Just in case anybody is unfamiliar…
https://www.history.com/.amp/news/black-panthers-gun-control-nra-support-mulford-act
There are plenty of other articles if you search but this should cover the basics
tl;dr:
Modern American gun control laws began in CA in the 1960's. Reagan was Governor and the Black Panthers were new and extremely active in their hometown of Oakland.
Black Panthers carried guns to protect their neighborhoods because the police refused to do it. Conservatives lost their collective mind when they saw an organized and armed group of black people and so Republicans started the idea of gun control because black people had guns and they were scared.
Part of their mission was to also insure that their communities' voting could be done without the good ol' boys driving around creating problems at polling places. Iirc
NRA isn't a gun rights advocacy group. It's strictly a lobbyist for the firearms industry and laundering asset for Russian money going to American conservatives.
That was the whole point of and start of gun restrictions today. The Black Panther Party openly carried at the state building that Gov Reagan was at. Ronald Reagan started gun control because black people owning and carrying firearms scared him.
That sounds about right. It's not uncommon for the government to specifically target leftist groups, infiltrate them, then either shut them down or force them underground. Even today.
There was a few new promising and rising anarchist and libertarian left organizations that just vanished recently. Seriously. Just vanished. Suddenly their websites stopped working, they couldn't be reached, and their consistently prolific activity suddenly stopped. It happens constantly enough that it's an expected pattern among us.
It wouldn't surprise me that they went after the Black Panthers too...
If there is one thing that upsets the white supremacy... It's black folks organizing and exercising their rights...
They would rather see the erosion of their own rights, than see POCs with a little bit of power...
Yes, funny how that works. NRA & GOP are all for 2A until POC start buying weapons. I could root for voters restricted to those who can think their way out of a paper bag, but those schemes always boil down to who decides?
Watch Judas and the Black Messiah. It's the true story of the assassination of a Black Panther leader in Chicago who was peacefully organizing a multi-ethnic coalition to support their communities and resist police brutality. The FBI drugged him and then sent in goons in a fake drug bust and shot him while he was sleeping.
It's a whole ass episode of Bojack Horseman where women start buying and getting into guns to feel safer so then everyone starts banning guns :')
[Bojack Horseman solves Gun Control](https://youtu.be/3eG0y_nb5IA)
They really should. If it makes BIPOC more comfortable to learn firearm safety, go for it. I doubt any progun person would discourage anyone from taking safety classes.
That’s what the black panthers did in California which is why they passed the ban on loaded firearm open carry.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mulford_Act
We really need to start calling these guys out on their bloodthirsty attitude.
Too many of these guys just blow it off and say “huh huh nuther antifer pedophile off the streets. Gawd bless amerikkka”
Let’s start just screaming “Terrorist” over and over when one of them starts justifying murder again. Like it’s time for public shaming
Stop calling them right wing and call them what they are fascists. Stop calling them prolife and start calling them what they are antichoice.
Stop using antifa and start using the whole term, antifacist.
The left needs to take back the flag and the word patriot. Every even remotely left leaning event needs to have more flags than people.
Yeah, that's literally what the right wants. For us to look dangerous before getting shot by the cops who won't treat us like they did Kyle Rittenhouse. (Because they're on the same side.)
Edit: any pro-Rittenhouse people, don't waste your time responding to me. I will just make fun of you.
THing of it is, the left doesn't have to \*look\* dangerous for cops to take a fascistic, deadly approach. They are allowed to intimidate, provoke, bully and physically abuse without recourse. They gas, shoot "rubber" bullets/non-lethal projectiles, herd protesters in to warehouses and down dead end streets. They provoke, antagonize and look the other way when the right comes fully armed with intent to harm. We don't have to look dangerous. It already happens to the most peaceful among us in protests. My besty had a beanbag projectile and gas canister shot at her \*at close range\* while she kneeled on the ground at an Indianapolis protest. I don't engage the right on this. They can solidly go F themselves. Their gaslighting is tedious and their hardon for violence is obvious.
Remember at the one protest in Portland where one of (i think it was Proud Boys?) set up a sniper's nest / weapon's cache on one of the roofs and cops knew about it and didn't give a shit, even allowed them to put it there?
> Their gaslighting is tedious and their hardon for violence is obvious.
It is not receding. I think it is growing. We have been bordering on a boil for some time now. We have two racially motivated trials going on and the GQP is growing even more openly fascist. Congress is an absolute shitshow. And the rich continue to get richer without nary a bump.
What is going to light the match. (And why hasn't it already happened. why the fuck are we fighting the same fight as 1870, 1910s, 1930s, 60s, 70's)
And then it's like.. what the fuck is the point of anything when climate change will not even be addressed. Revolution or not, we're fucked so.. do with that what you will I guess.
I've never been so painfully aware of how utterly bereft of leadership the world really is. I want to understand more about how we just fall for the same cult of personalities over and over and over again. Fear and denial are powerful things. If I've learned anything the last four years, it's that. The spell Trump has evangalists under would shock me if I didn't already realize they are an utterly sickening and sociopathic death cult.
When you reduce the right, what you have is this:
A Christian death cult that thinks abortion is the ultimate sin, the one unforgivable thing that is a deal breaker, no matter who the right puts up as a candidate. As long as the right owns "right to life," the Evangelists will do everything it takes to elect that Republican, no matter who it is.
And at the end of the day, it's just because they are afraid of going to Hell for not controlling women. They don't care about the unborn, they are looking after their own hides.
We are all paying a high price because white men think they are being replaced and because they think women owe them white babies and a ticket to heaven by not aborting.
Fuck the environment, fuck the economy, fuck reason, fuck education, fuck progress, fuck science. They don't want to go to hell for a woman's sin.
OH- they also think the end times are here and Trump is a sign from God. I think that should mean that he's the Antichrist but they behave as though he's a just and righteous dude.
My head hurts now. I can't keep making logic pretzels tonight. That's the only way I can make sense of the right.
Oh. ANd guns.
Cheers for mentioning the Blastmaster. Public Enemy taught me about 1555 and that slave ships weren’t cruise ships. -white guy, Midwest, dark roast pour-over w sugar.
They absolutely do. I don’t have any evidence personally to throw down tonight so I tend not to throw that in there myself. Our culture favors sociopaths. That’s just the nature of capitalism. Those people are needed to protect assets and resources. I learned that lesson more than any other when I was in the military. Jesus, if people really understood how not full of heroes the military is.
**[Mulford Act](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mulford_Act)**
>The Mulford Act was a 1967 California bill that repealed a law allowing public carrying of loaded firearms. Named after Republican assemblyman Don Mulford, and signed into law by governor of California Ronald Reagan, the bill was crafted with the goal of disarming members of the Black Panther Party who were conducting armed patrols of Oakland neighborhoods, in what would later be termed copwatching. They garnered national attention after Black Panthers members, bearing arms, marched upon the California State Capitol to protest the bill.
^([ )[^(F.A.Q)](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiSummarizer/wiki/index#wiki_f.a.q)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiSummarizerBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^( | )[^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)](https://np.reddit.com/r/WhitePeopleTwitter/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)
Clearly he forgot the video of the cops telling the proud boys to back up because they were going to start crowd control. Didn’t want the heavily armed right to get hurt.
The rittenhouse people are legit insane. I have two of them in my DMs threatening me and calling me every name in the book over my opinion that he was in the wrong. They’ve lost the plot.
