Ongoing Adventures of Kyle Rittenhouse

[Emily's Cat]

One which no one is making. Both you and Zig want to frame it that way, but it is being disingenuous.
There was testimony that he pointed his gun at protesters before anything even transpired. He could not even legally purchase the weapon he was carrying.

"She was in the bar illegally, and she was dancing very provocatively"

He was armed, his victims were not. Whether their actions constituted an 'attack' is in dispute. Your analogy is perverse.

"Sure, they broke into your house, but they weren't armed - you're the murderer for shooting them!" is a perverse form of argument.

I'll say it once more for those of you who don't seem to understand. By all means, take the position that Rittenhouse should never have gone there in the first place and should have stayed home. (She should never have gone to that part of town alone). By all means, take the position that Rittenhouse shouldn't have been armed in the first place. (She should never have worn such a provocative outfit). All of that can be a reasonable position to take with respect to whether the situation could have been avoided. Yes, it absolutely could have been avoided.

But what several people in this thread are doing is taking it several steps beyond that point. You're arguing that Rittenhouse's failure to avoid the situation makes them the criminal, and you lay blame on them for having been attacked. You excuse the fully grown adults that attacked Rittenhouse - one of whom chased Rittenhouse quite a ways trying to do them harm before Rittenhouse responded - and pretend that they're the real victims, because somehow Rittenhouse made them attack. This is pretty classic DARVO, and it's entirely analogous to blaming the victim of rape for not having avoided being raped.

You're blaming Rittenhouse, and labeling them a murderer, because a minor didn't avoid being attacked by grown adults.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Actually, if you want to be accurate and honest, Kyle initiated the conflict by bringing a gun.

"She initiated the sexual assault by wearing such a revealing outfit"

 

[theprestige]

He was armed, his victims were not. Whether their actions constituted an 'attack' is in dispute.

No it isn't. That dispute has been resolved, in Kyle's favor.

 

[Emily's Cat]

No, it is the sum total that is important. If it helps you understand it better, maybe think of the attacker as a 4 foot 10 nun singing songs and carrying a banana. You want to think that the threat can be subjectively determined--it cannot be. The standard is reasonableness. I can't just blow someone away because I subjectively think they are gonna harm me.

He was chasing Kyle. We do not know what prompted the chase--or I should say I don't know. I'd like you to point me to evidence that it was unprovoked and that the chasing constituted an 'attack' since not all chases can be considered aggressive or an assault. He apparently threw a plastic bag at Kyle, but that does not seem very threatening. You also ignore the earlier testimony that Kyle pointed his gun at a man standing on a car, which happened *before* the chase in question. It would be good to know what prompted Rosenbaum to chase Kyle--we may never know. All we do know for sure is that Kyle had the AR, Rosenbaum was unarmed.

"Therefore the minor shouldn't have run away, and the minor definitely shouldn't have defended themself from an attacker. You see, by running away and being armed, Kyle FORCED Rosenbaum to attack them in the first place!"

 

[Emily's Cat]

Nope. Wrong again.

I personally believe Rittenhouse did fear for his life, and Rosenbaum was also a half-wit for chasing and grabbing the gun.

If I'd been on the jury, I would've voted for acquittal too, but that's not what started it all, and that's what I'm responding to.

And yet you still appear to be arguing that Rittenhouse is a murderer for having defended themself against an adult attacker? You acknowledge that Rittenhouse feared for their life, and that Rosenbaum chased them and grabbed the gun... but somehow it's all Rittenhouse's fault and they're the bad guy here?

 

[Emily's Cat]

Sigh, once again, I'm not responding to whether he was guilty or not.

I'm responding to the fact that having the gun was what started it.

If he hadn't brought and carried the gun with him in plain sight, he wouldn't have been chased, and everything else wouldn't have happened.

ONce again...

"I'm not responding to whether she deserved it or not. I'm responding to the fact that dressing in a provocative matter is what started it. If she hadn't worn that short skirt and danced in such a sexy way, she wouldn't have been raped"

 

[Emily's Cat]

An illegal straw purchase is an illegal purchase whether or not charges were filed (they were) and whether or not someone pled down. Kyle was not legally able to buy the firearm. This is not in contention. Kyle convinced his friend to buy the firearm for him with money provided by Kyle. This is also not in contention. This straw purchase was done specifically to bypass a law prohibiting Rittenhouse from acquiring the firearm himself, thus making it an illegally obtained firearm.

Okay. And?

Does this somehow translate into Rittenhouse no longer having a right to defend themself against an attacker?

 

[Emily's Cat]

One of my peeves is provocation having little weight as a defense (although it mitigates sentencing, often substantially). I see Rittenhouse armed and "on patrol", in defiance of police orders/curfew, as provocation. You obviously don't.

