Wrong the drones overhead filmed everything.
Also there was someone else shooting, why didn’t people go after them and kill them?
1 Like
Lost on the first sentence. The standard is would a reasonable person be, I will pass up the obvious insult because I am polite.
He was not an active shooter. He never proactively shot anyone who wasn’t attacking him.
1 Like
He would have successfully argues self defense since Rittenhouse had recently shot and killed someone.
This is the situation we are getting ourselves into.
Self defense is becoming more and more about how well one can argue the threat of the other person after the fact.
Grosskreutz didn’t.
They’re still trying to portray the guy who was running away as the aggressor?
That’s simply pathetic.
2 Likes
It’s a property crime. Call the cops.
It worth putting lives in danger over it.
No, he would not succeed because it is in no way reasonable to be in fear of a kid who acted in self-defence and was running away from him.
The correct questions: Would a cop have been justified in shooting any one of the three and the answer is yes.
1 Like
We’re other people shot and killed that night?
Yes. It is
They didn’t know that at the time.
That is the point
That is not the point.
Justified or legal? So they would have been if they had seen him commit a felony. Cops don’t seem to have that restriction at all.
Ok. But at what point was Kyle supposed to say to himself “they may think I’m an active shooter, so I guess I’ll just let them Kill me”?
(I really hate how iPads try to auto correct into nonsense)
2 Likes
Could anyone please cite the legal statute or definition of who is to be designated as an active shooter?
Would a cop arriving at the scene be justified in shooting Rittenhouse?
Maniac with a death threat
Attacked with a club and attempt to take weapon
Pistol stuck in face
1 Like
Hope no one ever has to rely on you.
You think that people in that moment are thinking about statutes?