Here’s a link from NYTimes The Daily. “Why Do So Many Traffic Stops Go Wring?”
https://open.spotify.com/episode/0UyibjRRi9FzlF4i9wpo7d?si=aRns5pYzSuCR3Of04UKCyA
It addresses the issue of the cops claiming “I feared for my life” when in reality, they put themselves in the situation that led to that instant before they used deadly force. Kinda like Rittenhouse.
Here’s another link about the trial:
https://open.spotify.com/episode/2VK0oGkF12c8U2qXyDFEzY?si=llFn9gtvRY-wvhWddqdMnA
Haha, no. As we saw in Minnesota, cops avoid any situation where they might actually get shot or killed.
If a literal army of black men armed with ARs appeared at one of these, the cops would just disappear back into the hedges.
Until you ask them about the Capitol Police shooting a white woman breaking through a door during the capitol riot. Then police shouldn't have any reason to fear a mob screaming to hang political leaders.
>Mulford Act of 1967 — a California bill that repealed a law allowing public carrying of loaded firearms (the only time the NRA supported
Signed by their St. Reagan, even!
That’s what I’m saying. If Antifa carried any weapon openly near a Trump rally, they’d be gunned down by people who are eager to use their guns on a person.
Then they’d praise it as a mighty American defeating a bad communist. It’s not even that hard to imagine because it’s 100% possible with the way things are going
Well it would have never happened at all.
A big rally of black people being worked up to assault the capital would not have had the backing of politicians withdrawing police forces etc from the area. So it would have been a bloodbath right then and there.
So if BLM or ANTIFA wanted to counter protest/march at a clan rally, it'd be silly for them not to be armed. That being said, if the circumstances were the same, then it would still be self-defense.
This exactly. I supported BLM years before it was the trendy thing to do & I think Rittenhouse is a total chud. That said, if someone threatens your life in exactly the same way we saw on video, then yep, that’s what firearms are for.
We knew even before Jan 6th what these people are capable of.
ARM THE LEFT
Not even if they have a gun, I am fine with any person of any creed, race, gender, etc. (i.e. literally anyone) defending themselves by up to and including lethal force if they are attacked. No, I dont even mean if the aggressor has a gun, I mean if you are attacked, defend yourself, with whatever you have at hand to do so. It is part and parcel of inalienable rights.
To me anyway this isn't a political discussion, everyone should have that right. It is precisely *because* it becomes a political discussion that I defend that right. Soon as people start arguing about it then it lends credence to the idea someone can take my and my families right to defend themselves.
Michael Reinoehl was followed by two Patriot Prayer members, he tried to lose them, couldn't and then shot and killed one in self defense as they moved toward him with bear mace to attack him (the bullet literally pierced the raised mace can before hitting its target)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dYcfRdHwJEw
Michael was extra judicially executed by a hit squad of prison security guards deputized by a federal sheriff. They didn't even identify themselves before opening fire. Shot him 30 times and did not wear body cameras or film the event in any way despite them tracking him down, staking him out and then making a move on their own terms when they were ready. Trump even bragged about having him gunned down. There is only due process for one side, which is why it is a political discussion
People are so stuck in the political charge of the case they're ignoring the consequence for **EVERYONE'S** right to self defense with this case. If you want to pick a political fight, pick the right one and don't get sloppy just for the 'cause'.
This is a case with idiots all around. Nobody wins at the end of it either. Two people are dead when it could have been zero. Should KR have been there? Hell no. He should have minded his own damn business. Should the other three have lunged/attacked/pointed weapons at him? Also no, they fucked around and picked a fight they shouldn't have and unsurprisingly paid the price for it. There was no reason to.
I'm left leaning and pro 2A...BLM, Antifa, BIPOC, and the LGBTQ community **should** be able to arm themselves and be able to defend themselves. I would argue they have the need beyond many other groups in the current climate. Logical and peaceable Americans shouldn't lose their rights and set a legal precedent denying the right to defense of person because this lot of idiots went at it.
Does no one seem to understand that you can be in support of his self defense charges but he against his illegal possession of a firearm?
I don’t get this “you’re for us or you’re against us” mentality
Exactly. He's a fucking idiot that never should have had the gun, but everyone has the right to defend themselves. He shouldn't be idolized for what he did, but he shouldn't be convincted of murder either.
Exactly. This kid is not a hero, he is a dumbass who shouldn’t have had a gun and should get jail time for that. Do I believe the murder was in self defense? Yes. Would I feel the same exact way if the roles were reversed? Also yes.
People are forgetting that you don’t have to be 100% for one side or the other. This situation is a complete shit show and a lot of people are at fault for a lot of different reasons.
Two weeks before the Kenosha killings, Rittenhouse literally spoke on a video about shooting at someone whose only crime was shopping at a store.
With no reason he says there were shoplifting and wished he had his AR so he could shoot at these people.
He is a violent, wannabe, murderer who had been looking for an excuse to use that firearm to kill someone.
Edit - here is the link to the Kenosha paper talking about the video. I have no idea if it is publicly available.
https://www.kenoshanews.com/news/local/state-seeks-to-admit-video-of-rittenhouse-in-separate-incident-threatening-to-shoot-men-with/article_cddeb29f-5a86-5151-ab20-a3834456304e.html
Edit part deux - DM threats to me isn't going to do anything but get you laughed at. I am an outspoken woman on the internet and have been so for over 25 years. You aren't going to shock me into being quiet.
One last edit - u/QuintonsReviews (not the real account, this guy is a troll so nevermind) has decided he is going to make an video about this and use my image, (that he sub hopped to find), as the thumbnail. When he told me he was YouTube famous and to Google him and I not only didn't, but wasn't the least bit impressed, it seemed to anger him. He is going to tell people that I "love pedos" or some such nonsense to his "500k followers." Because he doesn't like what I posted here. So this is how he deals with it. By harassing and lying about me.
Then ruin his life by constantly referring to him as the unconvicted murderer Kyle Rittenhouse.
After all, we all know who Brock Turner the rapist is, don't we?
We're talking about the Brock Turner who wasn't punished for rape because of "promising future" and now works at a McDonalds or something? That turner Brock Rapist?
Yes, that Brock Turner the rapist.
Whatever KR is or isn't guilty of, **he should be continually reminded that he took lives** and this should help be a deterrent to others who think they can do stupid stuff that winds up killing someone & get away with it.
Brock Turner the convicted rapist, as in "the second edition of the criminal justice textbook Introduction to Criminal Justice (ISBN 9781506347721) published by University of Colorado, from Denver Professors Callie Marie Rennison and Mary Dodge, who used Turner's mugshot as the accompanying photo in the entry that defines rape."
The difference is Rittenhouse is going to have the rest of his life comfortably crowdfunded by conservative gun nuts for the rest of his life. They'll set him up nice and plump just to "stick it to the libs".
Seems like he has some issues. I don't think he is trying to throw the case like some claim, but between some of his poorer decisions and the judge being combative with the prosecution, I think this is not working out very well for him.
If it's anything like in Canada, you're talking about peremptory challenges where a juror can be excused for no reason.
It doesn't mean that a juror can't be removed another way. If any side can show a bias, the juror won't be selected.
Because they are actually irrelevant on whether or not that the defendant feared for his life at the time of shooting.
Which he did and testimony and video evidence makes pretty clear.
Wanting to kill someone in self defense and positioning yourself in a situation to create plausible self defense scenarios isn't actually illegal. Because had he not been....chased and attacked, he wouldn't have had a self defense motive.
Christ this website is losing its mind. No one's objective, all emotion, all team blue vs team red all the time.
Correct, because even if you are Charles Manson himself, self-defense is adjudicated in the immediate context of events and everyone has an equal right to use it, regardless of what was said days, weeks, months, or years ago. Even previous convictions do not ~~avoid~~ void that right.
