Kyle Rittenhouse being sued

[jc1240]

I was just asking. What is the answer? Cops did as usual in those "mostly peaceful protests" and just stood around the perimeter while arsonists and destroyers did their deeds. So, gov isn't willing to stop the criminals. Citizens are vilified for trying to stop it.

 

[Boats]

Can we all sue John Huber for raising a wife beating violent POS?

Interesting reading.

Joseph Rosenbaum & Anthony Huber Criminal Records Explored

Joseph Rosenbaum & Anthony Huber Criminal Records Explored. We've decided to tell you the criminal records of the men shot in Kenosha shooting.

www.wisconsinrightnow.com

Kyle Rittenhouse did the world a favor. If his mindset was more common, the world would be a better place. IMHO

 

[outrider58]

Can we all sue John Huber for raising a wife beating violent POS?

Interesting reading.

Joseph Rosenbaum & Anthony Huber Criminal Records Explored

Joseph Rosenbaum & Anthony Huber Criminal Records Explored. We've decided to tell you the criminal records of the men shot in Kenosha shooting.

www.wisconsinrightnow.com

Kyle Rittenhouse did the world a favor. If his mindset was more common, the world would be a better place. IMHO

He definitely killed the right two people. You'll get no argument from me on that.

I don't think that poor kid set out to kill anyone that night. I know he will likely relive that night for the rest of his life. And that makes me sad for him.

 

[Boats]

Rule #1 If you're not in trouble, don't go looking for it.

That applies to the arsonist violent protestors too. Why do they get a pass?

You know what doesn't cost time/money/the risk of death/jail?

Staying home in your town many miles from the place where trouble is brewing.

You know what won't get your wife beating pedo a$$ smoked by a 17 year old? The same advice

I disagree with all your premises, save for your first. Your first renders the rest moot.
His presence made little difference. Except two people died that night. The right two people, arguably, but none the less, needlessly. They're deaths made no difference at that moment and one could argue, made things worse going forward.

Tell that to the next kid Rosenbaum was gonna diddle, or the next significant other Huber was going to beat on.

 

[Sgt. Psycho]

Though I'd also add, WTF was his mother thinking? It wasn't like he ran off to do it. His Mom dropped him off. That feels more than a little neglectful as a parent. My oldest just turned 15. I realize that is two years shy of how old Kyle was, but I can't possibly imagine dropping a 17 year old off with no real training past "I've shot a gun in the woods some and I have some first aid skills" in what was obviously a pretty lawless riot, kissed them on the cheek and said "I'll see you later honey. Try not to need to kill anyone tonight".

This is not directed at you lazarus, but that is not exactly what happened.

Kyle did not have the rifle when his mother dropped him off earlier in the day, and possibly she didn't know he would have one later that evening (maybe he didn't plan to have one either until later, who knows?). He spent his daylight time there cleaning graffiti from previous rioting, and he was also known in the community having served as a lifeguard in Kenosha. I think we can safely remove Mom and her parenting skills from the argument.

As for Kyle later being armed with the rifle, it was legal, and the actions he took in defense of his own life were also legal, not to mention morally justified. Whether or not any outsider thinks he should or should not have been there is also not pertinent to what happened that night, it is merely an opinion offered by Monday morning quarterbacks after the fact.

He initially went to help clean up, and later was prepared to help with first-aid assistance. Whether his Mom, or whether even Kyle himself knew he would become more involved later, with or without a rifle, does not matter.

While anyone can claim Kyle was not adequately trained for an armed confrontation with rioters, was he any less trained than the other armed citizens there? Did he start any of the fights, or did he finish them? Did he not perform to a level of tactical and legal standards that all of us "trained" people hope we could emulate in the same situation? Did the well-armed and trained police there do anything to prevent the assaults on Kyle or protect him when he was assaulted?

In a world where men are not "men" anymore, Kyle certainly acted like a man, regardless of all the "shouldn't-have-been-there-not-trained-not mature enough" commentary he gets after the fact. People need to stop pandering to the Left with all of this after-the-fact commentary, commentary that feeds into the Leftist narrative that somehow Kyle was "wrong", no matter how right his actions turned out to be that night.

-He had every legal right to be where he was, and doing what he was doing. The criminals from out of town had no right to be in Kenosha destroying property and assaulting people.

-He managed to do everything legally and morally right when his life was in danger from criminal outsiders. Anyone who truly believes Kyle's "lack of training" is an issue in light of this is just jealous.

