Author | Lightnews

longi1974.bsky.social @longi1974.bsky.social · 7h

I mean, that is just flat out untrue. Where does this come from? Does it come from a genuine lack of knowledge of the case or dishonesty? I don’t get it at all. 🤷🏻‍♂️

2

longi1974.bsky.social @longi1974.bsky.social · 14h

It is just as probable that Rosenbaum could have killed or seriously injured Rittenhouse had he been unarmed. I suspect for many people, that would have been preferable.

1

longi1974.bsky.social @longi1974.bsky.social · 14h

Maybe they did fear for their lives, but so did he presumably. And not unreasonably so, either.

1

longi1974.bsky.social @longi1974.bsky.social · 15h

Yes, it is very likely that some of them would have been able to make an argument of self-defense under Wisconsin s.939.48.

1 1

longi1974.bsky.social @longi1974.bsky.social · 15h

It's your claim, why do I have to disprove it? The video evidence of people yelling "Get his ass" "Get that motherfucker" and "Cranium that boy" suggested to me that a citizen's arrest wasn't on the agenda.

1 2

longi1974.bsky.social @longi1974.bsky.social · 16h

She sure did. This has been fun, but it is also pointless. Have a good day.

1

longi1974.bsky.social @longi1974.bsky.social · 16h

Imagine getting so pissy over a post. Do you cry like this all the time, or what?

1 1

longi1974.bsky.social @longi1974.bsky.social · 16h

Ah well. I'm stuck with it, bub.

1 1

longi1974.bsky.social @longi1974.bsky.social · 16h

Are you suggesting that no cop ever has been prosecuted and convicted because of their use of force? What you describe above also is an example of how you can actually be wrong with your belief of imminent harm at the time, but the belief may be reasonable, depending on the circumstances.

1 1

longi1974.bsky.social @longi1974.bsky.social · 16h

Which countries would convict somebody for defending themselves against a crowd out for blood, but who were unaware of the facts?

1 1

longi1974.bsky.social @longi1974.bsky.social · 16h

The salt is real.

What was it about my post that upset you?

1 1

longi1974.bsky.social @longi1974.bsky.social · 16h

One of the things that critics of the Kenosha shootings make against Rittenhouse is to point out that "Only he killed someone that night", which is true. That fact did not inform his liability, but is illustrative that even with so many armed people, it was a relatively isolated incident.

1

longi1974.bsky.social @longi1974.bsky.social · 16h

You believe that a person defending themselves from a crowd who have attacked that person based on their lack of information and misunderstanding of the situation would not have privilege of self-defense in other countries?

Which countries are these, so that I can avoid them?

2 1

longi1974.bsky.social @longi1974.bsky.social · 16h

If you are going to be at a riot, where violent lunatics like Joseph Rosenbaum see no issue in attacking people, it makes sense to be armed in my opinion. Scores of people, including protesters, thought the same.

1 1

longi1974.bsky.social @longi1974.bsky.social · 16h

So you folded immediately and went straight for the "I'm butthurt by that post so I'll try insulting the guy!" response, eh?

2 1

longi1974.bsky.social @longi1974.bsky.social · 16h

There was nothing he did which was improper or unreasonable though. Was it unreasonable for him to prevent Rosenbaum (who had threatened to kill him) getting his gun? No. Was it unreasonable for him to then try to reach the police line, three blocks over? No.

1 1

longi1974.bsky.social @longi1974.bsky.social · 16h

It is the crux of the issue though. Regardless of what that chasing mob perceived or believed at the time, and no matter how noble their intentions may have been, it did not impact on his privilege of self-defense. That principle would (or should) hold universally.

1 1

longi1974.bsky.social @longi1974.bsky.social · 17h

There was no evidence that he was causing panic. There were a lot of armed and unarmed people mingling together on the street, So, the notion that he alone was a source of panic simply by virtue of being armed is not really feasible. He had been there for seven hours before Rosenbaum jumped him.

1 1

longi1974.bsky.social @longi1974.bsky.social · 17h

These things are always judged after the fact, and the fact is that the jury determined that the first shooting was lawful. In actuality then, Rittenhouse was not in the commission of a crime when he was running to the police chased by the crowd, and retained privilege of self-defense.

1 1

longi1974.bsky.social @longi1974.bsky.social · 17h

I am not so sure about that. Rittenhouse was the person on trial for his use of force. Therefore it was not the mistaken perception of the crowd that was judged, but Rittenhouse's "reasonable belief", as it was his belief which informed his conduct.

That is the way it works universally.

1 1

longi1974.bsky.social @longi1974.bsky.social · 22h

It was ridiculous of DA Mike Gravely to charge Rittenhouse in the first place. The evidence showing the circumstances of the shootings was pretty much available as it happened. There was no way that twelve people forming a jury were ever going to unanimously agree that it was not self-defense.

1 1

longi1974.bsky.social @longi1974.bsky.social · 22h

They may have been intending to protect others. That would not be an unreasonable assumption. But the fact is that Rittenhouse was never in the commission of a crime, so they were ultimately mistaken. Their error did not negate his privilege of self-defense when they attacked him.

1 1

longi1974.bsky.social @longi1974.bsky.social · 22h

I am not trying to treat you like anything. I was genuinely struggling to see where you were trying to get to with your last two posts. 🤷🏻‍♂️

1 1

longi1974.bsky.social @longi1974.bsky.social · 1d

The riot was not normal. The unrest in Kenosha was very abnormal and an extraordinary situation for that city. The response then was equally extraordinary. There were hundreds of armed people on the street, many lawfully armed with rifles and other firearms. But that, by itself, was not provocation.

1 1

longi1974.bsky.social @longi1974.bsky.social · 1d

I understand the law, I genuinely don’t know what point you are trying to make. 🤷🏻‍♂️

2 2