Kenosha shooting Rittenhouse verdict
Erick Jordan walks down a street with his rifle offering protection near a news conference Friday, Nov. 19, 2021 in Kenosha, Wis. (AP Photo/Paul Sancya)
Previous Post
Next Post

The acquittal points to the wide berth the legal system gives to defendants who say they acted out of fear, even if others around them were also afraid.

Wisconsin’s rules for self-defense are well within the national mainstream. If people reasonably believe they are at risk of death or great bodily harm, they can use deadly force. Most states say that someone who provokes violence or is acting illegally waives the right to self-defense, but Wisconsin allows it if the person has “exhausted every other reasonable means to escape from or otherwise avoid death or great bodily harm.”

The state does not have a full-fledged “stand your ground” statute that exists in at least 30 states, but people who believe they are threatened do not have a duty to retreat if they can.

Such rules can be combustible when juxtaposed against the state’s open carry law, which allows for situations like the one at issue in the trial, where numerous strangers were armed and had taken it upon themselves to maintain order.

Self-defense laws typically do not require someone to have good judgment and tend to consider only the moments leading up to the violence, not whether the person willingly entered a turbulent situation or contributed to the chaos.

“Do you look at the choice to go to a heated, confrontational area with a weapon that would be scary to a lot of people?” said Samuel Buell, a former federal prosecutor who teaches at Duke University School of Law, speaking of Mr. Rittenhouse. “You can’t really say that he doesn’t have a right to do that because of the status of gun laws.”

Similarly, even though the three men on trial for the killing of Ahmaud Arbery in Georgia chased him through a suburban neighborhood, they are claiming self-defense because, they say, Mr. Arbery tried to get control of a shotgun one was carrying.

Gun laws have generally become more permissive — open carry is now legal, to one degree or another, in almost every state. Gun purchases have soared and the Supreme Court appears poised to gut New York State’s handgun permit requirement in a Second Amendment case.

“If we’re going to have a country in which guns are pervasive and the law has little or nothing to say about where and when one may carry a gun and display a gun,” Mr. Buell said, “then we are going to have a situation where self-defense law can’t really handle it.”

Shaila Dewan and When it comes to self-defense, the burden is often on the prosecution.

Previous Post
Next Post


  1. I think we have too many child molesters, domestic abusers and other criminals rioting and creating property damage with weak politicians allowing them continue criminal activity.

    • ^ This.

      NYT: Rittenhouse Verdict Shows America Has Too Many Guns for Our Current Laws to Handle

      The guns weren’t the problem. The problem was the mob of arsonist rioters. Perhaps America has too little enforcement for our current rioting laws to handle.

      These deaths are on the rioters hands. You don’t burn down innocent people’s businesses and destroy their livelihoods because some guy received some police brutality (real or perceived). Destroy property and try to beat, kill, maim, those trying to put out fires, and you deserve to die. Period.

      • Mr. Rittenhouse did try to retreat. He was surrounded by people that meant him harm or at the least tried to block his way out of the area. From what was reported, he was standing guard at a car dealership and was then leaving. Should he had left the rifle with others or tried to get a ride out of the area? Yes, but he was well within his rights. Even prosecuting him was a miscarriage of justice. The state needed a scapegoat – it is a GD shame that is considered justice these days.

        • “Should he had left the rifle with others or tried to get a ride out of the area?”

          Leaving it with others is not an option in Leftist Scum controlled states like Washington state where a background check is required if someone else takes possession of the firearm…

        • When you hear them say too many guns it really means too much Second Amendment. Gun Control is so sneaky…but that is expected from an agenda rooted in racism and genocide.

        • Yes, he was leaving.. after putting out the dumpster fire that Dead Guy Number One had started with obvious intent to burn down the building at the shop where Kyle was helping with security. The dumpster fire guy decided to try and take Kyle’s rifle, and began pressing him. Kyle faced three options: shoot the clown Ded Right There, let the guy take his rifle and almost certainly kill him (Kyle), or run.. which is what he did.That is the ONLY reason he left the property of the carlot/shop. So DRT #1 earned hos own bullet by going off on Kyle who successfully prevented (or at least delayed) the arson of the occupied building there.. itself a felony. SO had DRT #1 been succesful in his torch job, and been caught, he’d have faced that felony rap. But no he ill-advisedly determined the “llittle kid wiht a big rifle” was no match for him, and he’d walk away with a bashed up kid lying on the ground and a near new AR pattern rifle. DRT #1 soon learned he had made a major miscalculation. The last one he was able to make. He was carrieed by six, and Kyle was judged by twelve, innocent. I rather think DRT #1 is not doing so well these days, nor will he…. ever.

