Riots, looting, vandalism, etc.

[portlandatheist]

You are a big fan of judicial violence. I am not.

See? I can do that too!

And I concur 100%. that the state should have an absolute monopoly on violence. You are completely fair in characterizing my position in that regard. That is my stance. When the state does a ****** job with that responsibility, it is up to us to fix it and we need to fix it. The only thing worse than violence delivered by the flawed state is vigilante violence.

 

[Meadmaker]

I've been trying to figure out what happened in this incident and it seems that those who support Kyle Rittenhouse argue that it was all done in self-defence.

Certainly, some video shows him being attacked by protesters who shout about how they are going to beat him up. There are definitely pictures of him being kicked, and hit with a skateboard, and when he shot one person in the arm, the hand connected to that arm is holding a pistol. That looks like self-defence, right?

Maybe not! There are at least a few problems with the self-defence argument:

1.) We don't really know how he came to shoot dead the first person. Was he simply protecting someone's property? Maybe, but was he protecting his own property or just randomly shooting someone he thought was looting/destroying someone else's property? If it is the former, maybe it would count as self-defence, but I highly doubt he owned it.

2.) Was it legal for him to be carrying the weapon in the first place? From what I understand, whether the state was open-carry or not, he was a minor. If it was not legal for him to open carry as a minor in Illinois or Wisconsin, then he would be committing a crime (I don't know if this is a felony or misdemeanor). Well...



Link

I think I've seen the video referred to, and in my very quick estimation, it seemed like self defense. However, that was the second person he killed. Unless the first person he killed was in self defense, then the second one would be felony murder.

The video I have seen of the first shots is too vague for me to get any sense of whether it was self defense. I doubt it, but that's what trials are for.

On some level, though, I don't really care. I know it's very important to Kyle Rittenhouse, but regardless of the findings we have a riot, and a dumbass kid carrying a gun into the middle of it, and two people dead, and a feeling among an awful lot of Americans that somehow any of this makes sense. It doesn't. It's nuts.

 

[Norman Alexander]

NY TIMES

This is the guy they just killed who supposedly killed the Patriot Prayer member.



Sure looks black to me.

 

[angrysoba]

This is the guy they just killed who supposedly killed the Patriot Prayer member.

[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/thum_690875f51d717ca8d5.jpg[/qimg]

Sure looks black to me.

It was just another white-on-white shooting.

 

[The Great Zaganza]

Rittenhouse illegally took a weapon, transported it illegally across state lines in order to use lethal force against people who might damage someone else's property without the owners' permission.
He was not defending himself, he was defending something that wasn't even his.
With a deadly weapon.

It's the quintessence of GOP politics that human lives are expendable, property is not.

 

[portlandatheist]

This is the guy they just killed who supposedly killed the Patriot Prayer member.

[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/thum_690875f51d717ca8d5.jpg[/qimg]

Sure looks black to me.

in this photo is his 11 year old daughter with a baseball bat. No matter your politics, bringing weapons to a protest is not a protest. it is not a protected assembly or speech. No guns. no knives. no paintball guns. no bear spray. If you want to protest, fine, but no weapons!

 

[angrysoba]

I think I've seen the video referred to, and in my very quick estimation, it seemed like self defense. However, that was the second person he killed. Unless the first person he killed was in self defense, then the second one would be felony murder.

Would it be felony murder or straight-up-murder?

My understanding is that felony murder occurs when in the act of a felony someone else gets killed, but if you are the one who did it, say in the act of an armed robbery, then it would simply be a murder if someone rushed you while you were holding a gun.

The video I have seen of the first shots is too vague for me to get any sense of whether it was self defense. I doubt it, but that's what trials are for.

Me too. But here is another thing. Are Rittenhouse's lawyers trying to claim Castle Doctrine? If so, isn't it only possible if you are defending your own property?

Or regular self-defence, in which case the burden of proof shifts to Rittenhouse?

And yet, even then, if the firearm was being illegally carried, then do you even get to claim self-defence even if someone is trying to take the gun off you?

In that case, carrying an illegal firearm around would seem to already put you in the wrong, and anyone trying to disarm you could have a more plausible self-defence excuse.

IANAL, of course, and I am spewing this stuff second and third-hand, but even so...

