Rittenhouse Acquitted of all charges

Rose Karuna

Childless Crazy Cat Lady
VVO Supporter 🍦🎈👾❤
Joined
Sep 24, 2018
Messages
2,458
Location
Central Florida
SL Rez
2005
Joined SLU
2007
Wow - Bring your own AK-47 to the party and kill two men and wound a third and get off with no charges what-so-ever. :shakefist:

 

Shiloh Lyric

Staying Woke
Joined
Sep 20, 2018
Messages
937
Location
A virtual world. And Pennsylvania.
SL Rez
2007
Joined SLU
August, 2008
Even if the Jury had found him Guilty, I'm pretty sure that biased-ass Judge, and his "God Bless the USA" ringtone, would have vacated the verdict. When the Victims can't be referred to as "victims", you know the fix is in from the beginning.
 

Noodles

The sequel will probably be better.
Joined
Sep 20, 2018
Messages
6,059
Location
Illinois
SL Rez
2006
Joined SLU
04-28-2010
SLU Posts
6947
There is a big push on this I've noticed for anyone who knows it's bull shit. Basically a couple of angles.

"It was clearly self defense from day 1 from the video."

"The victims were a pedophile and a domestic abuser, are you supporting a pedophile and a domestic abuser?"

Which is so stupid because no, no one is supporting a pedophile, while people are supporting is due process. People don't get to be judge jury and executionber just because someone is a pedophile. People don't get to just randomly kill other people in "self defense" after going into a shitty situation and being provocative.
 

Romana

The Timeless Child
Joined
Sep 21, 2018
Messages
5,097
SL Rez
2010
I don't even want to hear their rationale for how it can be self -defense to shoot someone in the back of the head. And the video didn't show anything like self defense.
And he didn't kill them because of what they may or may not have done in the past ; he couldn't possibly know it. He shot them because he wanted to shoot people, and now others will feel even more entitled to do the same. Open season on anyone they decide is something on their hit list, or anyone they think looks like one.
I knew it was going to turn out this way as soon as I saw what the judge said about not calling them victims. I still felt sick when I heard it.
 

Innula Zenovka

Nasty Brit
VVO Supporter 🍦🎈👾❤
Joined
Sep 20, 2018
Messages
23,946
SLU Posts
18459
Going forward, I think one way to try to salvage the law on self-defence might be to make it unavailable if it involves a gun you have brought to the scene. In those cases, self-defence would turn murder into manslaughter, but wouldn't be a complete defence.

That is, if a gun is available as a means of self defence when you need it, then it's legitimate to use it, but you may not deliberately bring it to the place or area at which it's used because you thought you might need to use it there for self-defence (or any other reason).

That is, if you're a resident or have a similar connection with the area who generally has a gun, then that's OK, but otherwise, no.
 
Last edited:

bubblesort

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 16, 2018
Messages
1,990
Going forward, I think one way to try to salvage the law on self-defence might be to make it unavailable if it involves a gun you have brought to the scene. In those cases, self-defence would turn murder into manslaughter, but wouldn't be a complete defence.

That is, if a gun is available as a means of self defence when you need it, then it's legitimate to use it, but you may not deliberately bring it to the place or area at which it's used because you thought you might need to use it there for self-defence (or any other reason).

That is, if you're a resident or have a similar connection with the area who generally has a gun, then that's OK, but otherwise, no.
That wouldn't work. The second amendment is clearly written to protect our rights to self defense with weapons. If you can't carry a weapon and use it for self defense, the second amendment means nothing.

Also, you end up with a legal framework where if you need a gun, you have to steal it before you can use it. That would mean that if somebody is threatened, they would have to mug somebody for their gun, and then they could defend themselves with said gun. Would the mugging be legal? Maybe? IDK, I could see maybe an argument along the lines of that which is necessary must be legal coming up to defend the mugger, or get a sentence for mugging that is lighter than the imminent death you are avoiding by shooting somebody.

