Kyle Rittenhouse shoots BLM protestors and found not guilty? Is this right?

AgnosticBoy

Agnostic, Independent (politically)
Administrator
Oct 1, 2020
364
55
TheAgnosticForum.com
Worldview

Agnosticism

I'll offer a brief summary for those not familiar with Kyle Rittenhouse.

Kyle Rittenhouse is an 18 year old White male. He went to Kenosha, Wisconsin during a time when there were Black Lives Matter protests over a Black male being shot by police. While in the city of Kenosha, Kyle was also armed with an assault rifle and claimed to be guarding businesses from riots and looting. He ended up shooting 3 protestors, 2 of the 3 people shot died. Kyle claims self-defense, but the state prosecutors claim that Kyle provoked the attacks and is therefore not entitled to a self-defense claim.

Here's one source that explains this incident, NPR.
Here is raw footage of the shootings (warning: graphic footage)

Kyle Rittenhouse court trial ended yesterday with a Not Guilty verdict. Now there are reports of protests in some cities. Unfortunately, this case has become very polarizing and I've tried my best to listen to both sides before drawing any conclusions. Some have brought up that racism, others claim that the verdict is right. What do you think? Let's debate that here!

For Debate...
Is Kyle Rittenhouse guilty of murder? Why or why not?
 
Last edited:

AgnosticBoy

Agnostic, Independent (politically)
Administrator
Oct 1, 2020
364
55
TheAgnosticForum.com
Worldview

Agnosticism

Is Kyle Rittenhouse guilty of murder? Why or why not?
In my view, Kyle Rittenhouse is not guilty of murder. I say this accepting that he is likely a White supremacist since photos have surfaced showing him hanging out with members of the Proud Boys and flashing a White power hand sign (source: Washington Post). Being a White supremacist with an AR 15 in the middle of a BLM protest is problematic, but that by itself is not illegal. Open carry is legal in the state, and he has a right to be anywhere he wants. Now if the prosecutors would've shown that Kyle was an aggressor or even threatened someone or started a fight, perhaps by making a racist comment ( no evidence of this happening), then that would leave room to show provoking. Since no one even knew that Kyle associated with the Proud Boys until well after the incident, then at the time it would have the same effect as any ordinary person showing up to the protest with an assault rifle.

But as it stands, those that were shot were in the wrong by trying to attack Kyle. Even if he's armed and/or racist, that doesn't mean you get to chase him, attack him, or even kill him. That leaves the door open for him to claim self-defense. Goes with the saying that two wrongs don't make a right. Even a White supremacists has a right to defend himself from a physical threat.

Feel free to disagree or agree but also present evidence, unless it's your opinion.
 
Last edited: