Kyle Rittenhouse | Now crowdfunding LOLsuits against Whoopi Goldberg, LeBron James, and The Young Turks

nimic said:
As @Gehrman pointed out, it's when he's doing it in the context of taking a photo with alt-right thugs like Proud Boys. Whether or not he knew what he was doing or was just being misled by his lawyers, it's clearly not comparable to AOC or Obama doing it.
Click to expand...
Very much this. It wasn’t a quick gesture of point articulation, it was a staged photo. It’s difficult not to read negatively into it.
 
Sky1981 said:
That hand gesture is a simpel a ok to me..been doing that in pictures until peace v sign and now korean heart sign took over...
Click to expand...
It’s almost like it’s a cultural thing.
 
This is unbelievable, everyone is so calm.

We are going to see so many more of these instances in the short term.

That said, where was the need to kill the man? Where was the need to protect from bodily harm? A chest bump now allows for an execution?
 
Thank God the stepfather had a rifle to protect himself.
 
How the feck is the killer so calm, and even more crazy the woman filming?

Seriously America is FUBAR.
 
Raoul said:
In Texas, trespassing, threatening the guy at his home - yeah he will definitely walk.
Click to expand...
I get the provocation (seemed a bit handbags t.b.h. and guy (dad) seemed pretty certain about when he should have his son so ”Mf” comment is nothing/expected) but other guy had moved (been pushed) a few yards away then just decided to shoot, twice… not due to any fresh threat but because some guy had flipped him off his porch?. And he’ll get off?!

Not doubting you, just curious as to what is “acceptable” with guns in US. Where’s the ‘threat’ to stepdad there?

(edit. Just read something else about this, suggests dad said he’d kill stepdad? Must have missed that on video clip)
 
BeforeKeanetherewasRobson said:
I get the provocation (seemed a bit handbags t.b.h. and guy (dad) seemed pretty certain about when he should have his son so ”Mf” comment is nothing/expected) but other guy had moved (been pushed) a few yards away then just decided to shoot, twice… not due to any fresh threat but because some guy had flipped him off his porch?. And he’ll get off?!

Not doubting you, just curious as to what is “acceptable” with guns in US. Where’s the ‘threat’ to stepdad there?

(edit. Just read something else about this, suggests dad said he’d kill stepdad? Must have missed that on video clip)
Click to expand...
'Stand your ground' / castle doctrine laws cast wide nets, especially in states like Texas.
 
BeforeKeanetherewasRobson said:
I get the provocation (seemed a bit handbags t.b.h. and guy (dad) seemed pretty certain about when he should have his son so ”Mf” comment is nothing/expected) but other guy had moved (been pushed) a few yards away then just decided to shoot, twice… not due to any fresh threat but because some guy had flipped him off his porch?. And he’ll get off?!

Not doubting you, just curious as to what is “acceptable” with guns in US. Where’s the ‘threat’ to stepdad there?

(edit. Just read something else about this, suggests dad said he’d kill stepdad? Must have missed that on video clip)
Click to expand...

If he was trespassing on another person's property and refused to leave, then he could be shot by the homeowner without any legal repercussions. In this case, he was not only trespassing but was also confrontational, refused to leave even after a warning shot, attempted to wrestle the gun away, then got shot. That's probably why no action has been taken against the guy who shot him - everything the homeowner did was legal under castle doctrine.
 
Raoul said:
I don't know, but the fact that he was on the shooter's property and wouldn't leave, even after a warning shot, suggests that this would be a classic "castle doctrine" case.

https://www.ncsl.org/research/civil-and-criminal-justice/self-defense-and-stand-your-ground.aspx
Click to expand...

No complain from me. Covered his corners. Videotapped. Although he's clearly fishing for reaction he already covered his 1,2,3 and stupid from the real dad to aim for physical contact.

Harsh but lawful
 
Sky1981 said:
No complain from me. Covered his corners. Videotapped. Although he's clearly fishing for reaction he already covered his 1,2,3 and stupid from the real dad to aim for physical contact.

Harsh but lawful
Click to expand...
So, a chest bump requires deadly retaliatory force?
 
Dargonk said:
If that is legal in America they really should just burn the place down and start again.
Click to expand...

I'm surprised people are questioning whether its legal when gun ownership is literally written into the country's founding document.
 
Raoul said:
I'm surprised people are questioning whether its legal when gun ownership is literally written into the country's founding document.
Click to expand...
True, and then defended to the hilt over things like healthcare etc by half the population.
 
