[manaboutown]

Originally Posted by tklloop

I have one question. If a 16 year old boy had not crossed state lines with an ASSAULT RIFLE and placed himself in a dangerous and volatile situation,,, would any of this happened???? NO! Kiel Rottenhouse was guilty as hell!!

This statement is inaccurate from beginning to end. The FACTS came out in the trial. The MSM and some public figures smeared Kyle, omitted and buried essential information essentially misrepresenting the whole situation from start to finish. This continues for that matter. Is that where this nonsense came from?

[Cheryl Barrios]

Originally Posted by Bonnevie

Unfortunately, that "good guy" will have to live with the fact he killed two people and seriously injured another because he wanted to play hero. it was a bad situation for a teenager to put himself in, and even if it was self-defense, people died and were injured because he went there.

that being said, I think most people accept the jury's verdict because we are a nation of laws supposedly.

You are correct in that the "good guy" will have to live with the fact that two people forced him to defend himself and as a result they lost their lives and a third one did the same when he pulled a gun on Kyle, aiming it at his head, forcing him to take defensive action again. It is not easy dealing with the fact that you simply injure someone by shooting them - you live with it every single day. You not only live with your own actions but the actions of the others who were intending to kill you. You "what if" every single day - what if I died?, what if I was injured severely (couldn't walk, suffered a brain injury, and more)?, what would have happened if those people had never forced me to shoot them?

However, I don't think he wanted to "play hero" when he was forced to defend himself. He was there to help. He did all types of things to benefit a community that was being destroyed. And all of those thugs and criminals only worked to destroy everything - oh, yeah, and to steal things. He was a good kid. He made a decision that most young people never would have made and those who were minors there were probably there to destroy the city, the businesses, the business owners, and the people who didn't kiss their butts in their thinking. They chose to die or get injured. They could have not approached him. They could have chosen to stay at home. They could have chosen not to assault him or bring their guns. But the two who died and the one who was injured because of each of their actions, chose to go for the destruction and everything else - they were all very well acquainted with victimizing people.

We are a nation of laws and within our laws we can defend ourselves, thank God. Everyone should realize that we never want that right lost with the others we are on the verge of losing.

[manaboutown]

Originally Posted by Taltarzac725

The kid who killed them will probably have a very hard time dealing with this once the hoopla machine goes onto something else.

...killed them in self defense...

[Stu from NYC]

Originally Posted by tklloop

I have one question. If a 16 year old boy had not crossed state lines with an ASSAULT RIFLE and placed himself in a dangerous and volatile situation,,, would any of this happened???? NO! Kiel Rottenhouse was guilty as hell!!

You might want to read a bit what actually happened before making comments like this.

BTW was the looting and destruction ok?

[Taltarzac725]

Originally Posted by manaboutown

...killed them in self defense...

How Wisconsin'''s self-defense law ensured Kyle Rittenhouse'''s acquittal

Sort of in self-defense. This case will be tied closely to its facts. I do not see others trying to use this as a model winning on their own unique set of facts.

[tklloop]

Originally Posted by Stu from NYC

You might want to read a bit what actually happened before making comments like this.

BTW was the looting and destruction ok?

So,, what really happened,,, I mean you obviously have all “your” facts! BTW,, Fox fake news is not a credible news source,,,,, it’s been proven numerous times in court. You may want to read up on this before making spaces out comments!

[tklloop]

Originally Posted by noslices1

You need a better news source.

Sounds like they nailed it! You have proven documented facts to dispute these??

[Bonnevie]

[QUOTE=Cheryl Barrios;2031812]You are correct in that the "good guy" will have to live with the fact that two people forced him to defend himself and as a result they lost their lives and a third one did the same when he pulled a gun on Kyle, aiming it at his head, forcing him to take defensive action again. It is not easy dealing with the fact that you simply injure someone by shooting them - you live with it every single day. You not only live with your own actions but the actions of the others who were intending to kill you. You "what if" every single day - what if I died?, what if I was injured severely (couldn't walk, suffered a brain injury, and more)?, what would have happened if those people had never forced me to shoot them

However, I don't think he wanted to "play hero" when he was forced to defend himself. He was there to help. He did all types of things to benefit a community that was being destroyed. And all of those thugs and criminals only worked to destroy everything - oh, yeah, and to steal things. He was a good kid. He made a decision that most young people never would have made and those who were minors there were probably there to destroy the city, the businesses, the business owners, and the people who didn't kiss their butts in their thinking. They chose to die or get injured. They could have not approached him. They could have chosen to stay at home. They could have chosen not to assault him or bring their guns. But the two who died and the one who was injured because of each of their actions, chose to go for the destruction and everything else - they were all very well acquainted with victimizing people.