      • Quote: “The guns weren’t the problem. The problem was the mob of arsonist rioters. Perhaps America has too little enforcement for our current rioting laws to handle.”

        Perhaps America has too many left wing politicians allowing and, by inaction, encouraging mobs to destroy their towns.

        When you encourage something you will likely get more of it.

    • And we have too many legacy media outlets pushing the lie of systemic racism and promoting riots which naturally attracts the worst of society like the BLM-Antifa thugs that chased down and attacked Rittenhouse.

      • “…pushing the lie of systemic racism…”

        “Tell a lie often enough, it becomes the truth.”

        So said an actual, for-real fascist…

    • I’m really sad about governments ordering Police and Military to stand down and allow arson, pillaging, and so on.
      I have seen both how quickly mobs respond to appropriate force and how mobs escalate if they feel empowered. I don’t believe pillaging in any way helps whether or not grievance is justified. It’s always the small guy who suffers, like families who lose grocery stores after arson, clinics, banking, all of it. Not to mention the toxic mess of burning plastic etc. Police / anti riot absolutely require training and equipment and discipline and accountability. Again, leadership failure to provide.

  2. “NYT: Rittenhouse Verdict Shows America Has Too Many Guns for Our Current Laws to Handle”

    Is that because the “Current Laws” have too many criminals to “Handle”? You know, like the violent convicted felons that attacked Rittenhouse.

  3. So many of these salty reaction tirades are rooted in the belief that one should be entitled to assault others with anything other than a gun and if you should decide to not tolerate said assault you’re evil and guilty of wrongthink. Basically, arguing that drunken euro-trash football hooliganism should be the accepted societal norm.

    How about people DON’T charge up into each others faces and assault one another? Is that so hard?

        • “When’s District Attorney Binger going to take his beating?”

          By their (utter lack of) logic, women should just have to accept being raped once in a while when dating…

      • Well we know most people other than these pin head Leftists don’t believe that for one minute. You go beat one of them up and you will be in jail and convicted so fast it will make your head spin particularly if you identify as a Conservative.

      • well BUnge and COmpany certainly got their beating well enough. But it was nowhere near what they NEED to get. How about indictment for wrongful prosecuting, false evidence, wihtholding exculpatory evidence from the Defense, how about a dmitting to evidence AFTER the record was closed to further additions, how about attempting to coerce or sway some of his witnesses, how about lying to the jury, how aobut overcharging, how about bringing charges BEFORE an adequate examination of the availble evidence, how about….. and HE will serve jail time year for year everything he tried to pin onKyle with his lies. That’s the BIBLICAL penalty for “bearing false witnss”. Which he cleaarly did on multiple occasions. THe liar bears the punishment meted out to the innocent, or the penalty that would have been meted out to the innicent hd the lies been believed nd acted upon. Binger needs to get fitted for an orange onesie and ushered into his own new residence… cocrete wall sbars along one side, food slid under the solid door twoce a day, noone to lie to, er squeeze me, talk to….

  4. Silly me. “the burden is on the prosecution’. I thought it was innocent until proven guilty. The burden is always on the prosecution regardless of the charges.

    The fascist left is mourning the loss of their kiddy diddler storm troopers and trying to disarm future victims. Remember, the fascist left introduced people to cattle cars and extermination camps.

    • “Silly me. “the burden is on the prosecution’. I thought it was innocent until proven guilty. ”

      Not since I was old enough to understand what a jury and a trial were all about. Of course, the theory is innocent unless proven otherwise, but down inside, “everyone” wants the defendant to prove innocence. Hence, the law school drill about a trial wherein the prosecutor and defense attorney opening statements are: “We rest our case.”, and sit down. The question then is, “Which verdict should the jury render?”

      Surprising number from the jury pool (the public at large) are perplexed and confused.

      • “innocent until proven guilty” does not mean you are actually “innocent until proven guilty”. Its a presumption that you are “innocent until proven guilty”, because the burden to prove you are responsible for violating the law rests with the prosecution. But, people forget, the defense also has a burden of “production” to produce things which counter the prosecution and show you to be in the right so you can’t just walk into court and say “Innocent until proven guilty” and then do nothing to defend yourself.

        • “But, people forget, the defense also has a burden of “production” to produce things which counter the prosecution and show you to be in the right so you can’t just walk into court and say “Innocent until proven guilty” and then do nothing to defend yourself.”

          Do you have a source for this theory? Kinda novel.