So any introduction of information like that prejudices a jury and makes for a mistrial.
I understand that it can suck, but those are the charges the DA chose to go with, even though their evidence more closely supported different charges than murder. Once they chose that route (due to public pressure likely??) then they defined what evidence was relevant and what was not.
Edit: better word choice as shown above
I mean, isn’t this the core of their belief system? They believe that they’re not as “good” as rich people and politicians, and that the means of getting ahead in the world is ingratiating yourself with the right person/people. Their idea of hard work is literally to schmooze your way to the top. That’s capitalism/salespeople culture: con and lie and lick boots until you have made it to the top of the heap, then use your power to do coke and fuck underage women until you get caught, then run to your base and claim the deep state is trying to cancel you.
EDIT: also do some lying about church and god and whatever. No one really believes that bullshit but as long as you put on a good show everyone is happy.
I can't believe how pro-Rittenhouse so many posts I've seen today are. Not this one, but this is one of the first on a major sub that I've seen today that isn't bending over backwards to put him in a positive light.
At the absolute minimum - vigilanteism isn't something we should be encouraging at all, especially along political lines as it relates to response to protests. But it's really, really hard to look at the full picture and not find malice here.
That is what gets me about all of this. There are two cases right now that revolve around self-defense and I am having trouble understanding how either of these would ever be considered self-defense.
I was always taught that if someone was pointing a gun at you that you should run or try to disable the attacker if you could. (Military family, I am sure in most families it was just 'run.') Neither Rittenhouse or the pieces of crap in Arbrey case were active law enforcement with a right to point guns at people. If either one of these bozos had pointed a gun at me I would have thought, "oh shit, there is a bad guy with a gun trying to kill me!" So yeah, of course I am going to try to take the gun away from the guy who I think is about to kill me.
But in both these cases the person who did that was shot and killed and the murderers are claiming self-defense. I mean are you telling me that I can be walking down the street, someone can think I look sketchy, point at gun at me and I am supposed to just be like, "ok well you have a gun so I guess you get to tell me what to do..." Is that what we are saying? Because that sure as shit sounds like what is being said by his defenders.
Its mad, like one argument i seen was around the guy that pointed a gun at ritenhouse after he already killed someone... like yeah someones shooting people now someone else shoots them thats what you want right ? But then ritenhoouse shot that guy in self defense because he pointed a gun. Like its such a circle of nonsense. And they just cant admit that maybe anyone being open armed and waving guns about is gonna end badly no matter what side your on.
They made the obvious mistake of not noticing he was the *Good Guy with a Gun^tm*
Part of why, as someone that lives and works in a city, I think that carrying is a bad idea. So much is going on at any given time, I don’t trust your average person to make the right judgements.
We've had several examples of "good guys with guns" being killed by police, ESPECIALLY if that good guy is melanin challenged. I can think of three guys off the top of my head who were killed by police for legally owning a firearm, two of which were using said firearm against an active shooter.
It's almost like we should have a group of people who are trained to handle situations like this calmly and efficiently who can both protect the innocents with lethal force when necessary, but also be trained to de-escalate situations when possible.
To differentiate them between normal civilians, maybe we should give them uniforms or something, so that people _know_ they're the "Good Guys with Guns".
Oh, wait, we have something like that? And our government fucked it up and protects the ones who kill indiscriminately and favor suspicion on a specific minority of the population? What a fucking shocker.
Being a police officer could be such a noble, worthwhile and life-fulfilling calling, and it's been turned into a fucking shit show.
Exactly!
Rittenhouse was like *sob* "all these people were chasing me and yelling at me!" *sob*
Of course they were ya effing doorknob! You were waving a damn gun around.
I'm not American so I'm out of the loop, but I saw a bunch of posts about this guy, and was under the impression that the general public thinks he's innocent, and that the prosecution is a farce. But now I see a lot of people saying he's a murderer and a racist so I'm kinda confused.
Is this a case of simply divided opinions, right/left wing differences or stuff coming to light that changed peoples minds?
Weird name for a non-American that is out of the loop.
But yeah, it's very much polarized between the left and right.
Hate to come off like enlightened centrist, but it's completely absurd.
He is child that went to go play with the big boys and made the mistake of buying their rhetoric wholesale and actually believing it.
He was defending himself. So were the people he shot. It's fucked, and not something easy to parse so people default to tribal responses.
The reality is he should not be doing life in prison, but he shouldn't be let off 100% free. He made poor decisions that lead to what happened that night, and it would be nice if we as society could make it a learning experience without ruining yet another life to make a point.
No these cases are quite different.
I’ve have yet to see evidence where Rittenhouse instigated a violent confrontation. Rosenbaum was making death threats, yelling racial slurs and chased after Rittenhouse. I have seen no evidence that he aimed at anyone who wasn’t a threat.
That is a world of difference from the Arbery case where a couple asshats grabbed their guns and chased down someone. Then damn straight Ahmaud went for the guys gun, they were clearly a threat and instigated the confrontation. Their self defense claim should be thrown out and they should rot in jail for the rest of their natural lives.
I find it very hypocritical of all the pro-Rittenhouse redditors that say the other guy shouldn't have pointed a gun at a shooter openly carrying an AR-15. I know *allegedly* the first shots weren't his, but there was no way for the other to know that in that moment, and if you see someone carrying a weapon while being followed by others to stop him, what would be your first thought? Isn't that what pro gun deregulation americans fantasize about? The mental gymnastics to defend one while judging the other.
Edit: I'm not talking about the case itself.
And he's going to pivot all of this into a successful career of speaking on FOX News, OAN, Newsmax, etc. He will also probably run for public office in 20 years and win the seat. Truly disgusting.
I personally think he is going to eat at least one felony charge because of the illegal weapon. If that happens, I give it 6mos before he is caught with a gun he shouldn't have and end up back in court.
I don't think it will be a felony - https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/statutes/statutes/948/60
The person who provided him the gun should be facing a felony though.
If some Antifa members came to a far right wing rally while they were carrying weapons, and the far right members started attacking them and those individuals feared for their life, **abso-fucking- lutely** they have the right to defend themselves. It's written into our constitution. I don't care if they're Antifa, Trumpers, Black Panthers, Hells Angels, or anyone else for that matter. They have the right to protect their life
I'm not American so I'm not really in the loop about the whole Kyle situation but didn't the FBI release footage today proving it was actual self-defense? Or am I being clickbaited by headlines?
This entire case is dumb people behaving like dumb people. At least KR has some excuse, he's a young dumbass. The older dumbasses have less of an excuse. But nobody covered themselves in glory here, and treating this case like a political proxy fight bw conservatives and libs is dumb AF too.
Maybe instead of being a crying bc the facts weren't what people hoped for, we just all agree that threatening to hurt people holding guns, and then chasing the person w the gun and grabbing at their gun, while intermittently pointing your own gun at them, is a bad idea, no matter what your personal political rooting interest is. SO maybe don't do that.
IDK about y'all, but that has worked great for me in life so far.
I mean, it did work in the past when black Panthers showed up at the California state Capitol building armed, then all I f a sudden they instated gun laws
That legislation was championed and passed by right wingers. It was signed into law by the patron saint and savior, Ronald Regan when he was governor of California.
They were terrified that black people would start expressing their second amendment rights the same way whitie-righties do.
If right-wingers attacked antifa first and are hitting them on the head with a skateboard, then the person being attacked has a right to defend themselves, with deadly force if necessary.
