Kyle Rittenhouse abruptly departed the stage during an appearance at the University of Memphis on Wednesday, after he was confronted about comments made by Turning Point USA founder and president Charlie Kirk.

Rittenhouse was invited by the college’s Turning Point USA chapter to speak at the campus. However, the event was met with backlash from a number of students who objected to Rittenhouse’s presence.

The 21-year-old gained notoriety in August 2020 when, at the age of 17, he shot and killed two men—Joseph Rosenbaum, 36, and Anthony Huber, 26, as well as injuring 26-year-old Gaige Grosskreutz—at a protest in Kenosha, Wisconsin.

He said the three shootings, carried out with a semi-automatic AR-15-style firearm, were in self-defense. The Black Lives Matter (BLM) protest where the shootings took place was held after Jacob Blake, a Black man, was left paralyzed from the waist down after he was shot by a white police officer.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    1573 months ago

    Maybe I’m missing something as I’m not from the states. Why the hell is a guy who is famous for murder invites to talk at a university?

    • Captain Janeway
      link
      fedilink
      923 months ago

      Rittenhouse was invited to speak at Wednesday’s event by the university’s Turning Point USA (TPUSA) chapter. Founded in 2012, the non-profit promotes conservative politics at schools and college campuses.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        71
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        It’s insane that the only reason he was noticed and brought into their political organization was through murder shooting and killing people.

        That’s how gangs initiate people.

        Edit: removed “murder” so nobody whines about whether he lawfully drove to another state with a gun and shot people.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          44
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          for the express purpose of intimidating people and hopefully getting the opportunity to shoot them in ‘self defense’

            • @zalgotext
              link
              283 months ago

              and, let’s not forget, illegally transported an illegal firearm across state lines. illegally.

      • deweydecibel
        link
        fedilink
        English
        233 months ago

        And they have another one set up for him next month at Kent State.

    • Stern
      link
      fedilink
      603 months ago

      He got away with it so he’s automatically a power fantasy for Cons.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      603 months ago

      Our gun culture is so nuts that it normalizes shit like this.

      When you look at it this way, it is utterly unsurprising that we have so many mass shootings.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        36
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        This isn’t normalisation, it’s celebration.

        I’m not going to be coy about why they’re celebrating him either: The pro-gun community spends hour after hour theorycrafting about how they can shoot people with their cool guns and get away with it. Kyle is being celebrated for finding a new “get out of jail free” technique that specifically targeted undesirables for murder.

        That’s all there is to it. They shower him with fame and money because he killed BLM protesters with America’s favourite gun. It’s his reward.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          13 months ago

          To me the nightmare is going to happen when we see more doxing with open carry. Imagine a situation where there will be apps listing the people to be targeted, people follow them around with guns, and the moment they react to the threat they get murdered under stand your ground. All perfectly legal.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            1
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            Yep. There are far-right groups whose favourite pastime (after being racist) is figuring out how to kill undesirables and get away with it.

            I actually wouldn’t be even slightly surprised if the whole “minorities need to buy guns and carry them everywhere as a magical safety talisman” began as a way of bringing the police-issued excuse “he had a gun so I got scared and shot him” to the public.

            Of course, I also wouldn’t be surprised if it came from a room full of sleazy gun industry executives who worked out that propaganda and hero fantasies work on left-wing people too.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      50
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      It’s because the US right will celebrate literally any action that they perceive as working against what they think everyone left of them supports or enjoys. Kyle was a clean cut looking young white man who heroically skirted the edge of laws regarding firearm purchases and visited a town that was not his own where he made sure to keep looking until he find a situation that required him to use his gun. The context was protests fueled by the death of George Floyd and shooting of Jacob Blake at the hands of police.

      There were probably folks who literally touched themselves after hearing a red blooded, AR wielding young white man was able to be acquitted of murder after shooting protesters at a BLM protest. On top of that, one of the men had some form of pedophilia in his past, boosting their drumbeat of messaging claiming that folks who support LGBTQ+, and by extension all democrats and leftists, are groomers out to molest kids.