        • Although there is no legal ‘burden of production’ on the defense, nor is there anything BUT a presumption of innocence that has to be DISproven by the presentation of direct, indirect, and circumstantial evidence to the contrary in court by the prosecution, which is the Gold Standard, it is not commonly possible in modern courtrooms.
          IF prosecutors were bound by strict rules of propriety and evidence presentation, and were not permitted to take flights of fancy and imagination and speculation, but could only present bare evidentiary fact, allowable evidence, and strict adherence to refraining from speculation or conjecture, held to all of this by a proactive, neutral, fair, and legally-minded judge, the defense would NOT have to put on any ‘rebuttal.’
          It doesn’t work that way in practice. Modern courtroom trials of ‘important cases’, and many in the past, are ‘law theatre,’ because prosecutors are political animals and looking for ‘wins’ instead of looking for justice. Those with great public interest are the most likely to receive the ‘Hollywood Treatment.’
          This case was an example of the prosecution entering the courtroom presuming the guilt of the defendant, or at least putting on a show to enforce that presumption upon the jury, and placing the defense in the position of having to correct that presumption despite any ‘presumption of innocence.’
          No, it’s not the way things are SUPPOSED to work, but it is the reality.

    • Hmmmm….the NYT author seems to be saying that the three men trying to kill Kyle were doing so because Kyle provoked their fears. Had he not been carrying that rifle, those three would have conducted themselves peacefully and civilly.


      • Not unlike the covidiots who are so afraid of catching the cold from the maskless they’ll get right up into your face and start shouting and spitting within kissing distance.

        If these pedos and felons were so afraid of Kyles gun they would have given him wide berth rather than start posing and posturing in his personal space.

        Logic and reason are not virtues held by these people.

        • Shire-man speaks the truth, “Logic and reason are not virtues held by these people.”
          Also, if these people are so feeble that the mere presence of someone carrying a gun makes them uncomfortable, then they should stay at home. The proper action would be to stay out of the way. An I Q of 30 is necessary for a person to walk and these folk appear to have a negative I Q. The MSM is no smarter.
          Considering the evidence only one word describes the left………….LIARS!

        • “Shire-man speaks the truth, “Logic and reason are not virtues held by these people.””

          According to ‘Critical Race Theory’, “logic and reason” are examples of ‘White Supremacy’, the same objective reasoning and ‘being on time’…

        • They have no logic or common sense because their narrative is simple, “I do what I want to do because I want to”. That sums up the total amount of intelligent thought they permit themselves to regurgitate day in and day out. Its like a person with a bad case of flatulence.

    • What Ralph, said, X 1000. We/POTG, will NEVER get fair MSM coverage. We must work to discredit them at every turn, especially when it deals with our CONSTITUTION and the RIGHTS it grants “We The People!”

      • Sneaky White 13,

        Our federal Constitution and state constitutions do not “grant rights”. Rather, they declare (recognize) our rights and that our rights are off-limits to government meddling.

        That is a critical detail. Why? If Constitutions grant rights, then Constitutions can eliminate rights.

        • We don’t derive our rights from the government. We possess them because we’re born. Period. And we YIELD them to a government.

        • Joe,

          You had me, right up ’til that last sentence. Sorry, Champ, I don’t, and never have, agreed to “yield” my INHERENT rights to the government. I MAY voluntarily delegate to the government certain abilities to PROTECT those rights, but . . . didn’t “yield” them; never will.

        • {Civil Rights}

          “And we YIELD them to a government.”

          No, they may be temporarily ‘loaned’ to government, but the people can revoke that loan at any time they wish, and reclaim them for themselves…

        • The Constitution doesn’t “grant” rights, uncommon_sense. It merely acknowledges them. “God-given rights” means just that, “. . . all men are created equal, endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights . . .”

  5. The more prudent thing to do would have been to carry a handgun. Better in close quarters, and if concealed wouldn’t have aroused the ire of the rioters around him.

    • Really love people making judgements about the personal self-defense choices of other people, when the person making said judgement wasn’t there and wasn’t them. But, you do you.

      • “making judgements about the personal self-defense choices of other people”

        Most especially when the other person’s choices saved his life against overwhelming odds, and were validated in a court of law!

      • Remember, he was on guard duty – the rifle was a symbol of that. Since he wasn’t in a uniform, the rifle was a great visual. I am sure that he did not want to use it, he was there to protect property – his and his friends having rifles guarding the dealership should have been enough.

        The wolfpack seperating what appeared to them as the weakest of the bunch was the pack’s mistake, but I am sure there were no tears for their fallen comrades.

