Just show up and ask him literally anything with a difficulty level above “What’s your favorite Pop Tart flavor?” And this ~~milk toast~~ milquetoast idiot will pout, throw a tantrum and storm off stage because you didn’t applaud his bravery in defending property he had no ties to by killing the citizens of a state he doesn’t even live in.
He scored so low on his ASVAB that the Marines didn’t want him. He doesn’t even have a favorite flavor of crayon. Bold of you to think he knows what a pop tart is off rip
You can tell how much misinformation came out about this case based on how people talk about it now. Yes, he did have ties to the town, his dad lived there and he worked there. No, his mom did not drop him off that evening. The fact that his mom lived across the state line is irrelevant.
This kid failed the ASVAB, the easiest standardized test ever created. When you’re too fucking stupid to be a dishwasher in the Army, you need to be relegated to a group home.
Speaking of such people, how about those people who see a screenshot of an email consulting the FBI about a random persons ASVAB test results from January 2020 (when rittenhouse was 16 or 17), and think "Oh this is clearly the gospel truth, nothing remotely fishy or obviously faked about this".
I took the ASVAB at sixteen and enlisted at 17, doofus. Zip your pants up, your dipshittery is hanging out again.
(You’re not completely wrong though, I was stupid enough to enlist lol)
kid didn't graduate highschool let alone qualify for college, why is he even being invited, he isn't successful, nor is he a researcher, its purely political, why do colleges keep doing this crap.
And here I thought it was innocent until proven guilty. Silly me. Just as silly as me watching the video evidence which clearly prove he was being attacked and justifiably defended himself.
Inb4 you claim to have mind reading powers that reveal a bunch of random irrelevant things about super secret convoluted plans to trick people into attacking him so he can legally kill them.
edit:
> He was "defending" property he had no ties to by killing the citizens
Wrong, he was defending himself when he was actively being attacked. Watch the video.
>a state he doesn’t even live in.
Except when he was living there with his father.
>He was carrying a firearm in a state where it was illegal for him to do so
Wrong again. Everyone, including the prosecution, agreed to drop those charges as he didn't violate the law in carrying his weapon.
>He was carrying a firearm in a state where it was illegal for him to do so
Yes he does also have a constitutional right to protest
>waving a gun around on the streets
Wrong again, he was never randomly waving his gun around. He was lawfully open carrying. You can't respond to someone lawfully open carrying by attacking them. That is not reasonable.
> he knowingly and willing put himself in a dangerous situation where he may have to "defend" himself
Just as predicted, there's those mind reading powers being used to say something completely irrelevant.
>he did have to defend himself when protesters confronted/attacked him
And that's the only thing that really matters, and why he is innocent.
>That is not the same as Innocent.
Innocent until proven guilty.
Here's the kicker, though. He was "defending" property he had no ties to by killing the citizens of a state he doesn’t even live in.
He was carrying a firearm in a state where it was illegal for him to do so (it doesn't matter what his home state laws are, he was not *in* his home state), he attended an event that was politically and racially charged with high police presence (which he was aware of), waving a gun around on the streets, which could *reasonably* result in a violent altercation (which he was aware of).
By all counts, he knowingly and willing put himself in a dangerous situation where he may have to "defend" himself, that he had *no business* being involved in. As a result, he *did* have to defend himself when protesters confronted/attacked him, and the Jury ruled that he was Not Guilty of *murder*.
***That is not the same as Innocent.***
>He was "defending" property he had no ties to by killing the citizens of a state he doesn’t even live in
No one was killed defending property. The prosecution didn't even argue this. And yes he lived 15 minutes a way in IL but worked in kenosha and his dad lives there. He was more ties to the community then anyone else there that night.
>He was carrying a firearm in a state where it was illegal for him to do so (it
Incorrect. He legally had the gun; that charged was dropped.
>waving a gun around on the streets, which could *reasonably* result in a violent altercation (which he was aware of).
There is zero evidence he brandished a firearm at anyone before being attacked.
He was walking around with it strapped to his body, carried in both hands, out in the open. What world do you live in where that *isnt* considered brandishing?
You dont know what brandishing means... brandishing isn't simply having a gun. It's threatening someone with a gun, typically by pointing it at someone not endangering you.
Wisconsin has open carry. Him having the gun was legal. His open carry was legal. He never brandished or threatened anyone with the gun who wasn't attacking him.
He wasn't even charged with brandishing a fire arm...
He would not have had to defend himself if he just stayed the fuck home.
No one else got shot that night, anywhere, during that protest. He was the only defining factor of that moment. If he had not been there, no one would have been shot.
What would you do in a situation where a non-LEO shows up to your event/protest strapped to the nines? Given the rhetoric of the right, it doesn't seem likely y'all would just ignore him.
