so what happens when Kyle Rittenhouse is acquitted?

Don't know and don't really care if he's guilty of any crimes or not. Lot of stupidity going on that day by both "sides".

It is disturbing that an underage individual participated, obviously with intent, since he traveled across state lines with a fire arm. Legal to do so or not, it clearly demonstrates intent to participate in the melee. Where the hell were his parents, or at least responsible adults on the scene? Originally Posted by reddog1951

He showed up to protect some businesses that put a call out on facebook looking for protection from the rioters. He also had EMT training and was there helping folks, including protestors. I think his intentions were good. What's not good is allowing a lawless violent mob to do what it wants.

Let the protestors protest. Rioters ought to be shot like a trespasser should.

Dodged the question. He was underage; evidently no argument there. Member of a gang? Uncontrollable bad kid? How did he come to be there, or be allowed to get in that position?

This entire scenario was an example of massive stupidity. Simply put, the idea that a private militia can patrol the public space with ar-15's and other weapons is an act of stupidity. If you are going to put yourself in the position of patrolling the public space with a weapon you should be prepared for the consequences of any actions you take doing so. All without a public mandate like the police or federal officers might have.

Kyle Rittenhouse deserves to be convicted of manslaughter simply because he was too stupid to not be there in the first place. Former Kenosha alderman Kevin Mathewson who called for the formation of the militia group he called the Kenosha Guard is even more complicit than Kyle Rittenhouse in my opinion. He deserves to be jailed for manslaughter just for starting this whole thing.

Don't know and don't really care if he's guilty of any crimes or not. Lot of stupidity going on that day by both "sides".

It is disturbing that an underage individual participated, obviously with intent, since he traveled across state lines with a fire arm. Legal to do so or not, it clearly demonstrates intent to participate in the melee. Where the hell were his parents, or at least responsible adults on the scene? Originally Posted by reddog1951

does it? or is that how you need to view it? remember that without these asshole radicals running around Rittenhouse would never have been there.


so i'll ask you a question and let's see if you answer it .. do you condone intentional rioting in the name of suspects who resist arrest?

This entire scenario was an example of massive stupidity. Simply put, the idea that a private militia can patrol the public space with ar-15's and other weapons is an act of stupidity. If you are going to put yourself in the position of patrolling the public space with a weapon you should be prepared for the consequences of any actions you take doing so. All without a public mandate like the police or federal officers might have.

Kyle Rittenhouse deserves to be convicted of manslaughter simply because he was too stupid to not be there in the first place. Former Kenosha alderman Kevin Mathewson who called for the formation of the militia group he called the Kenosha Guard is even more complicit than Kyle Rittenhouse in my opinion. He deserves to be jailed for manslaughter just for starting this whole thing. Originally Posted by txdot-guy

so you are saying Rittenhouse had no right to defend himself? remember that the videos showed him being chased and despite the press claiming otherwise one of the people chasing Rittenhouse threw a firebomb at him.


also one of the people he shot struck him with a skateboard first. that's assault and in all 50 states not only is that a crime but gives someone the right to defend himself.

you seem to be woefully uninformed on the situation. Rittenhouse didn't start the confrontation, the assholes who got what they deserved did. and the clown who's arm he nearly shot off had a handgun drawn and pointed it at Rittenhouse.


want me to post a video of one of the now dead assholes taunting people earlier that night?


Rittenhouse should never have been charged. the only reason he was is because the woke mentality of some of these cities political leadership tacitly support these rioters.

Dodged the question. He was underage; evidently no argument there. Member of a gang? Uncontrollable bad kid? How did he come to be there, or be allowed to get in that position? Originally Posted by reddog1951

Sorry about that. I thought it and didn't type it.

1.)Underage? Yes.

2.) Gang member? only if you consider the police a gang. He was a member of the Youth Police Cadet Program. That's where he got his EMT training.

3.) Uncontrollable bad kid? There's a video out there of him getting in a schoolyard fight, but I haven't heard anything about a history of violence.

4.) How'd he get there? Last I had heard his mom drove him there, I think? If I recall correctly, his parents are Threepers or something.

Dodged the question. He was underage; evidently no argument there. Member of a gang? Uncontrollable bad kid? How did he come to be there, or be allowed to get in that position? Originally Posted by reddog1951

Every one of those questions were answered. Can you not read?

Simply put, the idea that a private militia can patrol the public space with ar-15's and other weapons is an act of stupidity. If you are going to put yourself in the position of patrolling the public space with a weapon you should be prepared for the consequences of any actions you take doing so.

