while a lot of other people were out and about during a period of unrest? Also, that’s not how it works with people who commit sex offenses against children. They don’t become fixated on every young person they see (or even have tendencies to become fixated on young people). (I know this because I work with people facing/convicted of sex offenses, keep up with research regarding sex offenders, work with forensic psychologists who examine sex offenders, etc.)

In addition, while he was charged with raping a child, he wasn’t convicted of such. Not that his convictions were okay, but he wasn’t a convicted child rapist. And regardless of his prior convictions, Rittenhouse wasn’t aware of them, and it didn’t provide a justification for Rittenhouse to go walking around an area of unrest with an AR-15. The fact is this: if he’s not there, no one gets shot. Period. Regardless of whether Rosenbaum was being aggressive toward him, had he not been there with the gun, he would not have shot Rosenbaum, the other two victims would not have tried to stop a shooter who for all they knew was just shooting random people and could possibly shoot more, and they would not have been shot. It’s as simple as that. People who go around carrying AR-15s are going to cause problems. And that’s exacerbated when they take them into areas of unrest.

Lots of misinformation here. He was indeed convicted of raping multiple children. He spent over 10 years in prison for forcibly sodomizing at least two young boys under the age of 14. While in prison he racked up an extensive infraction list, including numerous violent offenses.

"Rosenbaum spent roughly 15 years in prison in his early adulthood, according to Arizona prison records. Court documents showed that Rosenbaum was accused of sexually abusing five pre-teen boys in 2002, was indicted on 11 counts of child molestation, and eventually pleaded guilty to two amended counts of sexual conduct with a minor."

6 details the Kyle Rittenhouse jury didn't consider when it deliberated the teenager's fate

Several details about Kyle Rittenhouse and the men he shot garnered media attention, but were not deemed appropriate for the jury to consider.

www.businessinsider.com

https://inmatedatasearch.azcorrections.gov/PrintInmate.aspx?ID=172556

Rittenhouse was part of a group of several people armed with AR-15s that were standing in front of a business. There is ample video evidence that shows that Victim 1 was indeed fixated on Rittenhouse. He was filmed standing in Rittenhouse's face, screaming threats to kill him, screaming the N word, and ignoring everyone else in the group. It is possible that he was angry at Rittenhouse because Rittenhouse extinguished the burning dumpster that Victim 1 attempted to roll into a gas station. But, for whatever reason, this guy was locked in on Rittenhouse all night. When Rittenhouse found himself separated from his group, Victim 1, after screaming death threats all night at Rittenhouse, chased him into an alley and attempted to grab his gun, at which point Rittenhouse opened fire. This was all established through video evidence, in a court of law.

I truly feel for Victims 2 and 3, as they were the true innocent victims in this incident. However, Victim 1 was a bad person, a violent person, and was the instigator.

 

[2ManyBlueCups]

I don’t know what distance has to do with it. He literally went across a state line. The rest is also obvious. He was itchin to pull a trigger. He was one giant blandishment of arms.

We don't live in Europe in 1995. A state line is essentially irrelevant....there are no border controls, no passport checks, and it is not unusual at all to cross state lines in this country. He lived in one state and worked about 10 miles away in another. It wasn't illegal to do so. Rittenhouse may be a turd, but the whole "state line" statement is a red herring.

 

[2ManyBlueCups]

2 of the 3 guys KR shot were unarmed.

I wonder what the outcome would have been if KR had been gunned down? Would the shooter have been found not guilty?

KR took 2 lives of 2 people who without this reckless actions would otherwise have been alive.

If not criminally responsible KR is morally responsible. He’s a gutless turd like Zimmerman.

I definitely agree with you that Victims 2 and 3 were actually real victims here. They didn't know the context of the first shooting. However, morally I place the blame more on Victim 1 than I do on Rittenhouse. Rittenhouse never should have been there, but Victim 1 never should have been there either, nor should he have attacked Rittenhouse. There never should have been riots in Kenosha in the first place.

 

[Icky Mettle]

Lots of misinformation here. He was indeed convicted of raping multiple children. He spent over 10 years in prison for forcibly sodomizing at least two young boys under the age of 14. While in prison he racked up an extensive infraction list, including numerous violent offenses.

"Rosenbaum spent roughly 15 years in prison in his early adulthood, according to Arizona prison records. Court documents showed that Rosenbaum was accused of sexually abusing five pre-teen boys in 2002, was indicted on 11 counts of child molestation, and eventually pleaded guilty to two amended counts of sexual conduct with a minor."

6 details the Kyle Rittenhouse jury didn't consider when it deliberated the teenager's fate

Several details about Kyle Rittenhouse and the men he shot garnered media attention, but were not deemed appropriate for the jury to consider.

www.businessinsider.com

https://inmatedatasearch.azcorrections.gov/PrintInmate.aspx?ID=172556

Rittenhouse was part of a group of several people armed with AR-15s that were standing in front of a business. There is ample video evidence that shows that Victim 1 was indeed fixated on Rittenhouse. He was filmed standing in Rittenhouse's face, screaming threats to kill him, screaming the N word, and ignoring everyone else in the group. It is possible that he was angry at Rittenhouse because Rittenhouse extinguished the burning dumpster that Victim 1 attempted to roll into a gas station. But, for whatever reason, this guy was locked in on Rittenhouse all night. When Rittenhouse found himself separated from his group, Victim 1, after screaming death threats all night at Rittenhouse, chased him into an alley and attempted to grab his gun, at which point Rittenhouse opened fire. This was all established through video evidence, in a court of law.