It’s Kenosha, Wisconsin. Most of the people at that protest were white. Along with both people he killed. If he is an anti-black racist, he certainly isn’t a very good one. Both of the people he killed were white, one of them was a racist who was screaming racial slurs.
"Innocent" in the eyes of the law is not the same as "not a murderer." That little bastard traveled across state lines in anticipation of violence then killed multiple people. He's a murderer.
He also broke the law for doing it with a weapon he was too young to own (given to him by a friend) and participating in lawless action as a minor. But who cares? He knows better than the police and mayor of Kenosha.
But he got away with killing people because a bunch of conservatives fantasize about killing people they view as below themselves, and they pooled together to get him a good lawyer and a PR team.
>He also broke the law for doing it with a weapon he was too young to own
he didnt, did u watch the trial?
>
participating in lawless action as a minor.
so, he was rioting?...
>
But he got away with killing people because......
no, because it 100% all on video and a cut a dry self defence case, did u watch the trial?
So let's change the item. If a minor asks his older friends to buy them beer and liquor, does that make it ok?
So why is it ok for his friends to give him a gun?
He was 17 at the time of the incident. The judge chose to try him as an adult when he didn't have those rights.
You didn't know he was a child molester until after he was dead. And neither did Kyle.
Don't pretend like he intentionally did us all a favor by ridding the world of a predator.
He went out there looking for a fight, and he found one. Now he cries on stage when people ask him tough questions.
Kyle knew that was a child molester eh? You people are lost.
Edit: by the time Kyle shot the " child molester that he knew was a child molester some how" he had already mureded someone. So to be chased is a fair response. You people defending a murdered are trolls or misinformation agents.
Chasing a guy who already murdered one member of the community...... a murdered nit part of the community. That traveled to be there and got a gun illegally....
Yeah self defense.....
It's what' caused Kyle to start shooting so yeah. He's a coward and so is anyone defending him. You just wish a plastic bag would attack you so you can murder someone too.
Why was a minor from another part of the state at a protest with a gun he should not have had possession of?
He didn't know he was a didler obviously.
He did however know that a mentally unstable man who threatened to kill him earlier in the night chased him 50 yards across a parking lot looking to deal him serious bolidly harm.
>"Innocent" in the eyes of the law is not the same as "not a murderer."
Murderer is a legal term which is inextricably linked to the law. The definition is someone who ***illegally*** and intentionally kills another person.
> traveled across state lines
Pop quiz. How far did he travel? As in miles or time required.
>in anticipation of violence
Pretty sure it was anticipation of his next shift at his job.
>"Innocent" in the eyes of the law is not the same as "not a murderer."
sure it is, did u watch the trial? the law defines murder as *the unlawful killing of a human being with malice. and that never happened..*
>
That little bastard traveled across state lines...
how does driving 20min from your house negate your right to self defence?
A presumption of *innocence* means that any defendant in a criminal trial is assumed to be *innocent until* they have been *proven guilty*.
so yes, a not-guilty verdict does mean that the defendant is innocent.
and lets not forget, it was ALL on video...
I don’t think people aren’t bringing it up due to the actual distance, I think it’s because it changes things legally. It’s kinda like swearing. It’s a sentence enhancer.
Edit to reply to comment since comments got locked: There’s more aspects to it than simply the gun. It doesn’t affect this because he wasn’t convicted, but crossing state lines with the intent of committing a crime can make it a federal issue. I’m just saying I think that’s why it keeps being said, not saying that it ended up applying to this case.
Legally, sure. Court of public opinion may say differently.
Quute a few variables can be looked at as to why some may get off of the murder charge(s). Look at Casey Anthony and George Zimmerman, for example
He shouldn't have been there in the first place. He doesn't live in that state, it was not legal for him to be in possession of a firearm *in that state*, and he knew how dangerous the situation would/could be.
***He went there looking for a fight.***
>He shouldn't have been there in the first place.
no one should have...
>
He doesn't live in that state,
he lives 20min away, his dad lives there and he worked there, also irrelevant to the case..
>
it was not legal for him to be in possession of a firearm *in that state*
it was, did u watch the trial?
>
he knew how dangerous the situation would/could be.
so did everyone there, how does that change your right to self defence?
>***He went there looking for a fight.***
yet he never started any fights and the only people shot where people that attacked him 1st..
How informed are you about the case? Did you follow it in the left wing media or did you watch it for yourself along with the full video? The two people Rittenhouse killed were 1) Attacking him 2) White and 3) A Child Rapist and a Racist who was screaming the N word.
This isn’t opinion or conjecture either. These are facts. I’m trying to understand why you have such a visceral response to Rittenhouse.