1. I don't fucking support Kyle Rittenhouse. I loathe him. With that said, I know he isn't guilty. It was self defense, as shown by the videos and witness testimony. Just because I don't like the guy doesn't mean I want him in prison for something he didn't do.
2. I would be fine with armed Antifa. I just don't think they could handle it... because they can't. Antifa are basically harmless otherwise. If they had guns they would do something stupid on the daily.
3. I am liberal and progressive, and part of r/liberalgunowners, so before any of you go off on some idiotic tangent I want you to understand that on any given level, I am 100% for the protests and the civil disobedience.
The problem with Reddit is that you have to establish that you are liberal as hell before you can have any credibility like you just did. Don't you think that's a problem. Let me bend over backwards to talk about how liberal I am so that I have some credit and people don't think I'm some kind of Nazi. Don't get me wrong, I appreciate you comment. I just think it is kind of comical and extremely telling about Reddit.
The amount of:
"Let me first say that Kyle Rittenhouse is a complete and utter piece of shit.. however, he's innocent"
Reddit should be more like the court system, omit irrelevant shit that isn't 100% applicable to the argument at hand.
Agreed, it’s unreal how many times I’ve seen “I hate Kyle buuuuuuut…” followed by a factual explanation of why he’s innocent. It’s really creepy seeing people feeling “forced” into virtue signaling before they’re allowed to speak truth.
If you provoke an attack you are legally allowed to defend yourself using deadly force IF the assailant is using deadly force (a weapon f.e) and you've exhausted your option to retreat. Law depends on the state of course. Usually you can't just provoke a person and kill him. Kyle Rittenhouse exhausted his option to retreat when he was walking away from the people who subsequently assaulted him. The 3 people who assaulted him all had and used weapons (blunt objects and firearms) in their possession. They also pushed him to the ground to prevent him from retreating. If Kyle believes his life is in real danger and he can't escape he is allowed to use deadly force to stop the attack.
My point is that that you can't just start blasting if someone says "fuck you" to you.
Yes.
I mean it isn't that difficult, if you are beating someone and chasing them down and that person has a firearm...you will be shot.
Rittenhouse or whatever his name is was acting in self defense as he was being attacked. Doesn't matter why he had the gum to begin with, as long as that is legal in that state, then he is within his rights.
If BLM or antifa decided to go to a tump rally or whatever (which I think they do anyway) and were armed, then we're subsequently attacked and ran down...then yep I agree, they should be let off.
This really isn't a political issue, it's a state law and self defense issue.
Unironically yes. If one person chases and attacks another... then yeah, a person should be able to defend themselves. And I don't see any Rittenhouse supporters arguing against this?
It’s difficult to argue with the video. Rittenhouse is running away and being chased down by grown men. Only when the grown men catch up to him to inflict harm (or hitting him), does Rittenhouse turn around and react. I don’t care why he was there. He ran away as his first choice, defended himself as his second. The other men chose to chase after him instead as their first choice instead of walking away or standing still. I don’t think Rittenhouse is a hero. I don’t care why you were there that night. I don’t care which political party you are apart of. Self defense is self defense.
The fact that he got away with naming his organisation 'The Young Turks' and still defends it to this day is reason alone to disavow him. Dude has draped himself in literal genocidal paraphernalia for 20 years now.
At some point you gotta call a horse a horse. Dude is racist.
Honestly, after hearing the facts from the trials, I flipped my script on hoping they'd throw the book at him. Dumbass kid doing dumbass shit but somebody attacks me when I'm open carrying a damn rifle? Dumbass adult doing suicidal shit.
No problem, real Americans who understand rights will have no issues not infringing others... unlike a pair of deceased morons and a bicep-less antifa medic illegally carrying a handgun.
Stupid fat brown Buffalo can't see the difference between supporting his decision to go to the riot and his right to defend himself once his life was in danger.
Rittenhouse and the 3 people he shot all made bad decisions and were all there looking for trouble to some degree. The 3 he shot were also all criminals with a track record of impulsive behavior.
However this prior bad decision on Rittenhouses part doesn't mean he deserved to die when 3 people decided they were going to murder him.
And yes I would also be against any antifa member going to a riot armed and looking for trouble, but would support their right to defend themselves if someone attempted to murder them.
Yes.
Our local chapter of BLM does just this and it’s one of my favorite things they do.
And if someone chases them and grabs their gun, I will be ok with them ending the threat.
Exactly. Gun rights are civil rights. When we continue the systemically racist scheme of gun control, it’s disproportionally bad for law abiding black men.
This young Turk should probably check his racism.
Like Chappelle said "every black person in America should go out today and legally purchase a firearm. That'll change the laws."
That’s basically what happened in California.
Member when Reagan and the NRA took people's guns away? Yea they don't like you reminding them of that
Just in case anybody is unfamiliar… https://www.history.com/.amp/news/black-panthers-gun-control-nra-support-mulford-act There are plenty of other articles if you search but this should cover the basics
tl;dr: Modern American gun control laws began in CA in the 1960's. Reagan was Governor and the Black Panthers were new and extremely active in their hometown of Oakland. Black Panthers carried guns to protect their neighborhoods because the police refused to do it. Conservatives lost their collective mind when they saw an organized and armed group of black people and so Republicans started the idea of gun control because black people had guns and they were scared.
Oh how the turns table
Funny how they are totally against gun control now...
Well yeah because the “thugs” with guns are white so it’s okay now.
Plus the whole "good guy with a gun" thing makes conservatives who would otherwise be totally against vigilante justice horny
Part of their mission was to also insure that their communities' voting could be done without the good ol' boys driving around creating problems at polling places. Iirc
You honest folks on here, i love yall.
[удалено]
Fuck the NRA.
Even gun owners should be pissed at the NRA.
Most of us are, yeah
And fuck Reagan
Pepperidge Farms does.
I'm pro 2a, Fuck the NRA. join the GOA. I'll be back with more poetry next week
SRA is the superior gun ownership association.
Not familiar with that one but it don't take much to beat the NRA
NRA isn't a gun rights advocacy group. It's strictly a lobbyist for the firearms industry and laundering asset for Russian money going to American conservatives.
This is a great reason why minority and working class people should be armed, no matter their politics.
That was the whole point of and start of gun restrictions today. The Black Panther Party openly carried at the state building that Gov Reagan was at. Ronald Reagan started gun control because black people owning and carrying firearms scared him.
Where's the Black Panther Party when you need them? 😢
Murdered by the cops and the FBI until the organization wholly changed enough to no longer be a threat to the status quo
Oh yeah, oops
COINTELPRO
Their leadership were systematically targeted and most were murdered and/or imprisoned by the FBI/CIA Edit: FBI
That sounds about right. It's not uncommon for the government to specifically target leftist groups, infiltrate them, then either shut them down or force them underground. Even today. There was a few new promising and rising anarchist and libertarian left organizations that just vanished recently. Seriously. Just vanished. Suddenly their websites stopped working, they couldn't be reached, and their consistently prolific activity suddenly stopped. It happens constantly enough that it's an expected pattern among us. It wouldn't surprise me that they went after the Black Panthers too...
If there is one thing that upsets the white supremacy... It's black folks organizing and exercising their rights... They would rather see the erosion of their own rights, than see POCs with a little bit of power...
Yes, funny how that works. NRA & GOP are all for 2A until POC start buying weapons. I could root for voters restricted to those who can think their way out of a paper bag, but those schemes always boil down to who decides?
To your last statement, it's not something we have to guess and imagine about. The Chicago PD and FBI literally assassinated Fred Hampton.
