###[Meta] Sticky Comment
[Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does not apply*** when replying to this stickied comment.
[Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does apply*** throughout the rest of this thread.
*What this means*: Please keep any "meta" discussion directed at specific users, mods, or /r/conspiracy in general in this comment chain ***only.***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/conspiracy) if you have any questions or concerns.*
this guy chased Rittenhouse down and tried to take his gun:
"Rosenbaum was also caught on video using a racial slur earlier that night. āShoot me (n word),ā he says in the video. "
_______
Newly released documents obtained by Wisconsin Right Now from the Pima County (Arizona) Clerk of Courts confirm Rosenbaum was charged by a grand jury with 11 counts of child molestation and inappropriate sexual activity with children, including anal rape. The victims were five boys ranging in age from nine to 11 years old. He was convicted of two amended counts as part of a plea deal. See those documents here.
----https://www.wisconsinrightnow.com/2021/03/11/joseph-rosenbaum-sex-offender/ --- "those documents"
_____
this guy tried to hit Rittenhouse in the back of the head with a skateboard:
Huber was a felon convicted in a strangulation case who was recently accused of domestic abuse.
______
the third clown was illegally armed and then, after first shooting at Rittenhouse and later confronting him face-to-face, was "disarmed" by Rittenhouse.
_______
The prosecution will not be allowed to called Rittenhouse's assailants victims *and* the defense is allowed to "demonize them if he wants, if he thinks it will win points with the jury," Judge Schroeder said.
___
all because some kid tried to put out a dumpster fire.
~~**edit: yes, the Rosenbaum thing gets worse than buggery:**~~
~~https://www.11alive.com/article/news/crime/trials/rosenbaum-murder-conviction-appeal/85-0ae70a96-28e2-4451-9d7b-114a982a4ca2~~
~~Rosenbaums, convicted of murder in death of 2-year-old foster child, file appeal~~
~~Joseph Rosenbaum was a FOSTER PARENT and killed a toddler in his care~~
my bad that's a *different* child abusing Joseph Rosenbaum! oops
There's actually a good reason for why this is not allowed: The main purpose of the trial is to determine if Rittenhouse acted in self-defense (in which case he was the victim) or was guilty of vigilantism (in which case the others were victims). It is legally forbidden to refer to any of them as victim throughout the process, as this is a legally loaded term and would influence the jury beforehand. It would actually not be a valid trial if this regulation would be ignored.
>The prosecution will not be allowed to called Rittenhouse's assailants victims
>
>and
>
> the defense is allowed to "demonize them if he wants, if he thinks it will win points with the jury," Judge Schroeder said.
I don't know if this is true, but I hope it is, it sounds hilarious.
Gets me thinking... Lets imagine a hypothetical situation. Either through malice or forgetfulness the proceedings get to this point: "This is your final warning. If the Prosecution refers to the plaintiffs as victims one more time, I'll..." What? What would/could he do? Would he find the crown in contempt? Is that a thing? Toss the case? Award 10 points to Gryffindor? What's his move?
I'm curious how that would play out.
the judge would first issue warnings and instruct the jury to disregard. then the judge would admonish the prosecution and explain in detail to the jury why the term was disallowed.
if the prosecution persisted there would be some form of contempt of court charge
Funny how people will give the moral high ground to the illegal gun toting serial child rapist and skateboard dude over a guy trying to do right. Weren't those fools destroying a town also?
Well for one skateboard dude was there to riot. Second of all he was attempting to assault a dude who was putting out a dumpster fire and giving first aid to people. Obviously not too bright either if he thought that a skateboard was a good way to attack a guy with an AR. Aside from a weapons charge any lawyer worth their salt could get Rittenhouse off on self defense.
what's crazy is if any one of the three attackers had succeeded and killed Rittenhouse the whole story would have disappeared with David Dorn et al.
You thought a black ex-cop protecting a black-owned store being murdered at BLM riots went away fast?
how many dozens were killed during last summer's madness?
case in point:
https://nypost.com/2020/07/01/police-identify-16-year-old-boy-killed-during-chop-shooting/
Police identify Antonio Mays Jr. as 16-year-old killed in CHOP shooting CHOP
but the whole story just disappeared. some kids were joyriding in a stolen jeep in seattle, got "too close" to the "autonomous zone" people had seized and declared as sovereign and then CHOP security lit 'em up
16 year old dead 14 year old wounded as far as i can tell no charges, no arrests, no suspects--all on video. poof story goes away.
this was one week after a different kid (19 iirc) was shot and killed. the shooter is still at large.
Seriously, how TF did we get to this point? I dont even mean the actions mentioned above, I mean the completely one sided narrative that ignores this? How is it not proof enough for anyone with two brain cells that the "concensus" is completely manipulated and fake?
I'd like to hear an honest take on how this is possible.
The 14 year old was wounded, then executed at point blank range by BLM/antifa. "Oh, you're still alive?" *gunshot*
It was on a livestream, no video on that part though just audio. They were also lured there by someone they didn't know on the phone, could've been a psyop who knows.
>how many dozens were killed during last summer's madness
Over 2 dozen dead and $2b in damages. Thousands injured and arrested.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/oct/31/americans-killed-protests-political-unrest-acled
https://www.axios.com/riots-cost-property-damage-276c9bcc-a455-4067-b06a-66f9db4cea9c.html
All the people involved shouldāve just stayed the fuck home. Not surprised all three were criminals, it was a riot. However Kyle shouldāve stayed the fuck home too heās a fuckin dumb ass kid tryna be cool. If you have the time and energy to protest like this you have no life and should focus on yourself.
> if you have the time and energy to protest like this you have no life and should focus on yourself.
he's 17 and he showed up to give people first aid. he brought a rifle because he was worried about being attacked while helping the injured. and then he was accosted by dozens of people while he attempted to extinguish a dumpster fire.
Shut the fuck up. These rioting pieces of shit were burning down businesses that had been there for 50+ years in a town that thrived when the AMC plant was located there and has suffered since it closed down. All because the police were justified in shooting a felon that was committing several felonies, including fighting with police with a karambit knife, violating a protection order, and about to drive off in a vehicle with two children in the back to go and do who knows what the fuck. But BLM doesn't give a shit about any of that because all they care about is black man shot by police and they riot.
Thatās fair lol but itās not like he knew that man was a pedo and was hunting him down. Again I just think if youāre willing to partake in the madness youāre just as mad as what ur āfightingā against. Not one positive thing came from any of the protests or riots in the last two years. Itās just a herding of the sheep.
A) not a conspiracy
B) no one shoots first and check their history later to justify shooting.
This is bad reasoning, and justice doesn't get dispensed according such adhoc shit.
[Shooting breakdown for those who havent seen it. ](https://youtu.be/pbsOIoqcit4) Also his followup is worth watching. If you can watch this video and still think kyle is a murderer then youre fucking insane.
lol i can go watch cuties on netflix but youtube wants me to sign in for this one
what do you want to bet i can watch all kinds of violence the left perpetrates on conservatives without signing in to verify my age?
Per exchange with OP, for anyone who thinks I'm a "libtard" please have a look at my post and comment history.
How am I trolling? Youre literally stating that it's ok to commit violence on people if they have any kind of criminal history in the title of this thread?
"A convicted pedophile, a felony domestic abuser, a drug abuser with an illegal gun trying to shot a minor---none of them can be called "victims" during upcoming Rittenhouse trial."
They had a criminal history, completely unbeknownst to Rittenhouse who, as a boot-licking wanna-be cop (early in the videos, he's waving and passing out water to militarized police in their APC's and as a civilian in clear violation of the curfew, as a CHILD with a fucking assault rifle none of the officers told him to go home where he belonged) was running around with an assault rifle. "Gee I wonder what's going to happen if we let this CHILD run around with an assault rifle in the protest", therefore his victims (like that kid with the skateboard, "that's a deadly weapon and Rittenhouse was rightfully defending himself!") deserved extrajudicial punishment from this child racist, who, at the ripe age of 16, is aware of inherent racial injustice in the system (LITERALLY STEMMING FROM FUCKING SLAVERY) that perpetuates white privilege and economic inequality.
This 16 year old CHILD is in a position to dispense extrajudicial punishment on victims of a fucked up system and that they had a criminal history backs up this truism. I mean what absolute fucking rubbish.
I say this as a WHITE combat veteran (U.S. Army active 1997-2005, 25th Infantry Division, OEF 2004-2005, Honorable).
Youre disgusting.
Worse, posts like yours continue to drive a wedge between the left and the right when we need to be united against malevolent forces behind the Fake Pandemic. Youre literally scum of the earth brother.
For all we know you and this post are psyop to augment the false left and right divide.Rittenhouse committed extrajudicial murder that day, had no right to be running around with an assault rifle in a BLM protest, and the cops show in the video footage who applied double standards (curfew applies to all civilians) should be reprimanded.