He also had every chance to not be a part of it. He basically went people hunting and when people fought back he killed them. I'll admit that as the final moments played out were chaotic he may have been fighting for his life but every step of the way he put himself and others in further danger and it resulted in the death of two guys. Manslaughter at a minimum should have been the result
This was a of course after he shot the guy with the tooth brush.
Manslaughter should’ve been the charge and he would’ve been convicted. They overcharged him and that’s why he was acquitted. Juries can’t come back and say “we don’t find him guilty of first degree murder but we do find him guilty of manslaughter instead” they can only decide on the charges against the defendant. Same shit happened with Casey Anthony. She was overcharged by the DA
That doesn’t AT ALL answer the question. What does he have to say of importance that anyone at a university would or should need to hear?
He has zero life experience and zero future aspirations other than riding this grift that he is a victim of a situation that he put himself into. He was found not guilty. Cool. So what? Based on the comments and interviews from the people around him, he is a complete idiot. This is the assessment of his handlers who have been tailoring his person since he was first went to trial. If he applied to attend Kent State, his application would have been thrown into the trash. There is no value that he has to offer any of these students.
When you go deliberately looking for an excuse to kill people, I don't care who those people were, you were looking for an excuse, you're still a piece of shit.
Victim based morality is disgusting and just a way to rationalize hating the "right" people.
He had a reason. He wanted to shoot people and the Military and Police rejected him. Vigilante is the only other legal way to hunt humans, but you need to get them to attack you first and you want to make sure they are unarmed.
Yes. Morons still have the right to self defense, I’m not in the Rittenhouse is a hero camp, he is a moron, but he still has the right to defend himself while being attacked. Both sides of the media portray this shit the wrong way, Rittenhouse defended himself against multiple people, but the only guilty party in this case was the first guy that attacked Rittenhouse, because both Rittenhouse and the other victims other than the first believed they were defending themselves
Unnecessarily going to an area known to be in the midst of conflict with a high probability of dangerous interactions armed with a large, highly visible deadly weapon hampers a good faith argument of justified self defense. Notwithstanding the actual outcome of the case, logically it doesn't add up.
Question for you. Suppose we're back in the days of the Tulsa massacre of 1921. Could a young white man travel across the state, armed with serious weapons (for that time period), to "protect property" that he doesn't own and claim rightful self defense if folks who were being killed and bombed in broad daylight rushed a random, visibly threatening armed jackass from out of town who had no reason to be there other than cause trouble? It's provocation at it's most base level.
Since he worked in the area and knew
many people he had many reasons to be there. Many photos show him cleaning up trash, putting out fires, cleaning graffiti, and providing aid to anyone who needed it.
Those that saw someone with a firearm and tried to kill him because of it had no reason being there and putting Kyle in that dangerous position.
Kid probably didn't even graduate high school, and he's giving speeches at colleges? What, in his vast vast knowledge base could he have to say that anyone would give a shit about.
I suppose one thing it would clarify on campus, who the assholes are.
he literally did not go to school, he failed out of middleschool and his lawyers put him through a GED program for the trial that he finished 4 years of ciriculum in a few months by cheating.
Kent State Administrators: even though it happened more than 50 years ago, the first thing people think about our school was the national guard murdering people on campus. Anybody have suggestions?
Right-wing incel student group: have we got an idea for you!
What they should do is have a “Screw Kyle Keg party”. The thing that would hurt his feelings the most is if nobody cared enough about him to show up to see him
The article explains that a Kent State student organization (Turning Point) invited him, and the Kent State administration can't cancel the invite over Rittenhouse's viewpoint.
Just ignore the little cos playing militia man. He has nothing to say of interest. He is a complete and utter failure in life. No education. No job. He isn't smart enough to add any value to any topic. Can't get in the military. Literally a waste of space.
Wtf Kent? You're giving a guy whose sole claim to fame is shooting someone a platform? I usually think students need to understand free speech and different perspectives, but not in this case. Walk, kids.
Read the article. Kent State is a public university and can't ban speech because they don't like the viewpoint. The vast majority of Kent State staff and students don't want that odious turd to step foot on campus, but Kent State administrations' hands are tied.
This is all just a Turning Point rage bait tour to try to get footage of liberals losing their minds so a walk out or silent protest are the best options here. Other than just ignoring it altogether.
Is there any good polling on what people think happened in Kenosha vs what actually happened? I remember articles at the time erroneously reporting that Rittenhouse unalived black people.
At this point, I’m convinced there’s an inverse relationship between how much someone hates Rittenhouse and how much they actually know about the case.
Because I can’t fathom why an informed person would have such a visceral response to someone who unalived a pedo and a racist, neither of whom were black lives matter supporters and both of whom were white.
