The Facts:
According to Revolver News quoting the New York Times (of all places), the shooting of 3 (2 dead) criminals by Kyle Rittenhouse will be ruled self-defense. We shall see but all the evidence at this time appears to be in Kyle’s favor. With the exception of his age, 17, he was within his legal rights to defend himself.
According to a news release Friday evening, attorney Pierce Bainbridge of Pierce Bainbridge Beck Price & Hecht LLP announced the firm will be representing Rittenhouse. WTMJ Milwaukee
Opinion:
I’ve been a bit shocked by FOX News’ lack of detailed reporting on this issue. I’ve also been a bit dismayed at FOX News personalities focusing more on the anti-vigilante angle than the need for self-defense. When good people are pushed too far they will form vigilante groups, not out of a desire to kill people but out of a need to do what the government will not.
Vets for Trump urges all Patriots to vote only for other Patriots. This excludes 99.99% of all those under the banner of Democrat and sadly some Republicans. It is not just the Presidency that we need to concern ourselves with. It is every Federal, State, and Local official that must go that does not support law and order. Do not forget, the Democrats brought us the first Civil War. Do not let the Democrats bring us the second one. Many argue we are already there. This election is the last hope to turn the tide against the anti-American left.
Discover more from Veterans for Trump
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
I honestly believe that if this kid is crucified, this could very easily be the tipping point of all out conflict. I have already prepared myself for the drive to wherever I have to go to stand in front of city hall with rifle in hand and show my support for this kid. He’s being vilified and denigrated THROUGHOUT the media and we all know how powerful the MSM can be when it wants something. If by chance he is found guilty of a crime, other than possessing a firearm at his age, wouldn’t it DEMAND that ALL fellow patriots come to his aid in the form of a gathering outside the venue where he was wrongfully accused? People like to talk about what they would do if just this situation arose. Wouldn’t it be tantamount to betrayal if we didn’t literally STAND UP for this young patriot and give as strong a showing of solidarity as we could?
The final paragraph in the article that points out the three men shot all had criminal backgrounds is this:
They start out with a similar statement against vigilantism. I know it is Monday morning quarterbacking to criticize the article. However, I would have added the thought from my opinion above: When good people are pushed too far they will form vigilante groups, not out of a desire to kill people but out of a need to do what the government will not.
Something along those lines would have made the article better.
A good point they do make is making sure you don’t get isolated in a war zone. That is what these areas of cities are, war zones. This is all the fault of the Defund Police movement. The Democrats must go. End of story.
Sorry, don’t agree. He presented himself as very threatening. His appearance would have cause alarm in any reasonable person. If I had been there and armed I would have made every attempt to disarm him, and if he pointed his gun at me, I would have shot him.
THAT would have been self defense.
Like the man said, Don’t take your guns to town.
This boy murdered two people who were trying to protect themselves and others from a present and extreme threat.
Even so, I am not sorry he was acquitted. I do strongly believe that it is far better to wrongfully acquit a guilty person than to wrongly convict an innocent person.
Perhaps you might be surprised by this, but I happen to think the right to keep and bare arms is extremely important, and if Rittenhouse had been old enough, he would should have the right to open carry, just as anyone would have a right to open carry. But with rights comes responsibility. If you choose to open carry in a situation that Rittenhouse was in, you need to be prepared to deal with the consequences of your actions. If you choose to open carry in a situation where tensions may be high.
How can anyone expect to know the intentions of someone with an AR-15? Is he there to defend the local businesses? Or is he preparing to start shooting people? Would it not be prudent to make sure he can’t start shooting people? Be honest now: If you saw some guy with a rifle at a racially charged protest, would you not be alarmed? Would it make a difference if the person with the rifle was black or white or looked Arab?
I don’t know if you would think the gunman’s race mattered, but I am 100% sure you would be alarmed. Anyone would. Those people he shot were alarmed, and they tried taking action based on that alarm.
Hi Eric. I know you are replying to Michael Ward but I thought I would comment. As you can see from the date of this post, it was a year before the trial. Revolver News got the outcome correct.
I understand what you mean about open carry and how that would make someone nervous. According to Rittenhouse, there were lots of people carrying that night and on both sides. Yes, it still would have made me nervous if I had been there.
In a previous post about gun control, If guns are the issue why is it when we were armed to the teeth overseas we did not shoot each other? There was an incident or two of a Muslim in our ranks that shot people. I think it was Fort Hood and one other time overseas. My point is, it is not the guns, it is the people.
If the government officials had done their job, none of this would have likely happened. They should have called in the National Guard and let the police do their job. That is why I am advocating for patriots to step up and vote for right-minded leaders! Sorry, I am just venting.