View Full Version : Rittenhouse Verdict
And it is equally true that if his attackers hadn’t been there, or hadn’t pursued and attacked him, then no one would have gone to the morgue that night.
I don’t see it as a flaw in our laws that being in the wrong place at the wrong time isn’t a capital crime.
I suppose one could consider it not a flaw in our laws that someone who is so stupid as to put themselves In what anyone with at least slightly below average intelligence would understand to be the wrong place at the wrong time deserves to be able to kill people. I don’t. But as Iris Lily says, you do you.
iris lilies
11-29-21, 10:17am
I suppose one could consider it not a flaw in our laws that someone who is so stupid as to put themselves In what anyone with at least slightly below average intelligence would understand to be the wrong place at the wrong time deserves to be able to kill people. I don’t. But as Iris Lily says, you do you.
Quoting Iris Lilies is always appropriate!
—-Iris lilies
I suppose one could consider it not a flaw in our laws that someone who is so stupid as to put themselves In what anyone with at least slightly below average intelligence would understand to be the wrong place at the wrong time deserves to be able to kill people. I don’t. But as Iris Lily says, you do you.
I’m willing to accept the jury’s determination of who the aggressors were in this case. The “deserves to be able to kill people” stems from the right to defend oneself. The prosecution tried the “heroes reacting to a threat” narrative, but the evidence didn’t support it.
I don’t think there’s much of an argument for anyone being there that night, but I certainly don’t think this stupid kid deserved to be convicted of murder based on some kind of aggravated ideological symbolism charge.
I would agree that Iris Lilies has much wisdom to offer.
I'm just saying that maybe self defense should not be a defense if one intentionally put themselves in a situation that most reasonable people would be smart enough not to. I challenge you to find anyone, just one person, who thinks that a white teenager running around at a BLM protest with a gun strapped to their chest is not one of the following. 1) tremendously stupid and naive. 2) malevolent and looking for trouble.
A person minding their own business should be able to claim self-defense. A person aggressively looking for conflict should not.
A person minding their own business should be able to claim self-defense. A person aggressively looking for conflict should not.
There was no evidence that he was aggressively looking for conflict. It may not have been a smart move to put yourself between a potentially violent group and the object of their destruction, thinking that arming yourself for self protection would keep a particularly violent person from targeting you. But people do that sort of thing all the time without any conscious desire to harm anyone else. I really don't understand the ongoing desire by some to demonize the boy when all the evidence points to others as the aggressors.
I really don't understand the ongoing desire by some to demonize the boy when all the evidence points to others as the aggressors.
The "boy"/"child" narrative is a bit odd too. He was not tried as a juvenile, and he was facing adult penalties. He was, what, 17 1/2 years old at the time of the incident, old enough to enlist in the military.
I'm just saying that maybe self defense should not be a defense if one intentionally put themselves in a situation that most reasonable people would be smart enough not to. I challenge you to find anyone, just one person, who thinks that a white teenager running around at a BLM protest with a gun strapped to their chest is not one of the following. 1) tremendously stupid and naive. 2) malevolent and looking for trouble.
A person minding their own business should be able to claim self-defense. A person aggressively looking for conflict should not.
Whether he was intruding on a “BLM protest” or a “destructive riot” is a judgment offering great opportunities for subjective perception. As is whether he or his attackers were “aggressively looking for conflict”.
I prefer that people be judged by their actions rather than anyone’s projection of their thoughts.
ApatheticNoMore
11-29-21, 1:30pm
I think the boy thing is just a comment on mentality.
I challenge you to find anyone, just one person, who thinks that a white teenager running around at a BLM protest with a gun strapped to their chest is not one of the following. 1) tremendously stupid and naive. 2) malevolent and looking for trouble.
I'd be happy to go with tremendously stupid and naive. And possibly (although not necessarily!) not realizing how many years upon years of white supremacy that invokes, you know besides just being generally wtf who does that, because young and dumb. Young and dumb AND unlikely to mature any time soon, because of the forces that are pushing on him now. His life now as some kind of hero to those who are malevolent and looking for trouble is perhaps a punishment of it's own.