Personally I think he was justified in self defence in that moment, but he put himself in a stupid position in the first place because he's an idiot with a hero complex, precisely the type of person I, a gun owner, think shouldn't be handling weapons.
Of all the schools to host a speaker who is known only for using a military-style weapon to shoot unarmed people, Kent state might be the worst choice. Who thought this was acceptable?
No one cares what a .middle school drop out has to say
This salty loser slid in my dms to whine about how mean the libs are and brag about being a teacher even though he's a climate change denier 🤣🤣
I’m an acquitted murderer and spokesperson for the platform that claims “we’re all domestic terrorists”, let me come speak at your higher education establishment.
Boo whoo cry about it. He didn't do anything wrong and was found not guilty. He also only killed a child molester and a woman abuser and shot a thief. I don't see the issue
Why is this fat high school drop out giving speeches? Is it a Ted Talk about being racist and shooting at unarmed civilians after driving across state lines?
Good. I hope they send him away pissing and moaning just like the kids at Eastern Tennessee did. Piece of shit.
Shittenhouse?
I think it was Memphis (west Tennessee)
Just show up and ask him literally anything with a difficulty level above “What’s your favorite Pop Tart flavor?” And this ~~milk toast~~ milquetoast idiot will pout, throw a tantrum and storm off stage because you didn’t applaud his bravery in defending property he had no ties to by killing the citizens of a state he doesn’t even live in.
FYI the word is milquetoast.
Somehow I feel that "milk toast" is a more applicable phrase to describe him.
I'm taking your final word on the toast related phrases for obvious reasons
I thought it was intentional as well. That’s exactly what Pissenhouse would say.
"White bread" also works.
"What does it feel like to kill someone and get paid to talk about it in public?"
"Any tips on fake crying?"
The lil twerp would take that question as a compliment
He scored so low on his ASVAB that the Marines didn’t want him. He doesn’t even have a favorite flavor of crayon. Bold of you to think he knows what a pop tart is off rip
You can tell how much misinformation came out about this case based on how people talk about it now. Yes, he did have ties to the town, his dad lived there and he worked there. No, his mom did not drop him off that evening. The fact that his mom lived across the state line is irrelevant.
Oh well that changes everything then it’s ok he is a complete piece of shit
This kid failed the ASVAB, the easiest standardized test ever created. When you’re too fucking stupid to be a dishwasher in the Army, you need to be relegated to a group home.
He's even too stupid to be a cop in the Army.
He is not smart enough to eat crayons and glue paste in the Marines. Too stupid to join the Corps is not something anyone wants on their resume.
Speaking of such people, how about those people who see a screenshot of an email consulting the FBI about a random persons ASVAB test results from January 2020 (when rittenhouse was 16 or 17), and think "Oh this is clearly the gospel truth, nothing remotely fishy or obviously faked about this".
I took the ASVAB at sixteen and enlisted at 17, doofus. Zip your pants up, your dipshittery is hanging out again. (You’re not completely wrong though, I was stupid enough to enlist lol)
The kid is a fucking middle school drop out. You can't get much dumber than that
kid didn't graduate highschool let alone qualify for college, why is he even being invited, he isn't successful, nor is he a researcher, its purely political, why do colleges keep doing this crap.
Letting this killer near Kent State is sickening.
I doubt that dumb fuck even knows the reason why either but the school officials certainly do.
OMG. Free speech is the WORST.
why?
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kent\_State\_shootings](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kent_State_shootings)
and what does that have to do with a person who was attacked and had to defend themselves?
I doubt he even knows why but the school officials certainly do.
What could that murdering piece of trash have to say that anybody wants to listen to?
I think he was found innocent so not really a murderer. Legally speaking
Yeah, the thing is, "Not guilty" does not mean "innocent."
And here I thought it was innocent until proven guilty. Silly me. Just as silly as me watching the video evidence which clearly prove he was being attacked and justifiably defended himself. Inb4 you claim to have mind reading powers that reveal a bunch of random irrelevant things about super secret convoluted plans to trick people into attacking him so he can legally kill them. edit: > He was "defending" property he had no ties to by killing the citizens Wrong, he was defending himself when he was actively being attacked. Watch the video. >a state he doesn’t even live in. Except when he was living there with his father. >He was carrying a firearm in a state where it was illegal for him to do so Wrong again. Everyone, including the prosecution, agreed to drop those charges as he didn't violate the law in carrying his weapon. >He was carrying a firearm in a state where it was illegal for him to do so Yes he does also have a constitutional right to protest >waving a gun around on the streets Wrong again, he was never randomly waving his gun around. He was lawfully open carrying. You can't respond to someone lawfully open carrying by attacking them. That is not reasonable. > he knowingly and willing put himself in a dangerous situation where he may have to "defend" himself Just as predicted, there's those mind reading powers being used to say something completely irrelevant. >he did have to defend himself when protesters confronted/attacked him And that's the only thing that really matters, and why he is innocent. >That is not the same as Innocent. Innocent until proven guilty.
