Of course they can. They have every right to defend themselves and protect property within the law. Every person should have those rights. Is that not the world you want to live in? He learned that an AR-15 is a good self defense weapon. And that the idiots who think a semi-auto is not a necessity are wrong.
The only reason Rosenbaum attacked was because Kyle got separated from his backup. Rosenbaum did what thugs do.
A Skateboard can be an effective weapon of Death to these mostly peaceful Rioters. Kris Kime was murdered in Seattle during the Mardi Gras riots with a Skateboard. I'm pretty sure Kris Kime had wished he was armed with an AR-15 the night he was killed by a mostly peaceful Rioter with a Skateboard. https://www.seattlepi.com/local/article/Teen-convicted-in-Mardi-Gras-murder-1070954.php
Nonsense. If he was over his head, he would be the one that was dead, because clearly that was the intent. Your victim blaming is the exact same as blaming a rape victim for wearing a short skirt. "But why was he there?"... because he has a right to be.
Would your people be carrying a gun? I would hope the people I care about are smart enough to run away from an active shooter. You have an odd way of caring.
Nah, I'm sure Kyle was somewhat familiar with his weapon.. MPO once those initial shots rung out survival instincts to over, really not that hard to aim and pull the trigger. From what I see, if he had not been chased by the man with a gun and skateboard dude and one other there would have been far less to talk about here.
but they were armed. I would say it was his community. 20 miles isn't that far and if he went there regularly to see his Father, I would call it his community. Really? After all the video proof of Rittenhouse's innocence, and all of the lefties that still claim him to be a murderer, racist, punk, evading police, etc., you have the gall to say that? As Brandon would say, "come on man!"
He was not an "active shooter" situation, the prosecution tried to make that case to and it didn't work. He was the person being assailed, engaged in an act of self-defense. So who would you try to stop the person attacking or the person under attack? From your post I really don't know for sure.
The fart leftists that are in charge of cities typically request please stand down so that you will do that so that you can then prosecute you for criminal Behavior. I know this may seem like sacrilege in the right wing circles but the police aren't your friends. They follow orders
Yes the argument which the evidence showed to be the facts about what happened and that it was clearly at act of self defense. The jury rejected the prosecutions arguments otherwise. Nothing but self-serving conjecture and suppositions. It is entirely unreasonable to believe and adult in that situation would have just waited for the person pointing the gun at them to shoot them before they fired their weapon in self-defense or would have told the guy with the skateboard club, OK hit me first and then I'll decide if I'll defend myself. It was a clear case of self defense I would expect anyone of any age to have engaged. Guess what, the jury decided the same. And those were skill prosecutors so don't try to claim he is really guilty the prosecution was just bad. They had no case from the get go. The charges should never have been brought. THAT'S why the prosecute was so bad and had to engage in such desperate tactics to try an win instead of just getting to the truth. And the persons who were attacking Rittenhouse were armed and assaulting him. And if you are choking me or bashing me with your bare hands in such a manner that I have reasonable fear for my life or serious bodily harm I can use force up to and including lethal force to stop you. The "unarmed" is entirely moot.