      It was a perfect storm of trump supporter daydreams all centered around Kyle Rittenhouse. Folks who buy into all or most of that view are big fans.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      293 months ago

      Because having someone else buy a gun for you that you can’t legally buy, traveling to a confrontational hotspot with your guns, failing to leave a situation that was escalating, and that choice leading to one shooting a mentally ill bipolar person is perfectly legal. And the right wing absolutely wants to make sure everyone knows that. So he gets to be trotted out for any occasion where they need a “famous” person who chose to exercise their right to self-defense, despite making every effort to place themselves in a situation where it might be necessary.

      But that’s not his fault.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        23
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        He also managed to escape open carry laws because the judge deemed any rifle above 15 inches was not a “Deadly Weapon” despite Rittenhouse using the weapon to cause multiple deaths, due to loose interpretation of the grammar of the written laws. And the state congress in IL did nothing to correct him.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              313 months ago

              For those that need a translation:

              “You have got to be shitting me”

              “I am in fact not shitting you, my dude. It is very disappointing that this is real.”

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                43 months ago

                I agree fully with you, but also this brings back to memory a 20 year old GameFAQs thread where we just posted initialisms and one guy was SO GOOD as guessing them

                I’m useless for this conversation but I’m sharing a bit about what I experienced growing up

                IASIHDFTTBITIWBRAAIAD

      • CommunityLinkFixerBotB
        link
        fedilink
        English
        103 months ago

        Hi there! Looks like you linked to a Lemmy community using a URL instead of its name, which doesn’t work well for people on different instances. Try fixing it like this: [email protected]

    • @[email protected]
      cake
      link
      fedilink
      183 months ago

      Because he’s famous for racist murder.

      Yeah our country isn’t doing great. Send ethics

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        -523 months ago

        calling it a racist murder just shows how much you really know about the topic at hand 🤣 goodness

        • @[email protected]
          cake
          link
          fedilink
          223 months ago

          He went out of his way to go to a blm protest with a rifle to protect shops from protestors. Legally it wasn’t murder according to the jury, but I’m not charging him with that crime, I’m saying someone who isn’t a racist wouldn’t put themselves in that position

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            -293 months ago

            youre wording just made it sound like it was a hate crime, which confused me because afaik all 3 who were shot were white, and rittenhouse is also white, so you can see where im coming from with that lol

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      23 months ago

      For better or worse rightwing groups often get to give talks at universities under freedom of speech laws. It is not an ideal situation. And frankly with the internet I don’t see why anyone can claim that they don’t have a medium to express their views.

      It’s whatever, my uni had a few controversial speakers and I just didn’t attend their talks

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      -123 months ago
      1. He’s not famous for murder.
      2. The university didn’t invite him to talk, it was just the venue.
      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        93 months ago

        He is only famous because he is a murderer and he got away with it. He has nothing else going for him at all.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          -113 months ago

          He was literally acquitted of murder. I’m not saying he’s famous - he’s really an obscure nobody - but his biggest claim to fame not only is legally not murder, claiming it is murder in a way people might take seriously, like a newspaper article, would open you up to liability for slander, since you’d be making claims it would be easy to prove in court you knew to be false when you made them.

          He’s a killer, yes. He killed people. That’s considered potentially distinct from murder in checks notes every country on Earth.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            9
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            OJ is a murderer and so is Rittenhouse and Zimmerman. If they want to sue me, they can go ahead.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            33 months ago

            Go ahead and sue me. He is a murderer. Just because the state messed up the case doesn’t make him less than a murderer.

            If you kill someone and the police never catch you are you a murderer? If they catch you but don’t have enough evidence to go forward are you a murderer? If they mess up the chain of custody of evidence are you a murderer?

            Who you are as a person is not altered by what some civil servants say about you. If the entire planet earth said I was a giant purple one eyed monster that wouldn’t make it so.

            He wasn’t convicted of murder doesn’t make him not a murderer. No go ahead and sue me for whatever bullshit you want.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              -23 months ago

              Nothing you said makes sense.

              Go ahead and sue me.

              Why on Earth would I do that?

              He is a murderer. Just because the state messed up the case doesn’t make him less than a murderer.

              And you declaring him a murderer doesn’t make him one any more than the state’a failure makes him not one - neither of which is relevant, since we’re discussing what he’s famous for, not making value judgments.