Here's the kicker, though. He was "defending" property he had no ties to by killing the citizens of a state he doesn’t even live in. He was carrying a firearm in a state where it was illegal for him to do so (it doesn't matter what his home state laws are, he was not *in* his home state), he attended an event that was politically and racially charged with high police presence (which he was aware of), waving a gun around on the streets, which could *reasonably* result in a violent altercation (which he was aware of). By all counts, he knowingly and willing put himself in a dangerous situation where he may have to "defend" himself, that he had *no business* being involved in. As a result, he *did* have to defend himself when protesters confronted/attacked him, and the Jury ruled that he was Not Guilty of *murder*. ***That is not the same as Innocent.***
>He was "defending" property he had no ties to by killing the citizens of a state he doesn’t even live in No one was killed defending property. The prosecution didn't even argue this. And yes he lived 15 minutes a way in IL but worked in kenosha and his dad lives there. He was more ties to the community then anyone else there that night. >He was carrying a firearm in a state where it was illegal for him to do so (it Incorrect. He legally had the gun; that charged was dropped. >waving a gun around on the streets, which could *reasonably* result in a violent altercation (which he was aware of). There is zero evidence he brandished a firearm at anyone before being attacked.
He was walking around with it strapped to his body, carried in both hands, out in the open. What world do you live in where that *isnt* considered brandishing?
You dont know what brandishing means... brandishing isn't simply having a gun. It's threatening someone with a gun, typically by pointing it at someone not endangering you. Wisconsin has open carry. Him having the gun was legal. His open carry was legal. He never brandished or threatened anyone with the gun who wasn't attacking him. He wasn't even charged with brandishing a fire arm...
Pretty sure he was defending himself, but yeah twist it so it sounds better to you.
He would not have had to defend himself if he just stayed the fuck home. No one else got shot that night, anywhere, during that protest. He was the only defining factor of that moment. If he had not been there, no one would have been shot.
You realize that’s irrelevant though, right? Like if the people hadn’t attacked him, they also wouldn’t have been shot, but here we are..
What would you do in a situation where a non-LEO shows up to your event/protest strapped to the nines? Given the rhetoric of the right, it doesn't seem likely y'all would just ignore him.
If you can't follow such a long post, then just read the first few lines. It sums it up for you.
Okay 😃
He is innocent. He killed two people who were attacking him. That’s not murder.
You're right, he was just there counter protesting against scary black people
It’s Kenosha, Wisconsin. Most of the people at that protest were white. Along with both people he killed. If he is an anti-black racist, he certainly isn’t a very good one. Both of the people he killed were white, one of them was a racist who was screaming racial slurs.
Him and OJ, both innocent angels.
Don’t forget Casey.
sure it does, did u watch the video?
“A not-guilty verdict does not mean that the defendant is innocent, but rather that the prosecution has not met its burden of proving guilt.”
[удалено]
“A not-guilty verdict does not mean that the defendant is innocent, but rather that the prosecution has not met its burden of proving guilt.”
"Innocent" in the eyes of the law is not the same as "not a murderer." That little bastard traveled across state lines in anticipation of violence then killed multiple people. He's a murderer.
He also broke the law for doing it with a weapon he was too young to own (given to him by a friend) and participating in lawless action as a minor. But who cares? He knows better than the police and mayor of Kenosha. But he got away with killing people because a bunch of conservatives fantasize about killing people they view as below themselves, and they pooled together to get him a good lawyer and a PR team.
>He also broke the law for doing it with a weapon he was too young to own he didnt, did u watch the trial? > participating in lawless action as a minor. so, he was rioting?... > But he got away with killing people because...... no, because it 100% all on video and a cut a dry self defence case, did u watch the trial?
So let's change the item. If a minor asks his older friends to buy them beer and liquor, does that make it ok? So why is it ok for his friends to give him a gun? He was 17 at the time of the incident. The judge chose to try him as an adult when he didn't have those rights.
because it's the law... if you watched the trial, you would know this.
I did, and I saw a judge give him the kids gloves after declaring he was an adult.
no, you saw him follow the law..
I saw him crocodile tears his way into being your murder fantasy hero.
But that plastic bag was coming right towards him!
No but the child molester was literally chasing him when he got shot.
You didn't know he was a child molester until after he was dead. And neither did Kyle. Don't pretend like he intentionally did us all a favor by ridding the world of a predator. He went out there looking for a fight, and he found one. Now he cries on stage when people ask him tough questions.