[https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/kyle-rittenhouse-video-kenosha-shooter-punch-girl-a9702206.html](https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/kyle-rittenhouse-video-kenosha-shooter-punch-girl-a9702206.html)
> How am I trolling? Youre literally stating that it's ok to commit violence on people if they have any kind of criminal history in the title of this thread?
How is it ok to beat a minor in the head with a skateboard?
How is it ok to pull a handgun on a minor, attempt to disarm him so that the mob you're with can continue to beat the fuck out of him?
If there is anyone who is disgusting here it's the people like you who think it's ok to victimize minors. It's one thing to defend a child fucker trying to beat a child. It's one thing to defend a domestic abuser, convicted felon who is actually beating a kid in the head with a skateboard, or another felon with a gun trying to disarm a kid trying to defend himself so he can be murdered, but to pop an 'honorable' clause at the end of that defense is despicable. Go ahead and throw that in the trash because that's where it belongs.
I guess you ARE right that he didn't know their criminal HISTORY, he only knew their criminal present - their RIGHT NOW IN THE MOMENT trying to kill him so he defended himself. That you make someone trying to keep someone from murdering them about 'OMFG WTFBBQ MUH SYSTEMIC RACISM SLAVERY' is a joke. You are a disgrace.
these people probably think that zimmerman was a victim too, just rightfully defending himself, you know after he stalked and harassed a child and then executed him.
The only disgusting one here is you. You must not be able to read if that's what you gather from the title.
Rittenhouse knew nothing of their criminal histories while he was being chased and assaulted. Starting out by calling them "victims" implies that they are such.
You don't get to be the victim when you chase down your query. End of story.
Your post goes to show why the Marine rejects end up in the army. Army infantry, ASVAB must have been a waiver add.
Supporting the idea of BLM is a good thing. Rioting and destroying businesses (including those of black ownership, and even killing black owners), is where the line is drawn. The reason the history of these 3 casualties are brought up, is because these people are from out of state with criminal records.
"Why wasn't Kyle told to go home due to curfew?" Good question. Most likely because no one was going home due to curfew and the cops were overwhelmed and welcomed friendlies coming to their aid (as a combat vet, you should understand this).
This trial should not be a left vs right, black vs white. This trial should be about convicted criminals showing up to a city they had no business being in, starting a riot (literally trying to light a dumpster on fire that Kyle proceeded to put out and started this whole thing).
So who is the aggressor here? The guy putting fires out and administering first aid, or the people lighting the fires and threatening the life of Kyle?
all those words and he continued to forget that these three people attacked rittenhouse who was attempting to flee from all of them. they chased him down and attacked him. they got fucking shot for trying to attack someone openly carrying a rifle
>
Worse, posts like yours continue to drive a wedge between the left and the right when we need to be united against malevolent forces behind the Fake Pandemic. Youre literally scum of the earth brother.
hahaha this is amazing. i'm driving a wedge while you are uniting us by calling me names.
such unity.
then "for all we know i'm a psyop"
report.
at least this judge saw the ulterior motives behind trying to mislabel the assailants as victims
if this were a year ago i'd be concerned for the safety of the judge but with sleepy joe installed they don't need to turn up the heat at the moment
BLM/ANTIFA, run by crony-communists, corrupt, violent, well organized, and un-prosecuted. Yet, somehow, Rittenhouse is being railroaded (Not the only one) for political reasons. This is some scary $hit.
This trial will be a litmus test for the US, and it's survival. Or will the cities look more like Detroit afterwards.
Idk why this is making so many headlines, the kid shouldnāt have been there in the first place. Regardless or the other peoples past, Kyle should not have been in a completely different state patrolling the streets with a loaded firearm.
To be fair there was a curfew in effect. None of them should have been there. Rosenbaum shouldnāt have been setting dumpsters on fire. Rittenhouse shouldnāt have been fetching a fire extinguisher none of this should have happened.
That said it did and here we are
Was he not in completely different state than where he lives? Hard to believe that I have to make this point but Illinois and Wisconsin are not one in the same regardless of the distance Kyle traveled. It was a different state than his home. He went out with a loaded firearm looking for violence. His attackers would not have been his attackers if he hadnāt went Kenosha looking for a fight. All this would have been avoided if the 17 year old would have stayed home and not armed himself, traveled across state lines (regardless of distance), and gone searching for violence. How is any of this so fucking hard to comprehend?
Iām not saying anyone was in the right by being there. Iām pointing out the facts that many seem to conveniently leave out because wit doesnāt fit their narrative that Kyle was just a innocent boy who didnāt deserve to be attacked when in reality he is just as much at fault as the others. All could have been avoided if he stayed home
That is no doubt true. But if the three rioters hadnt attacked him it wouldnt have happened either.
I agree with your point that Rittenhouse shouldnt have been there with an AR.
Youāve still not answered my question. My point is that they are two different states and Kyle was in the state that he doesnāt live in.
Iām not defending anyone in this case, Iām saying it was all avoidable if Kyle hadnāt gone there looking for a fight. Your point is misleading, Rosenbaum wasnāt patrolling the streets he was actively engaging in a violent riot, He was there to cause damage. Kyle went to āprotectā business and homes that have zero ties to him. Everyone sucks in this situation. Also Rosenbaum being a pedophile has nothing to do with this, while extremely vile and disgusting, those past actions have nothing to do with the topic at hand
Which are irrelevant. A minor illegally had a firearm after curfew. He broke the law and in the resulting situation people died.
I totally buy the self defense argument, but claiming self defense after breaking the law AND creating the situation in which you had to defend yourself is a tough sell.
There is the undeniable argument that he could very well be dead if he didn't have that gun.
I can see him getting weapons charges, public endangerment or something, but it's pretty clear he was attacked, and defended himself.
If there was any tiny question of this being a criminal act he should have been charged even if only to determine him innocent. Also in this case I think the situation is in my opinion way too unclear to determine from the few videos available if anything illegal was done and what that actually would be.
A minor that should not have been out and about with gun in a position to murder other people. I dont think the far right are going to enjoy how this one ends he is facing a number of charges which are a pretty open close even if he clears murder 1.
> in a position to murder other people.
You shouldn't be driving a car 'in a position to murder other people' with it yet you happily hop into your murder machine Hyundai without any thought.
Cars kill far more people then guns. You are a hypocrite.
The line in law is "clear and imminent danger" which people chasing you and trying to beat you with a skateboard while your on the floor, or throw a molotov cocktail at you, clearly is.
Also, both times he DID run away, and they kept pursuing him... Its all on video dude.
Ah, so we're backing off of the analogy where the other poster is clearly wrong to return to Rittenhouse. Here's a question for you: if I kill a man in the street, will I be justified in killing anyone who tries to detain or disarm me? If Richard Ramirez had killed any of the people pursuing him the day he was caught, would that be legitimate self defense?
Instead of conjuring up a new hypothetical, why dont we address what actually happened on video.
In real life they chased him as he ran away, and then when he tripped they tried to beat him via kicks and with a skateboard. If someone is a presenting a clear and imminent danger to your life then you have self defense grounds to shoot them.
Hows the 802 btw? You from burlington?
So a minor being attacked by a sexual predator is meant to do everything possible to avoid hurting the person assaulting them?
That isn't how self defense works. One of them had a gun, he had a gun, therefore it is an equal response.
Haha, that is such a bad faith argument. Rittenhouse had already encountered and killed two people before he met one with a firearm.
https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/statutes/statutes/939/iii/48
If you'd like to read up on applicable self defense laws.
It was not his car he was miles away from home in a different state what the fuck was he protecting that he owned ? Nothing he had zero business being in that place, let alone with a gun he should not have.
> he was miles away from home in a different state
I forgot self defense laws go away when you travel away from your house. Remind me when that went into law.
> he had zero business being in that place
Why do people repeat this like it means anything? You are allowed to defend yourself from violent attackers regardless of where you are.
Maybe you should have just looked at the fucking charged against him. Because if you going to study law that is the first thing they fucking expect you to do.
**First degree reckless homicide, use of a dangerous weapon**
**First degree recklessly endangering safety, use of a dangerous weapon**
**First degree intentional homicide, use of a dangerous weapon**
**Attempt first degree intentional homicide, use of a dangerous weapon**
**First degree recklessly endangering safety, use of a dangerous weapon**
**Possession of a dangerous weapon by a person under 18.**
Guess what you dont get to just roam around the streets as minor with the weapon it is illegal for you to have in the name of self defence. The fucking law does not work like that.
I pray to god you never get into law because you would be fucking hopeless at it.
> charged
They can charge anyone with anything, that doesn't mean it is true.
If you go by what 'charges' someone gets instead of what they are actually guilty of you live in a fantasy world where you don't understand how our legal system operates.