Whether he was intruding on a “BLM protest” or a “destructive riot” is a judgment offering great opportunities for subjective perception. As is whether he or his attackers were “aggressively looking for conflict”.
I prefer that people be judged by their actions rather than anyone’s projection of their thoughts.
I AM judging him by his actions. He strapped a ****ing gun to his chest and went to a BLM protest.
He wouldn’t have had ‘attackers’ if he hadn’t been a stupid ass. Behaving stupidly shouldn’t only have consequences for other people.
A thought experiment for ldahl. If a teenager with a gun strapped to his chest was walking down the street in front of your house at 10pm some night what would you do? Correct me if I’m wrong but I assume that you, and probably almost all of us, would call the police. Why? Because you perceived that individual to be a potential threat.
The "boy"/"child" narrative is a bit odd too. He was not tried as a juvenile, and he was facing adult penalties. He was, what, 17 1/2 years old at the time of the incident, old enough to enlist in the military.
Yep, at his age I was in the military, being trained with fully automatic weapons such as the M16 and M60 in preparation of possibly being sent to Viet Nam once I turned 18. It's only through time and life experience that I now realize I wasn't a man yet at that age. I still marvel at the fact the government, for its own purposes, disagreed.
happystuff
11-29-21, 2:35pm
Yep, at his age I was in the military, being trained with fully automatic weapons such as the M16 and M60. It's only through time and life experience that I now realize I wasn't a man yet at that age.
I think one of the key words here is "trained".
I think one of the key words here is "trained". That is an important word, I trained myself on the non-fully automatic variety such as Rittenhouse had before enlisting.
A thought experiment for ldahl. If a teenager with a gun strapped to his chest was walking down the street in front of your house at 10pm some night what would you do? Correct me if I’m wrong but I assume that you, and probably almost all of us, would call the police. Why? Because you perceived that individual to be a potential threat.
I might view him as a potential threat to avoid, but I certainly wouldn’t chase him down the street and whack him with my skateboard.
What I find interesting is that the left goes on and on about Rittenhouse being there, but doesn’t say squat about the Burn Loot Murder crowd. They “dindu” nothing, just like the relatives of gang bangers sob about when the gang bangers have been arrested for murder.
As IL said, NO ONE was wanted there that night. I think Rittenhouse made a bad decision, and so did the Burn Loot Murder crowd.
ApatheticNoMore
11-29-21, 3:05pm
What I find interesting is that the left goes on and on about Rittenhouse being there, but doesn’t say squat about the Burn Loot Murder crowd. They “dindu” nothing
well they ACTUALLY didn't necessarily do anything besides break curfew. The rest is all guilt by association.
Yep, at his age I was in the military, being trained with fully automatic weapons such as the M16 and M60 in preparation of possibly being sent to Viet Nam once I turned 18. It's only through time and life experience that I now realize I wasn't a man yet at that age. I still marvel at the fact the government, for its own purposes, disagreed.
Because since before Greek met Trojan on the plains of Ilium, it has been well known that the eighteen year old male can be induced to do crazy and dangerous things that his older self might shrink from.
rosarugosa
11-29-21, 3:59pm
Quoting Iris Lilies is always appropriate!
—-Iris lilies
This would be perfect on our SLF t-shirts, just above the salad spinner image!
A thought experiment for ldahl. If a teenager with a gun strapped to his chest was walking down the street in front of your house at 10pm some night what would you do? Correct me if I’m wrong but I assume that you, and probably almost all of us, would call the police. Why? Because you perceived that individual to be a potential threat.
Around here, it wouldn't receive much notice, and if the person wasn't acting "odd" it would be assumed they were going about some legitimate business.
That is an important word, I trained myself on the non-fully automatic variety such as Rittenhouse had before enlisting.
Yes, my daughter was proficient with those well before high school.
iris lilies
11-29-21, 5:32pm
I think the boy thing is just a comment on mentality.
I'd be happy to go with tremendously stupid and naive. And possibly (although not necessarily!) not realizing how many years upon years of white supremacy that invokes, you know besides just being generally wtf who does that, because young and dumb. Young and dumb AND unlikely to mature any time soon, because of the forces that are pushing on him now. His life now as some kind of hero to those who are malevolent and looking for trouble is perhaps a punishment of it's own.