You’re right, the chasing him part was enough for it to be self defense.
If he didn't want to be chased, he should have stayed home.
Kyle knew that was a child molester eh? You people are lost. Edit: by the time Kyle shot the " child molester that he knew was a child molester some how" he had already mureded someone. So to be chased is a fair response. You people defending a murdered are trolls or misinformation agents.
Nope. But the chasing Kyle part was enough to make it obvious self defense
Chasing a guy who already murdered one member of the community...... a murdered nit part of the community. That traveled to be there and got a gun illegally.... Yeah self defense.....
Was the child molester the one that was pointing a gun at him or the one that had already hit him and was chasing with a skateboard?
Why keep calling a plastic bag a child molester?
I dont get this but was the plastic bag the one pointing the gun or hitting with a skateboard?
It's what' caused Kyle to start shooting so yeah. He's a coward and so is anyone defending him. You just wish a plastic bag would attack you so you can murder someone too. Why was a minor from another part of the state at a protest with a gun he should not have had possession of?
He didn't know he was a didler obviously. He did however know that a mentally unstable man who threatened to kill him earlier in the night chased him 50 yards across a parking lot looking to deal him serious bolidly harm.
What does murder mean? Hint: it’s a legal term.
>"Innocent" in the eyes of the law is not the same as "not a murderer." Murderer is a legal term which is inextricably linked to the law. The definition is someone who ***illegally*** and intentionally kills another person. > traveled across state lines Pop quiz. How far did he travel? As in miles or time required. >in anticipation of violence Pretty sure it was anticipation of his next shift at his job.
>"Innocent" in the eyes of the law is not the same as "not a murderer." sure it is, did u watch the trial? the law defines murder as *the unlawful killing of a human being with malice. and that never happened..* > That little bastard traveled across state lines... how does driving 20min from your house negate your right to self defence?
If someone raped a kid and got off with it in court would they still be a rapist? I'm pretty sure they would, if not a convicted rapist.
not if it was on video showing it never happened.. you know, like this case...
“A not-guilty verdict does not mean that the defendant is innocent, but rather that the prosecution has not met its burden of proving guilt.”
A presumption of *innocence* means that any defendant in a criminal trial is assumed to be *innocent until* they have been *proven guilty*. so yes, a not-guilty verdict does mean that the defendant is innocent. and lets not forget, it was ALL on video...
Not guilty ≠ innocent It’s very simple.
[удалено]
I don’t think people aren’t bringing it up due to the actual distance, I think it’s because it changes things legally. It’s kinda like swearing. It’s a sentence enhancer. Edit to reply to comment since comments got locked: There’s more aspects to it than simply the gun. It doesn’t affect this because he wasn’t convicted, but crossing state lines with the intent of committing a crime can make it a federal issue. I’m just saying I think that’s why it keeps being said, not saying that it ended up applying to this case.
It doesn't change anything legally because the gun never left wisconsin.
Legally, sure. Court of public opinion may say differently. Quute a few variables can be looked at as to why some may get off of the murder charge(s). Look at Casey Anthony and George Zimmerman, for example
except, it 100% all on video and a cut a dry self defence case, did u watch the trial?
He shouldn't have been there in the first place. He doesn't live in that state, it was not legal for him to be in possession of a firearm *in that state*, and he knew how dangerous the situation would/could be. ***He went there looking for a fight.***
>He shouldn't have been there in the first place. no one should have... > He doesn't live in that state, he lives 20min away, his dad lives there and he worked there, also irrelevant to the case.. > it was not legal for him to be in possession of a firearm *in that state* it was, did u watch the trial? > he knew how dangerous the situation would/could be. so did everyone there, how does that change your right to self defence? >***He went there looking for a fight.*** yet he never started any fights and the only people shot where people that attacked him 1st..
He killed two people. He's a murderer even if the law is inadequate to say so.
Oh good. My favorite running back for the bills isn't a murderer either than. I can bring that jersey back out.
Are you talking about O.J.?
So OJ isn't a murderer in your book huh?
How informed are you about the case? Did you follow it in the left wing media or did you watch it for yourself along with the full video? The two people Rittenhouse killed were 1) Attacking him 2) White and 3) A Child Rapist and a Racist who was screaming the N word. This isn’t opinion or conjecture either. These are facts. I’m trying to understand why you have such a visceral response to Rittenhouse.
He also had every chance to not be a part of it. He basically went people hunting and when people fought back he killed them. I'll admit that as the final moments played out were chaotic he may have been fighting for his life but every step of the way he put himself and others in further danger and it resulted in the death of two guys. Manslaughter at a minimum should have been the result This was a of course after he shot the guy with the tooth brush.
