Self-defense against a raging mob isn’t murder. Why is he still in jail?

Self-defense against a raging mob isn’t murder. Why is he still in jail?

Attached: 5D711474-D566-402F-B117-C8CCD3DF8247.jpg (970x546, 85.16K)

Because when people are shot dead, we like to have a fucking trial to decide whether someone committed a crime or not, OP.

Cuck.

Where’s the proof that he committed murder, user?

Just because he killed 2 people in self-defense doesn’t mean he committed a crime. It happens all the time.

I’ll tell you why: because the DA from Wisconsin who is charging him is a leftist. They’re not prosecuting the 3rd guy who attacked him for assault, they let him go from the hospital

>Why is he still in jail?
He likes the size of the cocks he is getting in there so he plead guilty.

Proof is presented AT A FUCKING TRIAL, OP. I'm not sure how much clearer I can make this. When you kill two people and wound a third, you are going to have a fucking trial unless you were a soldier on a battlefield.

It’s no different than shooting 3 guys breaking into your house to attack you, people get let off with shootings like that all the time, the cops don’t even charge them.

How is this different? Explain

why are you pretending to be a retard?

Crossing state lines with a rifle and shooting two people isn't self-defense either though. He's still in jail because there needs to be a proper investigation and a proper trial, because the incident in question happened under the legal jurisdiction of the USA and not in some fucking Boogaloo fanfic.

Explain to me the difference. This kid was ATTACKED, so he DEFENDED himself. Do we not have a right and an obligation to defend ourselves?

So again, I ask, why is he still in jail?

OP is in the right faggot.

You attack someone you can be shot, QQ more you dildo waving sissy faggot, stop crying over rapist and women beaters.

He didn’t cross state lines with a rifle. The weapon was already in Wisconsin the entire time

post the video of him picking a fight with a little girl and getting his ass kicked for it

1. He was 17. It was illegal for him to possess that rifle. In his home state you have to be 21, in Wisconsin you have to be 18. This was crime one.
2. Crossing the state line with an illegally possessed weapon is a pretty big deal and a big fat number two on the crime list.
3. Wisconsin totally allows for the use of deadly force in self defense, but the caveat is that you can't be committing a crime while that use of force happens. Which we addressed above he was actively committing a crime by possessing that rifle.
4. Wisconsin has a Castle Doctrine. But you can only use deadly force if the perpetrators are in your dwelling or your place of business. For a place of business you have to own this, or be in charge of operations of the business. You can not just post up to protect a random business, also you can not chase people if they decide to retreat like this 17yo did. Wisconsin V. Charles L Chew is the case law. If you want to have a look.
5. Its not self defense when you get in your car with a rifle, drive 16 miles to another town, and walk the streets with a rifle.
He had every option to stay home but he chose to get involved in this situation with the plan to be involved in confrontation (hence the rifle) also in Wisconsin self defense law you can't be the instigator and then claim self defense.
He became the instigator the second he pursued.

All I know is that America needs more guns to increase their level of protection and freedom. They also need more lawyers and lawsuits to properly distribute justice and freedom

retard alert

Fair enough, but the crime I'm discussing isn't taking a weapon across state lines (if that would be a crime in this case). My point is that he went out of his way to show up to a potentially volatile situation with a deadly weapon from the next state over. If there's a murder trial, that would seriously weaken the "self-defense" defense, because he deliberately put himself in a position where this series of events was a distinct possibility, whereas if he hadn't been there, they wouldn't have occurred.

Also, in the videos where he's on the ground, a woman can be heard shouting that he "just shot a guy". I don't know if the timeline has been established yet, but if he'd already shot someone at the time he was being pursued then he wasn't acting in self-defense, it was a crowd of people attempting to take down an "active shooter". That's why there needs to be a proper investigation.

based truth

>My point is that he went out of his way to show up to a potentially volatile situation with a deadly weapon from the next state over

Sorry, that's not clear - regardless of where he picked up the weapon, he himself went across state lines in order to show up at the protest.

Nothing negates the right to protect yourself from death or great bodily harm.

Stop acting like you fucking know things.

>Nothing negates the right to protect yourself from death or great bodily harm.

So the unarmed protesters had every right to try to take him down then.

Can we use that line of reasoning with rapes please?
Women put themselves in situations where it's a real possibility all the time.
Miniskirt, yoga pants booty shorts just wandering around towns with their leaky holes 2mm away from exposures.

Omg you are a fucking idiot

It was obviously not self defense. But some morons dispute that and claim that it was, so we have to have a trial, apparently.

>being purposely retarded

Kyle didnt attack the protesters. He put out a dumpster fire with a fire extinguisher, and some protesters attacked him for it.

Its literally the definition of self defense.

Happens in most defensive shootings unless it was 100% cut and dry. I could shoot and kill someone trying to rob me tonight and I'd go to jail, too. That's how it works.

>obviously not self defense

What video did you watch? Bald dude was chasing Kyle, not the other way around.

Yeah, anybody hitting the boy or groping a woman should be punished by law. I suggest a fine or maybe some civil service.