              If you kill someone and the police never catch you are you a murderer?

              In every country on Earth, including whichever one you live in, it is possible to kill someone without it being murder. This is true in every culture and every religion.

              Who you are as a person is not altered by what some civil servants say about you.

              Now we’re out past the deep end of irrelevancy. At least when you were focused on actions people did or did not take, you were within the same ballpark as the topic. Who people are as persons has absolutely no relevancy. You might as well as brought up different ways to make pasta.

              You sound deeply unhinged. You might want to take a deep breath and figure out what you’re even talking about.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                23 months ago

                You sound deeply unhinged.

                I get to sue you now. No court on earth has established that. And any value judgement, by your own admission, must be backed up by a court.

                Pity you don’t know the difference between accidentally killing someone and showing up with a gun to an already crazy situation.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      -393 months ago

      Because the actual story fits blearily enough well with republican’s “good guy with a gun” mythos. Trigger Warning: Violence, Death, and Bodily Injury.

      If I’m wrong, please correct me and cite your sources.

      a guy who is famous for murder

      Correction: Famously accused of murder and acquitted of all charges despite rigorous cross examination and ever increasingly difficult hurdles to claiming self defence… such as assuming provocation incited the first attacker. Also despite intense political pressure from then and current POTUS Joseph Biden, who was vocally in favor of murder charges until after the not-guilty verdict was delivered.

      His first attacker, Joseph Rosenbaum (deceased): “The man with a toothbrush.” A belligerent 36 year old bare chested man. Chasing a 17 year old with a firearm, who was running away. A convicted child molester. At the time being tried for assault and out on bail. Shot at close range.

      His second attacker, Anthony Huber (deceased): An avid skater, chasing down a presumed murderer fleeing in the direction of the police. Assailed the accused in the shoulder, neck, and head with a skateboard and grappled over the rifle. Shot at close range.

      Third, Gaige Grosskreutz the star witness of the trial: a trained paramedic who chased the presumed murderer alongside Anthony Huber. Confronted the 17 year old, who had immediately prior, shot Anthony Huber while wrestling on the ground. Drew his pistol and immediately lost his right bicep upon pointing his weapon at the accused.

      The 17 year old, Kyle Rittenhouse, then approached officers with his hands above his head, and was told to get out of the road. Fears of a mass shooter caused the crowds to disperse.

      Please stop calling the idiot a murderer. He was acquitted, and the people who attacked him are none too heroic after looking at their part in the events, nor after seeing their criminal records.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        283 months ago

        Please stop calling the idiot a murderer.

        Who, Kyle Rittenhouse the scared little boy who murdered two people? Nah, I think I’ll keep calling him what he is, but you keep on living in your fantasy world down there in the States where gunning down people in the streets and schools is a normal every day thing.

        • AWildMimicAppears
          link
          fedilink
          English
          253 months ago

          I would also like to remind people of Brock Allen Turner, the rapist, who changed his name to just Allen Turner, who is also still a rapist. Just so that we don’t forget.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          -303 months ago

          Believe whatever you like, I’m not the world thought police. Discredit yourself if it please you. Fantasy is often preferable to reality and I won’t fault you for it.

          you keep on living in your fantasy world down there in the States

          You’re as likely to be Mr. United States as I am Mr. Canuk.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          23 months ago

          That’s a new tidbit. Thank you.

          As far as discrediting the trial, the jurors determine guilt.

          In America, the judge is allowed to dismiss or accept evidence and facts, which can skew a trial one way or another. However, this trial was almost ridiculously thorough. The jurors were not aware of the attackers’ backgrounds, nor were allowed to consider the attackers’ other actions that night. Jurors were told to consider the defendant had instigated the incident. On the stand, the paramedic admitted he expected he wouldn’t have been shot if he didn’t point his firearm at the defendant, meaning he was aware he wasn’t chasing a mass-shooter, and might otherwise be called a murderer by everyone who is calling the defendant one.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          03 months ago

          Apologist, possibly. I will absolutely defend that which I hold true. As a pedant, I will assert molesters are not rapists for molesting, rapists are not murderers for raping, and correctly classifying terrible things or events is not apologising, defending, or minimising. By all means call him a killer.