We are a nation of laws and within our laws we can defend ourselves, thank God. Everyone should realize that we never want that right lost with the others we are on the verge of losing.[/QUOTE

Guess what? All those what ifs Kyle might have to live with wouldn't exist if he realized he was out of his depth and stayed home. Of course, rioting is wrong. but living in a country with so called "militia" can appoint themselves as the police is third world stuff. You want to keep your rights but have no problem with armed militias? it's fine as long as they think like you I guess.

I don't remember reading what the people who were killed were destroying at the time he killed them. the first threw a plastic bag at him, the second and third got involved because they thought he was an active shooter and they wanted to prevent any more shootings. the third actually had paramedic supplies and was there to provide help....he was lucky he had a tourniquet. and he was the only one who had a gun.

yes, they were not model citizens, but Kyle didn't know that at the time. Mental health seemed to be involved in two of them.

we really don't know who initiated contact...

as to other rights we are on the verge of losing??? pray tell what are they? there seems to be concerted effort to restrict voting for groups that might not meet your criteria as being worthy. Mandates and masks are seen as affronts to people's rights instead of public health measures to end a pandemic....and if anyone here tries to express a view different from the prevailing one, they are told they can leave.

[tklloop]

Originally Posted by manaboutown

This statement is inaccurate from beginning to end. The FACTS came out in the trial. The MSM and some public figures smeared Kyle, omitted and buried essential information essentially misrepresenting the whole situation from start to finish. This continues for that matter. Is that where this nonsense came from?

You stated a lot of your misinformation you believe in,,, but have not discredited any of the facts?? Was he 16?? Did he cross state lines?? did he carry and Assault rifle?? Did he put himself into a dangerous situation he wasn’t trained for?? You may want to wtch a REAL news outlet.

[Kenswing]

Originally Posted by tklloop

You may want to turn off Fox fake news and join the real world!

FACT: he was 16 when this happened!
FACT: he traveled from Illinois to Wisconsin!
FACT: he carried and AR-15 assault rifle.
FACT: he murdered two innocent people who thought he was an “active shooter”!

Know the facts before you respond and make yourself look,,,,, trumpy?

FACT: He was 17 at the time of the shooting.
FACT: You inferred that he carried the AR-15 across state lines. He did not.
FACT: He carried an AR-15 semi-automatic rifle. Not an "Assault" rifle.
FACT: The jury determined that he shot and killed two criminals with violent pasts in self defense.

And I'm sure that "Trumpy" comment may get you in a bit of trouble..

[DAVES]

Originally Posted by ThirdOfFive

Whether we agree with the verdict or not, it is important to remember that no one here was on that jury. We weren't privy to the deliberations. And it is a given that none of felt anything even close to the pressure they must have felt.

It is important to remember as well that none of this was spur-of-the-moment. This jury deliberated for the better part of four days before delivering their verdict. I think we can assume with confidence that justice was done.

Whether or not we agree with the verdict is, in the end, superfluous. What I hope we all CAN agree on though is that, even with it's flaws, America still has the best justice system on the planet.

I am not qualified for my opinion. For me the English system has merit. As I understand it, you appear before a judge not a jury. If, you launch a case and you lose you pay the expenses of the falsely accused. The United States has far more attorneys per capita and far fewer cases as well. Cause and effect?

[DAVES]

Originally Posted by Bonnevie

this is what drives me nuts. I simply pointed out it will have an effect on him for killing people and that I personally don't feel a 17 year old should have been there, if he were my son he never would have been. YOU assume I condone the rioting????

I don't agree with the rioting. the people he killed were not model citizens. some of those who attacked him, believed him to be an active shooter and were trying to prevent more shots. that's the problem when non-police are walking around with guns.

I don't routinely go to MSN for news so I can't speak to whether they were biased. I would guess that the people that have shows lie Rachel, Joy, Ari, just like Tucker, Sean, Laura et al, would be protected because they are considered opinion shows. or in the case of Tucker, a court decreed no reasonable person would believe what he says.

that was the reason for the trial....so the facts could come out. the jury decided it was self defense. isn't that what trials are for?

I guess he could sue the city for bringing the charges but frankly, he should take the win and do something positive with the rest of his life.

Police? Am I the only one to ask where were the police? As I expect they were told not to get involved. Facts? Nothing is simple. As to suits, he will be made very wealthy. There is no shortage of people who caused this one is our President and far as I know he can't be sued.

[JMintzer]

Originally Posted by sparky4840

I'm sure Fox was unbiased, correct?

They were the only network to show the trial IN IT'S ENTIRETY....


MSNBC only showed the prosecution's closing argument, not the defense. Gee... I wonder why?

[JMintzer]

Originally Posted by MDLNB

Ah, but we all know that he would not lie in court, especially if that lie was instrumental in getting a plea deal on his charge of carrying a pistol with an expired license.

Not expired, revoked...

[JMintzer]

Originally Posted by Bruce3055

Wow! I had no idea others without weapons were killed "at the hands of violent thugs"
How many were killed?? Do you think everyone should carry weapons in the future?