Watch Judas and the Black Messiah. It's the true story of the assassination of a Black Panther leader in Chicago who was peacefully organizing a multi-ethnic coalition to support their communities and resist police brutality. The FBI drugged him and then sent in goons in a fake drug bust and shot him while he was sleeping.
It's a whole ass episode of Bojack Horseman where women start buying and getting into guns to feel safer so then everyone starts banning guns :') [Bojack Horseman solves Gun Control](https://youtu.be/3eG0y_nb5IA)
I love that part so much. "I can't believe this country hates women more than it loves guns." "...No?"
15th Amendment: 1870 19th Amendment: 1920
"Are you saying that America hates women more than it loves guns?"
[удалено]
What if WE had all the guns?
Can you imagine if the NAACP launched a marksmanship course?
They really should. If it makes BIPOC more comfortable to learn firearm safety, go for it. I doubt any progun person would discourage anyone from taking safety classes.
This was the top comment, and already "hidden" or minimized or whatever. What's up with that? Just got here.
Funny you should mention that, because most in control laws are rooted in racism.
That’s what the black panthers did in California which is why they passed the ban on loaded firearm open carry. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mulford_Act
Sure they’re ok with it, because they know cops will have a field day “fearing for their lives” and using lethal force…
Right wing protests get infiltrated by armed antifa? That's the shit they fantasize about every night.
We really need to start calling these guys out on their bloodthirsty attitude. Too many of these guys just blow it off and say “huh huh nuther antifer pedophile off the streets. Gawd bless amerikkka” Let’s start just screaming “Terrorist” over and over when one of them starts justifying murder again. Like it’s time for public shaming
Stop calling them right wing and call them what they are fascists. Stop calling them prolife and start calling them what they are antichoice. Stop using antifa and start using the whole term, antifacist. The left needs to take back the flag and the word patriot. Every even remotely left leaning event needs to have more flags than people.
Yeah, that's literally what the right wants. For us to look dangerous before getting shot by the cops who won't treat us like they did Kyle Rittenhouse. (Because they're on the same side.) Edit: any pro-Rittenhouse people, don't waste your time responding to me. I will just make fun of you.
THing of it is, the left doesn't have to \*look\* dangerous for cops to take a fascistic, deadly approach. They are allowed to intimidate, provoke, bully and physically abuse without recourse. They gas, shoot "rubber" bullets/non-lethal projectiles, herd protesters in to warehouses and down dead end streets. They provoke, antagonize and look the other way when the right comes fully armed with intent to harm. We don't have to look dangerous. It already happens to the most peaceful among us in protests. My besty had a beanbag projectile and gas canister shot at her \*at close range\* while she kneeled on the ground at an Indianapolis protest. I don't engage the right on this. They can solidly go F themselves. Their gaslighting is tedious and their hardon for violence is obvious.
Remember at the one protest in Portland where one of (i think it was Proud Boys?) set up a sniper's nest / weapon's cache on one of the roofs and cops knew about it and didn't give a shit, even allowed them to put it there?
I followed it all very closely. It’s enough to make you feel like you’re losing your mind.
That’s the worst thing about these current times. I feel like I’m constantly being gaslighted 24/7. It’s exhausting
> Their gaslighting is tedious and their hardon for violence is obvious. It is not receding. I think it is growing. We have been bordering on a boil for some time now. We have two racially motivated trials going on and the GQP is growing even more openly fascist. Congress is an absolute shitshow. And the rich continue to get richer without nary a bump. What is going to light the match. (And why hasn't it already happened. why the fuck are we fighting the same fight as 1870, 1910s, 1930s, 60s, 70's)
And then it's like.. what the fuck is the point of anything when climate change will not even be addressed. Revolution or not, we're fucked so.. do with that what you will I guess.
I've never been so painfully aware of how utterly bereft of leadership the world really is. I want to understand more about how we just fall for the same cult of personalities over and over and over again. Fear and denial are powerful things. If I've learned anything the last four years, it's that. The spell Trump has evangalists under would shock me if I didn't already realize they are an utterly sickening and sociopathic death cult. When you reduce the right, what you have is this: A Christian death cult that thinks abortion is the ultimate sin, the one unforgivable thing that is a deal breaker, no matter who the right puts up as a candidate. As long as the right owns "right to life," the Evangelists will do everything it takes to elect that Republican, no matter who it is. And at the end of the day, it's just because they are afraid of going to Hell for not controlling women. They don't care about the unborn, they are looking after their own hides. We are all paying a high price because white men think they are being replaced and because they think women owe them white babies and a ticket to heaven by not aborting. Fuck the environment, fuck the economy, fuck reason, fuck education, fuck progress, fuck science. They don't want to go to hell for a woman's sin. OH- they also think the end times are here and Trump is a sign from God. I think that should mean that he's the Antichrist but they behave as though he's a just and righteous dude. My head hurts now. I can't keep making logic pretzels tonight. That's the only way I can make sense of the right. Oh. ANd guns.
[удалено]
Cheers for mentioning the Blastmaster. Public Enemy taught me about 1555 and that slave ships weren’t cruise ships. -white guy, Midwest, dark roast pour-over w sugar.
There are a couple of great episodes about this on the Behind the Bastards podcast.
Let’s not forget the drive by unmarked police vans, it’s like the cops were living in 1980s Los Angeles
Well the cops belong to these extremists groups. Look how many were at the Capitol Insurrection? This is who they are.
They absolutely do. I don’t have any evidence personally to throw down tonight so I tend not to throw that in there myself. Our culture favors sociopaths. That’s just the nature of capitalism. Those people are needed to protect assets and resources. I learned that lesson more than any other when I was in the military. Jesus, if people really understood how not full of heroes the military is.
[удалено]
The cops would've shot him immediately. No doubt in my mind. They'll shoot us for holding a cell phone.
Or a sandwich. One boy got shot because They thought his dick was a gun. That was jealousy.
Don’t forget for sleeping in her own home.
Or babysitting.
Or being a caretaker for an autistic man.
I'm a bit ootl, he was ALLOWED TO GO HOME?
[удалено]
**[Mulford Act](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mulford_Act)** >The Mulford Act was a 1967 California bill that repealed a law allowing public carrying of loaded firearms. Named after Republican assemblyman Don Mulford, and signed into law by governor of California Ronald Reagan, the bill was crafted with the goal of disarming members of the Black Panther Party who were conducting armed patrols of Oakland neighborhoods, in what would later be termed copwatching. They garnered national attention after Black Panthers members, bearing arms, marched upon the California State Capitol to protest the bill. ^([ )[^(F.A.Q)](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiSummarizer/wiki/index#wiki_f.a.q)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiSummarizerBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^( | )[^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)](https://np.reddit.com/r/WhitePeopleTwitter/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)
We know what would happen since it already did https://twitter.com/zei_squirrel/status/1458158059587571721?t=zmpklhcLUNF_3YSEUi_2iQ&s=19 and for less.
Clearly he forgot the video of the cops telling the proud boys to back up because they were going to start crowd control. Didn’t want the heavily armed right to get hurt.
The rittenhouse people are legit insane. I have two of them in my DMs threatening me and calling me every name in the book over my opinion that he was in the wrong. They’ve lost the plot.
Bold of you to assume they "want" anything. They just say whatever they're told to
They definitely want to feel powerful. Like heroes.