          Murder apologist is a straw man I won’t be stepping to.

          Kindness to remind myself not to lash out or insult people over internet comments. What’s your username mean?

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        53 months ago

        A. You don’t loose the right to a fair trail because you are a criminal, a former criminal, or even just an asshole. Nor are you allowed to be murdered. It doesn’t matter how shit these people were a random guy with a gun doesn’t get to decide if they live or die.

        B. It is bizarre how prior situations only work against the victims. Everyone loves to point out that the victims were criminals and at the same time ignore the fact that Rittenhouse out himself in that situation

        C. I will call that piece of shit a fucking murderer to his fucking face if I ever fucking see him. He is a murderer. Even if God were real, and came down and told me straight off that he is not a murderer in my assessment of the facts he is.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          -23 months ago

          It doesn’t matter how shit these people were a random guy with a gun doesn’t get to decide if they live or die.

          A valid point. Do you feel the same way about the paramedic?

          Rittenhouse out himself in that situation

          Another valid point. I agree.

          C.

          Please yourself. Your assessment and a definition are worth something.

          How you sound to others is your problem, but personally I’d suggest you pick up a dictionary and then go with something more astute, such as killer, man-slayer, or gunman. Possibly gunboy.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            33 months ago

            A valid point. Do you feel the same way about the paramedic?

            I think I was super clear but evidently I wasn’t. People should not be murderes. If we are to have a death penalty, big if, it should be by the state through a process. Not random 17 year olds with a gun. I feel this way about everyone. No one should murder anyone. Murder is bad.

            I couldn’t decipher the rest of your comment.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              -13 months ago

              The paramedic is an attempted killer too. Where is your outrage over Gaige chasing a killer to kill him? What of his lack of trial?

              Just as well. The conversation is a shambling waste. You’re only here to feel justified anger I suppose, so we may as well go our separate ways. A pleasant morning to you. Ciao.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      -443 months ago

      I’m not defending him. But he was acquitted, so he’s not famous for murder. A bunch of people believe that he genuinely acted in legitimate self defense, and thus he is a symbol of the correct use of arms for self defense and a victim of a system that tried to jail him for doing so.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        40
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        The Judge deemed a rifle above 15 inches was not a “Deadly Weapon” due to wild interpretation of the grammar of the state laws. He went to a protest with a military style rifle and shot people in two separate confrontations, killing 2 people. He is a murderer, it’s just been ruled that murdering political opponents was allowed in this case.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          233 months ago

          Hell he drove across state lines to get said protest. His whole purpose was to kill people he was itching to do so.

          I am against killing people but if this little fucker was shot and killed I feel no remorse.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            -203 months ago

            Holy shit people are still repeating the drove across state lines crap to this day lmao. That shit was actually mentioned in the trial and quickly fell thru when Rittenhouse mentioned that they worked as a paramedic in that very place and made the prosecutor look like an asshole lmao.

            At least don’t spread misinformation my dude.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              123 months ago

              How stupid he 17 and no paramedic. And what paramedic is carrying around AR15? And yes he drove across state lines.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                -93 months ago

                My bad, not paramedic but lifeguard.

                And what paramedic is carrying around AR15?

                Oddly enough one of the people shot were indeed an EMT and they were also armed.

                And yes he drove across state lines.

                Because they worked on that town and he was there the day before the shooting, unlike the other people involved in the shooting which iirc never lived or worked there.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  43 months ago

                  He was no where near that town and fucking life guard. Why are defending this murdering little fuck?

                  • @[email protected]
                    link
                    fedilink
                    -63 months ago

                    He was no where near that town and fucking life guard. Why are defending this murdering little fuck?

                    Because you’re spreading misinformation lol. Did you even watch the trial?

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            26
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            The Jury did not get to decide on the gun charges because the Judge threw out the charges hours before closing statements. Any sympathy for this boy should be gone after seeing him use his “fame” to advocate shooting your political opponents, this is his chosen career path for years now.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                133 months ago

                Do you think Rittenhouse crossed state lines with a military style rifle and walked the streets for hours pointing it at protestors before shooting three, killing 36-year-old Joseph Rosenbaum, of Kenosha, and 26-year-old Anthony Huber, of Silver Lake, Wisconsin…

                but did not commit murder?