No if a woman straight up murders someone for groping her (or the boy does the same), of course they're going to jail.

You obviously haven't watched any of the videos of his lawyer breaking down his defense. Go do a Google search real quick so we don't have to bother explaining how wrong you are.

>its no different than shooting 3 guys breaking into your house
It wasnt his house, it was another state, on a strangers property, the stranger gave no permission to kyle to protect his properties.
If you want to use shitty metaphors a good one would be if a stranger walked into your home holding a rifle and plastic gloves saying hes gonna defend you.
Then when people walk by your home this guy aims his rifle on towards the passerbyers.
You don't know this guy with a rifle, you don't want this guy in your house, and the rifle is illegally held.
You leave the house, come back and there are 2 dead bodies.

This right here is why we have a social justice mob society right now. People dont fucking understand how law and order works.

I mean the police are also running a muck but seriously learn how law and order works.

Yeah, except you are totally wrong about that.

You can 100% be charged with murder when defending yourself if you created/instigated the situation. It's a charge that happens all the time.

Besides, use of deadly force during the commission of a crime (he was committing both state and federal crimes by possessing the weapon and crossing a state line with it) negates the self defense legal defense here.

He was attempting to retreat when attacked so is entitled to use deadly force provided he believed their was a threat to his life. Whether or not he travelled is irrelevant. And the gun thing is only a misdemener.

Aw poor little Rittenhouse, now he's basically a rape victim! Cry me a river.

link to video?

I love how you keep inserting this fantasy house to make your argument right.

Its doesn't matter where or how, self defense is self defense.

If I was going to break into your house, and then I saw you with a gun and I retreat, you can't shoot me and claim self defense.

But that's not what happened and you know it, and you're either a troll or a retard.

To top it off, they're still repeating to already diproven fact that it wasn't his gun, nor did the gun travel across state lines. Same tired, old, lies because they're seething some dumb fucks got got. Good riddance. I hope it happens more.

Ok genius. Cite your references.

I'll wait...

Google,

> He was attempting to retreat when attacked

Let me fix that for you... "he was attempting to escape after having committed a felony, and decided that shooting his way out was appropriate,"

It's not though, because he showed up to a volatile situation with a deadly weapon which in court would work against any claim that he was merely defending himself. If you're in a crowd of people and someone threatens to fire into the crowd with a rifle, then it's self-defense if you attack him regardless of whether or not a member of that crowd has committed a crime. We don't even allow cops to fire indiscriminately into crowds when they feel threatened or even when they're attacked.

>everything always results in a trial
What a retard...

He was attempting to retreat from a mob, not resisting arrest.

And what felony would that be? The only crime he committed was carrying a rifle underage in Wisconsin which is a misdemeanor.

Libtards will keep thinking they're right, and will continue to be shot.

Nothing lost...

Is there any evidence (video or reports) that implies that this was self defense?
I mean the kid went for a manhunt, probably would have killed people one way or the other.
Of course he'd try to make it look as self defense to get away with it, but seems a bit naive to try and defend him.

Because if he's ever released there'll be another riot. It's not about justice or reason, it's about satisfying bloodlust.

>Besides, use of deadly force during the commission of a crime (he was committing both state and federal crimes by possessing the weapon and crossing a state line with it) negates the self defense legal defense here.

Actually self defense laws apply even if you took someone else's gun off their property illegally. So no, misdemeanor transportation without legal carry doesn't come close to negating self defense.

lol, so you can't provide any
not that i care or have any stake in amerifat politics, but it seems pretty clear which side in this thread is informed

He was illegally carrying a firearm which he then used to shoot three people, two of them fatally. Regardless of the fact of it being a misdemeanor, that's not going to work in his favor.

The self-defense argument works both ways. He was shooting on people with a weapon he was illegally carrying. The people he shot were trying to neutralize him as a threat while he was committing a misdemeanor. Self-defense doesn't mean "last man standing".

It's not going to work against him either if they can't prove intent for him to cause violence, which the video evidence will refute. So a misdemeanor means literally nothing except a fine.

>trying to neutralize the threat
Is not self defense, your job is to get the police ASAP and not engage unless totally necessary. Stand your ground does not mean "I can chase someone down."

He was shooting in self defense only from the start, at least as far as we know.

To me it sounds like the typical escalation along the lines of you punch me lightly, I punch you regularly, you punch me hard, I go full force.
Trying to stop right after he punched is silly, especially considering he started the interaction.

Okay, cool, none of that is a felony though. Outside of that he acted entirely in self defense when he fired. If you've watched the videos out there you'd know this. Shut your mouth you ignorant nigger.

Your Fake news is keeping you mis-informed.
Kyle was not illegally carrying a firearm.
He had a right to open carry. CHeck the law.
Left-leaning media doesn't give you facts, because they don't care about facts.

>pick a fight with a mob
>have an assault rifle while doing so
>shoot my way out
>turn myself in
>get charged with crimes

lol wut

He was trying to stop someone from commiting a crime and then was attacked.

He sought out the mob.