On some level, though, I don't really care. I know it's very important to Kyle Rittenhouse, but regardless of the findings we have a riot, and a dumbass kid carrying a gun into the middle of it, and two people dead, and a feeling among an awful lot of Americans that somehow any of this makes sense. It doesn't. It's nuts.

Yes, if this kind of thing carries on with people excusing their side and crying out for justice against the other side, we'll end up seeing more of this if people don't calm down.

 

[Elagabalus]

Anything besides "he was killed during the encounter"? Like, how? Was he resisting? Was he armed? Did he overdose on fentanyl?

My guess is that he was resisting arrest.

 

[angrysoba]

My guess is that he was resisting arrest.

An antifa supporter suspected in the death of a right-wing activist last weekend in Portland, Ore., was killed as officers moved in to arrest him on Thursday evening, according to law-enforcement officials.

Members of a federal fugitive task force fatally shot Michael Reinoehl at about 7:30 p.m. while attempting to take him into custody in Lacey, Wash., according to Lt. Ray Brady of the Thurston County Sheriff’s Department. Four officers opened fire on Mr. Reinoehl outside of an apartment complex after he pulled a gun, according to Lt. Brady and the U.S. Marshals Service.

Mr. Reinoehl was pronounced dead at the scene, the Marshals Service said. None of the officers involved were hurt.

WSJ

 

[Suddenly]

My guess is that he was resisting arrest.

You forgot the quotation marks around "resisting arrest."

 

[johnny karate]

You forgot the quotation marks around "resisting arrest."

He also claims he was acting in self-defense. I guess now we’ll never know.

 

[Bogative]

Anything besides "he was killed during the encounter"? Like, how? Was he resisting? Was he armed? Did he overdose on fentanyl?

The facts and circumstances about his death are irrelevant.
He was a "freedom fighter" so his death is tragic and unjustifiable. The cops who killed him were probably militia, and racist, too.

 

[johnny karate]

in this photo is his 11 year old daughter with a baseball bat. No matter your politics, bringing weapons to a protest is not a protest. it is not a protected assembly or speech. No guns. no knives. no paintball guns. no bear spray. If you want to protest, fine, but no weapons!

All things being equal, sounds like good advice.

But things aren’t equal. This is an environment where the police are very cozy with violent right wing groups and turn a blind eye to their antics.

 

[Andy_Ross]

The facts and circumstances about his death are irrelevant.
He was a "freedom fighter" so his death is tragic and unjustifiable. The cops who killed him were probably militia, and racist, too.

They probably were. The FBI certainly think so according to reports, investigations and warnings that they have been issuing for years.

 

[angrysoba]

The facts and circumstances about his death are irrelevant.

If this is supposed to be a parody of someone's views then remember that it goes both ways.

If you hear that the cops shot someone dead, do you believe that the facts and circumstances are irrelevant?

In other words, have you made up your mind already about whether the killing was justified?

He was a "freedom fighter" so his death is tragic and unjustifiable. The cops who killed him were probably militia, and racist, too.

Personally, I don't think so. There are reasons for thinking the guy could be unhinged and that he is dangerous in situations like this.

However, I would like more facts before I come to that conclusion. Do you not agree?

 

[JoeMorgue]

Well the lists of way black people can't respond to being openly murdered in the streets by cops keeps getting longer.

Again I ask what are they supposed to do? Because y'all got a problem with every single way they do it.

 

[Suddenly]

Personally, I don't think so. There are reasons for thinking the guy could be unhinged and that he is dangerous in situations like this.

However, I would like more facts before I come to that conclusion. Do you not agree?

They better have video. If they don't then nothing the police say should be at all trusted.

It isn't that lack of video makes things hard to prove, rather than given the circumstances their not making a video record is damning. There is no excuse or reasonable explanation other than the wish to conceal.

 

[johnny karate]

Well the lists of way black people can't respond to being openly murdered in the streets by cops keeps getting longer.

Again I ask what are they supposed to do? Because y'all got a problem with every single way they do it.

I think the course of action preferred by most of these people is “Go away and stop bothering me”.

 

[Bogative]

Again I ask what are they supposed to do?

Obey instructions, don't resist.

 

[William Parcher]

Daily Mail is reporting that he opened fire on Federal officers with an assault style rifle. It was a firefight.