-"Should have" and "Shouldn't have" commentary after the fact has no bearing on the facts of the incident. All those making this commentary have no business claiming to be "pro-2A" and "pro-individual liberties" when they are second-guessing a young man who exemplified the qualities of both.

 

[teratos]

This is not directed at you lazarus, but that is not exactly what happened.

Kyle did not have the rifle when his mother dropped him off earlier in the day, and possibly she didn't know he would have one later that evening (maybe he didn't plan to have one either until later, who knows?). He spent his daylight time there cleaning graffiti from previous rioting, and he was also known in the community having served as a lifeguard in Kenosha. I think we can safely remove Mom and her parenting skills from the argument.

As for Kyle later being armed with the rifle, it was legal, and the actions he took in defense of his own life were also legal, not to mention morally justified. Whether or not any outsider thinks he should or should not have been there is also not pertinent to what happened that night, it is merely an opinion offered by Monday morning quarterbacks after the fact.

He initially went to help clean up, and later was prepared to help with first-aid assistance. Whether his Mom, or whether even Kyle himself knew he would become more involved later, with or without a rifle, does not matter.

While anyone can claim Kyle was not adequately trained for an armed confrontation with rioters, was he any less trained than the other armed citizens there? Did he start any of the fights, or did he finish them? Did he not perform to a level of tactical and legal standards that all of us "trained" people hope we could emulate in the same situation? Did the well-armed and trained police there do anything to prevent the assaults on Kyle or protect him when he was assaulted?

In a world where men are not "men" anymore, Kyle certainly acted like a man, regardless of all the "shouldn't-have-been-there-not-trained-not mature enough" commentary he gets after the fact. People need to stop pandering to the Left with all of this after-the-fact commentary, commentary that feeds into the Leftist narrative that somehow Kyle was "wrong", no matter how right his actions turned out to be that night.

-He had every legal right to be where he was, and doing what he was doing. The criminals from out of town had no right to be in Kenosha destroying property and assaulting people.

-He managed to do everything legally and morally right when his life was in danger from criminal outsiders. Anyone who truly believes Kyle's "lack of training" is an issue in light of this is just jealous.

-"Should have" and "Shouldn't have" commentary after the fact has no bearing on the facts of the incident. All those making this commentary have no business claiming to be "pro-2A" and "pro-individual liberties" when they are second-guessing a young man who exemplified the qualities of both.

Trained and prepared men get PTSD from such things.

 

[outrider58]

That applies to the arsonist violent protestors too. Why do they get a pass?

You're asking the wrong person.

This may be conjecture on my part, but I don't believe KR went there to kill child rapists nor arsonists. He killed to avoid having his own gun shoved up his ass.

 

[wpage]

Is simple self defense, to basic a dismissal argument?

US justice has become so political. Simple does not pay lawyer fees.

 

[Bob A]

Trained and prepared men get PTSD from such things.

Sometimes doing the right thing is costly, in every sense of the word.

 

[Sgt. Psycho]

Trained and prepared men get PTSD from such things.

Possibly Kyle will too. Still has no bearing on what he did in that moment.

 

[outrider58]

Sometimes doing the right thing is costly, in every sense of the word.

Again, he didn't go there to kill bad guys. He killed bad guys to save his own life. His living a life of regret is not worth my feeling good about a couple scumbags becoming room temperature. This is what happens when "good men" abdicate their responsibilities.

 

[Blaster229]

Ask him if he would do it again.

 

[Boats]

You're asking the wrong person.

This may be conjecture on my part, but I don't believe KR went there to kill child rapists nor arsonists. He killed to avoid having his own gun shoved up his ass.

I concur with that.

 

[Boats]

This is not directed at you lazarus, but that is not exactly what happened.

Kyle did not have the rifle when his mother dropped him off earlier in the day, and possibly she didn't know he would have one later that evening (maybe he didn't plan to have one either until later, who knows?). He spent his daylight time there cleaning graffiti from previous rioting, and he was also known in the community having served as a lifeguard in Kenosha. I think we can safely remove Mom and her parenting skills from the argument.

As for Kyle later being armed with the rifle, it was legal, and the actions he took in defense of his own life were also legal, not to mention morally justified. Whether or not any outsider thinks he should or should not have been there is also not pertinent to what happened that night, it is merely an opinion offered by Monday morning quarterbacks after the fact.

He initially went to help clean up, and later was prepared to help with first-aid assistance. Whether his Mom, or whether even Kyle himself knew he would become more involved later, with or without a rifle, does not matter.