Sadly, I agree with much of this if not all.
iris lilies
11-29-21, 5:33pm
This would be perfect on our SLF t-shirts, just above the salad spinner image!
Haha, thanks for the love.
I might view him as a potential threat to avoid, but I certainly wouldn’t chase him down the street and whack him with my skateboard.
So you’d just lock the doors and let him continue on his way? Maybe the suburbs of Wisconsin are different from every other suburb I’ve ever been in, including the one I live in now. Here if someone walked down the street with a gun strapped to their chest the cops would be here in minutes after being bombarded with a dozen calls about a suspicious person.
ApatheticNoMore
11-29-21, 5:52pm
yep I'd register a threat to avoid (and I would at any protest too), and in the walking down the street situation I'd also probably call the cops if safe to do so.
iris lilies
11-29-21, 6:09pm
Isn’t open carry legal in more than 40+ States?
Oh you should’ve heard all of the hoopla last spring when one of our problem neighbors who happens to be a young black man, was sitting in front of his house cleaning his gun. He was doing it to intimidate his neighbors of course. Well it worked, they called cops, they bitched and moaned on Nextdoor, and etc. As a Nextdoor moderator I had to remind Other moderators that he was likely not doing anything illegal.
The cops came and checked him out and all was well. But that doesn’t keep people on his block from taking his bait. He lives in row houses where everyone shares a wall, so everyone there is very close together.
So you’d just lock the doors and let him continue on his way?I think you have to weigh conditions on the ground before deciding if someone is a threat. When I lived in Alaska back in the 70's it wasn't at all unusual to see people walking down an Anchorage sidewalk with rifles and handguns. In 1974 I was part of a military team sent into Monticello Indiana to help secure businesses and search for victims of a huge tornado. As we rolled into town one of the first things I saw was an older gentleman and his son sitting in folding chairs in front of a pile of rubble with shotguns in their laps. The rubble had been a bank just a few hours earlier and you could easily make out the vault sitting amidst the destruction, we didn't think anything of someone protecting the scene.
In Kenosha last year it was sort of like Monticello in 1974. Parts of the town had been destroyed through fire and vandalism the previous night and many, many people were making an effort to protect what was left by encouraging the thugs to move along please, don't mess with us again. Seeing people with weapons standing in front of property likely to be a target of more of the same would not seem at all unusual to me and would only be a threat to anyone looking for trouble. I really believe all the vitriol against Riddenhouse is misplaced.
I really believe all the vitriol against Riddenhouse is misplaced.
I didn't look in depth into the timeline of his activities that day, or where he was, but I do think if he was operating alone "patrolling" he was being a bit dimwitted, but that's not a crime.
Also, I'm not generally a fan of open-carry (even when legal) as it invites you being targeted by even more dimwitted folks. This may reflect on his lack of tactical/strategic training and experience. (As far as being untrained with the firearm, well, he seemed to use it reasonably effectively when called upon to do so.)
Heck, when we had our last major crime problem here, the one that caused us to organize committees of vigilance in the village, my own Mom borrowed a rifle to protect her own home and those of her two immediate neighbors. But she didn't go out patrolling the neighborhood on her own, alone, at night :-) (She did manage to startle off The Bad Fellow when he was attempting to break into the neighbor's, but accomplished that with a flashlight, and a yell. She did have the rifle handy however. Even had the bayonet for it.)
I'm not generally a fan of open-carry (even when legal) as it invites you being targeted by even more dimwitted folks. I agree with this, open carry simply draws attention to yourself. Although, if I were attempting to prevent no-good-nics from targeting something under my watch I'd probably want them to know there was appropriate resistance at hand and maybe they should look for easier pickings elsewhere.
So you’d just lock the doors and let him continue on his way? Maybe the suburbs of Wisconsin are different from every other suburb I’ve ever been in, including the one I live in now. Here if someone walked down the street with a gun strapped to their chest the cops would be here in minutes after being bombarded with a dozen calls about a suspicious person.
Every third guy around here has a gun. In deer season, they come in from out of town. It’s not likely to create the sort of panic you’re looking for.
