Pasayten's Methow Valley Bulletin Board

I agree about Grosskreutz. I guess it amounted to whoever got the first shot off. After Grosskreutz saw that the other man was gunned down, he probably did want to defend himself against Kyle. Was Grosskreutz a friend of the other man? Too lazy to look up his name.

I think there are two big questions that come out of all this:

If Mr. Rittenhouse would have gone to the riot without an AR-15, what would have happened? I for one doubt very much anything would have happened at all.

If Mr. Grosskreutz would have shot Mr. Rittenhouse could he have plead self-defense as well? From what I saw of the video it would have been reasonable for him to shoot first, ask questions later, and plead self-defense.

Might as well join in. This is the 1st time I could really look at the video. A tragedy all the way around. For some reason, Kyle was running from people. He seemed to be scared. Sure with people chasing you, you would be. Was it something he said or just the fact he was carrying that gun. Rhetorical here. He did indeed trip. The skateboard came in later, from what I could tell.
The paramedic said he will always live with what happened. And Kyle too, will live with what he did. He really did believe it was self defense. And on the ground like that, after being hit with the skateboard and someone trying to grab his weapon(too bad they couldn't disarm him) he freaked and shot. Then when there was a gun aimed at him, he shot again. He didn't know if that person with the gun would have shot him. Ah, if, if, if, he had not gone there with the gun...So will this haunt Kyle all the rest of his days? He is guilty of going there with a gun and where are his parents in this? But that's not what he was on trial for. I do believe if it was a black man, the black man would not be alive.
David's just asking questions. I think it is still worth discussing. We know the outcome cannot be changed, but this is something to learn from. Of course, will people ever learn?

You are crazy.

This piece is designed to smear Kyle and portray a particular narrative, however the pertinent point is when he’s hit in the head prior to “tripping”. It was pointed out in court that that strike to the head from behind had far more power than many portrayed and I believe Kyle said he was dazed and that’s why he fell down. None of this changes the fact that Kyle was attacked and he defended himself and he was found not guilty in a court of law. Why are you so determined to change what has pretty clearly been proven? Why is Kyle such an enemy for you? I don’t think he’s a particularly smart kid but it seems our legal system worked pretty well here.

Okay, then please explain this video starting at 19:45:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VpTW2AJE9MQ

It clearly shows Rittenhouse tripping and falling and then Huber runs up and hits him with his skateboard. Is that video faked or some kind of false flag? Or what?

At least watch the video for fifteen seconds (starting at 19:45) and tell me what you see.

He was knocked down by the skateboard and he was running to the police because he shot someone. Really, this all came out in court and he was found not guilty, it’s not up for armchair deliberation and changing to fit a narrative that has completely fallen apart (mis-leading, falsifying, mis-representing, lying)

The videos I saw pretty clearly showed that Rittenhouse was already on the ground when Huber hit him with the skateboard. The video also pretty clearly showed that Huber was backing away from Rittenhouse when Rittenhouse shot him in the chest.

It was also pretty clear from the videos I saw that Rittenhouse freaked out and ran away after he shot and killed Rosenbaum. There were other shots being fired at the time, and it isn't clear exactly who was shooting at exactly what.

Maybe you saw other videos that show differently. I'm not going to go around calling people liars.

And as for “Nobody moves on” exhibit A is Hillary Clinton for that!

Biden had to quit his first presidential run for flat out lying and plagiarizing and he’s never changed! Can you find a single politician in high office who doesn’t seem to lie? You just seem to only care about lies from certain politicians. I take the ‘banker’ approach, I know the bank is betting on my failure when they are giving me the loan, I just don’t get outraged when I find out.

dorankj wrote: Sun Dec 12, 2021 9:17 am Have I ever said that?

Didn't mention you... However, plenty of trumpsters and trump himself still do... Including senators and house representatives... Kind of like ground hog day... Nobody moves on...

Have I ever said that?