    • “…and if concealed wouldn’t have aroused the ire of the rioters around him.”

      That defeats the purpose of him being there, discouraging an attack before it happens in the first place –

      “Man, I better not burn that business down, I could get my ass shot and killed!”…

    • That’s pretty funny. His intention was to defend against violent rioters trying to destroy businesses. Its hard to send a message that they ought to give up the idea by concealing your weapon when you are being threatened by paid rioters. Having your weapons in sight sends a very powerful message particularly if they know you will use it. Seems to me that is the whole purpose. During the riot in Los Angeles many years ago the only area not destroyed was the Korean section. Reason, they were armed and people knew not to mess with them. Most rioters are cowards and that’s is why every now and then those who deserve it need to be shot to send a message. No one else is going to give them consequences for their actions and that is why they do it in the first place.

  6. Are these two unaware that in any case the burden of proof rests on the prosecution? This is basic legal principle known to almost everyone except it appears these two “journalists”.

  7. Remember. These media giants are Communist funded and operated. Their writers and editors were educated by Marxist professors in Marxist colleges. Their owners were the 60’s Revolutionaries against the US communist extermination operations in the SE Asia theater of War. They have one mission. To destroy our country.

      • Don’t doubt it at all but the bottom line is why are we tolerating a Government that has declared war on its own citizens and has catered to rioters, illegals, refugees and criminals? If someone declared war on this Country we would defend ourselves not just sit around and talk about it.
        Well Conservatives and various other groups are clearly under attack and yet people have been slow to push back. its time to accelerate these things and always remember there are no rules in a street fight and we are in a street fight. Time to fight back and give as good as we get.

        • I agree with most of your points, but differ slightly on one of them… “why are we tolerating a Government that has declared war on its own citizens and has catered to rioters, illegals, refugees and criminals?”

          IMHO, the incident in question finally put the government on notice that if they will not prevent the violence and destruction, then we will. Notice how the riots came to a skidding halt as soon as just one good guy with a gun took matters into his own hands and fought back.

          Immediately the rioters knew deep down that they could be the next one shot, and no longer felt the burning need to burn, loot and murder. Things rapidly calmed down nationwide once people saw that certain individuals (actually, many of us on the right) have had enough and aren’t going to put up with the bullshit any more…

        • Well, at least as far as the rioters go, if not the other types you mentioned – the illegals, refugees and criminals. We still need to find ways to deal with all that rabble efficiently…

  8. “but people who believe they are threatened do not have a duty to retreat if they can.”

    And yet when someone does, and still ends up shooting people who are too stupid to not bring a gun to a gunfight (66% of the ones shot in this particular case) and assault others, we get articles like this.

    Are our “journalists” really this stupid? Or is our population so stupid they don’t understand that this is activism, not journalism? I’m going with both.

    • I’ve wondered about that. I believe some aren’t stupid. They just have zero integrity, and believe that the end justifies the means. I think other journalists, and the population that consumes this garbage, live in their own echo chamber. They won’t even consider opposing views because they’ve been conditioned to believe those views are evil. If they knew the difference between right and wrong to begin with, they wouldn’t be so susceptible to this.

    • Sorry that first statement is not necessarily true and it depends on the State in which you live.
      There are many States that do not require you to retreat and it is called Stand Your Ground. So if you are confronted and either have your life threatened or are attacked you may respond if you fear serious injury or death. You don’t have to move one foot.

      • “There are many States that do not require you to retreat and it is called Stand Your Ground.”

        To the gun-grabbers, you may be correct, but irrelevant. The reasonable, responsible person should make every effort to avoid a confrontation, and run away. Guns make people think they are John Wayne, and bad guys need to be dispatched. If you don’t have a gun, you would not go all “Rambo” and needlessly kill someone.

  9. Since Texas removed all restrictions on carrying edged weapons I had a Roman style short sword made and carry it frequently. I’ve also trained in fencing and sword fighting for more than 25 years. I wonder if the author of this article would be happier seeing me dismember and or disemboweling someone instead of shooting them?

    • Officer Bill,

      Swords betray the Progressive position that no one should have firearms because firearms enable a spree-killer to kill dozens of people.

      A spree killer with a sword could easily kill dozens of people because a sword is utterly silent unlike firearms–even firearms with suppressors. Granted, an enterprising spree-killer with a sword may have to apply slightly different tactics with a sword versus a firearm or select a different venue to achieve the same body count.

      If the objection to firearms is “killing capacity”, then why are tactics or venue relevant? After all, a spree killer can use multiple methods (without firearms) to murder equal numbers of people.

