Who doesn’t bring an AR-15 to an Emergency?



9 comments ↓

#1 "Woodstock" on 12.01.21 at 12:46 am

“‘Rittenhouse’ sounds German to me”…

#2 D@ily Spin on 12.01.21 at 8:16 am

He should have at least gotten probation so that he can’t possess any gun for 10 years. A full ‘Not Guilty’ sends the wrong message.

#3 what? on 12.01.21 at 12:59 pm

probation for what exactly? i don’t think being a stupid teenager is a crime, and i know defending yourself is certainly not a crime. remember, he was found not guilty by a jury of his peers. much the same as the clowns in georgia were rightfully found guilty by jury of their peers. you may not like all verdicts, but they are what they are. no crime no punishment. could very well be some civil suit problems for rittenhouse, but based on the evidence presented at trial, i think he walks there as well.

#4 l3wis on 12.01.21 at 4:29 pm

I think the jury made the right decision based on what was handed to them. He was overcharged. I don’t think he went there hell bent on homicide, but I also don’t think it was self defense. Like driving drunk and running over someone who walks in front of your car, Kyle put himself in a situation that caused him to kill some people. He should have been convicted of manslaughter, served 3-5 years and let out on probation. I still struggle with the fact he chose to put himself in a situation that would have required him to kill or be killed. That’s on him.

#5 rufusx on 12.01.21 at 5:40 pm

what? Didn’t he “present himself as a threat” to a guy on a skateboard? (one of the people he shot) When you threaten others – you cannot claim self-defense.

#6 Very Stable Genius on 12.01.21 at 5:41 pm

With that same fact pattern, would a black man have been found not guilty? I don’t think so. It’s like manslaughter in South Dakota, but in an inverse way, where politicians are either not charged or their sentence is much less.

I thought the force used in self-defense had to be reasonable and equivalent to the threat? Did the victims have AR-15s? Nope.

I think his age and emotional state were his true affirmative defenses, but if you are going to try anyone as an adult, then those ADs fly out the window in my estimation.

This case involved a minor with an AR-15, who was tried as an adult. Trying him as an adult takes the issue of why a minor has an AR-15 out of the picture, but should it? And when you walk back to valuate that, with good cause I might add, then how can he be tried as an adult? He should have been found guilty of murder as a minor and kept in custody until age 21.

#7 what? on 12.01.21 at 10:12 pm

so he’s guilty because his gun was bigger? because his gun wasn’t a chain? because his gun wasn’t a skateboard? all of those were weapons used to threaten rittenhouse.
again, jury found him not guilty based on what was presented. you don’t have to like it or agree with it, but it is what it is. oh yeah, the prosecutor was a complete moron…and he didn’t even go to USD.

#8 Fear & Loathing in Sioux Falls on 12.02.21 at 10:43 am

If I walk into a biker bar, shit happens, or might. Is it self defense or assuming the risk? Oh, that’s right, that’s a civil argument. Keep it criminal. Others had guns? Shots were fired at the 17 year old? So, a 17-year-old walked into Wisconsin with a gun… That sounds like a really bad joke with a bad outcome, if you ask me. #MommyHeThroughASkateboardAtMe #ChainGang #PretendersWithAGun?

#9 "Woodstock" on 12.02.21 at 4:33 pm

“‘Through’?”…. “Is that existential?”….