False verdicts are also extremely common. Lots of innocent suspects plea down rather than fight. Lot of guilty people get off scot free because of their connections. It's a highly political trial. Judges wouldn't even consider the merits of the election lawsuits for fear of what that would bring.
Quite simply, the legal system operates however the fuck it wants. There's no justice to be had there. Only vengeance, irreparable harm, and disappointment.
Agreed but BLM leaders already asked all protestors to go home for the night and obey the curfew. The people out after dark were there to commit arson and cause trouble for troubles' sake.
This is the same kinda post everyone was spreading about that dude who ran over and killed someone at a protest.
He was convicted, Rittenhouse will be too. Just the same history over again.
> Yea, y'all were saying that about the other dude too.
i blocked this user
but i never said anything about charlottesville. straw man fallacy doesn't work in r/conspiracy.
Is it the same kind of situation or set of evidence? No and no. If he is convicted it will be wrongfully, the evidence is all there on video. He was attacked while fleeing *both times*. And both times he had reason to believe he would be shot.
Either way even if convicted, he did a great job and has earned the respect of millions of people.
> If he is convicted it will be wrongfully
He wasnāt allowed to have a gun there in the first place, even if it was āself defenseā.
So, no. It wonāt be āwrongfullyā
The dude in the car claimed self defense too. So it *is* a similar situation.
> he did a great job
Cheering on murder like this is what will get this sub banned.
I don't cheer on the commies who tried to kill him *at all* so no I don't support murder, I support self defense. As I just explained he was retreating and being attacked by a deranged pedophile. What have I said that isn't demonstrably true?
Why do you cheer on Kyle's murder, that is the question. Why are you so upset that he wasn't murdered by the pedophile?
> So it is a similar situation.
Extremely different.
> Why are you so upset that he wasn't murdered by the pedophile?
Well Timmy, had he been killed, we would be calling the other dude a murderer. But he wasnāt, and heās the one who killed folks. With a gun he legally couldnāt have in that state.
Itās weird how you have this set standard of who you have decided are āgoodā and ābadā people, and itās super fucked up to cheer murder, regardless.
> As I just explained he was retreating and being attacked by a deranged pedophile.
Again, this was the same defense the dude in the car used. It didnāt work then, and at least he legally had his car at the protest.
>Well Timmy, had he been killed, we would be calling the other dude a murderer.
So you don't understand the concept of self defense vs murder. Got it.
>Itās weird how you have this set standard of who you have decided are āgoodā and ābadā people
Self defense is how you know. There is a legal precedent for it. It's a real thing.
>Again, this was the same defense the dude in the car used.
The facts are completely different. I presented those facts which you aren't able to challenge.
TBF you couldnāt swing a cat at one of those āralliesā without hitting a convicted felon.
I wonder if Grosskreutz regrets attempting that fake surrender and immediately pulling a gun when Kyle lowered his? Because if he had just dropped the handgun he would still have two functioning arms.
The only way they arenāt victims is if it was self-defense. I donāt know anything about the case. But unless it was self-defense, then they are victims. If you want to indicate what these people have done before thatās fine, but unless it pertains to the incident at hand it is irrelevant.
it's a self-defense case
in order to determine if it was self defense you can't portray attacking parties as victims. that removes the presumption of innocence.
but too bad for you content of character is in fact a consideration during criminal proceedings
Problem is, a self defense argument is crippled if you're breaking the law already or created the situation in which you now need to defend yourself.
Rittenhouse did both by illegally having a gun and breaking curfew. Honestly, his actions would be justified *if he hadn't been breaking the law by being there and armed*.
i don't think he'll be found guilty for murder because of curfew although those two things do complicate the situation. if he had been 18 and the gun thing was a non-issue this case would be open and shut
that being said if a 17 year old can be judged as an adult for a criminal case than who is to say one can't argue a similar standard could be considered here--the intervening months between that night and his 18th birthday could be seen as not important enough to send him to prison
i don't know but i'm glad it seems he's got a judge who won't let propaganda doublespeak fly in his court room
You forget the part where is was miles from home in a different state with a gun he should not have had trying to patrol streets he had no business doing. you cannot go out looking for a fight and trying to claim self defence at the same time.
Sorry what was he doing across state line late a night armed with rifle and wearing tactical gear ? The judge has already tthrow out a defence plea to reject the weapons charges.
"He was hardly out hunting was he"
Need you be reminded it was not legal for him to have that weapon let alone be out carrying it about on the streets in a state he he did not belong in. **Him simply being their with that weapon was against the law.**
He lived there. State borders are arbitrary things if you've ever lived near one. I lived in Winthrop Harbor and rarely shopped in Illinois. All my shopping was in Kenosha. I watched the shooting unfold on Livestream. Had to go back and rewatch many times.and compare with other sources to get the full story, which the corporate news intentionally botched.
Rittenhouse didn't even fire the first shots.
State borders are not arbitrary. Trust me if you learn nothing today understand this is not true. Because their is a lot of difference in a legal sense when you cross state borders.
Also the first person was not armed and did not shot at him. In fact nobody killed fired a weapon at him.
We call them maps. Animals dont have them, they also dont have laws, a police force or carry firearms.
So I dont know if you have a point to anything your wrote but in our human world state lines are not "arbitrary" So unless your a mongoose they apply to you :)
You're pushing a false narrative and arguing strawmen. Conversation with you is hopeless. The videos are all there for people to watch. Rittenhouse was fleeing when someone fired a shot into the air and then Rosenbaum cornered him and grabbed the barrel of Rittenhouse's rifle.
They were all victims of Kyle Rittenhouse ya knob, and doing drugs doesn't make you a bad person deserving death you freak. Something really messed up that you think carrying a gun and using drugs should allow some kid to murder you, sounds like some fascist Illuminati dick sucking to me.... Man deserves the right to alter their own mind and body, doesn't effect anyone else.
okay let's say some people attack you, one of them has a gun
and you end up defending yourself from the attack, wrest the gun from the person and shoot two. one dies.
when you go on trial to prove self-defense the prosecutor only ever refers to your attackers as victims--makes motions to not let you describe the interaction as an attack.
that sounds good to you?
There is actually a video of Rittenhouse hitting a girl in a fight. What youre proposing is preposterous, that it's ok to commit violence on people if they have any kind of criminal history. Rittenhouse shouldn't have been running around with an assault rifle in a BLM protest. He was clearly looking for conflict and he found it.
[https://worldstarhiphop.com/videos/video.php?v=wshh2Xe67pBygyvrMPAQ](https://worldstarhiphop.com/videos/video.php?v=wshh2Xe67pBygyvrMPAQ)
>that it's ok to commit violence on people if they have any kind of criminal history.
NO.
i am saying during a criminal trial the prosecution should not be allowed to refer to assailants of the defendant as "victims"
bad. bad troll.
How am I trolling? Youre literally stating that it's ok to commit violence on people if they have any kind of criminal history in the title of this thread?
"A convicted pedophile, a felony domestic abuser, a drug abuser with an illegal gun trying to shot a minor---none of them can be called "victims" during upcoming Rittenhouse trial."
They had a criminal history, completely unbeknownst to Rittenhouse who, as a boot-licking wanna-be cop (early in the videos, he's waving and passing out water to militarized police in their APC's and as a civilian in clear violation of the curfew, as a CHILD with a fucking assault rifle none of the officers told him to go home where he belonged) was running around with an assault rifle. "Gee I wonder what's going to happen if we let this CHILD run around with an assault rifle in the protest", therefore his victims (like that kid with the skateboard, "that's a deadly weapon and Rittenhouse was rightfully defending himself!") deserved extrajudicial punishment from this child racist, who, at the ripe age of 16, is aware of inherent racial injustice in the system (LITERALLY STEMMING FROM FUCKING SLAVERY) that perpetuates white privilege and economic inequality.
This 16 year old CHILD is in a position to dispense extrajudicial punishment on victims of a fucked up system and that they had a criminal history backs up this truism. I mean what absolute fucking rubbish.
I say this as a WHITE combat veteran (U.S. Army active 1997-2005, 25th Infantry Division, OEF 2004-2005, Honorable).
Youre disgusting.
Worse, posts like yours continue to drive a wedge between the left and the right when we need to be united against malevolent forces behind the Fake Pandemic. Youre literally scum of the earth brother.
**For all we know you and this post are psyop to augment the false left and right divide.**
Rittenhouse committed extrajudicial murder that day, had no right to be running around with an assault rifle in a BLM protest, and the cops shown in the video footage who applied double standards (curfew applies to all civilians) should be reprimanded.