    • I am sure there are quite a few folks who would be happy to see you do just that to as many Leftist rioters as possible. Perhaps we can pay your way to Portland where you would be kept busy severing body parts of the idiots up there.

      • Replace the riot police with a line of Roman maniple with shields and short swords–and the willingness to use the latter. That riot would end quickly.

        • Leftist Scum *despise* getting their hands dirty.

          Those jobs are for those ‘deplorables’ living in flyover country…

  10. The liberal tears are gonna flow for months over this one.

    Kyle is a folk hero on the right now. Possibly the jury too.

    These people will certainly not let small things like facts get in the way of their narrative. It is good that they failed to strip away the right to self defense this time. The shots he made could have bought the west some time to set things right befor the commies try to do their big push.

    Even the prosecution was a bunch of scum on this one.

    • He and the “miscarriage of justice” not guilty verdict will be held up as the very reason that gun laws need to be tightened for as long as it still inspires the true believers. Restrictions on self defense laws will not happen, since all 50 states have the same standard, but there will be a renewed call for bans on “assault weapoons”.

      • , since all 50 states have the same standard,

        Hmmmmm, not quite… Some States have a “Stand your ground law” some states have a “Duty to retreat law” Wisconsin does not have a stand your ground statute nor does it compel you to retreat from an aggressor…

      • “… there will be a renewed call for bans on “assault weapoons”.”

        Bring it.

        There are challenges to semi-auto rifle bans in the federal pipeline.

        I’d say there’s a fair chance that and magazine capacity bans could be granted cert. in the not-distant future…

  11. Dear New York Times, we have too many violent criminals and people who suffer from severe mental health issues and possibly prone to violence against people that don’t agree with them.

    As long as we continue to live with a part of our society that believes that allowing the criminal class to run amok without consequence then I vote for even more guns and even less laws, dare I say no gun laws at all. Ten years ago people were arrested and put in jail for arson and violence. Today it’s barely considered to be on the same par as jaywalking.

  12. It’s been fairly quiet since Freed Kyle went free. Do ya think the rabble rousers & commie anarchists worry about getting shot by a solid patriot citizen? I’m hoping! I foresee a red wave sweeping over America. Except in Chiraq…

  13. Self-defense laws typically do not require someone to have good judgment and tend to consider only the moments leading up to the violence, not whether the person willingly entered a turbulent situation or contributed to the chaos.

    Kind of like, oh I don’t know, rape laws?

    An attractive young women can go to a college fraternity party, wearing nothing but a thong bikini, holding a sign which says, “I want $ex,” flirt with the fraternity members, start passionately kissing and groping one or more fraternity members, and then say, “Leave me alone–I don’t want $ex any more!” and she has her full legal right to immediately stop any $exual advances or activity. Period. Her judgement in the hours and moments before are totally irrelevant with respect to her legal right to abstain.

  14. All of the horrific commentary that we are seeing/hearing from Progressive and Communist sympathizers demonstrates a simple fact that has yet to dawn on the general public consciousness:

    Progressive and Communist sympathizers define “right versus wrong” based on the politics of the opposing sides of a controversy or conflict, not based on simple timeless and objective standards of right and wrong.

    Consider a demonstration where everyone has been calm/polite and someone shows up with a sign with an “incendiary” message. If a Conservative is holding that sign, then Progressives and Communists will claim that it is okay for them to punch the Conservative person holding the sign. If a Progressive or Communist is holding the sign, then they will claim that it is wrong for a Conservative to punch the Progressive holding the sign.

    To be very simple and blunt about it, Progressives and Communists have the mindset that:
    1) “Others” (people who reject their politics) are corrupt/evil.
    2) It is okay to coerce, silence, exploit, abuse, beat, maim, and even kill those corrupt/evil “others”.

    The sooner the general public understands this, the better off we will all be.

  15. Play stupid games (chasing someone holding an AR-15 while threatening to kill him), Win stupid prizes (the guy you’re chasing while trying to kill shoots you with his AR-15 in self defense).
    Justice was well served IMHO. 2A All The Way!
    Now Rittenhouse should sue MSNBC, CNN and the others until their companies fold up and die.
    Just because.

  16. KYLE’s FREEEeeeeeee…!!!
    Now it’s time to watch the Baldwin episode…,
    I don’t like this puke much,
    Lets let the Karen’s have this clown to appease the liberal gun & 2 A haters. & in case you missed it…
    KYLE’s FREEEeeeeeee…!!!👍

  17. And of course, they had to link Rittenhouse’s case the the Arbery case in Georgia. Two cases that have absolutely nothing to with each other on every level. Garbage journalism.

