10-27-2021, 04:41 PM
(10-27-2021, 04:24 PM)GMDino Wrote: I don't know what his initial intent was but I'd bet he didn't come armed just to defend himself in case he was attacked. He went there to "defend" the town so he probably thought he would end up using the gun for that. If you bring a gun to defend something do you think it will be just to scare off the other people?
Now that's just a logical look at what he might have been thinking. He might have thought he was going to be a hero and shoot people he though were "bad". He might have really thought just showing up and showing the rioters he had a gun would stop them.
But none of that will matter in court.
It would all matter if it could be proved.
Quote:Intent will be hard to prove and another reason he will not be convicted.
You're very close here. It will actually be impossible to prove without a smoking gun, such as a social media post declaring it or Kyle recorded stating those intentions. As he has been very consistent with his motive for being there, both that night and earlier in the day, there is no way of disproving this or proving ill intent. At least not without some new evidence thus far unseen.
Quote:I'm gonna go out on a limb and still say no matter if his heart was in the right place his brain was not. Random people, even with some training, do not help in those situations they just lead to more confusion.
I'm actually more in line with your way of thinking here. Even a well intentioned person in such a situation can muddy the waters. What complicates this position during the time this incident took place was the very hands off, almost kid gloves approach to rioters in many parts of the country. This is an added danger of not allowing law enforcement to do its job, some people will feel the need to step in and fill that vacuum. I have been told, personally, by many black and Hispanic residents in Los Angeles County that Gascon's refusal to prosecute, or undercharge when he does, will lead to more vigilantism. I can't tell you how often I've heard some variation of, "we'll have to handle business ourselves."
Quote:And I'm still curious why not one officer thought to stop and see why the guy with the gun was standing there with his hands up as they were going to the scene of a shooting. Like it never crossed their minds...so he just left.
This is actually not hard to explain at all. Rittenhouse approached them in a non-threatening manner, surrendering as you describe it. In law enforcement, if you're responding to a multiple shooting you're not looking for the guy who is approaching you calmly in a posture of surrender, you're looking for the guy fleeing the scene. My understanding is they had no description of the shooter either. In a situation containing multiple armed people, both pro and anti protestors, you're definitely not going to think that Rittenhouse, based on his attitude and demeanor, is the person you are looking for. Now, if there were very few armed people there the chances of them confronting him initially would go way up, but that just wasn't the case here. I.e. if you're responding to a multiple shooting you're not looking for the guy being completely compliant.
(10-27-2021, 04:26 PM)BigPapaKain Wrote: If it was Tennessee and he was black he'd be in jail for years for breaking curfew.
(Seriously **** that judge)
Yeah, I saw that. Complete bullshit.