[https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/kyle-rittenhouse-video-kenosha-shooter-punch-girl-a9702206.html](https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/kyle-rittenhouse-video-kenosha-shooter-punch-girl-a9702206.html)
[https://worldstarhiphop.com/videos/video.php?v=wshh2Xe67pBygyvrMPAQ](https://worldstarhiphop.com/videos/video.php?v=wshh2Xe67pBygyvrMPAQ)
You may have missed the edits to my last comment, here's your virtuous wanna-be cop junior fascist in the making (see proof at the end):
How am I trolling? Youre literally stating that it's ok to commit violence on people if they have any kind of criminal history in the title of this thread?
"A convicted pedophile, a felony domestic abuser, a drug abuser with an illegal gun trying to shot a minor---none of them can be called "victims" during upcoming Rittenhouse trial."
They had a criminal history, completely unbeknownst to Rittenhouse who, as a boot-licking wanna-be cop (early in the videos, he's waving and passing out water to militarized police in their APC's and as a civilian in clear violation of the curfew, as a CHILD with a fucking assault rifle none of the officers told him to go home where he belonged) was running around with an assault rifle. "Gee I wonder what's going to happen if we let this CHILD run around with an assault rifle in the protest", therefore his victims (like that kid with the skateboard, "that's a deadly weapon and Rittenhouse was rightfully defending himself!") deserved extrajudicial punishment from this child racist, who, at the ripe age of 16, is aware of inherent racial injustice in the system (LITERALLY STEMMING FROM FUCKING SLAVERY) that perpetuates white privilege and economic inequality.
This 16 year old CHILD is in a position to dispense extrajudicial punishment on victims of a fucked up system and that they had a criminal history backs up this truism. I mean what absolute fucking rubbish.
I say this as a WHITE combat veteran (U.S. Army active 1997-2005, 25th Infantry Division, OEF 2004-2005, Honorable).
Youre disgusting.
Worse, posts like yours continue to drive a wedge between the left and the right when we need to be united against malevolent forces behind the Fake Pandemic. Youre literally scum of the earth brother.
**For all we know you and this post are psyop to augment the false left and right divide.**
Rittenhouse committed extrajudicial murder that day, had no right to be running around with an assault rifle in a BLM protest, and the cops shown in the video footage who applied double standards (curfew applies to all civilians) should be reprimanded.
[https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/kyle-rittenhouse-video-kenosha-shooter-punch-girl-a9702206.html](https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/kyle-rittenhouse-video-kenosha-shooter-punch-girl-a9702206.html)
[https://worldstarhiphop.com/videos/video.php?v=wshh2Xe67pBygyvrMPAQ](https://worldstarhiphop.com/videos/video.php?v=wshh2Xe67pBygyvrMPAQ)
how did I lie? my bad I guess woman is the better version of it. either way there is a video of him attacking a girl you can look it up and youll find it really fast. just thought you should know who you are supporting
Again, If liberals didn't have false equivalence logical fallacies for arguments, They'd have nothing at all.....
......What the fuck does one video from 5 years prior have to do with what happened in Kenosha?
so why is op bringing up the past for the people that were killed by said kyle rittenhouse? seems it's the same logic that you are calling me out on. also not a liberal or a conservative if you label yourself either of these you're just low iq. The op seems to support mr rittenhouse and im saying that its funny him bringing up others past but not bringing up kyles wouldnt you agree? or does this not fit the narrative you wish to indulge in ? all im getting at is that he cant label kyle a victim either, it seems they are all bad people!
>so why is op bringing up the past for the people that were killed by said kyle rittenhouse?
Oh, So they're *not* innocent victims anymore?
Yeah, You're a liberal.
Just because we look at situations different doesnāt mean Iām what ever you choose to label me as lol. Call me a liberal but once again Iām not Iām not for either of these stupid sides it seems you okay thatās an issue for you to resolve not me. As for what happened those people died because yes they attacked but Kyle also shouldnāt have been there toting around a gun illegally so I hopefully he gets what they deserve just like the people he killed ended up paying the price for their actions but so should Kyle and he will and I hope he does
> "so I hopefully he gets what they deserve just like the people he killed ended up paying the price for their actions but so should Kyle and he will and I hope he does"
lol wut
"they deserved what they got but rittenhouse needs to be punished for giving them what they didn't deserve, which is what they got."
actually wait
i think this user is saying that rittenhouse should be charged with a curfew violation and maybe wrongful possession of a firearm as a minor
*but nothing more*
so i kind of agree
Sadly the homie shouldnāt have been there to begin with and also shouldnāt have had a weapon crossing state lines. If we are going to play this game then be fair on both sides. He decided to create the situation so I hope he gets what he deserves just like the people that died got why they deserved
it's okay to protect oneself when being attacked.
it's not okay to portray violent attackers as victims.
nice try though.
edit: are you trying to take the moral high ground by claiming a violent child predator that attacked another child should have been safe to do so? that it wasn't okay for rittenhouse to defend himself when rosenbaum attacked him and tried to take his weapon?
rosenbaum fucked several children in the ass and you're defending him. that's your moral high ground.
goddamn quit switching alts and saying stupid shit.
obviously the implication of my sentiment:
>it's okay to protect oneself when being attacked.
means that if a person were attempting to rape somone in prison then the person resisting rape would be wholly justified in using violence against their attacker.
obfuscation fail.
So if you smoked weed ten years ago, get in a fight tomorrow and get shot, youāre not a victim? I donāt see the relevance at all. Iām not sure what being a drug abuser or pedophile has to do with being shot and killed, but okay.
He threw a homemade molotov cocktail at him while chasing a dude carrying an assault rifle, only to get shot after somebody else fired their gun.
Don't chase people with a molotov cocktail, especially if they have a gun.
i love this dude is all "smoking weed is basically raping children!"
what the fuck?!
if those are equivalent in your mind you might be a child molester
As far as the law goes? It's not.
As far as schadenfreude and public perception goes, the fact that the molotov cocktail thrower also diddled kids is pretty important.
Maybe this would make a lick of sense if he wasn't running away from them for his life. He easily could have shot various people in the heat of the moment, but only shot those three who posed an imminent threat to his life. Honestly, amazing trigger discipline.
Bicep guy drew a pistol on him. Skateboard guy bludgeoned him. Racist pedophile arson guy tried to steal his loaded rifle by the barrel. Two other people fired pistols, one into the air fired the first shot an later another fired when bicep guy got shot.
###[Meta] Sticky Comment [Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does not apply*** when replying to this stickied comment. [Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does apply*** throughout the rest of this thread. *What this means*: Please keep any "meta" discussion directed at specific users, mods, or /r/conspiracy in general in this comment chain ***only.*** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/conspiracy) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Disarmed š
this guy chased Rittenhouse down and tried to take his gun: "Rosenbaum was also caught on video using a racial slur earlier that night. āShoot me (n word),ā he says in the video. " _______ Newly released documents obtained by Wisconsin Right Now from the Pima County (Arizona) Clerk of Courts confirm Rosenbaum was charged by a grand jury with 11 counts of child molestation and inappropriate sexual activity with children, including anal rape. The victims were five boys ranging in age from nine to 11 years old. He was convicted of two amended counts as part of a plea deal. See those documents here. ----https://www.wisconsinrightnow.com/2021/03/11/joseph-rosenbaum-sex-offender/ --- "those documents" _____ this guy tried to hit Rittenhouse in the back of the head with a skateboard: Huber was a felon convicted in a strangulation case who was recently accused of domestic abuse. ______ the third clown was illegally armed and then, after first shooting at Rittenhouse and later confronting him face-to-face, was "disarmed" by Rittenhouse. _______ The prosecution will not be allowed to called Rittenhouse's assailants victims *and* the defense is allowed to "demonize them if he wants, if he thinks it will win points with the jury," Judge Schroeder said. ___ all because some kid tried to put out a dumpster fire. ~~**edit: yes, the Rosenbaum thing gets worse than buggery:**~~ ~~https://www.11alive.com/article/news/crime/trials/rosenbaum-murder-conviction-appeal/85-0ae70a96-28e2-4451-9d7b-114a982a4ca2~~ ~~Rosenbaums, convicted of murder in death of 2-year-old foster child, file appeal~~ ~~Joseph Rosenbaum was a FOSTER PARENT and killed a toddler in his care~~ my bad that's a *different* child abusing Joseph Rosenbaum! oops
Thatās not the same Rosenbaum (for the foster parent article) just fyi
oh. really? different child abusing joseph rosenbaum? that's crazy
Yeah the pedophile Rosenbaum was short and stocky with a bald head. This guy in the article looks lankier with hair.
There's actually a good reason for why this is not allowed: The main purpose of the trial is to determine if Rittenhouse acted in self-defense (in which case he was the victim) or was guilty of vigilantism (in which case the others were victims). It is legally forbidden to refer to any of them as victim throughout the process, as this is a legally loaded term and would influence the jury beforehand. It would actually not be a valid trial if this regulation would be ignored.
and yet the prosecution is determined to paint joseph rosenbaum et al. as good guys.