He wasn’t there to protect public space, but a private business. He was also cleaning graffiti and offering medical care. A kid parents can be proud of, unlike the savages stealing TVs and sneakers.

The consequences of defending yourself from attackers is that you live through it.

He wasn’t there to protect public space, but a private business. He was also cleaning graffiti and offering medical care. A kid parents can be proud of, unlike the savages stealing TVs and sneakers.

The consequences of defending yourself from attackers is that you live through it. Originally Posted by Jacuzzme

I'll concede the point that he might have been there to protect private property. However I would like to find out if Kyle Rittenhouse was a member of the Kenosha guard or if he just showed up.
Was he invited by any private business or person to guard private property or was he just a hanger on who wanted to participate.

Excerpted from an editorial in the Chicago Tribune.
By The Editorial Board
Chicago Tribune |
Aug 27, 2020 at 4:39 PM

The problem with armed militias, though, should be an obvious one: They’re not trained as law enforcement personnel and should have no role assisting police during a riot. Standing guard by invitation at a car dealership is different from patrolling the streets. The first may be acceptable in emergency situations; the second is dangerous and irresponsible.

And the fact that Rittenhouse, age 17, was there at all with a loaded weapon presented a grave risk to everyone. He was too young to open carry, according to the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. He was violating curfew. He was too inexperienced to act as armed security. He reportedly had an infatuation with law enforcement but had no legitimate reason to be on the streets with a rifle that night.

And so: Just as we should expect legitimate, peaceful protesters in cities across the country to police themselves, to assume some responsibility when rioters invade their midst and begin engaging violently with police, we should expect self-described militia organizations to obey the law, respect the role of law enforcement, police themselves, and assume some responsibility for rogue vigilantes who join their cause.

Agreed TxDot. Still no one cares to address my central question. How did an underage kid get in the situation in the first place? I don't care whether he was right or wrong, assaulted, or thought he was saving the mother country. Sorry, but where were the rational, responsible adults charged with his care, or those on the scene that may/should have recognized a too young participant? Per a response above, I presume his mother drove him there...presumably she also brought his firearm. Some mother for a role model. Right up there with June Cleaver.

All this hoo-ha about his age, half the US army is that age or just a year or 2 older. My sons were all excellent marksmen at half that, in a tree stand with a 30-30.

Agreed TxDot. Still no one cares to address my central question. How did an underage kid get in the situation in the first place? I don't care whether he was right or wrong, assaulted, or thought he was saving the mother country. Sorry, but where were the rational, responsible adults charged with his care, or those on the scene that may/should have recognized a too young participant? Per a response above, I presume his mother drove him there...presumably she also brought his firearm. Some mother for a role model. Right up there with June Cleaver. Originally Posted by reddog1951

as usual you presume completely wrong. his mother didn't give or buy him that gun.



https://www.nbcchicago.com/news/loca...rrest/2366751/


Kyle Rittenhouse Reveals How Gun Was Paid For in First Interview Since Arrest

Either way, I think he did the right thing and applaud what he did that night.

"All this hoo-ha about his age, half the US army is that age or just a year or 2 older. My sons were all excellent marksmen at half that, in a tree stand with a 30-30."

Might be right about a year or two older, probably wrong about 17, but doesn't matter, nor does marksmanship. The difference is, those of that age in the military are disciplined and supervised by those of presumably greater maturity, not running amok in a throng with no legal authority other than in their own minds.

He did the wrong thing by even being there.

I did not say his mother BOUGHT the gun, but evidently she DID drive him and his gun to the scene (yeah, she didn't know he had a gun....). Whatever, what responsible parent would knowingly deliver their child to such a fracas? I suppose it'd be ok to drive your 17 y/o daughter to a gang bang hosted by a bunch of your buddies.

He did the wrong thing by even being there. Originally Posted by reddog1951

Yep. He wasn't even old enough to even have a damn gun. I never understood why he was even there. Maybe the stupid fuck just played too much Call of Duty or whatever dumb video games kids play nowadays.

Might be right about a year or two older, probably wrong about 17, but doesn't matter, nor does marksmanship. The difference is, those of that age in the military are disciplined and supervised by those of presumably greater maturity, not running amok in a throng with no legal authority other than in their own minds.

LMAO! Your familiarity with the US military is severely lacking. There’s LOTS of 17year olds, and they’re given responsibility greater than you’ll ever know, with little to no supervision. You should be happy they do, since it’s usually them who end up senior NCOs before they’re 30.