MAGA Hero Kyle Rittenhouse Has Lost All His Money, His Lawyer Says

What if they're new neighbors? What if they're one street over? At what point does it become illegal?

Also it still doesn't answer why a law abiding citizens' ability to travel with his legally owned possessions should be dictated by rioters. Why should he be allowed to travel 20 miles one direction with no problem but not the other direction? Should criminals dictate our ability to travel?

Why does he need a reason to travel there at all with whatever legal possession he wants to bring? That's the beauty of it, he doesn't. Unfortunate so many of his fellow citizens disagree with freedom of movement.

 

Exactly, and the original poster demonstrates that to a tee with his observation.

 

What a comically off base post. There is no evidence Rittenhouse “saved” anyone. One of his victims was a real EMT. Not a make-believe AR carrying EMT. As I recall only one of the 3 shooting victims seemed like an actual scumbag (don’t recall which one). Know what? There was plentiful evidence Rittenhouse was a scumbag. One, a video of him sucker punching a girl. The other, a video of him sitting outside a convenience store saying “I wish I had my AR, I’d start shooting them”. That’s not a responsible gun owner, it’s an immature child. I don’t think the first example of him striking the girl was necessarily admissible (not even sure it was before the court). The video of him suggesting he wished he had his AR to shoot people seemed highly relevant to his mindset given he was referring to the very gun he used! But the jury never saw it as the judge excluded that evidence.

In this hypothetical where you don’t know your neighbor, let’s say in your zeal to “help” - you wrongfully shoot the neighbor instead of the intruder. Oops my bad? Justifiable homicide?

That’s closer to what happened here. Rittenhouse’s last two victims thought they witnessed a murder. Maybe that first one is debatable. I don’t recall seeing video from that original killing. You think it’s sane for a guy to keep “defending himself” by dropping even more bodies? I’ll repeat the other poster. You are sick. Arguably, by your own logic, any one of the witnesses at the scene should have just shot Rittenhouse dead immediately instead of attempting to disarm him. Self-defense. Would have saved the latter two victims. Know why that didn’t happen? Only one person involved in all that was a little sociopath.

 

Ok, what about someone 10 houses away? At what point do travel restrictions imposed by felonious rioters become paramount and my right to travel unimpeded with my legal possessions start. If you believe that's 19 miles I guess your view makes sense although it's misguided.

 

We just aren’t going to agree. I wholeheartedly disagree with open carry, especially weapons like assault style rifles. There is no need for except to intimidate and serve as an attractive nuisance.

I would support concealed carry of handguns, with strict licensing and training requirements.

 

This is just such a disingenuous argument. I stately very plainly that what he did was NOT illegal and that’s why he got off. Again, that doesn’t change the fact that he was a shithead kid with an AR who went looking for trouble. Defending people who live in immediate proximity of you is self defense. Defending people that you know or are related to that are 20 miles away in a different state is self defense. What Kyle did was neither. He went looking for a fight, found it and got away with it. You know it so quit playing dumb (you’re admittedly quite good at it).

 

It was quite obvious he's saying those who disagree with him are comparatively dumber. Making this statement in the same discussion where you are incorrect is the definition of misplaced confidence.

 

Well fortunately your opinions and feelings don't matter, we can both agree with that.

 

good lord are you obtuse. We are talking about SELF DEFENSE. If you are not in immediate danger of being harmed then it’s not self defense. You can’t just go to Chicago and start shooting gang bangers at Cabrini Green because “it’s only 3 states away where do you draw the line derp derp”

 

Whether he went looking for a fight or not is completely irrelevant. He should be able to go wherever he wants for any reason with any legal possession he wants regardless of whether rioters are attacking the destination or not.

 

Absolutely but you cannot at that point claim “self defense” which is the whole point. JFC

 

If I go to Chicago with a legally owned firearm and gang bangers attack me I very well will start shooting them. If he had drawn his weapon and shot them before they assaulted him you'd have an argument.

 

Dumber than a bag of hammers

 

It was self defense as he did not attack first, he defended. If I choose to go to a riot with an AR-15 I might be a dumbass but I'm not doing anything wrong, also don't attack me.

 

No more or less than anybody else on this board. Exactly what are you trying to accomplish by making a statement like that?

 

Legally you are right and that is the problem. Some of us are t big fans of dumbasses legally walking around with guns.

 

Again, for the tenth time, what he did was not illegal it was simply WRONG. Use your brain.

 

Driving 20 miles out of state to defend some person you don’t know’s car dealership is NOT “self defense” regardless of what the law says. Ok, OJ?

 

Under the circumstances I disagree with you that he should be able to go anywhere he wants for any reason. The Kenosha police should have told him to leave or better yet detained him. That is/was their right and failing to do it brought unnecessary grief to all concerned.

 

That's a bit extreme, but anywhere other than in gun-insane America, he'd be serving a prison sentence for sure. He literally got away with murder. Ignorance is the only thing which prevents him from being unable to live with himself.