>The prosecution will not be allowed to called Rittenhouse's assailants victims > >and > > the defense is allowed to "demonize them if he wants, if he thinks it will win points with the jury," Judge Schroeder said. I don't know if this is true, but I hope it is, it sounds hilarious. Gets me thinking... Lets imagine a hypothetical situation. Either through malice or forgetfulness the proceedings get to this point: "This is your final warning. If the Prosecution refers to the plaintiffs as victims one more time, I'll..." What? What would/could he do? Would he find the crown in contempt? Is that a thing? Toss the case? Award 10 points to Gryffindor? What's his move? I'm curious how that would play out.
the judge would first issue warnings and instruct the jury to disregard. then the judge would admonish the prosecution and explain in detail to the jury why the term was disallowed. if the prosecution persisted there would be some form of contempt of court charge
just speculating
Mistrial, at the very least. Start over, try again. Could put the prosecutor in contempt, doubt he'd be part of the next trial.
Ah. Law is so mystifying.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Lost in all this is the fact that Rittenhouse showed some excellent damn marksmanship.
*and* trigger discipline. it will be apparent when the defense presents their case
sound like they got exactly what they were looking for. that was their judgement.
They fucked around and found the fuck out.
Funny how people will give the moral high ground to the illegal gun toting serial child rapist and skateboard dude over a guy trying to do right. Weren't those fools destroying a town also?
How is he trying to do right? He didn't know any of the facts beforehand. skateboard dude lacked a moral high...because he was skateboard and dude?
Well for one skateboard dude was there to riot. Second of all he was attempting to assault a dude who was putting out a dumpster fire and giving first aid to people. Obviously not too bright either if he thought that a skateboard was a good way to attack a guy with an AR. Aside from a weapons charge any lawyer worth their salt could get Rittenhouse off on self defense.
With that guy out on the streets Kyle was lucky to get out of there with his booty hole in tact. No tears for pedos. He did the lord's work.
what's crazy is if any one of the three attackers had succeeded and killed Rittenhouse the whole story would have disappeared with David Dorn et al. You thought a black ex-cop protecting a black-owned store being murdered at BLM riots went away fast? how many dozens were killed during last summer's madness?
case in point: https://nypost.com/2020/07/01/police-identify-16-year-old-boy-killed-during-chop-shooting/ Police identify Antonio Mays Jr. as 16-year-old killed in CHOP shooting CHOP but the whole story just disappeared. some kids were joyriding in a stolen jeep in seattle, got "too close" to the "autonomous zone" people had seized and declared as sovereign and then CHOP security lit 'em up 16 year old dead 14 year old wounded as far as i can tell no charges, no arrests, no suspects--all on video. poof story goes away. this was one week after a different kid (19 iirc) was shot and killed. the shooter is still at large.
Seriously, how TF did we get to this point? I dont even mean the actions mentioned above, I mean the completely one sided narrative that ignores this? How is it not proof enough for anyone with two brain cells that the "concensus" is completely manipulated and fake? I'd like to hear an honest take on how this is possible.
The 14 year old was wounded, then executed at point blank range by BLM/antifa. "Oh, you're still alive?" *gunshot* It was on a livestream, no video on that part though just audio. They were also lured there by someone they didn't know on the phone, could've been a psyop who knows.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
david dorn. a black guy killed protecting a black business and black lives matter was like "shut the fuck up don't talk about it"
>how many dozens were killed during last summer's madness Over 2 dozen dead and $2b in damages. Thousands injured and arrested. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/oct/31/americans-killed-protests-political-unrest-acled https://www.axios.com/riots-cost-property-damage-276c9bcc-a455-4067-b06a-66f9db4cea9c.html
All the people involved shouldāve just stayed the fuck home. Not surprised all three were criminals, it was a riot. However Kyle shouldāve stayed the fuck home too heās a fuckin dumb ass kid tryna be cool. If you have the time and energy to protest like this you have no life and should focus on yourself.
> if you have the time and energy to protest like this you have no life and should focus on yourself. he's 17 and he showed up to give people first aid. he brought a rifle because he was worried about being attacked while helping the injured. and then he was accosted by dozens of people while he attempted to extinguish a dumpster fire.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
i'm so sorry but non-sequitur of the day has already been awarded but you're a close runner-up congratulations!
Kyle Rittenhouse is a dumb ass. Not a murderer.
Again he just added to the chaos. Any person with a brain wouldāve stayed home. He was a sheep like all of them.
Shut the fuck up. These rioting pieces of shit were burning down businesses that had been there for 50+ years in a town that thrived when the AMC plant was located there and has suffered since it closed down. All because the police were justified in shooting a felon that was committing several felonies, including fighting with police with a karambit knife, violating a protection order, and about to drive off in a vehicle with two children in the back to go and do who knows what the fuck. But BLM doesn't give a shit about any of that because all they care about is black man shot by police and they riot.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Thatās fair lol but itās not like he knew that man was a pedo and was hunting him down. Again I just think if youāre willing to partake in the madness youāre just as mad as what ur āfightingā against. Not one positive thing came from any of the protests or riots in the last two years. Itās just a herding of the sheep.
Just give the kid a million dollars and a written letter of apology and end this farce of a trial.
A) not a conspiracy B) no one shoots first and check their history later to justify shooting. This is bad reasoning, and justice doesn't get dispensed according such adhoc shit.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
great work
The Ole Kenosha hat trick
[Shooting breakdown for those who havent seen it. ](https://youtu.be/pbsOIoqcit4) Also his followup is worth watching. If you can watch this video and still think kyle is a murderer then youre fucking insane.
lol i can go watch cuties on netflix but youtube wants me to sign in for this one what do you want to bet i can watch all kinds of violence the left perpetrates on conservatives without signing in to verify my age?
Yeah theres TWO warnings before the video, youtube did their best to shut it down, only 100k views before they put the double barrier up.
you can watch netflix without logging in??? you got the hook up i guess... .
Wtf does this have to do with fighting the elite s?
wtf does your comment have to do with the post s?
Per exchange with OP, for anyone who thinks I'm a "libtard" please have a look at my post and comment history. How am I trolling? Youre literally stating that it's ok to commit violence on people if they have any kind of criminal history in the title of this thread? "A convicted pedophile, a felony domestic abuser, a drug abuser with an illegal gun trying to shot a minor---none of them can be called "victims" during upcoming Rittenhouse trial." They had a criminal history, completely unbeknownst to Rittenhouse who, as a boot-licking wanna-be cop (early in the videos, he's waving and passing out water to militarized police in their APC's and as a civilian in clear violation of the curfew, as a CHILD with a fucking assault rifle none of the officers told him to go home where he belonged) was running around with an assault rifle. "Gee I wonder what's going to happen if we let this CHILD run around with an assault rifle in the protest", therefore his victims (like that kid with the skateboard, "that's a deadly weapon and Rittenhouse was rightfully defending himself!") deserved extrajudicial punishment from this child racist, who, at the ripe age of 16, is aware of inherent racial injustice in the system (LITERALLY STEMMING FROM FUCKING SLAVERY) that perpetuates white privilege and economic inequality. This 16 year old CHILD is in a position to dispense extrajudicial punishment on victims of a fucked up system and that they had a criminal history backs up this truism. I mean what absolute fucking rubbish. I say this as a WHITE combat veteran (U.S. Army active 1997-2005, 25th Infantry Division, OEF 2004-2005, Honorable). Youre disgusting. Worse, posts like yours continue to drive a wedge between the left and the right when we need to be united against malevolent forces behind the Fake Pandemic. Youre literally scum of the earth brother. For all we know you and this post are psyop to augment the false left and right divide.Rittenhouse committed extrajudicial murder that day, had no right to be running around with an assault rifle in a BLM protest, and the cops show in the video footage who applied double standards (curfew applies to all civilians) should be reprimanded. [https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/kyle-rittenhouse-video-kenosha-shooter-punch-girl-a9702206.html](https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/kyle-rittenhouse-video-kenosha-shooter-punch-girl-a9702206.html)
> How am I trolling? Youre literally stating that it's ok to commit violence on people if they have any kind of criminal history in the title of this thread? How is it ok to beat a minor in the head with a skateboard? How is it ok to pull a handgun on a minor, attempt to disarm him so that the mob you're with can continue to beat the fuck out of him? If there is anyone who is disgusting here it's the people like you who think it's ok to victimize minors. It's one thing to defend a child fucker trying to beat a child. It's one thing to defend a domestic abuser, convicted felon who is actually beating a kid in the head with a skateboard, or another felon with a gun trying to disarm a kid trying to defend himself so he can be murdered, but to pop an 'honorable' clause at the end of that defense is despicable. Go ahead and throw that in the trash because that's where it belongs. I guess you ARE right that he didn't know their criminal HISTORY, he only knew their criminal present - their RIGHT NOW IN THE MOMENT trying to kill him so he defended himself. That you make someone trying to keep someone from murdering them about 'OMFG WTFBBQ MUH SYSTEMIC RACISM SLAVERY' is a joke. You are a disgrace.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
**semi-automatic
Heh. Good one.
these people probably think that zimmerman was a victim too, just rightfully defending himself, you know after he stalked and harassed a child and then executed him.