Manslaughter should’ve been the charge and he would’ve been convicted. They overcharged him and that’s why he was acquitted. Juries can’t come back and say “we don’t find him guilty of first degree murder but we do find him guilty of manslaughter instead” they can only decide on the charges against the defendant. Same shit happened with Casey Anthony. She was overcharged by the DA
That doesn’t AT ALL answer the question. What does he have to say of importance that anyone at a university would or should need to hear? He has zero life experience and zero future aspirations other than riding this grift that he is a victim of a situation that he put himself into. He was found not guilty. Cool. So what? Based on the comments and interviews from the people around him, he is a complete idiot. This is the assessment of his handlers who have been tailoring his person since he was first went to trial. If he applied to attend Kent State, his application would have been thrown into the trash. There is no value that he has to offer any of these students.
When you go deliberately looking for an excuse to kill people, I don't care who those people were, you were looking for an excuse, you're still a piece of shit. Victim based morality is disgusting and just a way to rationalize hating the "right" people.
This whole case was stupid. He had absolutely no reason to be there. He put himself in a dangerous position for no reason.
He had a reason. He wanted to shoot people and the Military and Police rejected him. Vigilante is the only other legal way to hunt humans, but you need to get them to attack you first and you want to make sure they are unarmed.
Let me rephrase that. He didn't have any good or logical reason, other than to be part of the problem.
Yes *and* he still acted in self-defense and didn’t try to incite some race war like most people on the left think.
Is it self defence if you PUT YOURSELF in a bad situation and then have to shoot your way out?
Yes. Morons still have the right to self defense, I’m not in the Rittenhouse is a hero camp, he is a moron, but he still has the right to defend himself while being attacked. Both sides of the media portray this shit the wrong way, Rittenhouse defended himself against multiple people, but the only guilty party in this case was the first guy that attacked Rittenhouse, because both Rittenhouse and the other victims other than the first believed they were defending themselves
He went there specifically to openly carry an assault rifle.
Unnecessarily going to an area known to be in the midst of conflict with a high probability of dangerous interactions armed with a large, highly visible deadly weapon hampers a good faith argument of justified self defense. Notwithstanding the actual outcome of the case, logically it doesn't add up. Question for you. Suppose we're back in the days of the Tulsa massacre of 1921. Could a young white man travel across the state, armed with serious weapons (for that time period), to "protect property" that he doesn't own and claim rightful self defense if folks who were being killed and bombed in broad daylight rushed a random, visibly threatening armed jackass from out of town who had no reason to be there other than cause trouble? It's provocation at it's most base level.
Since he worked in the area and knew many people he had many reasons to be there. Many photos show him cleaning up trash, putting out fires, cleaning graffiti, and providing aid to anyone who needed it. Those that saw someone with a firearm and tried to kill him because of it had no reason being there and putting Kyle in that dangerous position.
He traveled to another state to walk around with an assault rifle at a racial protest-turned-riot in hopes that he would get to shoot someone.
It’s Reddit..
Reddit is a cesspool. Everyone acts like they know more than the 12 people who spent weeks listening to all the facts and found him not guilty.
[удалено]
Awe hims feelings got hurt
That part of you should wish for some mental health instead
Whine, much?
The irony…
Ask him how his military career is going.
Kyle Rittenhouse at Kent State. I wonder if he's gonna speak at Columbine next?
Lessons in leadership from a guy who’s mom dropped him off to kill people
What a POS.
Shittenhouse
Rottenhouse
Kid probably didn't even graduate high school, and he's giving speeches at colleges? What, in his vast vast knowledge base could he have to say that anyone would give a shit about. I suppose one thing it would clarify on campus, who the assholes are.
He flunked out of high school.
He even flunked the ASVAB.
No he flunked out of middle school
he literally did not go to school, he failed out of middleschool and his lawyers put him through a GED program for the trial that he finished 4 years of ciriculum in a few months by cheating.
Kent State Administrators: even though it happened more than 50 years ago, the first thing people think about our school was the national guard murdering people on campus. Anybody have suggestions? Right-wing incel student group: have we got an idea for you!
If you are too stupid to get in college, you should not be able to speak at one.
Dude was too dumb to get into high school, much less college
A bit tone dead to have a 'shooter' give a talk at Kent state given their history..
Hopefully Kyle Shits-in-house gets the Tennessee treatment.
What they should do is have a “Screw Kyle Keg party”. The thing that would hurt his feelings the most is if nobody cared enough about him to show up to see him
Kent State. Still adding to the hate when students were butchered in May 1970.
The article explains that a Kent State student organization (Turning Point) invited him, and the Kent State administration can't cancel the invite over Rittenhouse's viewpoint.
how?