Turns out that no, I don't see wearing a short dress and flirting with a person as a mitigating factor for sexual assault. I don't care how provocative the attacker thinks the short dress and flirty behavior is.

 

[stanfr]

"She initiated the sexual assault by wearing such a revealing outfit"

yeah, cause she was dressed to kill...

 

[Emily's Cat]

Kyle claimed he was the victim of an assault. My argument is that Rosenbaum should have the same argument against Rittenhouse.

In what way did Rittenhouse assault Rosenbaum?

 

[Emily's Cat]

Nonsense. Illegally obtaining a firearm, then seeking out and going to a place you believe you will be able to use that firearm against other people, then actually using that firearm multiple times to kill people very clearly demonstrates an intent to fight.

"She illegally obtained a false id, then went to a nightclub on the prowl and believed she was going to get laid, then she got laid. Sure, she said no and tried to get away from the guy in question, but she clearly wanted to get laid so she really just got what she was asking for."

 

[stanfr]

"She was in the bar illegally, and she was dancing very provocatively"

Your analogy is stupid, and perverse.. This was a self-defense case. You don't seem to understand that.
As for the rest of your nonsensical response, you have not been paying attention. If I were on that jury, I very well might have voted for acquittal, albeit very reluctantly. But I would not have excused Kyle's behavior as you want to do. I'll ask you the same question I asked Zig:
If Grosskreutz had managed to get ahead shot off and killed Kyle before having his arm blown off, do you think he was not guilty under the laws of Wisconsin?

 

[Emily's Cat]

Then what other reason was there for him to be there? He didn't live there, he wasn't invited there, and he wasn't legally supposed to be there.

"She was under age, she wasn't on the guest list, and she wasn't legally supposed to be in the bar"

 

[stanfr]

In what way did Rittenhouse assault Rosenbaum?

Before answering that, you have to come to the conclusion that Rosenbaum chasing him was an "assault" Are you sure it was?

 

[stanfr]

No it isn't. That dispute has been resolved, in Kyle's favor.

Really? So you believe every jury verdict in history resolves the facts. Got it. You probably still think OJ is innocent.

 

[plague311]

"She was under age, she wasn't on the guest list, and she wasn't legally supposed to be in the bar"

Yeah, I read your whole stupid breakdown up top. It's an asinine comparison that isn't worthy of my rebuttal. Save your ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ for someone else, I have no interest in it.

 

[Emily's Cat]

1. He paid for and arranged the illegal acquisition.
2. He took that illegally obtained weapon into a conflict zone.
3. He ignored the curfew law.
4. He sought out a confrontation zone while carrying the weapon he believed he would need to use.

For the sake of argument, let's assume that everything you list here is true.

Now let's go to the next logical step. Do you believe that those actions therefore invalidate Rittenhouse's right to self defense?

 

[stanfr]

And yet you still appear to be arguing that Rittenhouse is a murderer for having defended themself against an adult attacker? You acknowledge that
Rittenbaum feared for their life and that Rosenbaum chased them and grabbed the gun... but somehow it's all Rittenhouse's fault and they're the bad guy here?

Is Rittenbaum a trans between Kyle and his victim? Does that account for the odd pronoun?

 

[Emily's Cat]

So you agree, the fact that he was there with a gun is what created the whole problem, right? If he hadn't been there with a gun then no one would have seen him as a threat. We're making progress!

So you agree, the fact that she was there in a short skirt is what created the whole problem, right? If she hadn't been there with a short skirt, then no one would have raped her. We're making progress!

 

[Emily's Cat]

Quite right. Back during Kylie's initial 15 minutes of heroism, I posted the
correct way to deal with Pudgey Boys like him:

• Stalk him -- carefully! -- until you can get behind him.
• Approach him quickly.
• Give him a tap behind the ear with, say, an empty bottle, only hard
enough to buckle his knees and land him on his face.
• Take away his wee gun and
• Run away with it, dropping out the mag and clearing the chamber;
these actions are feasible while running.
• When safely away from the area, slow to a brisk walk and field strip
the gun, tossing the removable components down street drains. If you
have good enough light and are familiar with the technique, remove the
bolt, cam pin, and striker and scatter them individually.
• Insert the barrel into a grating, or use the bolts of a streetlight base
as a fixture, and bend the barrel into the tightest crook you can manage.
Wrenching the upper reciever sidewise at the forward hinge should
finish the deactivating task permanently, but if you're near deep water,
consigning the wreckage there is no more than tidying up..

What about Mrs. Rittenhouse's little boy? Aw heck, a mild concussion
might do him good. Won't make him a worse person anyway.

WTAF? Your "correct approach" is to commit assault and battery, followed by theft, followed by vandalism?