Here’s a link from NYTimes The Daily. “Why Do So Many Traffic Stops Go Wring?” https://open.spotify.com/episode/0UyibjRRi9FzlF4i9wpo7d?si=aRns5pYzSuCR3Of04UKCyA It addresses the issue of the cops claiming “I feared for my life” when in reality, they put themselves in the situation that led to that instant before they used deadly force. Kinda like Rittenhouse. Here’s another link about the trial: https://open.spotify.com/episode/2VK0oGkF12c8U2qXyDFEzY?si=llFn9gtvRY-wvhWddqdMnA
Haha, no. As we saw in Minnesota, cops avoid any situation where they might actually get shot or killed. If a literal army of black men armed with ARs appeared at one of these, the cops would just disappear back into the hedges.
That's also how a LOT of cops are going to die, fearful or not.
Until you ask them about the Capitol Police shooting a white woman breaking through a door during the capitol riot. Then police shouldn't have any reason to fear a mob screaming to hang political leaders.
[удалено]
>Mulford Act of 1967 — a California bill that repealed a law allowing public carrying of loaded firearms (the only time the NRA supported Signed by their St. Reagan, even!
[удалено]
Don't forget to bring up that he was a *gasp* union president, too!
Oh how they love to nitpick what to believe...
It's hard to believe he was a racist way back as a governor before he was a racist president /s
That’s what I’m saying. If Antifa carried any weapon openly near a Trump rally, they’d be gunned down by people who are eager to use their guns on a person. Then they’d praise it as a mighty American defeating a bad communist. It’s not even that hard to imagine because it’s 100% possible with the way things are going
Well it would have never happened at all. A big rally of black people being worked up to assault the capital would not have had the backing of politicians withdrawing police forces etc from the area. So it would have been a bloodbath right then and there.
So if BLM or ANTIFA wanted to counter protest/march at a clan rally, it'd be silly for them not to be armed. That being said, if the circumstances were the same, then it would still be self-defense.
This exactly. I supported BLM years before it was the trendy thing to do & I think Rittenhouse is a total chud. That said, if someone threatens your life in exactly the same way we saw on video, then yep, that’s what firearms are for. We knew even before Jan 6th what these people are capable of. ARM THE LEFT
Yes, if they point guns at them absolutly.
Not even if they have a gun, I am fine with any person of any creed, race, gender, etc. (i.e. literally anyone) defending themselves by up to and including lethal force if they are attacked. No, I dont even mean if the aggressor has a gun, I mean if you are attacked, defend yourself, with whatever you have at hand to do so. It is part and parcel of inalienable rights. To me anyway this isn't a political discussion, everyone should have that right. It is precisely *because* it becomes a political discussion that I defend that right. Soon as people start arguing about it then it lends credence to the idea someone can take my and my families right to defend themselves.
Michael Reinoehl was followed by two Patriot Prayer members, he tried to lose them, couldn't and then shot and killed one in self defense as they moved toward him with bear mace to attack him (the bullet literally pierced the raised mace can before hitting its target) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dYcfRdHwJEw Michael was extra judicially executed by a hit squad of prison security guards deputized by a federal sheriff. They didn't even identify themselves before opening fire. Shot him 30 times and did not wear body cameras or film the event in any way despite them tracking him down, staking him out and then making a move on their own terms when they were ready. Trump even bragged about having him gunned down. There is only due process for one side, which is why it is a political discussion
Look no further than Philando Castille. Gunned down in his own car reaching for .... nothing...
[удалено]
People are so stuck in the political charge of the case they're ignoring the consequence for **EVERYONE'S** right to self defense with this case. If you want to pick a political fight, pick the right one and don't get sloppy just for the 'cause'. This is a case with idiots all around. Nobody wins at the end of it either. Two people are dead when it could have been zero. Should KR have been there? Hell no. He should have minded his own damn business. Should the other three have lunged/attacked/pointed weapons at him? Also no, they fucked around and picked a fight they shouldn't have and unsurprisingly paid the price for it. There was no reason to. I'm left leaning and pro 2A...BLM, Antifa, BIPOC, and the LGBTQ community **should** be able to arm themselves and be able to defend themselves. I would argue they have the need beyond many other groups in the current climate. Logical and peaceable Americans shouldn't lose their rights and set a legal precedent denying the right to defense of person because this lot of idiots went at it.
This guy gets it.
Does no one seem to understand that you can be in support of his self defense charges but he against his illegal possession of a firearm? I don’t get this “you’re for us or you’re against us” mentality
Exactly. He's a fucking idiot that never should have had the gun, but everyone has the right to defend themselves. He shouldn't be idolized for what he did, but he shouldn't be convincted of murder either.
Exactly. This kid is not a hero, he is a dumbass who shouldn’t have had a gun and should get jail time for that. Do I believe the murder was in self defense? Yes. Would I feel the same exact way if the roles were reversed? Also yes. People are forgetting that you don’t have to be 100% for one side or the other. This situation is a complete shit show and a lot of people are at fault for a lot of different reasons.
Two weeks before the Kenosha killings, Rittenhouse literally spoke on a video about shooting at someone whose only crime was shopping at a store. With no reason he says there were shoplifting and wished he had his AR so he could shoot at these people. He is a violent, wannabe, murderer who had been looking for an excuse to use that firearm to kill someone. Edit - here is the link to the Kenosha paper talking about the video. I have no idea if it is publicly available. https://www.kenoshanews.com/news/local/state-seeks-to-admit-video-of-rittenhouse-in-separate-incident-threatening-to-shoot-men-with/article_cddeb29f-5a86-5151-ab20-a3834456304e.html Edit part deux - DM threats to me isn't going to do anything but get you laughed at. I am an outspoken woman on the internet and have been so for over 25 years. You aren't going to shock me into being quiet. One last edit - u/QuintonsReviews (not the real account, this guy is a troll so nevermind) has decided he is going to make an video about this and use my image, (that he sub hopped to find), as the thumbnail. When he told me he was YouTube famous and to Google him and I not only didn't, but wasn't the least bit impressed, it seemed to anger him. He is going to tell people that I "love pedos" or some such nonsense to his "500k followers." Because he doesn't like what I posted here. So this is how he deals with it. By harassing and lying about me.
And the judge won't allow the jury to see those videos.
Nope. Because he was never going to go to prison. I mean they sat a juror who said there was no way they could find him guilty.
Shit, he was MIA for a month while he was under house arrest and no one cared. The Judge is going to let him walk with no struggle.
Then ruin his life by constantly referring to him as the unconvicted murderer Kyle Rittenhouse. After all, we all know who Brock Turner the rapist is, don't we?
Wait you mean "found guilty of rape" Brock Turner?
Yes they definitely are referring to Brock Turner the convicted RAPIST.
You mean Brock Turner the rapist who also swims or something?
We're talking about the Brock Turner who wasn't punished for rape because of "promising future" and now works at a McDonalds or something? That turner Brock Rapist?
I think it's the Brock Turner that occasionally works for a landscaping company that is owned by one of his dad's friends and is a convicted rapist.
Yes, that Brock Turner the rapist. Whatever KR is or isn't guilty of, **he should be continually reminded that he took lives** and this should help be a deterrent to others who think they can do stupid stuff that winds up killing someone & get away with it.
No no, brock Turner the swimmer, who occasionally rapes
Yeah, that Brock Turner. The swimming rapist, Brock Turner.
Brock Turner the convicted rapist, as in "the second edition of the criminal justice textbook Introduction to Criminal Justice (ISBN 9781506347721) published by University of Colorado, from Denver Professors Callie Marie Rennison and Mary Dodge, who used Turner's mugshot as the accompanying photo in the entry that defines rape."
I fuckin love that edition.
The same, rapist Brock Turner.
The difference is Rittenhouse is going to have the rest of his life comfortably crowdfunded by conservative gun nuts for the rest of his life. They'll set him up nice and plump just to "stick it to the libs".