Matthew 22:39: "thou shalt shoot thy neighbour with thy God given gun"
 
The guy saying he would take the gun and kill the other man with it, then grabbing the gun is going to be what makes this a “justifiable homicide”.
 
Suppose that Texas may have some law that protects him but under the same rules as Rittenhouse / Arbery trial my interpretation is the dad had reason to be there and assuming it's correct they were refusing to comply with the courts order then the step dad is the one provoking the fight and would not have the privilege of self defence.

Hard to tell from breaking news though so more context may be important.
 
Well the guy/dad asked for it. I mean he must have been drunk or on cocaine? Who goes into physical altercation against someone with a gun on his own property? Like wtf? In most American states you can shoot someone if you ask them to leave your property and they do not comply, let alone they challenge you physically.

It is such a f**ked situation as the step dad shot real dad because real dad was looking for his son. Everything here is f**ked up but real dad was asking for it.

Also it is amazing that noone screamed after the guy got shot twice? F**king hell I've been in few mild fist fights where women were screaming as if some was getting their throat slashed. They acted as if they were shooting a movie scene or something.
 
Drainy said:
Suppose that Texas may have some law that protects him but under the same rules as Rittenhouse / Arbery trial my interpretation is the dad had reason to be there and assuming it's correct they were refusing to comply with the courts order then the step dad is the one provoking the fight and would not have the privilege of self defence.

Hard to tell from breaking news though so more context may be important.
Click to expand...
https://www.everythinglubbock.com/n...f-defense-after-deadly-shooting-of-chad-read/

I would be as shocked to see this guy lose his self defense claim as I’d have been to see the McMichaels and Bryan acquitted.
 
Drainy said:
Not able to access in Europe.

No doubt it will be a legal shooting but I doubt it will be for the same reasons as Rittenhouse.
Click to expand...
Here’s the pertinent part…

Carruth told Read to leave. Carruth steps out momentarily to get a gun while Read had heated words with a woman identified in family court records as Read’s ex-wife. Read and the woman were arguing over issues related to child custody.

Carruth returned with a gun and repeated his demand that Read leave. At that point, the video depicts Read saying Carruth can go ahead and “use it, m***** f***** because G** d***** I’ll take it from you!”

Carruth’s attorney, David M. Guinn with Hurley, Guinn & Singh, said the shooting was self-defense. “All Texans may lawfully brandish a firearm to protect themselves, their property and their business.” Guinn said. “When Kyle did that, Chad Read advanced on him,” Guinn said.

Guinn also emphasized Read’s threat to take the gun from Carruth. “And instantaneously, he tried to take the gun away from Kyle,” Guinn said. “In doing so he was power enough to sling Kyle 180 degrees around on Kyle’s patio.”

“Raising his left leg, he was continuing his advance on Kyle, threatening him and posing an immediate threat. Kyle responded,” Guinn said. “This is a justifiable homicide.”
 
Carolina Red said:
Here’s the pertinent part…

Carruth told Read to leave. Carruth steps out momentarily to get a gun while Read had heated words with a woman identified in family court records as Read’s ex-wife. Read and the woman were arguing over issues related to child custody.

Carruth returned with a gun and repeated his demand that Read leave. At that point, the video depicts Read saying Carruth can go ahead and “use it, m***** f***** because G** d***** I’ll take it from you!”

Carruth’s attorney, David M. Guinn with Hurley, Guinn & Singh, said the shooting was self-defense. “All Texans may lawfully brandish a firearm to protect themselves, their property and their business.” Guinn said. “When Kyle did that, Chad Read advanced on him,” Guinn said.

Guinn also emphasized Read’s threat to take the gun from Carruth. “And instantaneously, he tried to take the gun away from Kyle,” Guinn said. “In doing so he was power enough to sling Kyle 180 degrees around on Kyle’s patio.”

“Raising his left leg, he was continuing his advance on Kyle, threatening him and posing an immediate threat. Kyle responded,” Guinn said. “This is a justifiable homicide.”
Click to expand...

The point I'm making, since this is the Rittenhouse thread, is that it was argued that Rittenhouse legally provoked the attack by Rosenbaum.

Provocation being an illegal act which is likely to provoke another into an act of aggression

I'd say denying a parent access to their child per a court order could be considered provocation under that provision.

Of course, its probable that since he was at home and trespassing the dad from the property he will get more protections. The dad should have recognised the position and withdrawn to the car and called the police if he was in the right.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.