🇳🇱
Kyle Rittennhouse is...
PS I want to hear what you think, not what you think the jury will decide.
#KyleRittennhouse #KyleRittenhouse
@freemo for me I think it’s kinda sus he just went into the chaos when it wasn’t even in his city. I am not really sure what happened but if there were no direct threat to him then yeah he is guilty. Again I want to précise I am really uninformed on this thing. But yeah, don’t go play the though guys or the cops and go in a dangerous place should be a common sense rule. You’re not equipped nor formed to deal with it (cops should be formed more, but that’s another story), this isn’t cod
@louisrcouture Some would say its suspect that he walked into a dangerous area with the intent of providing first aide and protecting people... I say its what redeems him.
As for a direct threat to him. He didnt shoot at first. A mob started to chase him screaming things about killing him and beating him up, he ran and didnt shoot back instead screaming "friendly friendly friendly" as objects were thrown at him by people chasing him. At every point he only shoots once he has been cornered and is within arms reach of physical assault. Even then one shot and ran, he didnt just start shooting a crowd or anything. At one point a gun was even held to his face showing the crowd was also at least partly armed.
Its a very clear case of self-defense IMO.
@freemo do we have access to the tape?
@louisrcouture it helps to also hear the testimony to fill in the details mind you. But I think the bulk of it is clear enough on the video.
@freemo when you he isn’t guilty of the second killing, however he definitely is guilty of the first one. He is the one who came into the scene, with his gun to confront the protesters. It doesn’t matter the protester tried to break a car, you do not go and confront people with your gun. He was also given a clear warning not to go into the scene, but he went on anyway. That is enough for me to believe he is guilty. Self defense require you not to be the first offender.
@louisrcouture Wait, so your saying if you legally and rightfully have a gun.. it is shouldered and your hand isnt even touching it, and you happen to approach someone to politely talk to them, then they have a right to kill you and you have no right to shoot back....
Cut me a break, thats reaching.
@louisrcouture Where do you see him shooting someone far away? Three people were shot.. 1) was the first guy who was chasing him, threw stuff at him, and shot him when he got in arms reach and tried assaulting him. 2) was when he was chased by a mob, fell to the ground and multiple people came within arms reach and started assaulting him, he shot that due... #1 and #2 died. 3) was the guy he shot ONLY after he aimed a pistol at him. Prior to that the man approach him with arms raised and he explicitly did not shoot him. But once the person aimed a gun at him he shot.
#3 was admitted to be the case by the person shot, he was the only one of the 3 who lived.
So where do you see him shooting anyone at a distance other than the one person who aimed a gun at him (and in that case he shot non-lethally).
@freemo he went on and shot him when he was still far away.
Maybe in America you can just go around with a gun and that’s not threatning but you didn’t ask whether we thought he would be convicted or but is he org is he not guilty. You asked for my opinion now you get it.
For me, if you come near me, yes you are threatening, especially if you already shot a few seconds ago. And Canada is pretty lax on guns as compared to other non-US places