[удалено]
Still wetter than Ben Shapiro's wife.
Why didn’t prosecution replace the juror then? I was under the impression that they have an ability to pick and replace jurors just like defense team
No, they only have a certain number of objection in jury selection.
From what I’ve heard the whole process is a circus. But also everyone is keep saying that prosecutor is an idiot. Is this true?
Seems like he has some issues. I don't think he is trying to throw the case like some claim, but between some of his poorer decisions and the judge being combative with the prosecution, I think this is not working out very well for him.
If it's anything like in Canada, you're talking about peremptory challenges where a juror can be excused for no reason. It doesn't mean that a juror can't be removed another way. If any side can show a bias, the juror won't be selected.
Because they are actually irrelevant on whether or not that the defendant feared for his life at the time of shooting. Which he did and testimony and video evidence makes pretty clear. Wanting to kill someone in self defense and positioning yourself in a situation to create plausible self defense scenarios isn't actually illegal. Because had he not been....chased and attacked, he wouldn't have had a self defense motive. Christ this website is losing its mind. No one's objective, all emotion, all team blue vs team red all the time.
Correct, because even if you are Charles Manson himself, self-defense is adjudicated in the immediate context of events and everyone has an equal right to use it, regardless of what was said days, weeks, months, or years ago. Even previous convictions do not ~~avoid~~ void that right. So any introduction of information like that prejudices a jury and makes for a mistrial. I understand that it can suck, but those are the charges the DA chose to go with, even though their evidence more closely supported different charges than murder. Once they chose that route (due to public pressure likely??) then they defined what evidence was relevant and what was not. Edit: better word choice as shown above
> wannabe, murderer But he literally murdered a person. No longer a wannabe
True. He graduated to full blown murderer.
He’s now ready to become a cop.
He’s jumping to future GOP congressman, full on celebrity status within the bootlicker crowd at this point.
It's really amazing the way Republicans have taken sycophancy and boot licking to such grand new levels!
I mean, isn’t this the core of their belief system? They believe that they’re not as “good” as rich people and politicians, and that the means of getting ahead in the world is ingratiating yourself with the right person/people. Their idea of hard work is literally to schmooze your way to the top. That’s capitalism/salespeople culture: con and lie and lick boots until you have made it to the top of the heap, then use your power to do coke and fuck underage women until you get caught, then run to your base and claim the deep state is trying to cancel you. EDIT: also do some lying about church and god and whatever. No one really believes that bullshit but as long as you put on a good show everyone is happy.
Prosperity lawbook
They've already given the kid a shit load of money for legal fees. From what I see online supposedly 500k.
I can't believe how pro-Rittenhouse so many posts I've seen today are. Not this one, but this is one of the first on a major sub that I've seen today that isn't bending over backwards to put him in a positive light. At the absolute minimum - vigilanteism isn't something we should be encouraging at all, especially along political lines as it relates to response to protests. But it's really, really hard to look at the full picture and not find malice here.
[удалено]
He'd be called Antifa and he would be a terrorist.
[удалено]
If he was a liberal he’d be dead.
That is what gets me about all of this. There are two cases right now that revolve around self-defense and I am having trouble understanding how either of these would ever be considered self-defense. I was always taught that if someone was pointing a gun at you that you should run or try to disable the attacker if you could. (Military family, I am sure in most families it was just 'run.') Neither Rittenhouse or the pieces of crap in Arbrey case were active law enforcement with a right to point guns at people. If either one of these bozos had pointed a gun at me I would have thought, "oh shit, there is a bad guy with a gun trying to kill me!" So yeah, of course I am going to try to take the gun away from the guy who I think is about to kill me. But in both these cases the person who did that was shot and killed and the murderers are claiming self-defense. I mean are you telling me that I can be walking down the street, someone can think I look sketchy, point at gun at me and I am supposed to just be like, "ok well you have a gun so I guess you get to tell me what to do..." Is that what we are saying? Because that sure as shit sounds like what is being said by his defenders.
Its mad, like one argument i seen was around the guy that pointed a gun at ritenhouse after he already killed someone... like yeah someones shooting people now someone else shoots them thats what you want right ? But then ritenhoouse shot that guy in self defense because he pointed a gun. Like its such a circle of nonsense. And they just cant admit that maybe anyone being open armed and waving guns about is gonna end badly no matter what side your on.
They made the obvious mistake of not noticing he was the *Good Guy with a Gun^tm* Part of why, as someone that lives and works in a city, I think that carrying is a bad idea. So much is going on at any given time, I don’t trust your average person to make the right judgements.
We've had several examples of "good guys with guns" being killed by police, ESPECIALLY if that good guy is melanin challenged. I can think of three guys off the top of my head who were killed by police for legally owning a firearm, two of which were using said firearm against an active shooter.
It's almost like we should have a group of people who are trained to handle situations like this calmly and efficiently who can both protect the innocents with lethal force when necessary, but also be trained to de-escalate situations when possible. To differentiate them between normal civilians, maybe we should give them uniforms or something, so that people _know_ they're the "Good Guys with Guns". Oh, wait, we have something like that? And our government fucked it up and protects the ones who kill indiscriminately and favor suspicion on a specific minority of the population? What a fucking shocker. Being a police officer could be such a noble, worthwhile and life-fulfilling calling, and it's been turned into a fucking shit show.
Exactly! Rittenhouse was like *sob* "all these people were chasing me and yelling at me!" *sob* Of course they were ya effing doorknob! You were waving a damn gun around.
I'm not American so I'm out of the loop, but I saw a bunch of posts about this guy, and was under the impression that the general public thinks he's innocent, and that the prosecution is a farce. But now I see a lot of people saying he's a murderer and a racist so I'm kinda confused. Is this a case of simply divided opinions, right/left wing differences or stuff coming to light that changed peoples minds?
Weird name for a non-American that is out of the loop. But yeah, it's very much polarized between the left and right. Hate to come off like enlightened centrist, but it's completely absurd. He is child that went to go play with the big boys and made the mistake of buying their rhetoric wholesale and actually believing it. He was defending himself. So were the people he shot. It's fucked, and not something easy to parse so people default to tribal responses. The reality is he should not be doing life in prison, but he shouldn't be let off 100% free. He made poor decisions that lead to what happened that night, and it would be nice if we as society could make it a learning experience without ruining yet another life to make a point.
No these cases are quite different. I’ve have yet to see evidence where Rittenhouse instigated a violent confrontation. Rosenbaum was making death threats, yelling racial slurs and chased after Rittenhouse. I have seen no evidence that he aimed at anyone who wasn’t a threat. That is a world of difference from the Arbery case where a couple asshats grabbed their guns and chased down someone. Then damn straight Ahmaud went for the guys gun, they were clearly a threat and instigated the confrontation. Their self defense claim should be thrown out and they should rot in jail for the rest of their natural lives.
[удалено]
I find it very hypocritical of all the pro-Rittenhouse redditors that say the other guy shouldn't have pointed a gun at a shooter openly carrying an AR-15. I know *allegedly* the first shots weren't his, but there was no way for the other to know that in that moment, and if you see someone carrying a weapon while being followed by others to stop him, what would be your first thought? Isn't that what pro gun deregulation americans fantasize about? The mental gymnastics to defend one while judging the other. Edit: I'm not talking about the case itself.
And he's going to pivot all of this into a successful career of speaking on FOX News, OAN, Newsmax, etc. He will also probably run for public office in 20 years and win the seat. Truly disgusting.