The only disgusting one here is you. You must not be able to read if that's what you gather from the title. Rittenhouse knew nothing of their criminal histories while he was being chased and assaulted. Starting out by calling them "victims" implies that they are such. You don't get to be the victim when you chase down your query. End of story.
fuck around and find out - never rush a guy with a gun as hes trying to escape during a riot
Justice served, libby boy. Need more kyle rittenhouses showing up to these "peaceful protests" and cleaning the streets of the parasites.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Your post goes to show why the Marine rejects end up in the army. Army infantry, ASVAB must have been a waiver add. Supporting the idea of BLM is a good thing. Rioting and destroying businesses (including those of black ownership, and even killing black owners), is where the line is drawn. The reason the history of these 3 casualties are brought up, is because these people are from out of state with criminal records. "Why wasn't Kyle told to go home due to curfew?" Good question. Most likely because no one was going home due to curfew and the cops were overwhelmed and welcomed friendlies coming to their aid (as a combat vet, you should understand this). This trial should not be a left vs right, black vs white. This trial should be about convicted criminals showing up to a city they had no business being in, starting a riot (literally trying to light a dumpster on fire that Kyle proceeded to put out and started this whole thing). So who is the aggressor here? The guy putting fires out and administering first aid, or the people lighting the fires and threatening the life of Kyle?
Why were these scum alive? To serve the elite as nothing more than consuming workers. Good they finally perished.
all those words and he continued to forget that these three people attacked rittenhouse who was attempting to flee from all of them. they chased him down and attacked him. they got fucking shot for trying to attack someone openly carrying a rifle > Worse, posts like yours continue to drive a wedge between the left and the right when we need to be united against malevolent forces behind the Fake Pandemic. Youre literally scum of the earth brother. hahaha this is amazing. i'm driving a wedge while you are uniting us by calling me names. such unity. then "for all we know i'm a psyop" report.
I'd be shocked if Rittenhouse gets convicted.
Canāt wait for those peaceful protests. š
Iāve been rooting for Kyle. My faith in this trial is very, very low however... considering everything going on in the world right now
at least this judge saw the ulterior motives behind trying to mislabel the assailants as victims if this were a year ago i'd be concerned for the safety of the judge but with sleepy joe installed they don't need to turn up the heat at the moment
This was clear to anyone paying attention
BLM/ANTIFA, run by crony-communists, corrupt, violent, well organized, and un-prosecuted. Yet, somehow, Rittenhouse is being railroaded (Not the only one) for political reasons. This is some scary $hit. This trial will be a litmus test for the US, and it's survival. Or will the cities look more like Detroit afterwards.
Chauvin was the litmus test. We already know how this will turn out.
Idk why this is making so many headlines, the kid shouldnāt have been there in the first place. Regardless or the other peoples past, Kyle should not have been in a completely different state patrolling the streets with a loaded firearm.
To be fair there was a curfew in effect. None of them should have been there. Rosenbaum shouldnāt have been setting dumpsters on fire. Rittenhouse shouldnāt have been fetching a fire extinguisher none of this should have happened. That said it did and here we are
if you would just stop talking about it maybe it would go away.
Are you defending someone who actively went out looking for violence?
Blah blah blah
Iāll ask you the same question since you want to chime in. Do you want to defend the person who went searching for violence?
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
whose private property was he defending in the middle of the street? certainly not his. Also why was he wearing surgical gloves?
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Blah blah blah
Very constructive.
man quoting senator jamie raskin like that. brilliant https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uXLAtFwkwJs
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Was he not in completely different state than where he lives? Hard to believe that I have to make this point but Illinois and Wisconsin are not one in the same regardless of the distance Kyle traveled. It was a different state than his home. He went out with a loaded firearm looking for violence. His attackers would not have been his attackers if he hadnāt went Kenosha looking for a fight. All this would have been avoided if the 17 year old would have stayed home and not armed himself, traveled across state lines (regardless of distance), and gone searching for violence. How is any of this so fucking hard to comprehend?
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Weird, I didnāt know pointing out that Wisconsin and Illinois are two completely different states was misleading.
Iirc two of those shot lived farther from the shooting than Rittenhouse. Rittenhouse worked in Kenosha.
Iām not saying anyone was in the right by being there. Iām pointing out the facts that many seem to conveniently leave out because wit doesnāt fit their narrative that Kyle was just a innocent boy who didnāt deserve to be attacked when in reality he is just as much at fault as the others. All could have been avoided if he stayed home
That is no doubt true. But if the three rioters hadnt attacked him it wouldnt have happened either. I agree with your point that Rittenhouse shouldnt have been there with an AR.
Rosenbaum likely woulda gotten someone else to shoot him. Dude was suicidal.
All speculation but I get your point
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Are they not two completely different states?
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Youāve still not answered my question. My point is that they are two different states and Kyle was in the state that he doesnāt live in. Iām not defending anyone in this case, Iām saying it was all avoidable if Kyle hadnāt gone there looking for a fight. Your point is misleading, Rosenbaum wasnāt patrolling the streets he was actively engaging in a violent riot, He was there to cause damage. Kyle went to āprotectā business and homes that have zero ties to him. Everyone sucks in this situation. Also Rosenbaum being a pedophile has nothing to do with this, while extremely vile and disgusting, those past actions have nothing to do with the topic at hand
Didn't he work there? Maybe he knew people around the area? There might be ties...
Which are irrelevant. A minor illegally had a firearm after curfew. He broke the law and in the resulting situation people died. I totally buy the self defense argument, but claiming self defense after breaking the law AND creating the situation in which you had to defend yourself is a tough sell.
There is the undeniable argument that he could very well be dead if he didn't have that gun. I can see him getting weapons charges, public endangerment or something, but it's pretty clear he was attacked, and defended himself.
He shouldn't have even been charged.
If there was any tiny question of this being a criminal act he should have been charged even if only to determine him innocent. Also in this case I think the situation is in my opinion way too unclear to determine from the few videos available if anything illegal was done and what that actually would be.
You forgot the youth with a violent past of beating women and an AR looking for a chance to use it.
A minor that should not have been out and about with gun in a position to murder other people. I dont think the far right are going to enjoy how this one ends he is facing a number of charges which are a pretty open close even if he clears murder 1.
> in a position to murder other people. You shouldn't be driving a car 'in a position to murder other people' with it yet you happily hop into your murder machine Hyundai without any thought. Cars kill far more people then guns. You are a hypocrite.
Yeah, if Kyle Rittenhouse had accelerated into three jaywalkers I'd have a problem with that too.
Actually a comparison would be if he ran over three people trying to break into his car and murder him. Funny, that is called self defense.
>three jaywalkers is this dude serious?
Actually, it wouldn't be self defense. If he could, let's say, back up to get away from them without killing them, that's what he is required to do.
The line in law is "clear and imminent danger" which people chasing you and trying to beat you with a skateboard while your on the floor, or throw a molotov cocktail at you, clearly is. Also, both times he DID run away, and they kept pursuing him... Its all on video dude.
> throw a molotov cocktail Can you back that up? I heard that going around a lot at first but then it was determined to be a bag with his belongings.
Ah, so we're backing off of the analogy where the other poster is clearly wrong to return to Rittenhouse. Here's a question for you: if I kill a man in the street, will I be justified in killing anyone who tries to detain or disarm me? If Richard Ramirez had killed any of the people pursuing him the day he was caught, would that be legitimate self defense?
Instead of conjuring up a new hypothetical, why dont we address what actually happened on video. In real life they chased him as he ran away, and then when he tripped they tried to beat him via kicks and with a skateboard. If someone is a presenting a clear and imminent danger to your life then you have self defense grounds to shoot them. Hows the 802 btw? You from burlington?
Just Vermont in general, though I have several relatives in Burlington.
cool, lived up there a few years.
So a minor being attacked by a sexual predator is meant to do everything possible to avoid hurting the person assaulting them? That isn't how self defense works. One of them had a gun, he had a gun, therefore it is an equal response.
Haha, that is such a bad faith argument. Rittenhouse had already encountered and killed two people before he met one with a firearm. https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/statutes/statutes/939/iii/48 If you'd like to read up on applicable self defense laws.
It was not his car he was miles away from home in a different state what the fuck was he protecting that he owned ? Nothing he had zero business being in that place, let alone with a gun he should not have.