  18. We have too many “confused” AGs and DAs who decline to prosecute arson, looting, assault, murder and other crimes associated with those “mostly peaceful” demonstrations… You want to keep rioters from being shot? Stop people from “rioting”… There is a huge difference between a lawful gathering to express grievances and an outright riot that leaves death and destruction in it’s wake… The problem is not too many guns, the problem is too many idiots giving people a reason to shoot them…

    • You are so full of bovine fecal matter that you make Anyone who has a brain and can look up the stats laugh our heads off at you. My god you’re an Estrogen field liberal without a brain. Of course liberals don’t have brains so that leaves you’re a pathetic piece of crap.

    • Your first mistake was quoting NBC! An extreme leftist media never known for presenting the truth regarding the Constitution, Bill of Rights, firearms or criminal statistics. It has been established fact that vehicular accidents kill more people, including children every year than firearms. Same for hammers, bats, knives, axes, screwdrivers and similar items. Yet the push to outlaw these items as well as vehicles to protect lives is non-existent! And only vehicles require licensing and testing.

      • To fur trapper
        quote————-And only vehicles require licensing and testing.————quote

        In order to civilized Capitalvania that is going to come to pass sooner than you think and the sooner the better. All civilized nations have licensing and testing to purchase a firearm.

    • dacian IN spite of your beliefs, all the problems of the world canNOT be resolved with passing a law or by your faulty “universal background checks.”

  19. Only in Capitalvania can any crook or psycho or far right nut case like Rittenhouse get ahold of a deadly weapon and then commit mass murder with them. No other civilized nation tolerates such utter madness where second hand guns are there for anyone who wants one. Yes Rittenhouse bought a new gun but the straw man sale would not have happened if semi-auto guns were vetted like full auto weapons are.

    • The prosecuting attorney showed that Rittenhouse acted in self defense. Other than some grainy video he tried to pass off everything pointed to self defense. Why did the HD video disappear? It didn’t support guilt is why.

      The jury didn’t buy the emotional plea nor did they give in to the mob. The looked at the facts, disregarded the innuendo and made a decision.

      That is how civilized Countries are supposed to operate. Not mob rule. Now we need to keep the Judiciary on the right track, and be color blind. Just jeep the left out if it and it will be what it is supposed to be.

  20. The vetting of new guns is not as thorough as the NFA vetting is either and that has to change. Otherwise Rittenhouse’s straw man purchase of a new gun would never have happened. You do not see machine gun sales being plagued with straw man sales because of the strict NFA vetting system, the purchaser is made aware that he is responsible for the gun as long as it is in his possession and it must be only sold through the NFA system and cannot be given to someone else.

  21. The Rittenhouse obscene ruling will only encourage the nut cases on the far right to gun down people at protest rallies attempting to exercise their right to protest police brutality and murder not only of minorities but of all American citizens.

    Letting Rittenhouse off the hook with no penalties had Europeans shaking their heads in complete disbelief. Some of my European colleagues asked me “Has the U.S. gone completely insane”? The answer is yes we have a society gone completely mad.

    Undoubtedly there will be civil law suits against Rittenhouse where the burden of proof is not as severe. Showing the Far Right that they cannot get off Scott Free will hit them where they fear it the most, right in their tight wad stingy pocket books. To the Far Right even losing a penny is a fate worse than death. Perhaps permanent bankruptcy may be far more effective with the far right than any anti-gun law could ever be.

    • Damn!! The biggest concern I had this morning as I started my day was what all those Socialists, Communists, anarchists and Jihadis over in Europe would think of MY Country after an innocent man was exonerated by a jury of his peers in an absurd political trial based on BS charges brought by a corrupt prosecutor…

      • THIS is really getting old… WTF is wrong with That comment? Fuck it, I tried to clean up my comments and and even rewrote this one three different times… Maybe it’s not ME maybe it’s YOU TTAG… If you don’t want my comments fucking say so… This IS the second time in TWO days that a benign comment has relegated to moderation hell where it will sit for 12/14 hours only to be released long after it’s relevance has passed… Why bother?

        • And 20 hours LATER here we are and of course NO explanation as to what the fuck got it flagged in the first place, thanks Y’ALL..

    • Keep us minorites out of your pasty lefty mouth, stop using us as political shields. If you want to push the lefts globohomo agenda then thats your business, just dont use what happens to us to further that bs

    • “Letting Rittenhouse off the hook with no penalties had Europeans shaking their heads in complete disbelief.”

