Decided to delete my initial reply and restructure my response to you
@Einherjar86. It's unfair of me to be so rude just because we disagree on this subject.
Him being a piece of shit doesn't justify any of this. You have no idea where he was now in his life, or anything else about him. You've written up an imaginary psychic history and are now using it to applaud the shooter.
1) I meant he was a p.o.s based on how we see him acting in the video footage.
2) Not exactly sure what "imaginary psychic history" means, but I think it's fair to assume that someone who;
- spent 9 years in prison for sexual misconduct with a minor
- was in and out of prison afterwards for all sorts of criminal offenses
- is white and says the n-word openly in mixed race crowds gathered for anti-racist purposes (this is relevant to me because if no black person there was checking him for it, it says something about his disposition)
- just happened to be at a riot wherein he's seen taunting armed civilians
- throwing an object at a 17 year old with a rifle as he attempts to retreat
- keeps pursing him until that 17 year old turns around and defends himself
---wasn't exactly an angel.
If someone comes at you with a gun and has already fired shots for questionable reasons, you have exhausted what's expected of you to be calm, rational, and to not give chase (if there are a lot of you, especially).
1) Kyle didn't came at anybody with a gun, before the first shooting or after it. First victim chased him. Second and third victims chased him and assaulted him. In both situations he is in the process of retreat.
2) I was referring to the legal concept of a duty to retreat because I don't think Wisconsin is a stand-your-ground state. What legal concept is your example based on?
I'm not going to defend rioting and looting either; but I'm also not going to use it as a means to justify murder. You keep resorting to the self-defense tack; but he went into a riot with a rifle. The expectation and chances of violence couldn't not be high, and he surely knew that. It wasn't self-defense, it was orchestrated assault.
I didn't justify murder because of rioting and looting, and that's also not why anybody was shot. He also didn't go into a riot with a rifle, he went there armed with his group while it was still a peaceful protest hours earlier. He was cleaning graffiti, handing out bottles of water and was equipped with a medical kit.
If you watch all the video footage available you can see that the only person acting aggressive is the first victim Joseph Rosenbaum. Everybody else in the footage is calm and attempting to keep the peace.
Even if we, in absence of footage going back far enough to know who started the altercation, grant that Kyle brandished his rifle in a way that made Joseph feel threatened which set off the chain of events, Kyle still retreated and was chased by this man.
I'll tell you what would have maybe justified it; if someone else pulled a gun on Rittenhouse. But even the guy who had one didn't do that. The kid was being attacked with bags of liquid and skateboards, from what I've seen. His life wasn't in imminent danger.
That's not true RE the man with the pistol. Setting aside that he had fired his pistol into the air while Kyle was retreating, if you watch the video footage you see Kyle aim his rifle at the man with the pistol and he puts his hands up seemingly in a H.U.D.S. surrender and then brandishes his pistol a moment later which is why Kyle fires once at him, at his arm.
So at the very least going by your own criteria here Kyle was justified in shooting the guy with the pistol.
If you do not want to watch the graphic footage;
Kyle is retreating, people in the crowd are shouting to get him etc, someone in white runs up and punches him from behind, someone swings a skateboard at him, Kyle falls to the floor, he goes to fire at someone about to rush him but falls backwards and fires twice into the sky, guy in white pants jumps and kicks him, guy with the skateboard attacks him again and is shot at while running away, Kyle rights himself and sits up as the man with a pistol runs at him and then stops (as I said up there) and then pulls his pistol on him, Kyle shoots him once, gets up and walks away to surrender himself.
I would submit he was also legally justified for shooting the guy with the skateboard that attacked him twice with it, once while he was retreating and again while he was on the floor.
How do you justify saying his life wasn't in imminent danger given the footage?
It is if you go there thinking "Damn, I bet one of those lefties flips out and get to shoot some of them."
Any evidence he thought this? You have accused me of creating a "imaginary psychic history" for Joseph Rosenbaum, but from HBB's post until now, it seems you have some intimate knowledge of Kyle's mentality and secret agenda. Seems very hypocritical, unless of course you know something about him that I haven't read yet.
It's just like the two dudes in georgia , you bring a gun for a reason - to use it.
Pretty much. The NRA and the right are trying hard to sell the narrative that a gun is a neutral thing and has no effect on the dynamics of a situation; and a lot of people buy it.
Any instinctive reaction I have to seeing a gun carried in public (especially if it's openly exhibited) has less to do with the weapon itself than with the politics that I can almost guarantee are embodied in the act of carrying the gun. Carrying in and of itself isn't a problem; it's a problem when these self-proclaimed citizen solders, militiamen, vigilantes, etc. carry guns into conditions that anticipate and instigate violence. That's not a neutral act. It's a preparatory act and it strongly implies premeditation.
The right-wing narrative that these guys are "heroes" doing lawful work is sheer propaganda designed to normalize violent behavior, with the economic rationale being to sell more guns, of course. It's all a marketing ploy.
To
@rms' point; yes you bring a gun for a reason and that reason is to use it, but your comment implies singular utility. Openly carrying a rifle as a show of force in order to peacekeep is "using it" just as much as randomly murdering someone with a gun is. Kyle also brought a medical kit with him, I assume he planned to use that too.
RE
the NRA and the right are trying hard to sell the narrative that a gun is a neutral thing and has no effect on the dynamics of a situation; and a lot of people buy it;
I don't see anybody saying a gun is neutral and has no effect on situational dynamics. In fact I read the opposite, that armed people are less likely to be victimized and that the presence of a firearm is itself a deterrent. Many on the right are calling for more lawful armed presence at protests in order that they remain peaceful, that businesses are not looted and so on. I also see many across the board supporting the idea of armed left-wingers having a presence to deter police brutality against protesters.
I think you just made that whole part up about right-wingers
trying hard to sell the narrative that a gun is a neutral thing and has no effect on the dynamics of a situation.
I disagree with the rest of what you said.