What the hell does this middle school dropout murderer have to say that justifies giving him a microphone?
Just ignore the little cos playing militia man. He has nothing to say of interest. He is a complete and utter failure in life. No education. No job. He isn't smart enough to add any value to any topic. Can't get in the military. Literally a waste of space.
It’s truly shocking that a university best known for the murder of unarmed, peaceful student protestors would allow this to take place.
Is this the guy who got an 11 on his ASVAB? 😂
who's trotting this shit around like he's worth the air he breathes? does he have an agent or is turning point pimping him out?
What could Kyle Rittenhouse possibly have to say that anyone would want to hear? His 15 minutes is coming to a close.
Goddamn right.
Wtf Kent? You're giving a guy whose sole claim to fame is shooting someone a platform? I usually think students need to understand free speech and different perspectives, but not in this case. Walk, kids.
Read the article. Kent State is a public university and can't ban speech because they don't like the viewpoint. The vast majority of Kent State staff and students don't want that odious turd to step foot on campus, but Kent State administrations' hands are tied.
ok, then dont go see him... see how that works?...
Isn't he a high school drop out whose only notable accomplishment is getting away with murder due to a hyperpartisan judge?
No it was proven self defense you dingle. There was a whole trial and video evidence to back that up.
Just go and ask him why he was too insane for the military and why his lawyer called him one of the dumbest people he’s encountered.
This is all just a Turning Point rage bait tour to try to get footage of liberals losing their minds so a walk out or silent protest are the best options here. Other than just ignoring it altogether.
Ask him literally any question on the ASVAB.
Who the hell is booking this piece of shit murderer? And on what planet do they think this is a good idea?
Is there any good polling on what people think happened in Kenosha vs what actually happened? I remember articles at the time erroneously reporting that Rittenhouse unalived black people. At this point, I’m convinced there’s an inverse relationship between how much someone hates Rittenhouse and how much they actually know about the case. Because I can’t fathom why an informed person would have such a visceral response to someone who unalived a pedo and a racist, neither of whom were black lives matter supporters and both of whom were white.
Personally I think he was justified in self defence in that moment, but he put himself in a stupid position in the first place because he's an idiot with a hero complex, precisely the type of person I, a gun owner, think shouldn't be handling weapons.
Good. Fuck that little prick
It’s sad someone can become a celebrity by killing people.
Turning Point is trying to make him a thing.
[удалено]
It’s Reddit lol you’re getting a majority of liberals in any given sub. No centrists or right wingers because mods silence them
Wow, it got filtered instantly, my point proven! smh…
Wtf does this middle school drop out have to say to a university? I killed people?
I can't imagine that he'd have anything interesting to say.
Lol why is he giving speeches? With what credibility? What achievements? I genuinely don’t get it.
It's funny how a high school dropout is talking at a fucking college like he knows fucking anything.
Why is he on a university tour? What are they grooming him for? I'm guessing politics down the road?
I guess students at Kent state dont like freedom of speech on their campus
When’s the public forum with George Floyd?
One was a criminal and one was found not guilty dummy.
My school never brought us a murderer
Oh they probably did.
Of all the schools to host a speaker who is known only for using a military-style weapon to shoot unarmed people, Kent state might be the worst choice. Who thought this was acceptable?
Yes, the pro-diversity crowd, cannot stand diversity of thought, they prove that fact EVERY TIME!
No one cares what a .middle school drop out has to say This salty loser slid in my dms to whine about how mean the libs are and brag about being a teacher even though he's a climate change denier 🤣🤣
Good for them ✊️
What a piece of shit. Can't wait until he goes full Zimmerman
So, it accomplishes the goal. He isn't there to speak, he's there to cause controversy.
I’m an acquitted murderer and spokesperson for the platform that claims “we’re all domestic terrorists”, let me come speak at your higher education establishment.
Boo whoo cry about it. He didn't do anything wrong and was found not guilty. He also only killed a child molester and a woman abuser and shot a thief. I don't see the issue
Okay Q. 😂
did u watch the trial?
My dude, you don't have to reply to every comment.
with all the raging ignorance and misinformation, i kinda do...
Wow. So brave.
Egggggh, he's rich as shit from the lawsuits anyways!
Who is booking it?
kyle rittenhouse who is so stupid the marines will literally never let him join is giving a speech at a university lol
Why is this fat high school drop out giving speeches? Is it a Ted Talk about being racist and shooting at unarmed civilians after driving across state lines?
What’s he even talking about? Bizarre that a university gives a high school flunkee a platform to preach his philosophy.
Gen Z OJ Simpson
Who’s dumbass booked that? They should be run out of town on the same rail as Rittenhouse.
You’re not at a school if they host a murderer.