      Dumbass, America as a nation was created for one purpose only, to NOT BE LIKE EUROPE. No surprise then, that our laws aren’t like Europe’s.

      Tell you what – How about Americans do to people like you and send you back there with your tail tucked between you legs? 🙂

    • ” Some of my European colleagues asked me “Has the U.S. gone completely insane”? The answer is yes we have a society gone completely mad. ”

      A headline posted on the Fox News website today:

      ‘Orgy of violence’: Dutch police open fire on rioters

      So, tell us all once again how your sensitive and civilized European colleagues are in any position to criticize America.

      • To upinarms

        You conveniently failed to mention they deliberately did not harm anyone when they did fire. They were warning shots only. U.S. Cops would have mowed dozens down in an orgy of blood, carnage and death.

        • Go read the story, dipshit. You conveniently overlooked the fact that there were some casualties. In any case, the police drew their weapons and opened fire, and those bullets had to land somewhere. But then, the state having a monopoly on violence suits you just fine, doesn’t it? Oh, those Europeans — they’re just too civilized, aren’t they?

      • Sorry, false fact. Plaintiff’s estate can sue for economic loses, his close family for loss of consortium. The only thing that goes away is the plaintiff’s claim for pain and suffering/emotional distress.

    • Civil suits allow for character impeachment. A likely fail for the felons who attacked Rittenhouse that night. Nothing to see there.

    • dacian, First, it was not “ruling”; it was the verdict of 12 just and true citizens. You see in this country you have the ABSOLUTE right of SELF DEFENSE. Criminals who mean you harm need to be dealt with in a manner consistent with the threat.

  22. We need more guns not fewer ones. For liberal idiots who have never owned, trained with, or used a gun, they are the ones who when threatened will call the police and then complain the 8 minutes it takes to get to their homes is too long. Then they will defund them.

  23. “Self-defense laws typically do not require someone to have good judgment and tend to consider only the moments leading up to the violence, not whether the person willingly entered a turbulent situation or contributed to the chaos. ”

    This is not true.

    Self defense laws have an “imminent great/serious bodily harm or death” concept. Just that by its self, aside from all the other little details to abide by the law requiring such good judgement, requires a person to have a great deal of good judgement. Self defense laws are the only laws which requires the average person to have a great deal of good judgement to exercise the natural right of self preservation in basically an eye blink in time.

    Presence in an area in a riot does not negate the right to self defense when it comes to you.

    “whether the person willingly entered a turbulent situation or contributed to the chaos” applies if the “defender” went to the specific “turbulent situation or contributed to the” specific “chaos” – it already applies in law. Rittenhouse, although a poor decision to go to begin with like the others there that made the poor decision to go, did not go to the “turbulent situation or contributed to the” specific “chaos” of the moment of need for self defense, it came to him.

  24. The Father of one of Rittenhouse’s victims announced today a civil lawsuit has now been filed against multiple people and organizations. Just as O.J. Simpson had been convicted in a civil law suit so history repeats itself. O.J. has been hounded now for the rest of his life by the civil law suit and so will be Rittenhouse until the end of his days. Poetic justice to a rabid right wing racist.

    • Ahem. They did not sue Rittenhouse. “The family of Anthony Huber, one of two men shot and killed by Kyle Rittenhouse during civil unrest in Kenosha, Wisconsin nearly a year ago, sued local law enforcement agencies Tuesday claiming they were partially to blame for what they called Rittenhouse’s “deadly rampage.”

    • Maybe that father should have raised his child better.

      Huber? Repeat domestic abuser? And his father is upset his son died because he was assaulting someone again?

      You need better heros.

  25. I live in Colorado and have a CCW and while Colorado is both an Open Carry and Concealed Carry State in the entire time I have lived here, 15 years, I have only seen a few people open carry. Personally, I do not because I know that it makes some folks uneasy so I try to respect that. I can also say that I have been around firearms for over 50 years target shooting, hunting etc. and like most responsible gun owners have never had a single firearm incident. I am strictly a self-defense individual and again, like most firearm owners I know, have no desire to use my firearm in any way other than legal. Painting all firearm owners with one brush stroke is a joke. With over 150 million of us if we were any where as bad as people make us out to be there wouldn’t be anyone around to criticize us. Almost 2/3rds of all firearm deaths are suicides not homicides and more people die from being beaten with hands and feet than with rifles. Most of the Left does not understand anything about firearms, the rules of engagement, or pays any attention whatsoever to the facts. Alec Baldwin a very verbal critic of firearm owners just killed someone because of his own negligence. Any first time gun owner knows you always check your firearm to make sure it is in the condition it is suppose to be in for its intended use. You do not take a firearm from anyone and then shoot it without checking it out thoroughly before doing so. So here is a big mouth Leftist celebrity who violates every rule in the book and has now taken someone’s life. How typical of the hypocritical Left.