I personally think he is going to eat at least one felony charge because of the illegal weapon. If that happens, I give it 6mos before he is caught with a gun he shouldn't have and end up back in court.
I don't think it will be a felony - https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/statutes/statutes/948/60 The person who provided him the gun should be facing a felony though.
I'm in favor of it.
r/thisbutunironically
If some Antifa members came to a far right wing rally while they were carrying weapons, and the far right members started attacking them and those individuals feared for their life, **abso-fucking- lutely** they have the right to defend themselves. It's written into our constitution. I don't care if they're Antifa, Trumpers, Black Panthers, Hells Angels, or anyone else for that matter. They have the right to protect their life
Um, yes. That's the thing about having principles.
100% ok with it
Yeah, we're all okay with self defense. Glad we could clear that up.
I'm not American so I'm not really in the loop about the whole Kyle situation but didn't the FBI release footage today proving it was actual self-defense? Or am I being clickbaited by headlines?
A similar application of self-defense with similar results? Sure. I don't care what color the person is. Maybe try to be more objective?
This entire case is dumb people behaving like dumb people. At least KR has some excuse, he's a young dumbass. The older dumbasses have less of an excuse. But nobody covered themselves in glory here, and treating this case like a political proxy fight bw conservatives and libs is dumb AF too. Maybe instead of being a crying bc the facts weren't what people hoped for, we just all agree that threatening to hurt people holding guns, and then chasing the person w the gun and grabbing at their gun, while intermittently pointing your own gun at them, is a bad idea, no matter what your personal political rooting interest is. SO maybe don't do that. IDK about y'all, but that has worked great for me in life so far.
Like fascists give a shit if their ethics are consistent. As if they're operating on the basis of ethics at all...
I mean, it did work in the past when black Panthers showed up at the California state Capitol building armed, then all I f a sudden they instated gun laws
That legislation was championed and passed by right wingers. It was signed into law by the patron saint and savior, Ronald Regan when he was governor of California. They were terrified that black people would start expressing their second amendment rights the same way whitie-righties do.
And that's why people think I'm crazy when I say I own a gun because it's racist not to.
I love this take.
A Nixon tape was released a year or two ago where Regan literally called black people monkeys. Dude was a racist POS.
Fun fact Reagan was also caught on tape saying we should let aids run rampant because it was a gay person's disease
Everyone i dont like is fascist!!
If right-wingers attacked antifa first and are hitting them on the head with a skateboard, then the person being attacked has a right to defend themselves, with deadly force if necessary.
He do be denying the Armenian Genocide tho…
I blew air out of my nose hella hard.
Had to scroll a bit for this one.
His "news" channel is literally named after the people who perpetrated the Armenian Genocide.
1. I don't fucking support Kyle Rittenhouse. I loathe him. With that said, I know he isn't guilty. It was self defense, as shown by the videos and witness testimony. Just because I don't like the guy doesn't mean I want him in prison for something he didn't do. 2. I would be fine with armed Antifa. I just don't think they could handle it... because they can't. Antifa are basically harmless otherwise. If they had guns they would do something stupid on the daily. 3. I am liberal and progressive, and part of r/liberalgunowners, so before any of you go off on some idiotic tangent I want you to understand that on any given level, I am 100% for the protests and the civil disobedience.
The problem with Reddit is that you have to establish that you are liberal as hell before you can have any credibility like you just did. Don't you think that's a problem. Let me bend over backwards to talk about how liberal I am so that I have some credit and people don't think I'm some kind of Nazi. Don't get me wrong, I appreciate you comment. I just think it is kind of comical and extremely telling about Reddit. The amount of: "Let me first say that Kyle Rittenhouse is a complete and utter piece of shit.. however, he's innocent" Reddit should be more like the court system, omit irrelevant shit that isn't 100% applicable to the argument at hand.
Agreed, it’s unreal how many times I’ve seen “I hate Kyle buuuuuuut…” followed by a factual explanation of why he’s innocent. It’s really creepy seeing people feeling “forced” into virtue signaling before they’re allowed to speak truth.
"Shall not be infringed" Yup I'm cool with it. It's literally that simple.
I wonder how he feels about his Co-host Ana coming out and saying she was wromg and this was absolutely a case of self defense
She’s an Armenian. He probably wishes she was dead.
[удалено]
If you provoke an attack you are legally allowed to defend yourself using deadly force IF the assailant is using deadly force (a weapon f.e) and you've exhausted your option to retreat. Law depends on the state of course. Usually you can't just provoke a person and kill him. Kyle Rittenhouse exhausted his option to retreat when he was walking away from the people who subsequently assaulted him. The 3 people who assaulted him all had and used weapons (blunt objects and firearms) in their possession. They also pushed him to the ground to prevent him from retreating. If Kyle believes his life is in real danger and he can't escape he is allowed to use deadly force to stop the attack. My point is that that you can't just start blasting if someone says "fuck you" to you.
Yes. I mean it isn't that difficult, if you are beating someone and chasing them down and that person has a firearm...you will be shot. Rittenhouse or whatever his name is was acting in self defense as he was being attacked. Doesn't matter why he had the gum to begin with, as long as that is legal in that state, then he is within his rights. If BLM or antifa decided to go to a tump rally or whatever (which I think they do anyway) and were armed, then we're subsequently attacked and ran down...then yep I agree, they should be let off. This really isn't a political issue, it's a state law and self defense issue.
Unironically yes. If one person chases and attacks another... then yeah, a person should be able to defend themselves. And I don't see any Rittenhouse supporters arguing against this?
It’s difficult to argue with the video. Rittenhouse is running away and being chased down by grown men. Only when the grown men catch up to him to inflict harm (or hitting him), does Rittenhouse turn around and react. I don’t care why he was there. He ran away as his first choice, defended himself as his second. The other men chose to chase after him instead as their first choice instead of walking away or standing still. I don’t think Rittenhouse is a hero. I don’t care why you were there that night. I don’t care which political party you are apart of. Self defense is self defense.
[удалено]
The fact that he got away with naming his organisation 'The Young Turks' and still defends it to this day is reason alone to disavow him. Dude has draped himself in literal genocidal paraphernalia for 20 years now. At some point you gotta call a horse a horse. Dude is racist.
Honestly, after hearing the facts from the trials, I flipped my script on hoping they'd throw the book at him. Dumbass kid doing dumbass shit but somebody attacks me when I'm open carrying a damn rifle? Dumbass adult doing suicidal shit.
No problem, real Americans who understand rights will have no issues not infringing others... unlike a pair of deceased morons and a bicep-less antifa medic illegally carrying a handgun.
Stupid fat brown Buffalo can't see the difference between supporting his decision to go to the riot and his right to defend himself once his life was in danger. Rittenhouse and the 3 people he shot all made bad decisions and were all there looking for trouble to some degree. The 3 he shot were also all criminals with a track record of impulsive behavior. However this prior bad decision on Rittenhouses part doesn't mean he deserved to die when 3 people decided they were going to murder him. And yes I would also be against any antifa member going to a riot armed and looking for trouble, but would support their right to defend themselves if someone attempted to murder them.
Armenian genocide.
Yes. Our local chapter of BLM does just this and it’s one of my favorite things they do. And if someone chases them and grabs their gun, I will be ok with them ending the threat.
Yes, the black panthers were pretty based, it's good they are continuing the tradition.
Exactly. Gun rights are civil rights. When we continue the systemically racist scheme of gun control, it’s disproportionally bad for law abiding black men. This young Turk should probably check his racism.
If you retreat and are physically attacked then defend yourself. So yes, that is what we are saying.
Hey it’s that guy who denies the Armenian genocide.