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  -8
                  edit-2
                  3 months ago

                  crossed state lines with a military style rifle

                  That did not happen… It was mentioned in the trial and everything, the gun was always in the same state, and rittenhouse was already for several days there as they worked there…

                  walked the streets for hours pointing it at protestors

                  I wanna see the evidence of this. (EDIT: There isn’t any and they just made it the fuck up lmao)

                  killing 36-year-old Joseph Rosenbaum

                  That guy was caught on video threatening everyone before the shooting happened. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N70fok1R2Kg

                  26-year-old Anthony Huber

                  This guy kicked either kicked rittenhouse in the head or hit him in the head with a skateboard lmao. AND rittenhouse tried to flee from him before so not like he even tried to stand his ground lmao.

                  It is really sad how people spread misinformation about the case, yes rIttenhouse is an idiot, but you’re just blatantly lying at this point.

                  edit: And for the people that keep spreading the lie that the judge was biased, please watch this legal eagle video;

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

                  • @[email protected]
                    link
                    fedilink
                    43 months ago

                    That did not happen… It was mentioned in the trial and everything, the gun was always in the same state, and rittenhouse was already for several days there as they worked there…

                    It was mentioned by Rittenhouse in his own testimony, of course he would blatantly admit to breaking the laws while on trial unless there were evidence either way.

                    I wanna see the evidence of this.

                    Are you high? Where do you think he was when these multiple confrontations started? He wasn’t brawling people on rooftops or inside of businesses, idiot.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  -173 months ago

                  Do I think he’s an idiot for doing so? Absolutely. Do I think those actions you listed in and of themselves revoke any claim he has to self defense? Absolutely not.

                  • @[email protected]
                    link
                    fedilink
                    123 months ago

                    He literally travelled there with a loaded murder-rifle to point it at people and kill them. That’s not defence. Nothing about that is defence. It’s literally offence, he went there from out of state just to do that.

                  • @[email protected]
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    33 months ago

                    walked the streets for hours pointing it at protestors

                    If they had shot him first, would they be the ones defending themselves from him?

          • @RobertoOberto
            link
            143 months ago

            Quick hypothetical for you:

            John shoots and kills Frank. They had never met each other and John did not know that Frank has a history of abusing children. John claims it was self-defense.

            Was the shooting justified?

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              -143 months ago

              There is not enough information. If you add the fact that Frank was chasing after John and trying to grab his gun, then yes it would be justified.

              The whole point is that people here seem to be defaulting to the racist pedo that was chasing after the minor. I dont get it out of ideologically you are forced to defend the guy on your team even if they spent years in prison for one of the worst crimes.

              • @RobertoOberto
                link
                13 months ago

                There is not enough information.

                Yeah, that’s the point.

                  • @RobertoOberto
                    link
                    13 months ago

                    Also right.

                    The point I was getting at is that the question of whether or a shooting is justified depends entirely on the circumstances that led to the shooting. Not someone’s past criminal behavior that the shooter was not aware of.

                    You may certainly disagree with other peoples’ reasons for viewing the shooting as unjustified. But it seems that you are either unwilling or unable to see that both people involved in an altercation can be bad. One shouldn’t be considered a hero just because he’s less bad than the other.

                    The dead pedo deserved what he got. Rittenhouse is a dumbass who was looking for a fight and luck was the only thing that saved him from killing an innocent bystander.

                    These can both be true at the same time, and saying that Rittenhouse’s actions shouldn’t be celebrated is not the same thing as defending pedophilia.

              • @RobertoOberto
                link
                13 months ago

                I think you missed the whole point of my comment.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              -433 months ago

              A racist pedo runs at a minor and gets killed and you are mad… Not really seeing how your stance is defendable.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                203 months ago

                Lmao, imagine thinking people who murder BLM protestors are fighting against racism. You’re too far gone, mate.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  -363 months ago

                  I didnt say he was fighting against racism, I said one of the people you are defending was a racist pedo that spent years in prison and was in the process of attacking another minor, and you are defending them. Why are you so strongly defending that person?