Also, there is the question of mugging the right person. I know people in other parts of the world think all of us carry guns all the time, so finding the right person to mug should be trivial, but in a life or death situation, the risk of accidentally mugging some unarmed pacifist weirdo is just too high.
 

GoblinCampFollower

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 20, 2018
Messages
5,415
SL Rez
2007
Going forward, I think one way to try to salvage the law on self-defence might be to make it unavailable if it involves a gun you have brought to the scene. In those cases, self-defence would turn murder into manslaughter, but wouldn't be a complete defence.

That is, if a gun is available as a means of self defence when you need it, then it's legitimate to use it, but you may not deliberately bring it to the place or area at which it's used because you thought you might need to use it there for self-defence (or any other reason).

That is, if you're a resident or have a similar connection with the area who generally has a gun, then that's OK, but otherwise, no.
I'm uncertain of the right details as I'm not a lawyer, but it is clear that US law needs to be rewritten on self defense for most or all states. I feel like part of the problem is that in many legal cases, self defense is almost thought of as a binary yes/no which isn't realistic. There is a whole spectrum of how involved the killer was in escalating the altercation before they had to use lethal force. I think in many jurisdictions, I could find someone on the street, see if I can provoke them, then claim I had to kill them in self defense if they throw the first punch and I claim I "feared for my life." I think we need more options for lesser charges besides manslaughter for cases where they really seemed to fear for their life but also clearly weren't innocently minding their own business when they had to "defend" themselves. Or for cases where you can't really prove murder but they clearly were being a massive idiot.

...and on a semi related note, I'm sure we can all agree how god awful of a mother Wendy Rittenhouse is. To the point where maybe she should be charged for letting her son go across state lines with a rifle as a freaking minor!
 

Romana

The Timeless Child
Joined
Sep 21, 2018
Messages
5,097
SL Rez
2010
I'm uncertain of the right details as I'm not a lawyer, but it is clear that US law needs to be rewritten on self defense for most or all states. I feel like part of the problem is that in many legal cases, self defense is almost thought of as a binary yes/no which isn't realistic. There is a whole spectrum of how involved the killer was in escalating the altercation before they had to use lethal force. I think in many jurisdictions, I could find someone on the street, see if I can provoke them, then claim I had to kill them in self defense if they throw the first punch and I claim I "feared for my life." I think we need more options for lesser charges besides manslaughter for cases where they really seemed to fear for their life but also clearly weren't innocently minding their own business when they had to "defend" themselves. Or for cases where you can't really prove murder but they clearly were being a massive idiot.

...and on a semi related note, I'm sure we can all agree how god awful of a mother Wendy Rittenhouse is. To the point where maybe she should be charged for letting her son go across state lines with a rifle as a freaking minor!
Letting him? She drove him there. With the gun.
 

GoblinCampFollower

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 20, 2018
Messages
5,415
SL Rez
2007
Letting him? She drove him there. With the gun.

maybe not true:


I'm not sure I believe the bit about him not driving with the weapon... but am willing to believe he drove himself.
 
Last edited:

Noodles

The sequel will probably be better.
Joined
Sep 20, 2018
Messages
6,059
Location
Illinois
SL Rez
2006
Joined SLU
04-28-2010
SLU Posts
6947
The problem with making Self Defense a straight easy out is you can just claim anything is self defense. I have not watched in in ages but I think it was a South Park episode where they outlawed hunting or something except in defense. So the hunter guys would go out and Hollar, "It's coming right for us!" Before shooting the animals.
 

GoblinCampFollower

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 20, 2018
Messages
5,415
SL Rez
2007
The problem with making Self Defense a straight easy out is you can just claim anything is self defense. I have not watched in in ages but I think it was a South Park episode where they outlawed hunting or something except in defense. So the hunter guys would go out and Hollar, "It's coming right for us!" Before shooting the animals.
YEP. And I'm watching the Ahmaud Arbery case closely since this one was even more clearly not self defense. They were on the offense till Ahmaud tried to fight back...