Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

Kyle Rittenhouse. Murder or self defense ?


MaxVerstappen33

Recommended Posts

I assumed that this kid killed someone with stray bullets or something like that. But if you look at the details, this is text book self defense. The case is fascinating strictly from a legal standpoint. Its not so fascinating from an emotional or political standpoint.

 

Do I own guns ? No. And I don't want to. This kid is an idiot for going around with a gun. That's my Canadian view of it anyway. But there was hundreds of people with guns that night. The first guy he shot literally tried to wrestle the gun out of his hands. And there is pictures of the second guy with his hand on the gun.

 

This is a video clip from the defense but it shows all of the footage pertinent to the case.

 

 

 

Edited by MaxVerstappen33
  • Wat 2
  • RoughGame 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the first shooting, the victim Joseph Rosenbaum throws an improvised molotov cocktail at him and then gives chase to him.

ritten4_by_backspin321_deu5o9p-350t.jpg?

 

Rittenhouse runs away but is cornered between a building and some cars. Rosenbaum gets to within reaching distance and lunges for the gun. Rittenhouse shoots him. 

 

rittenshouse2_by_backspin321_deas4hj-ful

 

FBI surveillance photo showing Rosenbaum and Rittenhouse.

 

rosenritten_by_backspin321_deu03c1-pre.j

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the US anyway, the legality of the gun is irrelevant if the threshold of self defense has been met. So saying the kid shouldn't have been there , shouldn't have had the gun ect , doesn't invalidate a self defense.


Classic Self-Defense: , whether the weapon used in self-defense is lawfully possessed doesn’t matter. The five core elements of self-defense – innocence, imminence, proportionality, avoidance, and reasonableness – don’t make any reference whatever to the legality or illegality of one’s defensive weapon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, King Heffy said:

Because there was an armed domestic terrorist.

So you don't think self defense laws should exist ?

 

According to the prosecutions own witness:

Rosenbaum , who was released from a mental institution the day before, was acting in a "violent" manner that night, throwing rocks and trying to set fires.

Balch said that in one earlier encounter, Rosenbaum threatened to kill him and Rittenhouse "if he caught them alone."

 

Edited by MaxVerstappen33
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, King Heffy said:

The only reason people are making excuses for him is because he's white.  He's a textbook terrorist and should be executed for that garbage.  I would argue the people trying to disarm this piece of $#&% are the vigilantes.

No he really isn't. Subhuman scum? Yes. Deserving of a shank in prison? Sure. But the definition of terrorist doesn't apply. 

As per Oxford: 
The calculated use of violence or threat of violence to inculcate fear. Terrorism is intended to coerce or intimidate governments or societies in the pursuit of goals that are generally political, religious, or ideological.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Gnarcore said:

No he really isn't. Subhuman scum? Yes. Deserving of a shank in prison? Sure. But the definition of terrorist doesn't apply. 

As per Oxford: 
The calculated use of violence or threat of violence to inculcate fear. Terrorism is intended to coerce or intimidate governments or societies in the pursuit of goals that are generally political, religious, or ideological.

And if you look at why he was there in the first place, I would argue he qualifies.

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...