It's fascinating to me to learn that all of you live in neighborhoods where hunters go walking down the street with long guns strapped to their chests as a matter of normal behavior. I guess Denver, Miami, New York City, suburban NJ, San Francisco and suburban Bay Area are all a different world from the various places everyone on simple living lives because I have never in my life seen anyone other than a cop, and occasionally rent-a-cops, carrying a gun around.
It's fascinating to me to learn that all of you live in neighborhoods where hunters go walking down the street with long guns strapped to their chests as a matter of normal behavior. I guess Denver, Miami, New York City, suburban NJ, San Francisco and suburban Bay Area are all a different world from the various places everyone on simple living lives because I have never in my life seen anyone other than a cop, and occasionally rent-a-cops, carrying a gun around.
It's fascinating to me that you've spent your entire life in the few spots in this country where open carry is not allowed. What are the odds?
It's fascinating to me that you've spent your entire life in the few spots in this country where open carry is not allowed. What are the odds?
It's remarkable isn't it. Although probably not so remarkable when one considers that legal open carry was much less of a thing when I lived in Denver, Miami and New York City. But no, I didn't do research and plan this. I just wound up in these places because opportunities arose in each place so I went. (well, except for Denver unless one considers being born an opportunity that they took advantage of...) I guess some of us are just lucky. To be fair, though, just as many people have a black friend or a gay friend or whatever, I do have one friend who likes guns. Since he lives in the bay area he doesn't take them out in public though. Just to the shooting range and once or twice a year he drives down to Phoenix to visit his brother and they go out on federal land and shoot stuff.
I’ve open carried in small town western Michigan a few years back when I was with a friend who was open carrying. We’d been at the outdoor range, went to Walmart to get some drinks and snacks with our holstered carry pistols on our belts. No one said boo. I didn’t even think much about it.
You don’t dare do that in IL.
Teacher Terry
11-29-21, 11:38pm
I lived in rural upstate New York where many people hunted in the 70’s, Kansas, Texas, Wisconsin and now Nevada and never have I seen anyone open carry. If I ever see anyone doing so I am leaving immediately. Hunters I know put their hunting rifle in the car when they are going you guessed it hunting.
Considering that 2 motorcycle gangs got in a shootout in a casino once during the big motorcycle festival the casinos now forbid people to wear colors affiliated with their gangs. I stay out of the casinos during the motorcycle festival. Some of the restaurant in them have great food but I can go other times. Even when I have been to small rural towns in Nevada I haven’t seen people wearing guns.
ToomuchStuff
11-30-21, 5:34am
It's fascinating to me to learn that all of you live in neighborhoods where hunters go walking down the street with long guns strapped to their chests as a matter of normal behavior.
In the "old days", of my late boss (would be 61 this year), and my parents time frame, hunting season, would see people have deer rifles in their vehicles, even in the school parking lots. Heck my parents generation people worked on them in school, and one school, I am told, had some in it, for their ROTC program.
Now, if someone had deer rifle in their vehicle, the schools would be locked down. Also people are more apt to carry them, then have them stolen out of their vehicles.
I was allowed to have firearms at my high school. I couldn’t keep them in my dorm room but was allowed to check them out for use. Now, the school at the time owned all the land to the horizon, and then some.
rosarugosa
11-30-21, 6:35am
It's fascinating to me to learn that all of you live in neighborhoods where hunters go walking down the street with long guns strapped to their chests as a matter of normal behavior. I guess Denver, Miami, New York City, suburban NJ, San Francisco and suburban Bay Area are all a different world from the various places everyone on simple living lives because I have never in my life seen anyone other than a cop, and occasionally rent-a-cops, carrying a gun around.
I think you can count MA as being part of that different world. I too have only seen police carrying guns.
I've not observed open carry around here. It used to be some would have the EZ rider rifle racks in pickups in rural areas, but not any more, probably due to theft. Lauren Boebert, a congresswoman from my state owns a cafe in Rifle, Colorado where the waitresses all have open carry pistols. She also subscribes to QAnon theory.
If I understand current law, I could not have a concealed weapon without a permit, but could legally walk around with an AR? When I go hunting with a shotgun behind the seat I suppose it might be illegal as a concealed weapon, but I'm not sure where the law stands on that.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.