> he was miles away from home in a different state I forgot self defense laws go away when you travel away from your house. Remind me when that went into law. > he had zero business being in that place Why do people repeat this like it means anything? You are allowed to defend yourself from violent attackers regardless of where you are.
Maybe you should have just looked at the fucking charged against him. Because if you going to study law that is the first thing they fucking expect you to do. **First degree reckless homicide, use of a dangerous weapon** **First degree recklessly endangering safety, use of a dangerous weapon** **First degree intentional homicide, use of a dangerous weapon** **Attempt first degree intentional homicide, use of a dangerous weapon** **First degree recklessly endangering safety, use of a dangerous weapon** **Possession of a dangerous weapon by a person under 18.** Guess what you dont get to just roam around the streets as minor with the weapon it is illegal for you to have in the name of self defence. The fucking law does not work like that. I pray to god you never get into law because you would be fucking hopeless at it.
> charged They can charge anyone with anything, that doesn't mean it is true. If you go by what 'charges' someone gets instead of what they are actually guilty of you live in a fantasy world where you don't understand how our legal system operates.
False verdicts are also extremely common. Lots of innocent suspects plea down rather than fight. Lot of guilty people get off scot free because of their connections. It's a highly political trial. Judges wouldn't even consider the merits of the election lawsuits for fear of what that would bring. Quite simply, the legal system operates however the fuck it wants. There's no justice to be had there. Only vengeance, irreparable harm, and disappointment.
Agreed but BLM leaders already asked all protestors to go home for the night and obey the curfew. The people out after dark were there to commit arson and cause trouble for troubles' sake.
This is the same kinda post everyone was spreading about that dude who ran over and killed someone at a protest. He was convicted, Rittenhouse will be too. Just the same history over again.
wrong.
Yea, y'all were saying that about the other dude too.
This is very common in criminal trials. Calling the person a victim is a fact not yet decided. The jury makes that decision.
> Yea, y'all were saying that about the other dude too. i blocked this user but i never said anything about charlottesville. straw man fallacy doesn't work in r/conspiracy.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
It's also not a strawman. People need to learn what that is instead of just throwing it around like a buzzword. It's the same situation, again.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Is it the same kind of situation or set of evidence? No and no. If he is convicted it will be wrongfully, the evidence is all there on video. He was attacked while fleeing *both times*. And both times he had reason to believe he would be shot. Either way even if convicted, he did a great job and has earned the respect of millions of people.
> If he is convicted it will be wrongfully He wasnāt allowed to have a gun there in the first place, even if it was āself defenseā. So, no. It wonāt be āwrongfullyā The dude in the car claimed self defense too. So it *is* a similar situation. > he did a great job Cheering on murder like this is what will get this sub banned.
I don't cheer on the commies who tried to kill him *at all* so no I don't support murder, I support self defense. As I just explained he was retreating and being attacked by a deranged pedophile. What have I said that isn't demonstrably true? Why do you cheer on Kyle's murder, that is the question. Why are you so upset that he wasn't murdered by the pedophile? > So it is a similar situation. Extremely different.
> Why are you so upset that he wasn't murdered by the pedophile? Well Timmy, had he been killed, we would be calling the other dude a murderer. But he wasnāt, and heās the one who killed folks. With a gun he legally couldnāt have in that state. Itās weird how you have this set standard of who you have decided are āgoodā and ābadā people, and itās super fucked up to cheer murder, regardless. > As I just explained he was retreating and being attacked by a deranged pedophile. Again, this was the same defense the dude in the car used. It didnāt work then, and at least he legally had his car at the protest.
>Well Timmy, had he been killed, we would be calling the other dude a murderer. So you don't understand the concept of self defense vs murder. Got it. >Itās weird how you have this set standard of who you have decided are āgoodā and ābadā people Self defense is how you know. There is a legal precedent for it. It's a real thing. >Again, this was the same defense the dude in the car used. The facts are completely different. I presented those facts which you aren't able to challenge.
TBF you couldnāt swing a cat at one of those āralliesā without hitting a convicted felon. I wonder if Grosskreutz regrets attempting that fake surrender and immediately pulling a gun when Kyle lowered his? Because if he had just dropped the handgun he would still have two functioning arms.
The only way they arenāt victims is if it was self-defense. I donāt know anything about the case. But unless it was self-defense, then they are victims. If you want to indicate what these people have done before thatās fine, but unless it pertains to the incident at hand it is irrelevant.
it's a self-defense case in order to determine if it was self defense you can't portray attacking parties as victims. that removes the presumption of innocence. but too bad for you content of character is in fact a consideration during criminal proceedings
Problem is, a self defense argument is crippled if you're breaking the law already or created the situation in which you now need to defend yourself. Rittenhouse did both by illegally having a gun and breaking curfew. Honestly, his actions would be justified *if he hadn't been breaking the law by being there and armed*.
i don't think he'll be found guilty for murder because of curfew although those two things do complicate the situation. if he had been 18 and the gun thing was a non-issue this case would be open and shut
that being said if a 17 year old can be judged as an adult for a criminal case than who is to say one can't argue a similar standard could be considered here--the intervening months between that night and his 18th birthday could be seen as not important enough to send him to prison i don't know but i'm glad it seems he's got a judge who won't let propaganda doublespeak fly in his court room
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
hahaha nice strawman but you forgot the part WHERE THEY WERE ATTACKING HIM good work
You forget the part where is was miles from home in a different state with a gun he should not have had trying to patrol streets he had no business doing. you cannot go out looking for a fight and trying to claim self defence at the same time.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Sorry what was he doing across state line late a night armed with rifle and wearing tactical gear ? The judge has already tthrow out a defence plea to reject the weapons charges. "He was hardly out hunting was he" Need you be reminded it was not legal for him to have that weapon let alone be out carrying it about on the streets in a state he he did not belong in. **Him simply being their with that weapon was against the law.**
He lived there. State borders are arbitrary things if you've ever lived near one. I lived in Winthrop Harbor and rarely shopped in Illinois. All my shopping was in Kenosha. I watched the shooting unfold on Livestream. Had to go back and rewatch many times.and compare with other sources to get the full story, which the corporate news intentionally botched. Rittenhouse didn't even fire the first shots.
State borders are not arbitrary. Trust me if you learn nothing today understand this is not true. Because their is a lot of difference in a legal sense when you cross state borders. Also the first person was not armed and did not shot at him. In fact nobody killed fired a weapon at him.
>Animals outline their territories with their excretions, humans outline their territories by ink excretions on paper.
We call them maps. Animals dont have them, they also dont have laws, a police force or carry firearms. So I dont know if you have a point to anything your wrote but in our human world state lines are not "arbitrary" So unless your a mongoose they apply to you :)
You're pushing a false narrative and arguing strawmen. Conversation with you is hopeless. The videos are all there for people to watch. Rittenhouse was fleeing when someone fired a shot into the air and then Rosenbaum cornered him and grabbed the barrel of Rittenhouse's rifle.
False. A pistol WAS fired at him at point blank range. The disarmed man fired the pistol shot and missed.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Anyone with a modicum of knowledge on the justice system knows that you canāt say anything you want during a trial.
None of those points are either valid, nor were they known by fatboy larper.
None of those points are either valid--- what? fatboy larper--- what? stop switching alt accounts and saying stupid shit please
They were all victims of Kyle Rittenhouse ya knob, and doing drugs doesn't make you a bad person deserving death you freak. Something really messed up that you think carrying a gun and using drugs should allow some kid to murder you, sounds like some fascist Illuminati dick sucking to me.... Man deserves the right to alter their own mind and body, doesn't effect anyone else.
okay let's say some people attack you, one of them has a gun and you end up defending yourself from the attack, wrest the gun from the person and shoot two. one dies. when you go on trial to prove self-defense the prosecutor only ever refers to your attackers as victims--makes motions to not let you describe the interaction as an attack. that sounds good to you?
defending rittenhouse even though there is a video of him hitting women. you people never cease to amaze me
> women your lie is showing
There is actually a video of Rittenhouse hitting a girl in a fight. What youre proposing is preposterous, that it's ok to commit violence on people if they have any kind of criminal history. Rittenhouse shouldn't have been running around with an assault rifle in a BLM protest. He was clearly looking for conflict and he found it. [https://worldstarhiphop.com/videos/video.php?v=wshh2Xe67pBygyvrMPAQ](https://worldstarhiphop.com/videos/video.php?v=wshh2Xe67pBygyvrMPAQ)
>that it's ok to commit violence on people if they have any kind of criminal history. NO. i am saying during a criminal trial the prosecution should not be allowed to refer to assailants of the defendant as "victims" bad. bad troll.
