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

[BeforeKeanetherewasRobson]

In Texas, trespassing, threatening the guy at his home - yeah he will definitely walk.

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)

 

[calodo2003]

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)

'Stand your ground' / castle doctrine laws cast wide nets, especially in states like Texas.

 

[Raoul]

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)

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.

 

[Moby]

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.

Barbaric.

 

[calodo2003]

Barbaric.

In many states, property also means car.

 

[Fridge chutney]

If that happened in England, what would the legal result be?

 

[P-Ro]

If that happened in England, what would the legal result be?

Community service. We've all got AR15s here so these sorts of things happen all the time.

 

[Sky1981]

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

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

 

[calodo2003]

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

So, a chest bump requires deadly retaliatory force?

 

[Sky1981]

So, a chest bump requires deadly retaliatory force?

Dont look at me pal... I'm against gun law. But as as far as the law concerns he's in the clear for me.

If you want to discuss how effed up all this then yes I'd agree american are fubar.

 

[Dargonk]

If that is legal in America they really should just burn the place down and start again.

 

[Raoul]

If that is legal in America they really should just burn the place down and start again.

I'm surprised people are questioning whether its legal when gun ownership is literally written into the country's founding document.

 

[Dargonk]

I'm surprised people are questioning whether its legal when gun ownership is literally written into the country's founding document.

True, and then defended to the hilt over things like healthcare etc by half the population.

 

[Ekkie Thump]

Matthew 22:39: "thou shalt shoot thy neighbour with thy God given gun"

 

[Carolina Red]

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”.

 

[Drainy]

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.

 

[ExoduS]

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.

 

[Carolina Red]

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.

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]

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.

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. At least not under my watched it one time, no context insomniac 4:30am take

 

[Carolina Red]

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.

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.”

 

[Drainy]

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.”

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.

 

[youngrell]

Did anyone read the full article? It’s even more bizarre.

The dad’s current wife is the one filming from the car and she didn’t believe it to be a real gun, which explains the calmness as she sees her man killed. She believes it was a set up as the mother stood there filming it all after winding him up somewhat.

The step dad is married to someone else who happens to be the judge.

Those kids have no chance.

 

[MrMarcello]

The stepdad escalated tension by leaving the scene and returning with a gun, but guess it still goes down as self-defense under the law interpretation - his property and all. All around madness.

 

[KirkDuyt]

The okay sign defenders are really missing context. It's like doing a nazi salute with a group of nazi's and claiming nah that's also just the sign for calling for a free kick. Refs do it all the time.

Regarding the other thing, after how many times of asking someone to get of your porch are you allowed to murder him with an assault rifle?

 

[Cloud7]

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.

As a non American I don't think I will ever be able to wrap my mind around this. I get that it's essentially been the law since the country was founded, but that it has maintained popular support since then is just something I cannot fathom.

 

[Sky1981]

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.

If you think it's provoking and against the law or your rights, call the cops. Or if it's his right for custody just film yourself being barred and milk them dry in court.

Trespassing and assaulting or even trying to hold the landowner gun is stupidity. Let alone when you're already given a warning shot, and clearly in the wrong side of the law

 

[Sky1981]

The okay sign defenders are really missing context. It's like doing a nazi salute with a group of nazi's and claiming nah that's also just the sign for calling for a free kick. Refs do it all the time.

Regarding the other thing, after how many times of asking someone to get of your porch are you allowed to murder him with an assault rifle?

The thing is Rosenbaum past as a pedophile still doesnt make it ok for him to be shot. Just like Rittenhouse affiliation and political view shouldn't have any bearings on him being guilty or not in this specific occasion. Fair goes both ways.

And sure if half the world actually using nazi like salute on daily basis.

I think even whastapp have that a ok thing and it really is just ok although old fashioned ok in indonesia

 

[The Corinthian]

If I had to guess what their names were, it would be Chad and Kyle.

 

[KirkDuyt]

The thing is Rosenbaum past as a pedophile still doesnt make it ok for him to be shot. Just like Rittenhouse affiliation and political view shouldn't have any bearings on him being guilty or not in this specific occasion. Fair goes both ways.

And sure if half the world actually using nazi like salute on daily basis.

I think even whastapp have that a ok thing and it really is just ok although old fashioned ok in indonesia

Not saying it makes him guilty, just saying that he didn't mean it is an ok sign. Obviously there is no way to concretely prove that Sweet Kyle meant to do the white supremacist sign in a group of white supremacists, but actually meant it as the ok sign, because yes, everyone obviously knows it's also an okay sign just as the swastika was originally not a nazi symbol either.