I truly feel for Victims 2 and 3, as they were the true innocent victims in this incident. However, Victim 1 was a bad person, a violent person, and was the instigator.

There was no misinformation in my post. Read what you cut and pasted. He was convicted of sexual misconduct with a minor. He was not convicted of rape, thus he was not a “convicted serial child rapist” as you stated. “Rape” is a legal term that has specific meaning. If you’re going to argue that Rittenhouse wasn’t a murderer because he wasn’t convicted, then don’t argue that someone not convicted of rape was a convicted rapist. We can agree that his crimes of conviction were just as reprehensible as rape. We can agree he was a bad person. But his sex offenses— which occurred 18 years prior to his encounter with Rittenhouse— were irrelevant to the context of what occurred that night in Kenosha.

It’s as simple as this: Had Rittenhouse not unnecessarily inserted himself into that situation with his AR-15— which was a horrible idea that had potential for very bad results— no one would have been shot by him. If you bring your gun to a disturbance where you are not needed, and attention turns to you once you enter that disturbance, and you end up using your gun to shoot others as a result of having that attention turn to you, blood is on your hands.

 

[2ManyBlueCups]

There was no misinformation in my post. Read what you cut and pasted. He was convicted of sexual misconduct with a minor. He was not convicted of rape, thus he was not a “convicted serial child rapist” as you stated. “Rape” is a legal term that has specific meaning. If you’re going to argue that Rittenhouse wasn’t a murderer because he wasn’t convicted, then don’t argue that someone not convicted of rape was a convicted rapist. We can agree that his crimes of conviction were just as reprehensible as rape. We can agree he was a bad person. But his sex offenses— which occurred 18 years prior to his encounter with Rittenhouse— were irrelevant to the context of what occurred that night in Kenosha.

It’s as simple as this: Had Rittenhouse not unnecessarily inserted himself into that situation with his AR-15— which was a horrible idea that had potential for very bad results— no one would have been shot by him. If you bring your gun to a disturbance where you are not needed, and attention turns to you once you enter that disturbance, and you end up using your gun to shoot others as a result of having that attention turn to you, blood is on your hands.

Ok, sure. We can agree that this man forcibly molested and performed oral sex on at least five young boys under the age of 13, but he was not convicted of sodomizing them, just molesting them. He was also convicted of beating his girlfriend once she found porn on his phone after he was released from prison. You are right that Rittenhouse had no way of knowing this at the time, but the fact that Rittenhouse was stalked and attacked by a man with a very violent criminal history is relevant as it shows that the person who attacked Rittenhouse was prone to violence and crime. Thus, his threats to murder Rittenhouse were likely very credible.

And we can play the chicken or the egg game all night long. Had Kenosha not descended into violence, Rittenhouse would not have been there with his AR-15. Rittenhouse was filmed numerous times before the shooting behaving calmly and rationally. He was not filmed antagonizing anyone, or inciting violence. He was filmed passing out water bottles, standing quietly, and extinguishing a fire with a fire extinguisher. Had Rosenbaum not attacked Rittenhouse, no one would have died that night. The fact of the matter is that Kenosha did descend into violence, Rittenhouse did show up with a rifle, and Rosenbaum did stalk and attack him. Interrupt any one of those three events and three people are likely still alive today.

 

[superrific]

We don't live in Europe in 1995. A state line is essentially irrelevant....there are no border controls, no passport checks, and it is not unusual at all to cross state lines in this country. He lived in one state and worked about 10 miles away in another. It wasn't illegal to do so. Rittenhouse may be a turd, but the whole "state line" statement is a red herring.

There are criminal laws where crossing a state line is an element of the offense. So, no, crossing a state line is not "essentially irrelevant" in some contexts.

 

[Awinisawin]

We don't live in Europe in 1995. A state line is essentially irrelevant....there are no border controls, no passport checks, and it is not unusual at all to cross state lines in this country. He lived in one state and worked about 10 miles away in another. It wasn't illegal to do so. Rittenhouse may be a turd, but the whole "state line" statement is a red herring.

Huh?

It’s the gun crossing the state line that’s an issue. Not the person. Again. What does where he works have to do with anything? That is what sounds like a red herring to me.

 

[KishiKaisei]

To be fair, “another state” was like 5 miles away where he worked. And while he may not be the brightest bulb in the bunch he did not murder anybody.

 

[KishiKaisei]

Oh yeah, I agree with all of that. But “murder” is different than “kill”. He put himself in a bad situation and then that situation escalated largely due to the actions of somebody else. He should never have been there but neither should most of the people that were out there.

 

[2ManyBlueCups]

Man, the ignore feature really is a welcome addition to this board.

 

[bridgetender]

To add to this post, I have come to see that the more American flags people post or decorate themselves and their property with, the less patriotic they are.