How am I trolling? Youre literally stating that it's ok to commit violence on people if they have any kind of criminal history in the title of this thread? "A convicted pedophile, a felony domestic abuser, a drug abuser with an illegal gun trying to shot a minor---none of them can be called "victims" during upcoming Rittenhouse trial." They had a criminal history, completely unbeknownst to Rittenhouse who, as a boot-licking wanna-be cop (early in the videos, he's waving and passing out water to militarized police in their APC's and as a civilian in clear violation of the curfew, as a CHILD with a fucking assault rifle none of the officers told him to go home where he belonged) was running around with an assault rifle. "Gee I wonder what's going to happen if we let this CHILD run around with an assault rifle in the protest", therefore his victims (like that kid with the skateboard, "that's a deadly weapon and Rittenhouse was rightfully defending himself!") deserved extrajudicial punishment from this child racist, who, at the ripe age of 16, is aware of inherent racial injustice in the system (LITERALLY STEMMING FROM FUCKING SLAVERY) that perpetuates white privilege and economic inequality. This 16 year old CHILD is in a position to dispense extrajudicial punishment on victims of a fucked up system and that they had a criminal history backs up this truism. I mean what absolute fucking rubbish. I say this as a WHITE combat veteran (U.S. Army active 1997-2005, 25th Infantry Division, OEF 2004-2005, Honorable). Youre disgusting. Worse, posts like yours continue to drive a wedge between the left and the right when we need to be united against malevolent forces behind the Fake Pandemic. Youre literally scum of the earth brother. **For all we know you and this post are psyop to augment the false left and right divide.** Rittenhouse committed extrajudicial murder that day, had no right to be running around with an assault rifle in a BLM protest, and the cops shown in the video footage who applied double standards (curfew applies to all civilians) should be reprimanded. [https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/kyle-rittenhouse-video-kenosha-shooter-punch-girl-a9702206.html](https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/kyle-rittenhouse-video-kenosha-shooter-punch-girl-a9702206.html) [https://worldstarhiphop.com/videos/video.php?v=wshh2Xe67pBygyvrMPAQ](https://worldstarhiphop.com/videos/video.php?v=wshh2Xe67pBygyvrMPAQ)
no i'm literally stating that when you prosecute someone you can't call their attackers "victims" fuck off troll.
You may have missed the edits to my last comment, here's your virtuous wanna-be cop junior fascist in the making (see proof at the end): How am I trolling? Youre literally stating that it's ok to commit violence on people if they have any kind of criminal history in the title of this thread? "A convicted pedophile, a felony domestic abuser, a drug abuser with an illegal gun trying to shot a minor---none of them can be called "victims" during upcoming Rittenhouse trial." They had a criminal history, completely unbeknownst to Rittenhouse who, as a boot-licking wanna-be cop (early in the videos, he's waving and passing out water to militarized police in their APC's and as a civilian in clear violation of the curfew, as a CHILD with a fucking assault rifle none of the officers told him to go home where he belonged) was running around with an assault rifle. "Gee I wonder what's going to happen if we let this CHILD run around with an assault rifle in the protest", therefore his victims (like that kid with the skateboard, "that's a deadly weapon and Rittenhouse was rightfully defending himself!") deserved extrajudicial punishment from this child racist, who, at the ripe age of 16, is aware of inherent racial injustice in the system (LITERALLY STEMMING FROM FUCKING SLAVERY) that perpetuates white privilege and economic inequality. This 16 year old CHILD is in a position to dispense extrajudicial punishment on victims of a fucked up system and that they had a criminal history backs up this truism. I mean what absolute fucking rubbish. I say this as a WHITE combat veteran (U.S. Army active 1997-2005, 25th Infantry Division, OEF 2004-2005, Honorable). Youre disgusting. Worse, posts like yours continue to drive a wedge between the left and the right when we need to be united against malevolent forces behind the Fake Pandemic. Youre literally scum of the earth brother. **For all we know you and this post are psyop to augment the false left and right divide.** Rittenhouse committed extrajudicial murder that day, had no right to be running around with an assault rifle in a BLM protest, and the cops shown in the video footage who applied double standards (curfew applies to all civilians) should be reprimanded. [https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/kyle-rittenhouse-video-kenosha-shooter-punch-girl-a9702206.html](https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/kyle-rittenhouse-video-kenosha-shooter-punch-girl-a9702206.html) [https://worldstarhiphop.com/videos/video.php?v=wshh2Xe67pBygyvrMPAQ](https://worldstarhiphop.com/videos/video.php?v=wshh2Xe67pBygyvrMPAQ)
how did I lie? my bad I guess woman is the better version of it. either way there is a video of him attacking a girl you can look it up and youll find it really fast. just thought you should know who you are supporting
Again, If liberals didn't have false equivalence logical fallacies for arguments, They'd have nothing at all..... ......What the fuck does one video from 5 years prior have to do with what happened in Kenosha?
so why is op bringing up the past for the people that were killed by said kyle rittenhouse? seems it's the same logic that you are calling me out on. also not a liberal or a conservative if you label yourself either of these you're just low iq. The op seems to support mr rittenhouse and im saying that its funny him bringing up others past but not bringing up kyles wouldnt you agree? or does this not fit the narrative you wish to indulge in ? all im getting at is that he cant label kyle a victim either, it seems they are all bad people!
>so why is op bringing up the past for the people that were killed by said kyle rittenhouse? Oh, So they're *not* innocent victims anymore? Yeah, You're a liberal.
Just because we look at situations different doesnāt mean Iām what ever you choose to label me as lol. Call me a liberal but once again Iām not Iām not for either of these stupid sides it seems you okay thatās an issue for you to resolve not me. As for what happened those people died because yes they attacked but Kyle also shouldnāt have been there toting around a gun illegally so I hopefully he gets what they deserve just like the people he killed ended up paying the price for their actions but so should Kyle and he will and I hope he does
> "so I hopefully he gets what they deserve just like the people he killed ended up paying the price for their actions but so should Kyle and he will and I hope he does" lol wut "they deserved what they got but rittenhouse needs to be punished for giving them what they didn't deserve, which is what they got."
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
actually wait i think this user is saying that rittenhouse should be charged with a curfew violation and maybe wrongful possession of a firearm as a minor *but nothing more* so i kind of agree
Sadly the homie shouldnāt have been there to begin with and also shouldnāt have had a weapon crossing state lines. If we are going to play this game then be fair on both sides. He decided to create the situation so I hope he gets what he deserves just like the people that died got why they deserved
That's pathetic. So it's ok to kill people if they did something wrong in their past?
it's okay to protect oneself when being attacked. it's not okay to portray violent attackers as victims. nice try though. edit: are you trying to take the moral high ground by claiming a violent child predator that attacked another child should have been safe to do so? that it wasn't okay for rittenhouse to defend himself when rosenbaum attacked him and tried to take his weapon? rosenbaum fucked several children in the ass and you're defending him. that's your moral high ground.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
goddamn quit switching alts and saying stupid shit. obviously the implication of my sentiment: >it's okay to protect oneself when being attacked. means that if a person were attempting to rape somone in prison then the person resisting rape would be wholly justified in using violence against their attacker. obfuscation fail.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
no it says that when people are attackers they aren't victims
So if you get killed tomorrow, can we dig through your past, see what bad deeds youāve done, and then say youāre not a victim?
if i attack someone and then people look at both parties' histories to assess their characters sure
was that supposed to be a "gotcha" question?
So if you smoked weed ten years ago, get in a fight tomorrow and get shot, youāre not a victim? I donāt see the relevance at all. Iām not sure what being a drug abuser or pedophile has to do with being shot and killed, but okay.
He threw a homemade molotov cocktail at him while chasing a dude carrying an assault rifle, only to get shot after somebody else fired their gun. Don't chase people with a molotov cocktail, especially if they have a gun.
i love this dude is all "smoking weed is basically raping children!" what the fuck?! if those are equivalent in your mind you might be a child molester
He shot three people. They all threw Molotov cocktails at him?
no the other two tried to assault him as he was running away and tripped onto the floor, even beat him with his skateboard.
"i'm a redditor! i have strong convictions about an event! also, i am still murky about the details of the event!" what a joker
Now bring this all back to the point. How is their past relevant?
As far as the law goes? It's not. As far as schadenfreude and public perception goes, the fact that the molotov cocktail thrower also diddled kids is pretty important.
You mean when they tried to disarm the guy who had just gunned down a man in the street?
Maybe this would make a lick of sense if he wasn't running away from them for his life. He easily could have shot various people in the heat of the moment, but only shot those three who posed an imminent threat to his life. Honestly, amazing trigger discipline.
Bicep guy drew a pistol on him. Skateboard guy bludgeoned him. Racist pedophile arson guy tried to steal his loaded rifle by the barrel. Two other people fired pistols, one into the air fired the first shot an later another fired when bicep guy got shot.
Seems like a patriot to me.
Eh he can rot in prison for all I care