Well since no court acknowledged Trump's election lawsuits, that should stop the "election stolen" talk then since furthering mis-truth is really lying....

Incorrect Ray, ‘the way it works’ is when a jury of your peers finds you not guilty (and you can see for yourself) furthering mis-truth is really lying.

“Cops letting the kid carry his rifle and giving him water, that is just racism pure and simple.” Are you just crazy? It’s legal to carry a gun (charge was dismissed in court) giving him water is racism, when did that start? You are a liar (furthering something you KNOW to be untrue) I stand by my assertion.

Do not think anybody is lying... Just multiple folks looking at videos and evidence and coming up with their own interpretations and opinions... That's the way it works in a free country...

Nonsense! He didn’t trip, he was knocked down with the skateboard, and then shot only when the gun was put in his face even the guy shot admitted that on the witness stand. You guys are just liars! Pathological but still furthering a untruth.

I did watch the video(s) of the incident. And I also read a couple of synopsi of it as well.

From what I can tell, Rittenhouse was reasonable to shoot Mr. Rosenbaum, the unarmed man who attacked him. After he ran away and tripped my impression was that he lost situational awareness and was mostly panic-firing at anything that looked like a threat.

He shot the guy who threw his skateboard at him (Mr. Huber) and then shot the guy with a pistol (Mr. Grosskreutz) in the arm.

The case of Mr. Grosskreutz is interesting, as one could argue using the exact reasoning that was used to defend Mr. Rittenhouse that he would have been justified in shooting Mr. Rittenhouse. This is my big problem with the "logic" of this case and that it seems to give a green light to gun battles on our streets.

You two really should watch the video that is all over the place! If anything close to what you say actually happened you would have a point BUT IT DIDN’T. And Kyle didn’t perform any of the scenarios you play out, all you really seem to freak out about is the type of gun he had for self protection. Maybe you should consider it’s actually wise to display that you have the means to defend yourself, an armed society is a polite society! Weakness is provocative to those who intend to do wrong.

Well, the law is what the law is, and a jury has decided that what Kyle Rittenhouse did was not illegal.

That doesn't make his actions that day smart or wise or even reasonable.

Again, I have to ask the question, "why did he think he needed an AR-15 when he was there to clean up graffiti and put out fires?" Lots of other people who were there that day didn't see the need to shoot people or even go armed.

I am concerned that the logical conclusion you can draw from that case is that it is okay if you go out armed looking for trouble and shoot people who frighten you. So I guess you could go out and cruise rough neighborhoods and execute people? How is that different from a hunting license for humans?

You’re really pretty ignorant Alf, the key is SELF defense. So yes, if you are being attacked you can use whatever force is necessary to stop it including killing your ATTACKER. I will even come to your defense in that situation. If you are the attacker with your flame throwers and claymores and you just don’t like others words and disapproval of your ridiculous ideas then you get what you get. Now run off crying that I just threatened you as is your way, child!

So there’s this great concept called self protection or self defense (so important they made a constitutional amendment) if no one attacks you your great, if they do you can match and overwhelm the force used against you. Again, there’s tons of video of all this. If Kyle was never attacked he seemed to show pretty good restraint with his lawful firearm, if he hadn’t used it I agree with his fear that he would now be dead. Do you really defend the absolute dirtbags that attacked a 17 yo kid? I don’t completely condone Kyle’s reason and wisdom to be there with a firearm, I think he’s a less than wise 17 year old but in the situation he did nothing illegal and those that chased him down and attacked him did. Also, EVERYONE involved was white, so let’s skip any racism angle.

Okay, okay.

I'm not a firearms expert and I've never owned a barbie gun. So how exactly does an AR-15 help you put out fires or scrub graffiti?

He put out fires and scrubbed graffiti, this works better if you actually know the facts! Maybe watch the trial, it was all on TV.

So he was going to somehow "help" with his fake EMT?

Lots of other people went to that riot unarmed to help. Why was he so special?