In the context of legal self defense, yes. If you don't agree with basic self defense law I don't know what else to tell you. You are 100% entitled to the opinion you hold but it does not reflect what legal self defense constitutes in the majority of the USA.
The degree of force that a person uses should be what is reasonably necessary to protect themselves, correct? I’m not convinced that running at someone requires the runner to be fired on, given that jumpkick man doesn’t appear to have accosted Rittenhouse prior to that, and given that directly responding defensively was not the only option.
It is the onus of the prosecution to convince the jury that it was beyond a reasonable doubt that Kyle did not actually feel that Rosenbaum or any of the others were not going to cause him great bodily harm or death. I don't think the evidence supports that claim.
That’s what can be problematic. If I say that I was in fear for my life, even if I was not, regardless of the ‘threat’ - how does anyone prove otherwise? Does this become a license to kill without consequence?
The mob that had begun to chase him made their intentions known very clearly by not only what they were saying, but by what they did as well, Huber, Grosskreutz, and jump kick man included.
You mean more than 100 people were trying to kill or seriously hurt a 17 year old boy? Was the mob a criminal organization known for killing people?
The mob that had begun to chase him made their intentions known very clearly by not only what they were saying, but by what they did as well, Huber, Grosskreutz, and jump kick man included.
The mob wasn't following orders, there was no one in command. What some guy said doesn't prove Huber was trying kill or seriously hurt Rittenhouse.
"I have the type of (REAL) job where I can choose how to spend my time," says Marcus.
Testimony during the trial described Rosenbaum as belligerent, issuing threats to Rittenhouse, and was agitated throughout the night, as well as being involved in an arson fire.
Now that is relevant. What threats did Rosenbaum make?
There is still no evidence Huber was trying to kill or seriously hurt Rittenhouse.
How can you make these types of declarations when it's clear you haven't followed the trial or examined the evidence?
LIGHT HAS A NAME
We only get stronger when we are lifting something that is heavier than what we are used to. ~ KF
How can you make these types of declarations when it's clear you haven't followed the trial or examined the evidence?
Because I keep asking them for evidence. They are giving me none. I am asking them "What is the evidence that Huber was trying to kill or seriously hurt Rittenhouse?" and all I get is "someone else said this" and "another 39 year old man kicked him".
Last edited by doubtingthomas on Mon Nov 22, 2021 12:23 am, edited 1 time in total.
"I have the type of (REAL) job where I can choose how to spend my time," says Marcus.
In the context of legal self defense, yes. If you don't agree with basic self defense law I don't know what else to tell you. You are 100% entitled to the opinion you hold but it does not reflect what legal self defense constitutes in the majority of the USA.
The degree of force that a person uses should be what is reasonably necessary to protect themselves, correct? I’m not convinced that running at someone requires the runner to be fired on, given that jumpkick man doesn’t appear to have accosted Rittenhouse prior to that, and given that directly responding defensively was not the only option.
Can you clearly state what you think Rosenbaum would have done if he had managed to reach Kyle before being shot? The only scenario in which Kyle is not entitled to self defense is in fairyland where Rosenbaum reaches Kyle, calmly takes the rifle away, disassembles it while reassuring Kyle, and calmly hands it back. Any action outside of that is a reasonable assumption on Kyle's part that when Rosenbaum gets to him that he is going to get the crap beaten out of him or that Rosenbaum will take his gun and use it on him.
Jumpkick man doesn't need to accost him at all before jumpkick man attempts to kick him in the head. That is the whole point of self defense. You don't wait till the actual act of great bodily harm or death has occurred, rather, you take action to prevent it.
It is the onus of the prosecution to convince the jury that it was beyond a reasonable doubt that Kyle did not actually feel that Rosenbaum or any of the others were not going to cause him great bodily harm or death. I don't think the evidence supports that claim.
That’s what can be problematic. If I say that I was in fear for my life, even if I was not, regardless of the ‘threat’ - how does anyone prove otherwise? Does this become a license to kill without consequence?
It really isn't. Self defense is fairly cut and dry. Many states have 'duty to retreat' contingencies attached to self defense. Self defense cannot be invoked in an instance of provocation. There are many logical attachments to self defense that are well defined.
Last edited by Kukulkan on Mon Nov 22, 2021 12:27 am, edited 1 time in total.
"I advise all to go on to perfection and search deeper and deeper into the mysteries of Godliness." -Joseph Smith
The mob that had begun to chase him made their intentions known very clearly by not only what they were saying, but by what they did as well, Huber, Grosskreutz, and jump kick man included.
You mean more than 100 people were trying to kill or seriously hurt a 17 year old boy? Was the mob a criminal organization known for killing people?
There doesn't need to be a numerical attachment to self defense. You can act in self defense if it s 1,000,000 people or 1.
The mob that had begun to chase him made their intentions known very clearly by not only what they were saying, but by what they did as well, Huber, Grosskreutz, and jump kick man included.
The mob wasn't following orders, there was no one in command. What some guy said doesn't prove Huber was trying kill or seriously hurt Rittenhouse.
Hence the reason why it is so much more dangerous. Have you ever heard of mob mentality? The mob mentality was so strong here that it caused 3 people who didn't even witness the Rosenbaum shooting to pursue and attack Kyle.
"I advise all to go on to perfection and search deeper and deeper into the mysteries of Godliness." -Joseph Smith
How can you make these types of declarations when it's clear you haven't followed the trial or examined the evidence?
Because I keep asking them for evidence. They are giving me none. I am asking them "What is the evidence that Huber was trying to kill or seriously hurt Rittenhouse?" and all I get is "someone else said this" and "another 39 year old man kicked him".
Could you tell me without looking it up (Jesus will know if you do!), what order were the 3 men shot in.
"I advise all to go on to perfection and search deeper and deeper into the mysteries of Godliness." -Joseph Smith
Testimony during the trial described Rosenbaum as belligerent, issuing threats to Rittenhouse, and was agitated throughout the night, as well as being involved in an arson fire.
Now that is relevant. What threats did Rosenbaum make?
There is still no evidence Huber was trying to kill or seriously hurt Rittenhouse.
Hence the reason why it is so much more dangerous. Have you ever heard of mob mentality? The mob mentality was so strong here that it caused 3 people who didn't even witness the Rosenbaum shooting to pursue and attack Kyle.
Okay. Let me ask in a different way. Would Huber be found guilty of attempted murder or assault in a court of law? Was Grosskreutz ever charged with attempted murder?
Have you ever heard of mob mentality? The mob mentality was so strong here that it caused 3 people who didn't even witness the Rosenbaum shooting to pursue and attack Kyle.
It can happen, but it doesn't mean Huber had to intention to kill him or to send him to the hospital. The burden of proof now falls on you. Innocent until proven innocent.
Huber didn't do anything against the law, he had the right to disarm the 17 year old boy.
"Under Wisconsin law, anyone under 18 who possesses a dangerous weapon is guilty of a misdemeanor, unless they fall under an exception, such as for hunting, military service or target practice." https://www.jsonline.com/story/news/202 ... 640342002/
Last edited by doubtingthomas on Mon Nov 22, 2021 12:35 am, edited 1 time in total.
"I have the type of (REAL) job where I can choose how to spend my time," says Marcus.
