Kyle shouldnt have turned up to a protest with a tool designed to kill people. He intentionally put himself in danger and then justified his shooting by self defense.
None of that would have happened if ol kyle just stayed home.
I find it bizarre how the right has absolutely zero nuance or acceptance of he caused it by being there in the first place.
He was attacked. He defended himself. which completely ignores he did not need to be there, and wouldnt have had any reason to “defend” himself if he just stayed home
A gun toting child decided he wanted to defend … a building? and play medic.
and the right lifts him proudly up as “defending himself”.
Kyle shouldnt have turned up to a protest with a tool designed to kill people. He intentionally put himself in danger and then justified his shooting by self defense.
Do you always blame victims? LIke she shouldn’t have wore that skirt? Or she shouldn’t have had that extra drink?
He had every legal right to be there with his rifle.
which completely ignores he did not need to be there, and wouldnt have had any reason to “defend” himself if he just stayed home
The same could be said for the rioters; had they not tried to kill him, they would be alive today.
The only person acting legally that evening was Kyle, and somehow you think he is responsible.
You are comparing someone wearing clothes to someone else turning up a violent riot with a weapon to kill people, and then actively goes out to look for danger? And he had clothes thrown at him. He thought they wanted his gun.
Yeah absolutely the same situation.
Its incredibly strange to refer to rittenhouse as a victim
@breadsmasher @wintermute_oregon Calling #KyleRittenhouse an “attacker” in 2024 is wild lol
… shooting someone isn’t an attack?
hE wAs DeFenDinG hImSeLf
You can defend yourself without murdering people. Not surprised americans don’t understand that
@breadsmasher “Most people don’t know this, but self defense is murder”
Most americans dont know this, but the rest of the world dont need to carry guns their whole lives “just in case”
You dont need to actively put yourself in danger to then “use self defense”.
Thats murder with an extra step.
@breadsmasher Please, tell me more of this wisdom, it is funny to read
Why waste the time? Itll just slide right over your smooth brain
@breadsmasher No no no dude please, it’s been a joy to read so far
See how bizarre lefties are. Defending yourself from being murdered is wrong. Kyle should have just let them murder him.
Kyle shouldnt have turned up to a protest with a tool designed to kill people. He intentionally put himself in danger and then justified his shooting by self defense.
None of that would have happened if ol kyle just stayed home.
I find it bizarre how the right has absolutely zero nuance or acceptance of he caused it by being there in the first place.
He was attacked. He defended himself. which completely ignores he did not need to be there, and wouldnt have had any reason to “defend” himself if he just stayed home
A gun toting child decided he wanted to defend … a building? and play medic.
and the right lifts him proudly up as “defending himself”.
Do you always blame victims? LIke she shouldn’t have wore that skirt? Or she shouldn’t have had that extra drink?
He had every legal right to be there with his rifle.
The only person acting legally that evening was Kyle, and somehow you think he is responsible.
You are comparing someone wearing clothes to someone else turning up a violent riot with a weapon to kill people, and then actively goes out to look for danger? And he had clothes thrown at him. He thought they wanted his gun.
Yeah absolutely the same situation.
Its incredibly strange to refer to rittenhouse as a victim
He didn’t know what was thrown at him. Well, the guy tried to take his gun from him. So, it appears Kyle was right about his assumption.
He is the victim. Three violent felons attacked him, and he had to use self-defense to protect himself from death or severe injury.
The only people at fault here are three violent felons who wanted to harm Kyle.