Kyle Rittenhouse found not guilty

Foxtrol isn't sure in what country it happened.

But the police didn't show up, and putting his gun down in the middle of a riot would have be a supremely stupid thing to do.

Rittenhouse choosing to go into the situation was a supremely stupid thing to do.

In many mass shootings civilians try to disarm shooters because the police aren't there - according to many here it is illegal to do this once the shooter is retreating carrying their gun 🙄

The School Crime scene where John Rambo was, it's not a normal country.

Do keep up.

Sure was.

No it's not "illegal". But if the shooter is leaving the scene, where they have shot one attacker, with their gun lowered and they are attacked by a citizen wanting to stop them (as could very well be the case here, and is probably why Grosskreutz has not been charged with anything despite being illegally in possession of a firearm and wielding it) then it is open to a self defense claim.

Self defense is a state of mind decision. The judge or jury (depending on the type of trial) are tasked with deciding what the state of mind of the shooter was at the time that they shot, and whether there were any grounds for them to feel that their life was in immediate danger. In this situation, where Rittenhouse was walking away with his gun lowered after shooting in (alleged) self defense, and given that he did not shoot anyone before being attacked by them, it seems reasonable that self defense is on the table. If he'd indiscriminately shot a bunch of people, or even shot one person aggressively and not in self defense, then it would be exceedingly difficult to mount a self defense defence because proving that a person had switched from a mindset where they had murderous intent to one where they were not muderous in a matter of minutes would be almost impossible.

Maybe it was self defence but he went there with a gun he had no right to carry why was he there at all,.? what would happen to a parent in Ireland who gave a rifle to a 17 year old boy and helped them to go to protest or an area where there was a minority left wing group protesting

He had no legal right to carry a rifle

I hope he does not get away without some punishment

Of course he is a hero to some right wing extremists

Why were the rioters there that day ?

Nobody gave them a permit to stage a riot. Or burn down buildings etc.

Why were the rioters waving guns around, and threatening people? (including pedophiles and convicted felons)

Why were the police basically told not to do anything about all of these unlawful things?

If you can unearth some answers to these questions, and more, then perhaps you might also stumble on the reasons why a 17 year old kid wound up in the middle of this sh!tstorm!

I know it's a bit of a rubex cube, but the truth is out there.

What's interesting is that the mainstream American media seems to be acting in a way where they appear to want people's trust in justice being served by the courts to be reduced.

What's the desired endgame?

Trial by public opinion?

Using social media, where you have conveniently removed anyone with a dissenting voice.

You can see even in this thread, people baying for blood based mostly on "how it looks" rather than the facts of the case. And even some of these people, who are honest enough to admit that the facts don't support a conviction, are clearly disappointed that he might walk.

Why? Because they think they know Kyle Rittenhouse perfectly. They are arrogant enough to think they know exactly who and what Kyle Rittinhouse is, from high up on their lofty perch. They see it all with perfectly clear vision.

It's high level delusion and arrogance. The reality is, none of us really know who this kid is - whether he's a good kid or a bad kid in his everyday life. It doesn't matter what side of the political spectrum you think he falls into. Pre-judging him based on your ingrained societal biases, is wrong. Whatever way you choose to spin it.

That's unfortunately the way some people would run society if they got half a chance. Whatever doesn't portray the image they want to see in society, gets erased from the perfect illusion they're painting in their heads.

If you cared about justice, you wouldn't have these people jury tampering and closing down a 17 year old's go fund me page - so he can't mount a robust defense etc. They only care about justice, if it fits perfectly with their manufactured version of it.

I agree with your side of the discussion, but i just wanted to say, by saying the judge was inappropriate, arent you just also basing that on a cultural context of appropriateness? it seems like the same structure in the argument to me from both sides.

Again, I agree with your point overall, but i do see it as part of agreeing with my internal cultural alignment.

He's and adult not a child