Context.

Kyle is a racist little cnut, which doesn't make him guilty of murder, it just makes him a cnut.

Though by my standards he's also a murderer. Same as marrying a 9 year old in a country where it's legal still makes you a nonce.

 

[2mufc0]

In any other normal place you would stay in your house and call the police.

 

[calodo2003]

Did anyone read the full article? It’s even more bizarre.

The dad’s current wife is the one filming from the car and she didn’t believe it to be a real gun, which explains the calmness as she sees her man killed. She believes it was a set up as the mother stood there filming it all after winding him up somewhat.

The step dad is married to someone else who happens to be the judge.

Those kids have no chance.

It almost looked staged.

 

[ExoduS]

As a non American I don't think I will ever be able to wrap my mind around this. I get that it's essentially been the law since the country was founded, but that it has maintained popular support since then is just something I cannot fathom.

It will be interesting how this case goes but I'm not seeing the killer getting even charged let alone convicted.

Back in early days of America people went out west and slowly populated the land. The land on which you settle was literally called "a claim", not your property legally until much later. People were bullied and muscled out of their "claims" so those land conflicts were normal in the wild west. Certain states don't want to give up the old ways just like Amish don't want to give in into modern technology.

It is strange, it is a bizarre but to locals it is normal and right way to live.

Overall this tragedy was avoidable but there is too much adultery going on here.

I love it how in Texas everyone loves God but adultery and murder is ok. It is God given right to do anything you please?

That step dad is an aggressive little c*nt who managed to marry a very good looking judge and to obviously go around and f*ck some more as she was not enough. Real dad was too charged emotionally and didn't realize he is dealing with a cold blooded sociopath who only cares about self interest.

 

[oates]

Back in early days of America people went out west and slowly populated the land. The land on which you settle was literally called "a claim", not your property legally until much later. People were bullied and muscled out of their "claims" so those land conflicts were normal in the wild west. Certain states don't want to give up the old ways just like Amish don't want to give in into modern technology.

150 years ago the quickest transport was a horse or a train that did 30mph, one federal marshal to cover a territory as big as Rhode Island - I think I heard that in a John Ford movie, must be true. Maybe a telegraph wire. There's been some development since. British people had similar issues but maybe a peeler in every main city, Brits had guns and sharp pointy swords but with the coming of big society we just gave them up. Bloody politicians have never given us a constitution the buggers.

 

[Drainy]

21:55

He is asked about the proud boys meeting and the OK hand sign

 

[MarylandMUFan]

21:55

He is asked about the proud boys meeting and the OK hand sign

Interesting and reasonable response. Really, if it wasn't for the video of him punching the girl from behind, I may feel sympathetic towards him.

 

[KirkDuyt]

Interesting and reasonable response. Really, if it wasn't for the video of him punching the girl from behind, I may feel sympathetic towards him.

Ah his mom was there too. That explains alot.

 

[Sky1981]

Not saying it makes him guilty, just saying that he didn't mean it is an ok sign. Obviously there is no way to concretely prove that Sweet Kyle meant to do the white supremacist sign in a group of white supremacists, but actually meant it as the ok sign, because yes, everyone obviously knows it's also an okay sign just as the swastika was originally not a nazi symbol either.

Context.

Kyle is a racist little cnut, which doesn't make him guilty of murder, it just makes him a cnut.

Though by my standards he's also a murderer. Same as marrying a 9 year old in a country where it's legal still makes you a nonce.

Off course I agree he knows what he's doing. But where do we draw the line if we use this as a factor in deciding his innocence?

And just saying we made many stupid stuffs thinking some movement is cool back in our 18s but that doesnt always make us a psycopath racist. At least i see something good in him. Or maybe that's just me.

 

[Adisa]

Just seen the video of the stepdad shooting the father. In only one country on this planet is that considered normal.

 

[Cascarino]

This is unbelievable, everyone is so calm.

How the feck is the killer so calm, and even more crazy the woman filming?

Seriously America is FUBAR.

Was it shock or something? It sounded like they were having a normal conversation after the shooting, so weird and unnerving to watch.

 

[calodo2003]

Was it shock or something? It sounded like they were having a normal conversation after the shooting, so weird and unnerving to watch.

Shock, desensitization, all of the above?