                  • @[email protected]
                    link
                    fedilink
                    163 months ago

                    @CableMonster believes he should decide who lives and dies, probably deserves to be on a watchlist as a potential mass murderer.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              -33 months ago

              Sure, it puts into context the attitude of the first individual he killed. People dont really seem to care about how he chased down and tried to grab the gun of a minor, so the next best part is to point out how he was a criminal that was again trying to harm a minor, for at least the 6th time.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        253 months ago

        But he was acquitted

        Irrelevant.

        He’s famous for being a murderer, whether he was found guilty or not doesn’t matter.

        A bunch of people believe that he genuinely acted in legitimate self defense

        They’re stupid, simple as.

        • DaBabyAteMaDingo
          link
          fedilink
          03 months ago

          Killer and murder are not the same thing. You got access to the internet, right? I’ll give you some homework: figure out why they aren’t allowed to use the word “murderer(er)” in cases.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          -183 months ago

          Irrelevant.

          Murder is literally the illegal killing of someone. So yes it absolutely matters whether he was convicted. To claim it’s irrelevant that he was found not guilty of murder just exposes how detached from reality your position is. We can argue that he should have been found guilty, but you have to realize that the people who disagree with you don’t think he’s a murderer.

          They’re stupid, simple as.

          And I’ve heard plenty of them make the claim anyone who thinks he is a murderer is stupid. In this regard, you’re just like them.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            123 months ago

            Murder is literally the illegal killing of someone

            Irrelevant. People know him as a murderer, thus that is what he is famous for. Plenty of people are famous for shit thats not technically accurate.

            but you have to realize that the people who disagree with you don’t think he’s a murderer.

            I do, I just don’t care what wrong people think about shit that’s basic and obvious.

            And I’ve heard plenty of them make the claim anyone who thinks he is a murderer is stupid. In this regard, you’re just like them.

            Yeah but those people are fucking stupid, so I wouldn’t listen to them.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              -7
              edit-2
              3 months ago

              People know him as a murderer

              I don’t, because I actually watch the damn trial

              shit that’s basic and obvious.

              Is it basic and obvious that you should just let be yourself attacked by a crowd even after trying to flee from said crowd instead of defending yourself?

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              -93 months ago

              People know him as a murderer

              The people inviting him to speak seen him as a victim who acted in self defense. Which is the whole point of the question: he’s not a murder to them.

              Yeah but those people are fucking stupid, so I wouldn’t listen to them.

              It’s funny how exactly like them you are, and how stupid you think they are for it.

            • @Jax
              link
              -93 months ago

              Ehh, except you’re wrong. Using terms colloquially is one thing, no one has accepted that the legal definition of murder has changed. Certainly not regarding Rittenhouse.

              Yes he is known for being a killer or a shooter but he is not a murderer until charged in a court of law. Make whatever argument for how the decision not to charge him was wrong, I won’t disagree. He is a killer. The distinction is important because the “law” deemed it rightful.

              Again, make whatever argument you want for that being wrong.

                • @Jax
                  link
                  -4
                  edit-2
                  3 months ago

                  18 U.S.C. § 1111 defines murder as the unlawful killing of a human being with malice

                  the unlawful premeditated killing of one human being by another.

                  This is both the legal definition of murder and the dictionary definition.

                  Next you’ll say “But lAnGuAgEs ChAnGe OvEr TiMe”

                  Edit: I’d like to point out the failure to recognize that my meaning is the law failed. Should he be a murderer? Yes. Is he? No. Why is that? The justice system failed.

                  You can apply whatever meaning to whatever words you want, none of that matters in the face of the far reaching power that is the U.S. justice system. You declaring he’s a murderer is the most meaningless form of activism I can think of. You’re an ant screaming at a bulldozer.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                -53 months ago

                “killing black people isn’t murder like killing rats with pesticide isn’t murder” -the least racist conservative

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        93 months ago

        The legal system can piss on a person and tell them it’s raining, and you’d be willing to drink it.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          -83 months ago

          If you think you can tell that from me based on this one post, well you are not nearly as bright as you think you are.