While anyone can claim Kyle was not adequately trained for an armed confrontation with rioters, was he any less trained than the other armed citizens there? Did he start any of the fights, or did he finish them? Did he not perform to a level of tactical and legal standards that all of us "trained" people hope we could emulate in the same situation? Did the well-armed and trained police there do anything to prevent the assaults on Kyle or protect him when he was assaulted?

In a world where men are not "men" anymore, Kyle certainly acted like a man, regardless of all the "shouldn't-have-been-there-not-trained-not mature enough" commentary he gets after the fact. People need to stop pandering to the Left with all of this after-the-fact commentary, commentary that feeds into the Leftist narrative that somehow Kyle was "wrong", no matter how right his actions turned out to be that night.

-He had every legal right to be where he was, and doing what he was doing. The criminals from out of town had no right to be in Kenosha destroying property and assaulting people.

-He managed to do everything legally and morally right when his life was in danger from criminal outsiders. Anyone who truly believes Kyle's "lack of training" is an issue in light of this is just jealous.

-"Should have" and "Shouldn't have" commentary after the fact has no bearing on the facts of the incident. All those making this commentary have no business claiming to be "pro-2A" and "pro-individual liberties" when they are second-guessing a young man who exemplified the qualities of both.

well said

 

[outrider58]

Ask him if he would do it again.

Wurd

 

[Bob A]

Ask him if he would do it again.

In a sane, just world, his actions would not have led to the reactions they received. This is not to say he wouldn't have to deal with having taken life, but he would have been spared the additional trauma brought on by those who are working behind the scenes to destroy our society.

Recalling that old chestnut "All that is necessary for Evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing," would anyone forced into a similar action have refrained from action?

Would that help give us the world we want?

In retrospect, what would things look like if the isolationists had prevailed in 1940, and we allowed England to fall? What will happen, going forward, if there is no resistance to the current push to destabilise society?

The legions of jackbooted thugs are always waiting for the opportunity to force their way into power. Freedom is always one generation away from extinction.

 

[Blaster229]

In a sane, just world, his actions would not have led to the reactions they received. This is not to say he wouldn't have to deal with having taken life, but he would have been spared the additional trauma brought on by those who are working behind the scenes to destroy our society.

Recalling that old chestnut "All that is necessary for Evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing," would anyone forced into a similar action have refrained from action?

Would that help give us the world we want?

In retrospect, what would things look like if the isolationists had prevailed in 1940, and we allowed England to fall? What will happen, going forward, if there is no resistance to the current push to destabilise society?

The legions of jackbooted thugs are always waiting for the opportunity to force their way into power. Freedom is always one generation away from extinction.

Well, he successfully defended nothing and almost died doing it. And grown men looking up to him for it. Rioters that night weren't looking to force their way into power.

Where were 100's of "Good men"? I guess he was the only good Patriot available that night.

 

[outrider58]

In a sane, just world, his actions would not have led to the reactions they received. This is not to say he wouldn't have to deal with having taken life, but he would have been spared the additional trauma brought on by those who are working behind the scenes to destroy our society.

Recalling that old chestnut "All that is necessary for Evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing," would anyone forced into a similar action have refrained from action?

Would that help give us the world we want?

In retrospect, what would things look like if the isolationists had prevailed in 1940, and we allowed England to fall? What will happen, going forward, if there is no resistance to the current push to destabilise society?

The legions of jackbooted thugs are always waiting for the opportunity to force their way into power. Freedom is always one generation away from extinction.

Your argument is 'macro'. Rittenhouse's situation was 'micro'. He had little affect on the greater good. He was only trying to survive/escape a bad decision.

 

[Jim12]

Dodging service for weeks (months?). The judge noted the fact that he agreed with the plaintiff's lawyers that he was dodging service intentionally. He was finally served papers at his mother and sister's home in Florida where they had moved. Served them on his sister who said he wasn't home at the time. Rittenhouse's lawyers claim he doesn't live there and he wasn't properly served and tried to claim he doesn't have a residence anywhere. The judge basically told them to suck eggs and it was obvious he has been dodging service and he was properly served in the end.

Sounds like the judge is pretty unhappy in this instance of Rittenhouse and his lawyers trying to be too cute.

I can't imagine how the heck the plaintiff's estate's lawyers are going to win this one, but pissing off the trial judge doesn't help you as the defense.

Service of process is procedural, not substantive.

Has absolutely nothing to do with the merits, if any, of the case.

 

[lazarus]

Service of process is procedural, not substantive.

Has absolutely nothing to do with the merits, if any, of the case.

Of course. But it tends to piss judges off when people deliberate dodge service. I personally don’t want a judge max at me.