    • “Painting all firearm owners with one brush stroke is a joke.”


      It has proven a pretty effective tactic, overall.

  26. These idiots can’t tell the difference between a guy with a gun being chased, grabbed, kicked, assaulted with lethal weapons, and threatened with a handgun, and an armed guy with two accomplices pointing it at an unarmed man. The first case is clearly a case of self defense since he instigated nothing, and the shotgun holder instigated the second encounter. The second isn’t self defense unless Georgia’s weird citizen’s arrest laws excuse it.
    Kyle’s attackers after Rosenbaum could also claim self defense since they could have believed they were attacking someone who just attacked an innocent and was about to attack someone else. It doesn’t change the fact that Kyle knew he didn’t just arbitrarily murder someone, and he was being attacked in a manner that could cause death or great bodily injury. That’s why you shouldn’t insert yourself into a conflict you don’t know how it started. Put your gun away after the threat gas been neutralized.. Plenty of good guys, like CCW holders, off duty and plain clothes cops have been killed by other good guys who mistook them for bad guys.

  27. Marissa Alexander. Alexander, an African American woman, didn’t cross state lines looking for trouble. It found her. Per her testimony, after fleeing her abusive, estranged husband after he broke through a locked door and shoved her to the floor, she fired a warning shot at him. No one was hurt.

    She was sentenced to 20 years.

    That is the difference between White privilege in the courts (Rittenhouse) and the book being thrown at a black woman for using a weapon to defend herself with and no one was even hurt.

  28. Couple of things WRONG with your summary…

    (1) Marissa Alexander was in HIS (the estranged husband’s) home in spite of her own restraining order against HIM and he did NOT break down any doors
    (2) Her statement was that he “threatened” to kill her though did not touch her physically
    (3) She went to her car and retrieved her handgun
    (4) She fired the gun at his head but missed with small children nearby
    (5) At the time it was illegal to fire a “warning” shot, it was considered aggravated assault with a deadly weapon and 20 years WAS the mandatory minimum (that law was changed in 2014)
    (6) She was offered a plea deal of three years which would have had her back out in one but she declined, stood trial and was found guilty of three counts of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon..
    (7) She was sentenced in 2012 after a jury of 6 deliberated for only 12 minutes, the verdict was overturned on appeal in 2013 and in 2015 she plead guilty to three counts of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon in a deal that capped her sentence at three years (time served)….
    I understand that the ignorance is strong within you and your desire to distort facts and mold them into YOUR “truths” knows NO bounds but you should at least use something that cannot be so easily proven to be a falsehood. So far nothing you have said in this thread has ANY basis in actual FACT but hey, thanks for playing…

  29. There ARE tooo many guns in the hands of those charged with seeing to “the security of a free state” (meaning at that time and place, civilised society) which guns are NOT being used appropriately.

    Interesting observation that I do NOT believe is mere conicidence… immediately Kyle’s rounds went off and news spread he had single handedly and in a few moments taken three of Antifas kingpin operatives out of action, Antifa/BLM shut down operations in Kenosha. The simple fact that SOMEONE took up arms to defend themself and private property was being guarded with live fire when needed put a halt to their operations in Kenosha. Didn’t it happen that way? I REFUSE to believe those two fcts aree not closely linked.
    also note that so far, Kenosha LE and Guard have presented strong enough show of force that notihing signficant has happened in way of rioting, destruction, arson, murer, etc.

    Imagine of Wheeler, the head biscuit in Portland Oregon were to issue Rules of engagement that clearly and unambiguously assert that mob action, arson, assalts, WILL be met with military grade lethal force, then CARRY THROUGH on that promise, Portland’s rioting woul be ended within forty eight hours. THey’ll all be loaded up on their chartered luxery motor coaches and whisked off to Los Angeles and San Francisco to ply their rogue trade in those places. The Gabbling Nuisance will welcome them home with open arms…. both kinds.

  30. The guy in the pic…is that his urban set up? not grounded in reality….you ever try to find a close combat target in a high magnification scope? Yikes! Keep him AWAY!!!

  31. There are 300,00,000 guns a 1 billion rounds of ammunition in the United States. If gun owners were the problem, we’d know it.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here